Archive for the ‘Government’ Category

Californians face higher electricity rates based on income

Saturday, March 16th, 2024

For households earning $28K per year or more; unless state legislature reverses course; 5 local legislators voted for bill

By Allen D. Payton

Bill Votes – AB-205 Energy. (ca.gov)

In 2022, the California legislature passed and Governor Gavin Newsom signed AB205 – Energy into law, which requires that the Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) “shall, no later than July 1, 2024, authorize a fixed charge for default residential rates.” As a result, the CPUC is currently reviewing proposals for a tiered, fixed-price structure, as directed by the bill.

According to FOX Business, the state’s three main, investor-owned utilities – Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E), Southern California Edison (SCE) and San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E) – proposed a tiered rate plan: “Households earning $28,000-$69,000 would be charged an extra $20 to $34 per month. Those earning $69,000-$180,000 would pay $51 to $73 per month, and those earning more than $180,000 would pay a $85-to-$128 monthly surcharge.”

According to California Energy Markets, “The first version of the income-graduated fixed charge, or IGFC, could be implemented by SDG&E and SCE by 2026, according to Freedman. PG&E is in the process of changing its billing system, he said, so its implementation would likely be in 2027.”

That’s on top of the 13% increase for both electricity and natural gas rates for PG&E customers approved by a unanimous vote of the CPUC last November that went into effect on January 1, 2024. Plus, another vote on March 7 for $4-$6 in additional monthly fees for the typical ratepayer that will take effect in April, was approved for PG&E to recover $516 million in costs for wildfire mitigation, gas safety and electric modernization.

According to a Canary Media report, “The utilities are also proposing to significantly lower the per-kilowatt-hour charges that customers pay to counterbalance the big increase in fixed charges, and to structure both fixed and volumetric charges in a way that allows lower-income customers to save money overall. Still, the proposal, if enacted, would instantly make California the home of the nation’s highest monthly utility fixed fees, according to analysis by clean energy research firm EQ Research.”

The IGFC would require the CPUC to evaluate every ratepayer’s income annually in order to assess the appropriate fee.

Local Legislators Voted for Bill

Five of Contra Costa’s state legislators supported AB205 on party-line votes including Assemblymembers Tim Grayson, Rebecca Bauer-Kahan, Buffy Wicks, Lori Wilson and State Senator Nancy Skinner. The first four each voted for the bill, twice.

Assemblyman Jim Frazier didn’t vote on the bill in 2021 and State Senator Steve Glazer didn’t vote on AB205 during the State Senate’s floor vote in 2022. Newsom signed the bill into law on June 30, 2022.

Details of New Law

As of July 1, 2022, the applicable portion of the law now reads as follows:

SEC. 10. Section 739.9 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to read:

(d)  The commission may adopt new, or expand existing, fixed charges for the purpose of collecting a reasonable portion of the fixed costs of providing electrical service to residential customers. The commission shall ensure that any approved charges do all of the following:

    (1) Reasonably reflect an appropriate portion of the different costs of serving small and large customers.

    (2) Not unreasonably impair incentives forconservation, energy efficiency, and beneficial electrification and greenhouse gas emissions reduction. 

    (3) Are set at levels that do not overburden low-income customers.

(e)(1) For the purposes of this section and Section 739.1, the commission may authorize fixed charges for any rate schedule applicable to a residential customer account. The fixed charge shall be established on an income-graduated basis with no fewer than three income thresholds so that a low-income ratepayer in each baseline territory would realize a lower average monthly bill without making any changes in usage. The commission shall, no later than July 1, 2024, authorize a fixed charge for default residential rates.

    (2) For purposes of this subdivision, ‘income-graduated’ means that low-income customers pay a smaller fixed charge than high-income customers.”

Source: Energy Sage published 3/10/24

Californians Pay 27% More for Electricity Than National Average

According to Energy Sage, California residents currently pay 31 cents per kilowatt-hour compared to the national average of 18 cents per kilowatt-hour. “On average, California residents spend about $256 per month on electricity. That adds up to $3,072 per year. That’s 27% higher than the national average electric bill of $2,426.” 

Effort to Reverse Course

Now, some members of the legislature are trying to backpedal on their votes and stop the IGFC increases from being approved. As they had unsuccessfully attempted last September, on Jan. 30, Republican lawmakers tried to bring an immediate vote to repeal AB 205 to the Senate floor, but Democrats who have the majority, voted to table the motion.

That same day, Assemblymember Jacqui Irwin, (D-Thousand Oaks) and 10 others introduced a bill to repeal AB205. According to Irwin’s press release about the new bill, “The CPUC has had the authority to implement a fixed rate charge, up to $10, since 2015, but has declined to do so. I see no need to rush now. It’s time to put some reasoning back into how we charge for electricity in California.” Bauer-Kahan is listed as a principal coauthor. It was also introduced in the State Senate.

According to the aforementioned Canary Media report, “The newly introduced bill, AB 1999, would limit the CPUC to adding a fixed charge of no greater than $10 a month on customers’ bills to pay for the rising costs of maintaining the state’s utility grids, regardless of household income.”

The bill is in the committee process, was referred to the Assembly Committee on Utilities and Electricity. If approved it will then head to the floors of both houses of the state legislature for votes and if passed, the bill will head to the governor’s desk for his signature or veto.

Supervisor Glover seeks people to serve on county committees, commissions, boards

Friday, March 8th, 2024

District 5 residents who want to get involved in improving their communities

Applications due March 29

Supervisor Federal Glover announced opportunities for District 5 residents to make decisions affecting their communities. “A lot of policies begin in these county commissions and boards,” said Glover. Commissions are appointed by the Board of Supervisors based on his recommendation. Interested individuals may apply online at: https://contra-costa.granicus.com/boards/forms/321/apply/ or they can contact Supervisor Glover’s office at (925) 608-4200. Completed applications must be received in Supervisor Glover’s office by close of business Friday, March 29, 2023.

Crockett-Carquinez Fire Protection District Fire Advisory Commission: reviews and advises on annual operations and capital budgets; reviews Fire District expenditures; advises the Fire Chief on district service matters; and serves as a liaison between the Board of Supervisors and the community served by the fire district. The seats that are open are: 1 Regular Seat (Appointee 2). Meetings are held on the third Thursday of the month at 7:00 p.m. at 746 Loring Avenue, Crockett, CA 94525. The current seat opening has a term ending December 31, 2024. For information call Dean Colombo at (925) 787-0790.

Emergency Medical Care Committee: Role is to review the County’s ambulance and other emergency services as required in State law; and serves in an advisory capacity to the County Board of Supervisors, and to the County EMS Agency, on matters relating to emergency medical services as directed by the Board. The Committee meets at the Contra Costa County Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Administrative Office, 777 Arnold Drive, Martinez, CA, from 4 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. The current vacancy is for District V – Consumer Representative with a term ending September 30, 2024. For information, call Rachel Morris (925) 608-5454. Rachel.Morris@cchealth.org

Measure X Community Advisory Board: The Measure X Community Advisory Board was established by the Board of Supervisors on February 2, 2021 to advise the Board of Supervisors on the use of Measure X transactions and use tax funds. The current vacancy is for the District 5 Seat – Alternate seat with a term ending March 31, 2025. The meetings are normally scheduled for Wednesday’s at 5:00 p.m. For information call Adam Nguyen at (925) 655-2048. Adam.Nguyen@cao.cccounty.us

Measure X Community Fiscal Oversight Committee: The Measure X Community Fiscal Oversight Committee was established by the Board of Supervisors earlier this year to advise the Board of Supervisors on financial audits of Measure X tax funds. The current vacancy is for the District 5 Seat with a term ending December 31, 2024. The meeting dates and times are to be determined. For information call Adam Nguyen at (925) 655-2048. Adam.Nguyen@cao.cccounty.us

Mental Health Commission: The Mental Health Commission was established to review and assess the community’s mental health needs, services, facilities, and special problems, in order to advise the Board of Supervisors concerning local mental health services and programs. The current vacancies are for the District 5 Seat 3 with a term ending June 30, 2027. The Mental Health Commission meets the first Wednesday of each month from 4:30-6:30 p.m. For information call Angela Beck at (925) 313-9553. Angela.Beck@cchealth.org

Community Listening Session on gun violence in Antioch March 12

Thursday, March 7th, 2024

At the Nick Rodriguez Community Center, 213 F Street in Antioch’s historic, downtown Rivertown. Hosted by the Contra Costa Health Department’s Violence Prevention Program and Gun Violence Prevention Coalition, and Bridge Builders to the New Generation.

According the CCHealth’s website, The Violence Prevention Program uses a public health approach to prevent and reduce gun violence in Contra Costa County by providing high-risk populations with social support and services informed by evidence-based practices and equity principles. The program, established in October 2022, was made possible through a three-year grant from the U.S. Department of Justice Community-Based Violence Intervention and Prevention Initiative.

The Violence Prevention Program is partnering with community stakeholders to develop a Gun Violence Reduction Strategic Plan for the county. The plan will focus on developing social-emotional learning programs for at-risk youth, building workforce development opportunities and career paths, and working with communities to improve the physical environment, neighborhood appearance and community engagement.

Currently, the program is working with the nonprofit consultant on a landscape analysis of the county’s existing violence prevention efforts.

The Gun Violence Prevention Coalition is a diverse, community and multi-agency-driven collaborative supported by Contra Costa Health’s Violence Prevention Program. The Coalition seeks to increase collaboration among residents, community partners, and agencies who are interested in and are actively involved in reducing gun violence and advancing gun-violence prevention policies. The Coalition’s goal is to prevent and reduce the incidence of gun violence and its associated negative community and health impacts.

SNAP food replacement due to widespread power outages during strong winter storm in California announced

Saturday, March 2nd, 2024

By Julie Yee, Public Affairs Specialist, Western Regional Office, Food and Nutrition Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced Friday, March 1, 2024, that households impacted by widespread power outages that started on February 4th as the result of a strong winter storm in California could be eligible for replacement of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)/CalFresh benefits. This is one of many recent steps USDA has taken to ensure California residents in need have food to eat.

Rather than require SNAP households to report food losses individually, USDA allowed the State of California to approve automatic mass replacements for residents of certain zip codes who lost food as a result of the power outages and winter storm. The waiver applies to specified zip codes from 27 counties. More details will be made available through the  California Department of Social Services (CDSS). 

SNAP participants in areas hardest hit by the power outages may have a portion of their February benefits replaced. SNAP recipients residing in other affected areas may request replacement benefits by filing an affidavit with the local office attesting to disaster-related loss.

Additionally, USDA has approved CDSS’ request to waive the 10-day reporting requirement for replacement of food purchased with SNAP benefits that were lost as a result of power outages due to the winter storms that began in February. The waiver is in effect through March 4, 2024.

USDA’s Food and Nutrition Service is ready to consider additional waivers that may be needed to help program participants who have lost food due to widespread power outages and to simplify the application process for affected households, upon request from the CDSS. Individuals seeking more information about this and other available aid should dial 2-1-1. For more information about California SNAP, visit https://www.cdss.ca.gov/food-nutrition/calfresh.

USDA’s Food and Nutrition Service works to end hunger and improve food and nutrition security through a suite of 16 nutrition assistance programs, such as the school breakfast and lunch programs, WIC and SNAP. Together, these programs serve 1 in 4 Americans over the course of a year, promoting consistent and equitable access to healthy, safe, and affordable food essential to optimal health and well-being. FNS also provides science-based nutrition recommendations through the co-development of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. FNS’s report, “Leveraging the White House Conference to Promote and Elevate Nutrition Security: The Role of the USDA Food and Nutrition Service,” highlights ways the agency will support the Biden-Harris Administration’s National Strategy, released in conjunction with the historic White House Conference on Hunger, Nutrition, and Health in September 2022. To learn more about FNS, visit www.fns.usda.gov and follow @USDANutrition.

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.

Antioch selected as one of first host sites of Economic Recovery Corps

Friday, February 23rd, 2024
Source: City of Antioch

Matched with “non-binary” Fellow to run program to support new Crossroads to The Delta Project to revitalize the local economy, address commuter challenges, promote a sustainable business ecosystem

The City of Antioch announced on Wednesday, Feb. 21, 2024, it has been selected as a host site of the first cohort for the Economic Recovery Corps (ERC). The ERC is a new, collaborative initiative designed to accelerate recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic in distressed communities and regions throughout the U.S. by connecting organizations with the talent and capacity needed to advance new ways of doing economic development that promote economic resilience and transformative change. The ERC is working in partnership with the U.S. Department of Commerce’s U.S. Economic Development Administration and the International Economic Development Council.

The ERC Program has the potential to shift the practice of economic development nationwide in an unprecedented manner.

Utilizing strategic partnerships, innovative industry development and data-driven planning, the project addresses issues such as lengthy commutes, limited local job opportunities and underutilized city resources. The challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic include a disbanded public safety office, staff shortages, struggling small businesses, and an underused waterfront. The ERC Fellow will research, audit, manage, or develop up to six key initiatives, covering areas like district-based associations, OceanTech, advanced manufacturing, supplier diversification programs, and assessing small business grant impact. The project aims to contribute to Antioch’s economic recovery and sustainability, fostering a resilient and vibrant community.

About the Fellow

The City also introduced ERC Fellow Gaby Seltzer who was matched with the Antioch community. Seltzer will play a pivotal role in revitalizing the local economy, address commuter challenges, and promote a sustainable business ecosystem. Gaby will be living and working in our community for the next 2.5 years.

The ERC’s website provided background about Antioch’s fellow in the program.

“Gaby is passionate about building community wealth and power through sustainability initiatives. ‘Their’ professional background is in grassroots food systems work, including managing a social enterprise program that increased access to healthy foods at corner stores in Washington, DC’s food apartheid neighborhoods. Through this work, ‘they’ helped locally-anchored businesses build resilient partnerships with residents, governments, academic institutions, and industry groups.

Witnessing the power of local networks to foster sustainability and social justice led Gaby to Presidio Graduate School, where ‘they’ honed ‘their’ cross-sector organizing skills through an MBA and MPA in Sustainability. While pursuing these degrees ‘they’ consulted for several economic resilience organizations. ‘They’ also served as an Environmental Defense Fund Climate Corps Fellow twice: first designing a data portal to drive climate investments to frontline communities at the City of Seattle, and next building datasets and learning materials to drive climate adaptation programming at Pacific Gas & Electric Company.

In ‘their’ spare time, Gaby enjoys spending time outside and hosting gatherings.”

Asked if there is just one or more fellows, how Seltzer was matched with Antioch and in which city department the fellow will be working, Antioch Economic Development Manager Bret Sweet responded, “There was only one fellow, Gaby Seltzer. Gaby has asked us to use ‘they’, ‘them’ and ‘their’ in reference.”

“I applied for the program and went through a fairly intensive pitch process along with (Acting City Manager and Economic Development Director) Kwame (Reed),” he explained. “Once we were selected, we formed a panel of city and county employees to interview multiple candidates. As it worked out, we scored the highest and Gaby ranked Antioch the highest, so we were matched. There are 65 fellows in the program and only two were sent to California. As I learned at the kick-off last week in Portland, apparently ‘more than half the candidates asked to work on the Antioch project’.”

“Gaby works in the Economic Development Department here and will also work a bit with the Economic Development Department at the county,” Sweet added.

About the Project

Asked about the name of the project, Sweet shared, “Crossroads to the Delta project is the name we designed for the six initiatives we asked applicants to work on. Here is the project as it appeared to applicants: Crossroads To The Delta

“It was the name of the project for the ERC. It is not something established by the council,” he continued. “It was named crossroads to highlight Antioch’s positioning between San Francisco, Palo Alto, Stockton and Sacramento.”

“Gaby and I worked all last week at the kick-off in Portland to update the project goals based on feasibility, bandwidth and resources. We will probably have the page updated by next month,” Sweet said.

Learn more about the ERC program and the various projects across the US and stay up
to date on the ERC’s happenings by signing up for updates at www.iedconline.org/ERC_Updates.

Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.

Payton Perspective: It’s time for reparations for descendants of African slaves in America

Friday, February 23rd, 2024
“15th Amendment, or the Darkey’s millenium: 40 acres of land and a mule.” Man and boy with cart in front of the Putnam House, Palatka, Fla. Source: The Miriam and Ira D. Wallach Division of Art, Prints and Photographs: Photography Collection, from The New York Public Library. (1850 – 1930). (PUBLISHER’S NOTE: Objects depicting racist and/or stereotypical imagery or language may be offensive and disturbing, but the National Museum of African American History and Culture in which this photo is displayed aims to include them in the Collection to present and preserve the historical context in which they were created and used. Objects of this type provide an important historical record from which to study and evaluate racism).

Using federal land, not cash

By Allen D. Payton, Publisher

During this Black History Month, as I’ve been arguing for several years, I believe it’s time for all Americans to agree reparations promised to freed slave families following the Civil War in 1865 should finally be fulfilled – but to their descendants.

First, let me point out the fact – especially to my fellow Republicans who might oppose them – that reparations were first, a Republican idea, ordered by Union Army Major General William Tecumseh Sherman, and supported by President Abraham Lincoln, the nation’s first Republican president. As a reminder, the Republican Party was formed to abolish slavery, and Lincoln and the Union Army successfully fought the Civil War to accomplish that goal.

40 Acres & A Mule

You may have heard the phrase “40 acres and a mule”, which was made more popularly known by movie actor and director Spike Lee who labeled his production company “40 Acres and a Mule Filmworks”. But you may not know that the phrase originated with reparations. That’s because Special Field Orders No. 15 were issued by Sherman on January 16, 1865, before the Civil War ended that May, granting “a plot of not more than (40) forty acres of tillable ground” to families, “made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States He also later ordered the army to lend mules to the freed slaves for their farming efforts.

The orders included the confiscation of 400,000 acres of plantation land along “a strip of (Atlantic) coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina to the St. John’s River in Florida, including Georgia’s Sea Islands and the mainland 30 miles in from the coast.” The land was to be divided into parcels on which approximately 18,000 formerly enslaved families and other Black people then living in the area would be settled.

The purpose was to provide for the freed slaves both a means to earn a living and support themselves, and the result would have been giving them an asset that could be passed on to future generations.

According to History.com, “The freedmen set out to begin working their new land immediately, with a group of 1,000 settling on Georgia’s Skidaway Island. In subsequent months as many as 40,000 freedmen settled on the redistributed land.”

Order Rescinded

Unfortunately, after Lincoln’s assassination just three months after the order was issued, his running mate on the National Union Party ticket in 1864, Democrat Vice President Andrew Johnson, following his ascension to the presidency, rescinded Sherman’s order. He returned to Confederate owners the 400,000 acres of land. Thus, the freed slaves were denied the land they had been granted and reparations were never offered to them by the federal government, again.

Why Reparations Now?

Some people argue that it’s been over 150 years, so why do Black Americans need reparations, today? My initial response is that they’re long past due. But my main answer is two-fold. One is the fact that a major issue among most Blacks in the U.S., today is a lack of asset ownership, including homes, real estate, investments and businesses. For example, the average Black family has one-tenth the assets of the average white family in the U.S.

Disparity in Household Wealth

According to the U.S. Census Bureau’s Wealth and Asset Ownership Detailed Tables: 2020, Table 1. Median Value of Assets for Households, from the Survey of Income and Program Participation, Survey Year 2021, the median net worth for all households was $140,800. However, when broken down by ethnicity, the median “Black alone” household had one-tenth the assets of the median “White alone” household, or $18,430 compared to $178,500. The disparity is even greater when compared to the median “White alone, non-Hispanic” household which had assets of $217,500.

My argument for the disparity and second one in favor of why reparations, now is the fact that for nearly 250 years, almost all Blacks in the U.S. couldn’t own property because they were property, nor did they get paid. They also couldn’t get an education. So, the rest of us, whose ancestors were never subjected to the horrors and evil of chattel slavery, in effect had a 250-year head start!

Yes, I’ve heard the arguments about the Irish, which is my ancestry, and how they were mistreated, or others who were indentured servants. But those were not the same as being a slave sold, bought and owned by someone else, as well as their future generations to follow.

A Federal Responsibility, Not State or Local

Second, reparations are not a state or local issue, but a federal responsibility. Long before the day the Declaration of Independence was signed on July 4, 1776, and in spite of the fact it enshrined the statement that, “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness,” and then from the signing of the U.S. Constitution on September 17, 1789, to Lincoln’s issuance of the Emancipation Proclamation and the end of the Civil War, our federal government allowed slavey. It continued for another 65 years after the Constitution was ratified on May 29, 1790, for a total of 246 years since the first African slaves were brought to our country in 1619. So, again, reparations are a federal responsibility.

(A side, historical note on the Three-Fifths Compromise and clauses in the Constitution. It was not intended by the framers to further devalue the lives of slaves, but to reduce the influence in Congress by the slave states, by preventing them from having additional members in the House of Representatives and a greater number of electors in presidential elections. The slave states wanted to include the slaves in the census count, while the free states didn’t want them included at all. The compromise determined that three out of every five slaves were counted when establishing a state’s total population. A benefit to the slave states was it reduced the amount of taxes they had to pay to the federal government.

In Article I, Section II, Clause III of the Constitution, the Three-Fifths Compromise is stated as:

“Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several states which may be included in this Union, according to their respective numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole number of free persons, including those bound to service for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other persons.”

See also James Madison’s writings in Federalist Paper No. 54 in which he argues that slaves were both property and people, and thus required some degree of representation).

But I digress. Back to the issue at hand.

Source: Federal Bureau of Land Management

Reparations Are About Land, An Asset

Third, to my Democrat friends I remind them, reparations were initially land and that’s what they still should be, today, not cash. They should be about helping Black Americans own an asset for their use, from which to generate income and to pass on to future generations.

The federal government owns over one-fourth of the land in the U.S. According to a 2020 report and 2023 report by the Congressional Research Service, it amounts to “roughly 640 million acres, about 28% of the 2.27 billion acres of land in the United States”.

Looking at a map you’ll see the federal land is “heavily concentrated in 12 western states (including Alaska), 3 where the federal government owns roughly half of the overall land area.” That includes 45.4% of California, 60.9% of Alaska, 38.6% of Arizona, 36.2% of Colorado, 20.2% of Hawaii, 61.9% of Idaho, 29.0% of Montana, 80.1% of Nevada, 52.5% of Oregon, 63.1% of Utah, 28.6% of Washington and 46.7% of Wyoming. The federal government also owns 12.9% of Florida.

Much of that land is either in national parks (79.9 million acres), in national forests (192.9 million acres) or is farm and ranch land leased to farmers and ranchers. Five federal agencies administer most of it, including the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and National Park Service (NPS) in the Department of the Interior (DOI) and the Forest Service (FS) in the Department of Agriculture. with the Department of Defense controlling 8.8 million acres, and 4% administered by multiple other agencies.

So, my proposal is to give to all Black Americans, who can prove they are a descendant of a slave in America, some of that federal land. It can either be given out on an individual or family basis.

While not all Black Americans are descendants of a slave in the U.S. – for example, Vice President Kamala Harris, whose father descended from a Jamaican slave, would not qualify – for simple calculation purposes let’s say all of them are. Blacks currently make up about 13% of the U.S. population of about 330 million people for a total of 40 million people.

If we gave every Black American one, two or even five acres, that would be 40, 80 or as much as 200 million acres which would still leave 440 million acres remaining for ownership and use by the federal government. (Frankly, I don’t understand why the federal government needs to own so much land, especially ranch land for grazing, anyway.)

The new owners could do what they want with the land: farm it, drill it for oil, gas or water, mine it, lease it, swap it with other reparation land recipients, build a home on it, borrow against it, or perhaps form joint ventures with neighboring property owners and develop new communities, even cities. But I believe the one stipulation should be the land could only be sold to another descendant of an American slave. Then, it could be passed on to future generations.

Another argument I’ve heard or read about reparations is, why should people today have to pay anything when neither they nor their family ever owned slaves. This approach addresses that concern. By giving out federal land, there would be no cost to current taxpayers. While it might reduce revenue to the federal government from a reduction in leased lands, that’s a small price to pay for addressing this 160-year-old matter once and for all time.

Source: Congressional Research Service

No One Has to Participate

Some Black people have stated publicly they don’t need or want the help and find it offensive that they be offered reparations. Let’s be clear, no one who is qualified has to participate in a federal reparations program. But I believe most would. Who wouldn’t want free land?

Those who chose to participate would, of course, have to prove their status, and some form of reparations commission or government agency would have to be formed to verify their status and manage the distribution of the land grants. Once verified, program participants would be entered into a lottery and the property could be distributed in periodic drawings. It could even be televised nationally as the participants’ numbers are drawn, and advertising could be sold, and the revenue shared with the federal government to make up for the loss of land lease revenue.

One Time Program May Take Several Years

To sum up, I say it’s time, once and for all, to fulfill the commitment of reparations ordered in 1865 and give portions of federally owned land to the descendants of slaves in the U.S. It might take several years to accomplish, but I believe we should and could start right away.

Once the land has been distributed and all who want it received their share, then that would be it. We’d be done. Everyone would be happy, and there could be no more complaining. The agency would be disbanded, the issue would be put to rest, and it would be up to the new landowners to make do with theirs what they can.

Now, all we need is for Members of Congress and U.S. Senators to introduce the idea and move it forward.

Contra Costa Advisory Council on Equal Employment Opportunity seeks three members

Tuesday, February 20th, 2024

One Business member, two Community members

The Contra Costa County Advisory Council on Equal Employment Opportunity (ACEEO) has one vacant Business seat and two vacant Community seats open to applicants. The successful candidate for the Business seat must own a business within the county, and candidate(s) for the Community seats must either work or reside within the county. All candidates must have an interest in equal employment matters. The ACEEO meets on the fourth Friday of each month from 9:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m., except for holidays.

The ACEEO assists with the implementation of the County’s Equal Employment Opportunities and Contracting Programs and serves as an advisory committee to the Board of Supervisors. The ACEEO reviews the Equal Employment Opportunities Program and recommends actions to facilitate the attainment of the County’s goals for equal employment opportunities regardless of gender and race/ethnicity.

The Board of Supervisors established the ACEEO on July 9, 1991. The Council has thirteen (13) seats representing the following groups: 4 Community seats; 2 Labor seats; 2 Management seats; 1 Educational seat; 1 Disability seat; 1 Business seat; 1 Veteran seat; and 1 Labor/Trade seat.

Application forms can be obtained from the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors by calling (925) 655- 2000 or visiting the County webpage at www.contracosta.ca.gov/3418. Applications should be returned to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, 1025 Escobar St., 1st Floor, Martinez, CA 94553. Applications can also be emailed to ClerkoftheBoard@cob.cccounty.us.

Applicants should plan to be available for public interviews. For further information about the ACEEO, please contact Antoine Wilson at antoine.wilson@riskm.cccounty.us or (925) 335-1455. You can also visit the web page at www.contracosta.ca.gov/4503/Advisory-Council-on-Equal- Employment-Opp.

DeSaulnier announces 2024 Congressional Art Competition for high school students

Tuesday, February 20th, 2024
2022 District CA-11 Congressional Art Competition winner, “Growing Up” by Menglin Cai of Danville. Source: Office of Congressman Mark DeSaulnier (when he represented the 11th District)

Deadline for submittals is April 5th

Walnut Creek, CA – Today, Congressman Mark DeSaulnier (D, CA-10) announced he will participate in the nationwide 2024 Congressional Art Competition. High school artists living in California’s 10th Congressional District may begin submitting original artwork to his office virtually from now through Friday, April 5th. The winning piece will be selected by a panel of local judges who will view all artwork electronically and announced at a reception to celebrate all participants following the submission deadline.

Participants may submit one photograph or scan of their artwork, taken in the highest possible resolution, to kaylee.deland@mail.house.gov. Submissions must include the Student Release Form. Artwork entered in the contest may be up to 26 inches by 26 inches, may be up to 4 inches in depth, and not weigh more than 15 pounds. If your artwork is selected as the winning piece, it must arrive framed and must still measure no larger than the above maximum dimensions.

  • Paintings – including oil, acrylics, and watercolor
  • Drawings – including pastels, colored pencil, pencil, charcoal, ink, and markers (It is recommended that charcoal and pastel drawings be fixed.)
  • Collages – must be two dimensional
  • Prints – including lithographs, silkscreen, and block prints
  • Mixed Media – use of more than two mediums such as pencil, ink, watercolor, etc.
  • Computer-generated art
  • Photography

All entries must be original in concept, design and execution and may not violate any U.S. copyright laws. Any entry that has been copied from an existing photo or image (including a painting, graphic, or advertisement) that was created by someone other than the student is a violation of the competition rules and will not be accepted. Work entered must be in the original medium (that is, not a scanned reproduction of a painting or drawing).

The rules for the 2024 competition are available here or on House.gov.

“Every year I am so impressed by the talent of the students in our district who participate in the Congressional Art Competition,” said DeSaulnier. “I am pleased to again host this event as an opportunity for young artists to showcase and be recognized for their creativity.”

The competition is open to all high school students living in California’s 10th Congressional District. The winning piece will be displayed in the U.S. Capitol and the winner will be invited to Washington D.C. to attend a national reception honoring winners from around the country. All submissions must be emailed to Kaylee.deland@mail.house.gov no later than 5:00 p.m. PT on April 5, 2024.

The Congressional Art Competition is a nationwide high school visual art competition to recognize and encourage artistic talent in the nation and in each congressional district. Since the Competition began in 1982, more than 650,000 high school students have participated. Complete contest guidelines and submissions forms are available on the Congressman’s website here. For more information or help submitting artwork, please contact DeSaulnier’s office at 925-933-2660.