Archive for the ‘Opinion’ Category

Writer says Bonilla has muddled record on gay rights

Thursday, February 26th, 2015

Dear Editor:

Susan Bonilla must come out to voters on her gay rights record.

As a member of the LGBT community, I am appalled by Assemblywoman Bonilla’s muddled record on gay rights. Not once in her candidacy for the 7th State Senate seat has she explained why as Supervisor she voted for Contra Costa not to stand up against Proposition 8.

Bonilla’s deciding vote made us the only county in the Bay Area to not join the fight against Proposition 8, even though her district voted overwhelmingly against it. And while today she claims to be a support of gay rights, her endorsement of pro-life, anti-gay candidates flies in the face of her newly formulated positions.

There’s only one candidate on the ballot who’s consistently supported marriage equality since her first day in office, and that’s Assemblywoman Joan Buchanan. Joan opposed Proposition 8 when it was politically unpopular, and has a zero-tolerance policy for endorsing candidates who do not support equal rights.

Please join me in supporting Joan Buchanan for State Senate on March 17, 2015.

Robert D. Camacho, Concord

Camacho was a candidate for the Concord City Council in 2012 and a 2008 Hillary Rodham Clinton Delegate from the 10th Congressional District to the National Democratic Convention.

Share this:
email Writer says Bonilla has muddled record on gay rights su Writer says Bonilla has muddled record on gay rights digg Writer says Bonilla has muddled record on gay rights fb Writer says Bonilla has muddled record on gay rights twitter Writer says Bonilla has muddled record on gay rights

Democrat club leaders explain their support for Buchanan in State Senate race

Thursday, February 26th, 2015

Why the Grassroots Democrats
are for Joan Buchanan

Four local Democratic Club Presidents say why they support
Joan Buchanan for Senate District 7 in the March 17th primary.

Submitted by Ellis Goldberg

Four Democratic clubs endorsed Joan Buchanan and are actively working on her campaign. Club members are sending personal notes to voters urging them to vote for Joan. This is what the club presidents are telling voters.

Brodie Hilp Democrat club leaders explain their support for Buchanan in State Senate race

Brodie Hilp
President
San Ramon Valley Democratic Club

Joan has spoken at our club many times and each time we are amazed at her expertise on a wide range of issues such as California water issues and the California budget. If you attended the candidate debates, you heard the other candidates speak in platitudes and generalities. In contrast, Joan’s answers were thorough and at a much higher level than the other candidates. Another example of her intellect and commitment to high standards is when she rescued several legislative bills from erroneous wording which would have left loopholes and cost taxpayers money. Besides her intellect, equally undeniable is her passion for public education and compassion for the children in California. In summary, we at the grassroots level support Joan for State Senate. She may not be good at wooing big organizations with big money for campaigns, but she is has a big heart and the intellect to get the job done right.

 Ellis Goldberg Democrat club leaders explain their support for Buchanan in State Senate race

Ellis Goldberg, President
TriValley Democratic Club

Joan Buchanan does her homework!State legislators consider 1700 bills in each two year session, they can’t have a good grasp of all of them. When state legislators need an analysis of the effects, costs and unintended consequences of a particular bill under consideration, they go to Joan. She is a highly respected, influential “GO TO” legislator known for insightful thought out analysis. When other legislators can’t get their head around an issue they come to Joan. That’s how she leads. It is not enough to vote on the issues, championing issues is required. Joan Buchanan is a champion.”

Karen Cohen Democrat club leaders explain their support for Buchanan in State Senate race

Karen Cohen
President
Diablo Valley Democratic Club

Our club unanimously endorsed Joan because of her integrity and her grasp of complicated issues that is the result of diligent study combined with unusual intelligence. We know we can count on her to make decisions for the good of all citizens.Joan is committed to securing a positive economic future by passing responsible, performance-based, balanced budgets; supporting small businesses and innovative technologies; and prioritizing education in order to ensure a competent workforce.

Jane Walter Democrat club leaders explain their support for Buchanan in State Senate race

Jane Walter
President
Democrats of Rossmoor

Our club has voted to endorse Joan Buchanan’s candidacy for the State Senate for many reasons. Joan has a special relationship to Rossmoor. She is a dues paying member of our club and a popular speaker at our meetings which she attends on occasion. Joan has held constituent meetings on our campus and understands the needs and interests of the Rossmoor community. As our representative in the State Assembly, Joan was especially effective in the areas of technology, fiscal planning, and education. She is a passionate advocate for our public schools. Joan always does her homework and has never failed to impress us with her deep understanding of the issues facing our state and region. We know that she deeply cares about the causes she supports and never acts or speaks out of political calculation. As our State Senator, Joan would continue to work for the causes which we as Democrats would like to see supported in the State Legislature. 
Share this:
email Democrat club leaders explain their support for Buchanan in State Senate race su Democrat club leaders explain their support for Buchanan in State Senate race digg Democrat club leaders explain their support for Buchanan in State Senate race fb Democrat club leaders explain their support for Buchanan in State Senate race twitter Democrat club leaders explain their support for Buchanan in State Senate race

Letter writer says a Bonilla victory will cost taxpayers for another special election

Wednesday, February 25th, 2015

Dear Editor:

While both candidates for the upcoming State Senate special election are very much in alignment on paper and in their votes on the issues, one of the best reasons to vote for Joan Buchanan on March 17th is that if the current Assembly Member Susan Bonilla wins, it will trigger yet another special election, thus costing our great county over one million dollars; money that could well be spent on other programs and services.

The next step is for Assembly Member Susan Bonilla to finish up her just recently elected two-year term and let’s send Joan Buchanan back to Sacramento to continue to protect seniors, make college more affordable, and keep our budgets balanced. It is a win-win.

Ken Richard, Walnut Creek

Share this:
email Letter writer says a Bonilla victory will cost taxpayers for another special election su Letter writer says a Bonilla victory will cost taxpayers for another special election digg Letter writer says a Bonilla victory will cost taxpayers for another special election fb Letter writer says a Bonilla victory will cost taxpayers for another special election twitter Letter writer says a Bonilla victory will cost taxpayers for another special election

Letter writer questions power of State Democratic Party versus local club endorsements

Tuesday, February 24th, 2015

Dear Editor:

The conundrum of the California Democratic Party versus the local Democratic club endorsements. The California Democratic Party endorsement of Susan Bonilla in the State Senate District 7 race was based on the outcome of a vote of 75 local people authorized to vote in this internal party process. A total of 44 additional votes were gathered by Bonilla thanks to a greatly discredited rule that allowed any state legislator currently in office to get ‘proxy’ votes from anywhere in the state. Advantage Incumbents. (The rule’s been removed from the Party By-Laws, but not officially until May, so it was still ‘legal’ to use this procedure).

The Democratic clubs within Senate District 7 that have chosen to make endorsements represent a larger group of people.

Joan Buchanan endorsements:

Rossmoor Democratic Club – 600+ members

Diablo Valley Democratic Club -  70 members

Tri-Valley Democratic Club – 60 members

San Ramon Democratic Club – 73 members

Susan Bonilla endorsements:

Concord Democratic Club – approximately 20 members

Do the math.

Sue Hamill, Walnut Creek

Share this:
email Letter writer questions power of State Democratic Party versus local club endorsements su Letter writer questions power of State Democratic Party versus local club endorsements digg Letter writer questions power of State Democratic Party versus local club endorsements fb Letter writer questions power of State Democratic Party versus local club endorsements twitter Letter writer questions power of State Democratic Party versus local club endorsements

Antioch recall leader responds to Mayor Harper’s response

Sunday, February 15th, 2015

Dear Editor:

Mayor Harper’s response to the recall can be summed up in a few salient points:

Mayor Harper has sworn in 10 police officers.

The mayor’s claim is years late.  In 2010 he started his getting tough on crime and had zero tolerance to crime.campaigns.  Again in 2012, same thing and in 2013 was going to hire 22 officers.  In 2010 the Antioch Police department staffing was authorized for 102 positions, they had 90.  In 2015 they are still authorized for 102 positions and they still have 90. Doesn’t seem like much of an emphasis on zero tolerance or being tough.

Mayor Harper claims the recall will cost $198,994, the cost of two officers.

The mayor’s claim is so exaggerated it is ridiculous.  Measure O cost one-fourth of that amount and is likely to be the same if not less and if an officer costs $100,000 then why didn’t he authorize the hiring of 42 officers instead of spending over $4.5 million on overtime in 2011, 2012 and 2013.  That was OT only, not benefits or base pay, OT only.  Obviously the city had the money.

Mayor Harper says “under his leadership” he got a grant for $625,000 to hire 5 officers.
The mayor’s forgot to mention that is for 3 years only.  What happens to the 5 officers when the funding runs out after 3 years.  When is this going to happen since it took 5 years to get to a net zero in police staffing?

Mayor Harper says, “Police Department conducts weekly crime suppression operations – one of which resulted in 87 arrests in just a five-day period.” 

Which is a true statement, but if you were at the council meeting when the chief explained there were 150 officers and 8 agencies involved and only 7 of those 87 arrests were Antioch’s.  Yet another gross exaggeration by the mayor.

Mayor Harper states twice, regarding safety that, “Our families deserve to feel safe, ” and “Nothing is more important than keeping our neighborhoods and children safe.” 

Mayor Harper, the problem is we don’t need to “feel safe”, we need to “be safe” and if nothing is more important then why haven’t measures been taken to ensure success in maintaining safety of the neighborhoods and children.  Ensuring safety is not abandoning children after a couple of visits to Deer Valley Plaza and then coercing the AUSD to hire security to detain the children and let the APD arrest them.  What happened to “no child left behind”.  The Deer Valley Plaza takeover by Strategic Threat Management has done nothing but move the problem to neighboring establishments.  What the Mayor has been successful in is promoting their disrespect of the APD and fear of the STM.  They know the APD won’t arrest them so they go where they are safe. Their fighting, en mass, has not stopped, just moved.  Their problems have not been addressed, just moved.

Mayor Harper claims to have, “ended work furloughs city-wide”. 

That is correct, but only after withholding information from the voters to ensure passage of Measure O.  The City of Antioch received the following payment and never let anyone know until voting had started on Measure O it appeared passage was successful. The following payments were received and the information withheld on:

Apr, 2014 – $2,698,000+

Jun, 2014 – $550,000+

Oct, 2014 – $269,000+

A total of over $3.5 MILLION

The City of Antioch waited over 6 months to bring the city back to full-service for the sole purpose of withhold that information to help ensure the passage of Measure O.  Measure O only passed by less than 600 votes.  How people do you think would not have voted for Measure O had they known how much the City of Antioch was sitting on.  How many city employees would have preferred to be working full-time instead of waiting nine months.  How many residents and business do you think would have preferred to have the city full-service instead of waiting nine months.

Mayor Harper wants everyone to believe that he is powerless and does not have the ability to do what he said he was going to do.  The fact is, he shouldn’t, the reality is, he does.  A recent article in the Antioch Herald exposed another power play by Mayor Harper to take control of the city council for the last two plus years.  The City Manager not only condoned what the Mayor has done, he supported it and argued that it’s existence has been around long before Harper, a fact dispelled by the prior mayors and council members.

The fact is that the leadership of the City of Antioch must be changed and replaced with person(s) that care about Antioch, not just political aspirations. 

Mayor Harper makes all kinds of claims and promises, but the reality is none of them are real or have happened.  What is real is how much the average person is losing because of higher costs and lower housing resale amounts, both of which amounts to huge losses in revenues to the city.  Additionally, residents end up paying higher auto and housing insurance premiums.  Shopping visits include trips to other cities for security reasons and because so many businesses have moved out of Antioch.  The list goes on and on and is never ending – all because of a lack of tolerance toward crime and being soft on crime.

Rich Buongiorno

Antioch

Share this:
email Antioch recall leader responds to Mayor Harpers response su Antioch recall leader responds to Mayor Harpers response digg Antioch recall leader responds to Mayor Harpers response fb Antioch recall leader responds to Mayor Harpers response twitter Antioch recall leader responds to Mayor Harpers response

Payton Perspective: Antioch Council listens to the public, stops requiring agreement of three to get item on agenda

Wednesday, February 11th, 2015

Unanimous decision sets things right, the way they’ve long been practiced in Antioch

Payton Perspective logo 300x140 Payton Perspective: Antioch Council listens to the public, stops requiring agreement of three to get item on agendaBy Allen Payton

Sometimes you CAN fight City Hall and win. Tonight was one example. After two weeks of Antioch residents, community leaders and this newspaper rising up and challenging the practice by Antioch Mayor Wade Harper requiring a consensus of council members to allow any one of them to get an item placed on a future council agenda, the City Council voted 5-0 to eliminate the practice.

After multiple speakers all opposing the practice to various rounds of applause from the audience, and in spite of City Manager Steve Duran’s best efforts to convince the council – although incorrectly and repeatedly – that this was a long held practice, the council decided it was best to let each individual council member represent the people who elected them, properly.

The one thing that Duran did get correct about how things were done by previous mayors, was that they would meet with their city managers to set the meeting agendas. But, no one was ever arguing that. The issue was what was being placed on the agenda and that it was not the mayor’s right to deny a council member to have their item placed on a future agenda.

Before Mayor Pro Tem Lori Ogorchock made her motion to eliminate the practice, it appeared things were just going to remain as they have been for the past two years, with Harper and Council Members Mary Rocha and Tony Tiscareno supporting the status quo with a head nod of three council members to agree. But, with Council Member Monica Wilson stating she felt it was best for any council member to be able to place an item on the agenda and Rocha seconding Ogorchock’s motion, it was clear the motion would pass.

To support his argument that this was not a new practice, Harper pointed out one time in the 28 years prior to him being elected Mayor, when a council member didn’t get their proposal placed on the agenda. He said he watched a meeting when then-Council Member Reggie Moore tried to get his idea of a police oversight commission placed on a future agenda. Then-Mayor Don Freitas said he would speak with the city attorney about it. I’m not aware if it was ever placed on the agenda. But, even if it wasn’t that was only one time that happened.

Rocha attempted to support the same argument by reminding people of when she was Mayor, and I was on the council, and we had two council members who were part of a group of citizens that were rather controversial and caused challenges during council meetings. But, as a reminder, that wasn’t because of crazy ideas the two council members wanted or had placed on the agenda, but rather their supporters speaking on almost every agenda item, at every council meeting, causing them to last as late as 3 a.m. That’s why our council changed the public speaking time from five minutes to the current three minutes per person per agenda item.

Besides voting for the motion, the other good thing Harper did was to publicly apologize to Ogorchock for making her feel her proposal, of hiring three more Community Service Officers for the police department, would not be placed on a future agenda, during the January 13th meeting.

It was eye-opening, however, to learn from an additional survey city staff conducted in the past two days, that other cities in Contra Costa County follow the practice of requiring a consensus of council members to get an item placed on a future agenda. I’m just glad Antioch hasn’t followed that practice, except for during the past two years. I agree with Ogorchock who stated said she wanted Antioch to be the leader and let other cities follow us, rather than the other way around, on this matter.

This issue and the minor skirmish that ensued, reminded the city council and staff of whose government this is – ours, we the people – and makes me pleased that representative, responsive government still works in Antioch. It also reminds me of the old saying “the price of liberty is eternal vigilance.”

So, thank you to the council for taking the right course of action on the issue of getting items on future agendas, tonight.

To our readers and residents of Antioch, the Herald will continue to challenge our elected representatives and hold them accountable, and keep you informed of their actions, both good and bad.

As for the mayor’s idea of having a moment of silence at the beginning of the meeting for prayer or meditation, that didn’t bother me, nor would it have violated the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause. If the U.S. Senate can open with a prayer by the Chaplain of the Senate, surely a moment of silence is acceptable, as well.

I had left the meeting before that discussion, so, I was surprised to learn, later that the council vote 4-1 against the idea, along faith lines with the four Catholic members voting against Harper, the one Protestant member on the council. So, I guess everyone will have to just continue saying their prayers before they show up for council meetings. I just pray all requested items get placed on a future agenda!

Share this:
email Payton Perspective: Antioch Council listens to the public, stops requiring agreement of three to get item on agenda su Payton Perspective: Antioch Council listens to the public, stops requiring agreement of three to get item on agenda digg Payton Perspective: Antioch Council listens to the public, stops requiring agreement of three to get item on agenda fb Payton Perspective: Antioch Council listens to the public, stops requiring agreement of three to get item on agenda twitter Payton Perspective: Antioch Council listens to the public, stops requiring agreement of three to get item on agenda

Letter writer questions 2,841 new homes proposed for southeastern Antioch

Monday, February 9th, 2015

Dear Editor:

How many people in Antioch are aware that huge new housing developments are being planned? Do people know what kind of impact this will have on traffic, city services, and taxes?

We need to have a Town Hall meeting to inform the Antioch residents of these new expansion plans.

Such a meeting should be widely publicized using every kind of outreach tools available. The information presented to the public should cover general topics about the potential impacts to the city and a general description of each new area including maps.

In the recent City Manager Weekly Reports, there are three housing developments under review that will add 2,841 new homes in southeastern Antioch. That area is mostly rural now, so this will add a lot of requirements for new services such as fire service, police service, water and sewer maintenance, code enforcement, animal control, traffic lights, etc.

Will these be high-density housing areas with cluster houses, small lots, and narrow driveways serving multiple houses?

What sort of fees will these developers pay to cover the cost of building new schools, fire stations, and expanding city services? Will the new residents pay annual assessments to cover a portion of the ongoing new costs to the city?

Joseph Ramus

Antioch

Share this:
email Letter writer questions 2,841 new homes proposed for southeastern Antioch su Letter writer questions 2,841 new homes proposed for southeastern Antioch digg Letter writer questions 2,841 new homes proposed for southeastern Antioch fb Letter writer questions 2,841 new homes proposed for southeastern Antioch twitter Letter writer questions 2,841 new homes proposed for southeastern Antioch

Watchdog: Where did Antioch Mayor Wade Harper go wrong?

Monday, February 9th, 2015

Watchdog Logo 300x95 Watchdog: Where did Antioch Mayor Wade Harper go wrong?Why was he served with recall papers for the second time in months?

By Barbara Zivica

Antioch Mayor Wade Harper has an impressive resume. He has a Master‘s of Business Administration from John F. Kennedy University (2009), a Bachelor of Arts Degree from Patten University and graduated Magna Cum Laude. He’s had a 24-year career in Law Enforcement, starting with the Emeryville Police Department and ending up as a Lieutenant for the Tracy Police Department (2005 – 2013). In 2008 he was appointed to the Antioch Unified School District’s Board of Trustees, ran for and was elected to the Antioch City Council in 2010 and was elected Mayor in 2012. He’s currently on the Board of Directors for Delta Diablo Sanitation District and Tri- Delta Transit.

His first misstep as Mayor was to pass an “urgency ordinance” at the December 27, 2012 council meeting – a rare second December meeting, especially during the week between the holidays – which had to become effective before January 1, 2013 when a voter approved state law would mandate specific pension formulas for public employees (2.7% at age 55 for police officers and 2% at age 62 for other employee categories). The urgency ordinance amended the September 1, 2012 contract agreement with Antioch’s police officers and misc. employees in which the retirement benefit formulas for new hires was changed from 3% at age 50 for police to 3% at age 55 and the retirement benefit formula for misc. employees was changed from 2.7% at age 55 to 2% at age 62. In other words the “urgency” ordinance restored the 3% at 50 base formula although a cap was put on lateral police hires. The chief would only be able to hire 5 lateral officers at the 3% at age 50 retirement formula after which he’d have to consult council. All new hires (not current PERS or reciprocal system members) would be under the new 2.7% @ 57 formula.

His second misstep as Mayor was acting as the principal officer of Citizens for a Safe Antioch In Support of Measure C, and telling residents that passage of the half cent sales tax ballot measure would enable the hiring of 22 new police officers. Measure C, a general tax measure requiring only 50% approval plus one vote to pass, however, made no such claim. It specifically stated “the revenue would be deposited in the City’s general fund. It could be used for any legal municipal purpose including: police and emergency response; code enforcement, local economic development and job creation; street repair and any other City program and service.”

As for past versus current police staffing: On February 21, 2012 Police Chief Cantando reported that the department was authorized for 102 positions and was projected to be at 90 filled positions as of March 11, 2013.

At the January 27, 2015city council meeting, Cantando presented the council with a report detailing crime statistics, calls for service and staffing. According to his report, the police department has 102 authorized sworn positions including the Chief, 90 full time positions are filled, there are 9 sworn vacancies and 3 recruits were to begin the academy on January 26, 2015. Doesn’t seem as we’ve made much progress toward hiring 22 new officers, does it?

Share this:
email Watchdog: Where did Antioch Mayor Wade Harper go wrong? su Watchdog: Where did Antioch Mayor Wade Harper go wrong? digg Watchdog: Where did Antioch Mayor Wade Harper go wrong? fb Watchdog: Where did Antioch Mayor Wade Harper go wrong? twitter Watchdog: Where did Antioch Mayor Wade Harper go wrong?