Archive for the ‘Politics & Elections’ Category

County Elections Office to provide drop-off boxes to enable easier voting, this year

Saturday, October 4th, 2014

Contra Costa residents will find it a little easier to vote this upcoming election, as the County Elections Office is teaming up with City Clerks to provide several convenient “CoCo Vote-N-Go” drop off locations prior to and on Election Day.

Brentwood, Antioch, Pittsburg, San Ramon, Orinda, Concord, Pleasant Hill, Walnut Creek, Richmond, San Pablo, Hercules, and Pinole are among the cities who are participating in this effort. The secure, steel drop-off boxes will be in place at those city halls starting the week of Oct. 13 – one week after permanent vote-by-mail and absentee voters receive ballots. Days and hours of availability will vary by city.

We are excited to join with our City partners in offering this option for our fast growing number of vote by mail voters,” said County Registrar of Voters Joe Canciamilla in announcing the new service. “In the future, voters should expect to have an even wider range of drop locations in their local communities.”

The distinguishable red boxes will be available during normal city business hours. City staff members will also have the popular “I Voted” stickers upon request for those who drop off their ballots.

County elections officials will regularly pick up collected ballots.

Ballots may also be dropped off 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. at the County Elections Office in Martinez, located at 555 Escobar St., or at any polling place on Election Day.

For more information about voting by mail, call 925-335-7800 or visit the County Elections Website at www.cocovote.us.

Share this:
email County Elections Office to provide drop off boxes to enable easier voting, this year su County Elections Office to provide drop off boxes to enable easier voting, this year digg County Elections Office to provide drop off boxes to enable easier voting, this year fb County Elections Office to provide drop off boxes to enable easier voting, this year twitter County Elections Office to provide drop off boxes to enable easier voting, this year

Antioch Election Forums on Comcast Channel 24 beginning Tuesday night, September 30

Monday, September 29th, 2014

The 2014 Antioch Election Forums co-sponsored by the Antioch Chamber of Commerce and Antioch Herald will air on Comcast Local Cable Access Channel 24, beginning this week.

The schedule is as follows on each of the following dates: starting Tuesday, Sept. 30 and Oct. 2, 7, 9, 21 and 23.

County School Board Candidates Forum Areas 4 and 5 – airs at 6 p.m.

Measure O Campaign Forum – airs at 7 p.m.

Antioch City Council Candidates Forum – airs at 8 p.m.

Antioch School Board Candidates Forum – airs at 10 p.m.

The forums can also be viewed on the Antioch Chamber of Commerce website at www.AntiochChamber.com.

Share this:
email Antioch Election Forums on Comcast Channel 24 beginning Tuesday night, September 30 su Antioch Election Forums on Comcast Channel 24 beginning Tuesday night, September 30 digg Antioch Election Forums on Comcast Channel 24 beginning Tuesday night, September 30 fb Antioch Election Forums on Comcast Channel 24 beginning Tuesday night, September 30 twitter Antioch Election Forums on Comcast Channel 24 beginning Tuesday night, September 30

County School Board candidates forum gets heated

Sunday, September 21st, 2014

By John Crowder

On Thursday night, September 18, 2014, candidates running for two seats on the Contra Costa County Board of Education (CCCBE) participated in a question and answer forum held at the Antioch City Council chambers. Present were all four candidates. Incumbent and retired school administrator Richard Asadoorian is facing challenger Mike Maxwell, a former teacher and local businessman, in the race for Area 4. Incumbent Cynthia Ruehlig, a non-profit administrator, is being challenged by educator Jeff Belle in the race for Area 5. Maxwell is a resident of Danville, while the rest of the candidates are from Antioch.

Paul Burgarino, formerly of the East County Times, and now serving as a Voter Education and Engagement Specialist with the Contra Costa County Election Division, served as moderator for the event. The two panelists asking questions were Allen Payton, publisher of the Antioch Herald, and Dr. Sean Wright, CEO of the Antioch Chamber of Commerce.

Of the four debates held in Antioch last week, this one produced the most contentious moments, as Belle and Ruehlig challenged each other throughout the night.

Following opening statements and then in answer to the first question, posed by Wright, Asadoorian, Belle, and Ruehlig emphasized their public service credentials, and Maxwell his teaching experience and desire to help kids.

The second question of the night, posed by Payton, asked for the candidate’s views on charter schools in general, and the contentious Dozier-Libbey charter school petition in particular. The answers set the stage for the battle that would continue throughout the rest of the evening between Belle and Ruehlig.

All four candidates expressed at least some support for charter schools.

Maxwell said they were important, and a good asset to the community, but decided to forbear on the Dozier-Libbey question.

Asadoorian, while stating his support for Clayton Valley Charter School, said that he opposed the Dozier-Libbey petition because the school was, “not failing.” He characterized the teacher’s independent charter petition as an attempt to “kidnap” the school for a small number of teachers who were upset.

Ruehlig pointedly disagreed with Asadoorian, taking the position that the Charter School Act of 1992, the applicable state law relating to the formation of charter schools, required the approval of the petition since, “ it met all of the legal requirements.”

Belle stated that he opposed the Dozier-Libbey petition, while at the same time expressing support for the idea of charter schools. “But,” he said, “you can’t do this in the middle of the night. That’s a form of tyranny. We cannot abandon public schools, especially for private schools. They’re public schools, but charters are a lot different.”

Following Belle’s statements, Ruehlig immediately exercised her prerogative for a rebuttal. She referred again to the Charter School Act, emphasizing it was the duty of the board to follow the law when confronted with such issues.

Belle then made his own passionate response to Ruehlig, saying, “Although the law may say something is right [doesn’t make it right].” He went on to say, “Before 1964, the law said hanging was right.”

Ruehlig, though, was not ready to back down, and told Belle, “If you don’t like the law, you can change it.” Bringing up a theme she would return to throughout the evening, that she believed Belle was unfamiliar with the role of the county education board, she said, “If you want to change the law, run for legislator.”

After this lengthy exchange, Wright asked the next question, seeking to learn what each candidate believed the county could do to assist Antioch schools in quelling the violence that has been so prevalent in the news lately.

The incumbents, Asadoorian and Ruehlig, while acknowledging the concern, emphasized the limitations placed on the county board with respect to local matters. Asadoorian said, “Our power is limited…we can’t delve into local politics.” Ruehlig, explaining the role that the county board has, said, “School violence must be addressed at the local level. We have fiscal oversight.” She went on to say that it was important to keep their hands off with respect to specific cases, due to the appellate role the county board serves in the expulsion appeal process.

Maxwell, acknowledging the limited role of the county board previously emphasized by Asadoorian, said he though the county could facilitate issues if they were asked for help.

Belle, though, took a different approach. “It doesn’t take intellect to see something is wrong,” he said. “The board can direct the Superintendent to do a very full performance assessment.”

The next question, asked by Payton, followed up on the responses the candidates had given regarding the issue of violence, by asking each of the participants to explain what they saw as the role of the county superintendent.

Three of the candidates, Asadoorian, Maxwell, and Ruehlig, emphasized the fiscal and budget responsibility of the board, while Ruehlig also spoke about upholding the education code and adjudicating certain issues, such as expulsion and charter school appeals. Belle again took a different position, noting that the board was “elected by the people, first of all,” and, while acknowledging the role of state law, said they should also focus on federal law. “State law does not trump federal law any day,” he said. Belle also spoke again about directing the superintendent, setting up another confrontation with Ruehlig, who said, “The superintendent is a constitutional position. The board works with the superintendent, not one over the other.”

Another point of contention was raised in a discussion of Common Core. Maxwell favored Common Core, saying, “Everything is good in moderation.” Asadoorian thought the controversy surrounding Common Core was due to it being misunderstood. “It’s not a [federal] government takeover,” he said. He went on to say, “It aligns with the kinds of standards that colleges want.” Ruehlig said the Common Core was a set of standards that established what the students should learn, but said that the teachers still determine how to teach.

Belle, however, took one of his most passionate stands of the evening, calling Common Core a “re-indoctrination of children.” In a statement provided by Belle in an email elaborating on his position, he said, “The authors of Common Core are wrong as to what constitutes college readiness.” He went on to characterize the program as, “A

nationalization of public education in America – an indoctrination of mindless information.” He concluded, “I’m not a supporter of Common Core.”

Although the debate was drawing to a close at this point, Ruehlig and Belle weren’t done challenging one another yet. Each candidate was permitted to ask a question of their opponent, and Ruehlig, in an attempt to paint Belle as unfamiliar with the education code, took advantage of the opportunity to ask Belle how AB97 (Dealing with the requirement that county and local boards annually adopt a Local Control Accountability Plan) effects the county office of education, and how he would mitigate those effects. Belle responded that it was, “the right thing to do philosophically, but wrong in budget.”

Belle then asked Ruehlig whether or not she currently sat on the board of a charter school. When she responded in the affirmative, he said, “Why wasn’t this made transparent during the Dozier-Libbey [charter school appeal?]” He went on to say it was a, “conflict of interest.”

Ruehlig, however, seemed to be prepared for the question, responding that she had, “Just last month” become a member of the Synergy board. She emphasized that she was not a member of the board during the Dozier-Libbey appeal, said that Synergy was a state charter, which meant there was no chance of a conflict of interest, and concluded by telling Belle, “You are misinformed.”

In asking for closing comments, Burgarino alluded to the contentious exchanges between Ruehlig and Belle, by saying, “Let’s start with the quiet side of the room,” as he asked for statements by Asadoorian and Maxwell first. Now, Asadoorian was able to get in a dig at his opponent, while at the same time highlighting the difference in their experience, when he said, referring to Maxwell, “If he doesn’t win, I hope he’ll start coming to our meetings to find out what we’re all about.”

Maxwell laughed it off though, then concluded by saying that he was very concerned about our kids and their education, and that the board, “needed a new face.”

Belle focused on a theme from his campaign literature, saying that our schools were at a critical mass, and that lack of safety amounted to a public health issue. “We need clear policy direction,” he said.

Ruehlig emphasized her knowledge of the education code and the role of the county board, then once again challenged her opponent in this area, saying it was important to ask if a person is “ready to serve, or just giving empty promises.” Referring to Belle, she asked, “Are you ready to serve?”

The complete forum can be seen on the Antioch Chamber of Commerce website at www.AntiochChamber.com and on Comcast Local Cable Channel 24 and at 10 p.m. on September 30 and October 2, 7, 9, 21 and 23.

Share this:
email County School Board candidates forum gets heated su County School Board candidates forum gets heated digg County School Board candidates forum gets heated fb County School Board candidates forum gets heated twitter County School Board candidates forum gets heated

Antioch School Board candidates challenge incumbents on Dozier-Libbey, violence, budget issues at forum

Sunday, September 21st, 2014
Antioch School Board candidate forum Antioch School Board candidates challenge incumbents on Dozier Libbey, violence, budget issues at forum

Debra Vinson speaks during the Antioch School Board candidate forum, Thursday, September 18, 2014.

By John Crowder

On Thursday night, September 18, 2014, candidates running for the Antioch Unified School District (AUSD) board participated in a question and answer forum held at the Antioch City Council chambers. Present were all four candidates, incumbents Gary Hack and Joy Motts, and challengers Walter Ruehlig and Debra Vinson.

Paul Burgarino, formerly of the Contra Costa Times, and now serving as a Voter Education and Engagement Specialist with the Contra Costa County Election Division, served as moderator for the event. The two panelists asking questions were Allen Payton, publisher of the Antioch Herald, and Dr. Sean Wright, CEO of the Antioch Chamber of Commerce.

As illustrated by the closing statements of Motts and Ruehlig, voters are being given a clear choice between the challengers and the incumbents when they go to the polls this fall. Following Ruehlig’s closing statement, wherein he listed what he considers a series of problems created by the missteps of the current leadership, including lower test scores, deficit spending, lawsuits being filed, violent behavior by students, and teachers threatening to leave the district over lack of support, Motts defended current board policies. “In spite of some of the comments,” she said, “I think we are headed in the right direction.”

The forum began with each of the candidates providing opening statements. Each spoke about his or her background, and why they felt qualified to lead the school district.

Motts said that she was a lifelong resident of Antioch, and the daughter of a former trustee of the school board. She noted her work with the Celebrate Antioch Foundation and the Rivertown Preservation Society. She said that, during her tenure, “We went in a great direction…we’ve done what we need to change the dynamic, to bring excellence [to the school district.]”

Ruehlig also talked about his background, noting his time as a vocational counselor and his former service on the school board. Emphasizing fiscal responsibility, he said that when he last served on the school board, he joined the board at a time when the school district had been placed on the state “watch list” due to a $3 million accounting error, and that he left it with $27 million in reserves. He also said that he had brought more choice for parents with 3 charter schools and 5 linked-pathway academies during his tenure.

Hack noted that he was a long-time resident of Antioch, and had been a teacher and school leader for 45 years. He said that leadership means engaging the community, and emphasized the importance of listening to the needs of students and the expectations of parents.

Vinson stated that she had lived in Antioch for close to 15 years, and had spent her career guiding children. She said that she was a board certified counselor, and, if elected, would be the only board member with that experience. She stressed the importance of developing interests, a “career identity,” at an early age, and said that schools should be linked to careers.

Wright asked the candidates what they considered to be the most pressing problem facing AUSD, and how they would solve it.

All four candidates mentioned school violence as a problem. Ruehlig tied the issue to academic achievement, saying, “You can’t have constructive education without control. Vinson was particularly forceful in addressing the question of violence, noting the recent videos of school violence at Dallas Ranch Middle School that have been shown repeatedly on the news, and saying that “teachers feel unsafe.” Motts emphasized, “underfunding of public education,” but went on to say that you, “have a hard time getting academic achievement if students feel unsafe.” Hack listed violence as one of “multiple issues.”

Payton followed up with a question asking how each candidate would handle discipline problems and put the teacher back in control of the classroom.

Here, a clear difference emerged between the challengers and the incumbents. Vinson said that teachers, “don’t have control of the classroom,” and that, “students need to learn empathy.” Ruehlig followed suit, listing numerous problems currently occurring, including, “throwing [substitute teachers] into the classroom, lack of classroom management training, tardiness, and use of cell phones in class, among other things. He suggested that students should face on-campus suspensions, segregated from their peers, rather than be given a day off for bad behavior.

The incumbents took a different tack. Hack stated that Black Diamond Middle School (BDMS) had problems, but that they had been resolved. He said that Deer Valley High School, “was much worse 10 years ago,” and that it was an, “ongoing process.” Motts said that she disagreed with Vinson’s assessment, and that AUSD had made significant progress with classroom management training and other programs, such as restorative justice.

Another question asked how well each candidate believed the district had handled the Dozier-Libbey charter school petition. Here, again, there was a stark contrast between the incumbents and the challengers.

Vinson said that AUSD leadership had handled the matter, “poorly,” and that the problem would have been avoided altogether if the administration had been exercising leadership and meeting with teachers. Ruehlig concurred, saying the matter had been “botched from the beginning,” and illustrated, “a massive failure to communicate.” He also denounced what he said was the, “uncalled for demonizing of the teachers,” a comment that garnered him applause from throughout the chamber. Vinson, in a follow-up comment, said that she “agreed” with Ruehlig, and that “there was some bullying going on [by AUSD].”

The incumbents, on the other hand, both blamed the Dozier-Libbey teaching staff for the problems. Motts said that a lack of communication from the teacher-petitioners had caused the divisiveness. Hack said that the teachers had acted, “in a clandestine way,” and that, “We reacted because we don’t want [the school] to leave the district.”

The candidates were also asked about the deficit spending that has so dramatically reduced their reserves. Here, again, the challengers and incumbents saw things very differently.

Both Ruehlig and Vinson pointed to the millions of dollars in deficit spending that has been occurring in recent years as a serious problem. Vinson said that there had to be fiscal responsibility

On the other side, both incumbents defended their deficit spending, Motts stating, “We made a conscientious decision to avoid cutting services.” Hack followed up on this theme, saying, “We’ve been one of the few districts not to cut services.”

Other questions included the views of the candidates on Common Core, the televising of board meetings, helping ELL students, and more.

The debate ended, as noted earlier, on the same note on which it began, with the two incumbents, Hack and Motts, lauding current practices, while Ruehlig and Vinson decried numerous problems with current policy and called for a change in direction.

The complete forum can be seen on the Antioch Chamber of Commerce website at www.AntiochChamber.com and on Comcast Local Cable 24 at 9:00 p.m., September 30 and October 2, 7, 9, 21 and 23.

Share this:
email Antioch School Board candidates challenge incumbents on Dozier Libbey, violence, budget issues at forum su Antioch School Board candidates challenge incumbents on Dozier Libbey, violence, budget issues at forum digg Antioch School Board candidates challenge incumbents on Dozier Libbey, violence, budget issues at forum fb Antioch School Board candidates challenge incumbents on Dozier Libbey, violence, budget issues at forum twitter Antioch School Board candidates challenge incumbents on Dozier Libbey, violence, budget issues at forum

Antioch Council candidates share views, ideas, experience during forum

Wednesday, September 17th, 2014

By John Crowder

On Tuesday night, September 16, 2014, five of the eight candidates running for the Antioch City Council met at the council chambers to take questions from panelists and residents on their plans for the City if elected. Although each candidate had the opportunity to question and rebut opponents, none did so, resulting in a debate largely devoid of contention.

With moderator Paul Burgarino, Voter Education and Engagement Specialist for Contra Costa County Election Division enforcing the ground rules, panelists Allen Payton, publisher of the Antioch Herald, and Dr. Sean Wright, CEO of the Antioch Chamber of Commerce took turns questioning the candidates.

Three candidates were absent from the proceedings. Jeffery Hall-Cottrell, Steven Bado and Lori Ogorchock, the latter two being out of town. Ogorchock sent a surrogate speaker, Bill Chapman, to fill in for her and to read both an opening and closing statement on her behalf. Those candidates attending were Karl Dietzel, Diane Gibson-Gray, Anthony Segovia, Lamar Thorpe, and currently appointed incumbent Tony Tiscareno.

Each candidate began with an opening statement. Chapman, speaking for Lori Ogorchock, noted her 40-year residence in Antioch. He emphasized her leadership skills and history of community service, including her work with Junior Diabetes, the Antioch Unified School District, City Park and fight against blight. Her priorities, he said, would be a revitalized downtown and fully staffed police force.

Lamar Thorpe talked about his experience on the Antioch Economic Development Commission and his current work in education. He related how he had to overcome adversity from the time he was born, in prison, to a mother addicted to crack. He said he joined the Navy after attempting community college, and being forced to leave because of his illiteracy. There, he said, he taught himself to read, and went on to graduate from George Washington University. His focus if elected, he said, would be job creation.

Diane Gibson-Gray said that she was a 50-plus year resident of Antioch. She listed numerous civic and other organizations in Antioch that she has been part of, including her current stint as a board member of the Antioch Unified School District (AUSD), her service as Executive Director of the Arts and Cultural Foundation of Antioch, and time spent on the Antioch Planning Commission. She said she would focus on three areas if elected: Public safety, fiscal responsibility, and economic development.

Tony Tiscareno noted that he had lived in Antioch for 45 years, and that he currently serves on the city council, having been appointed to fill Wade Harper’s seat when he was elected mayor. He said he was concerned that there were not enough recreational opportunities for young people in the city, and that having more for kids to do would help to reduce crime. He said he would take a hands-on approach to bringing volunteers together to work on reducing crime.

Anthony Segovia said that he was born and raised in Antioch, had been involved in broadcast journalism, and currently works in finance. His focus, if elected, would be on crime reduction, downtown redevelopment, and the budget.

Karl Dietzel said that he was a 65-year-old immigrant from Germany. He stated that he lived right in the middle of a the crime-ridden area of Sycamore. Emphasizing his independence, he said that he was not connected to any special interests, would truly represent the average citizen, and would focus on the budget, crime, and economic development.

Early in the forum, Payton asked the candidates what they had accomplished for Antioch. Gibson Gray answered first, saying that she had been involved in replacing the superintendent at AUSD, and, in her role as a board member for the school district, had decreased the amount of deficit spending each year and produced a balanced budget. She also discussed her many community service efforts.

Tiscareno mentioned his work coaching children in sports and his time on the city council.

Segovia said his experience did not compare with the other candidates, but that he did volunteer work and had been involved with youth football.

Dietzel emphasized that he had never held an elected office, but had done work to fight graffiti.

Thorpe stated that he had run Councilwoman Monica Wilson’s campaign, served on the Economic Development Commission, contributed to the “state party,” and was involved with the group ‘Parents Connected’ as a mentor.

Wright asked the candidates about their ideas for generating revenue for the city. In response, Tiscareno spoke about hiring new city manager Steve Duran and said there was a need to bring in more commercial, residential, and light industrial development. He also talked about bringing in a ferry and revitalizing the downtown.

Segovia said he would work with investors to come to the city, and would revitalize the downtown.

Dietzel noted that, according to a recent letter sent out by the city manager, we are in a “severe fiscal crisis.” He said Antioch is on the verge of bankruptcy, and that we need to have an Economic Development Director, set up a collections department, and privatize city investments that were losing money, such as Prewett Ranch, the animal shelter, and the golf course.

Thorpe said that passing Measure O would be a good step, but that the most important action would be to create jobs which would, in turn, generate more sales tax revenue.

Gibson-Gray also emphasized her support for Measure O, and spoke about needing regional development, and perhaps more large retail units.

In response to a question from Burgarino, all candidates expressed their support for Measure O.

A question from the floor asked what the candidates considered the most significant problem facing Antioch, and what they would do to solve it. In response, Thorpe referenced jobs, while the other candidates all focused on crime.

Another question noted that police services are currently 73% of the city budget, and asked how they planned to handle negotiations with the police department when their contract came up for review. Gibson-Gray and Segovia both said there was a need for concessions on the part of the department. (According to the city finance department, the cost of a police officer is now about $200,000 per year.) Tiscareno said it was best left to the negotiating team, while Thorpe emphasized the need to retain good quality officers, stating there could be no compromise on that. Dietzel spoke about getting Measure O in place, and said we need to buy locally.

Other areas covered during the session included homelessness, illegal dumping, dealing with feral cats, relating to a diverse community, and more.

The complete forum can be seen on Comcast Local Cable Channel 24 and on the Antioch Chamber of Commerce website at www.AntiochChamber.com. The schedule will be posted on the Antioch Herald website, www.antiochherald.com.

Share this:
email Antioch Council candidates share views, ideas, experience during forum su Antioch Council candidates share views, ideas, experience during forum digg Antioch Council candidates share views, ideas, experience during forum fb Antioch Council candidates share views, ideas, experience during forum twitter Antioch Council candidates share views, ideas, experience during forum

Measure O advocates dominate opponents in forum

Wednesday, September 17th, 2014

By John Crowder

On Tuesday night, September 16, 2014, proponents of Measure O, a proposal to place a tax on residential landlords in the city of Antioch, clearly dominated their opponents in an election forum cosponsored by the Antioch Chamber of Commerce and the Antioch Herald.

Speaking in favor of the measure were former Antioch mayor Don Freitas, chairman of Antioch Residents for Fairness-Yes on Measure O, and local Realtor Mark Jordan. Representing the opposition were Alex Aliferis, Executive Director, Contra Costa Taxpayers Association, and Wayne Cook, a longtime Antioch resident and senior citizen.

During opening statements, each side framed their case. Freitas explained that the idea for the tax originated with a citizen’s group, the Friday Morning Breakfast Club (FMBC), and that its purpose was to provide a stable source of revenue for the city. Speaking for the opposition, Cook characterized it as an unfair assessment that would place fixed-income seniors in jeopardy.

The format for the debate had two panelists, Dr. Sean Wright, CEO of the Antioch Chamber of Commerce and Allen Payton, Publisher of the Antioch Herald, asking questions of the two sides. Questions taken from the audience and submitted on cards were also worked into the debate by the panelists. Paul Burgarino of the County Elections Department was the Moderator.

The questions began with Wright asking the proponents how the fee structure was determined, and how much money the tax was expected to generate for the city. Jordan responded that the fees were compromise numbers, worked out between FMBC and city staff. Aliferis said the city council “claims” it will raise $2.1 million.

Participants were questioned by Payton as to how the money would be spent. Aliferis stated that the money would go to the general fund, and there was no guarantee of additional police officers. He said that, even with Measure C, the city had not gained any additional police presence. Freitas said that, while 20 additional officers had been hired, because of retirements and attrition, the number of new officers was low. Even so, he pointed out that the city council was keeping their commitment to spend 100% of Measure C money on police and code enforcement. He agreed that the money would go to the general fund, but emphasized that the general fund includes money for police officer salaries.

Referencing their campaign literature, Payton asked the opponents of Measure O to name businesses who were on the record in opposition to the landlord tax. Unable to name any, Aliferis instead said that it would hurt seniors. This tactic did not work in his favor, however, as the audience (comprised mostly of seniors) expressed their displeasure with his response. It also opened the door for Freitas to produce statistics showing that most seniors in Antioch, about 75%, would feel no effect from the tax increase. Jordan was later able to build on this theme when he emphasized that rents are based on what the market will bear, and that landlords simply do not itemize expenses in establishing rental fees. The debate regarding the effect of the measure on seniors culminated with Freitas asking seniors in the audience who had been involved with writing the measure to stand, further emphasizing his point that seniors stood to benefit from the tax initiative because they would be getting a safer city.

Another question Payton raised was whether or not the city council had gone back on their word by putting the rental tax on the ballot after enlisting the support of apartment owners for the passage of Measure C last year. Freitas responded that if both measures had been on the ballot last year, they would have failed. He said that the understanding was always that the rental tax would be revisited. He went on to say that the FMBC had made many overtures to the apartment owners to reach a compromise, but they were unwilling to make any concessions regarding a tax.

Throughout the debate, it was apparent that Freitas and Jordan had prepared for the event; their talking points were well-rehearsed, and they had statistics to back up their positions. On the other hand, the opponents were frequently silent for long periods, and sometimes had little or no response to a question. When Freitas asked his opponents when they “would stop lying” in their campaign tactics, it appeared to take Cook off guard. Cook said that he would find out if someone on his side was lying, and, if so, put a stop to it.

The full debate will be shown on Comcast Local Cable Channel 24 and on the Antioch Chamber of Commerce website at www.AntiochChamber.com. The schedule will be published on the Antioch Herald website, www.antiochherald.com.

Share this:
email Measure O advocates dominate opponents in forum su Measure O advocates dominate opponents in forum digg Measure O advocates dominate opponents in forum fb Measure O advocates dominate opponents in forum twitter Measure O advocates dominate opponents in forum

Candidate for Congress Tony Amador to hold fundraiser Sept. 17

Wednesday, September 10th, 2014

YOU’RE INVITED TO A FUNDRAISER TO SUPPORT

Tony Amador for Congress Candidate for Congress Tony Amador to hold fundraiser Sept. 17

CANCUN RESTAURANT

135 E Miner Avenue

Stockton, CA 95202

Wednesday, September 17, 2014

5:30 – 7:30 p.m.

HOST

Juan Ruvalcava

CO-HOST

Supervisor Ken Vogel

Samuel Ybarra

HOSTS $500 – CO-HOST $250 – GUEST $25

Make checks payable to Amador for Congress – P.O. Box 1155 – Woodbridge, CA 95258

OR donate at https://www.efundraisingconnections.com/c/TonyAmador

RSVP TO LISA GARCIA AT (916) 893-4449 OR lgarcia916@yahoo.com

PAID FOR BY AMADOR FOR CONGRESS

FEC #C00553289

Share this:
email Candidate for Congress Tony Amador to hold fundraiser Sept. 17 su Candidate for Congress Tony Amador to hold fundraiser Sept. 17 digg Candidate for Congress Tony Amador to hold fundraiser Sept. 17 fb Candidate for Congress Tony Amador to hold fundraiser Sept. 17 twitter Candidate for Congress Tony Amador to hold fundraiser Sept. 17

Antioch Chamber to host Coffee with the Candidates Tuesday morning

Monday, September 8th, 2014
A Bright Future For Antioch
Candidates for City Council
Coffee with the Chamber
Tuesday, September 9th, 2014
8am – 10am 

95 Antioch Chamber to host Coffee with the Candidates Tuesday morning
The Antioch Chamber of Commerce will be holding a Coffee with the Chamber with the Candidates for City Council event on Tuesday September 9th from 8 AM- 10 AM. 

The event will start with 30 minutes of networking, coffee and pastries and then conclude with candidate panels.

Questions will be turned into the Chamber via index cards and the Chamber will select questions that are pertinent to the business community.  Questions will be answered on a rotating basis and time will be allotted for candidates to add or counter other candidates.  We will seek for time allotted fairness but want to do so in a more relaxed atmosphere than a typical Candidate forum

Event Location

Antioch Chamber of Commerce

101 H Street unit #4, Antioch 94509

Time: 8am – 10am

This is a great opportunity to meet your City Council Candidates and get some of your questions answered.

We look forward to seeing you there!

Share this:
email Antioch Chamber to host Coffee with the Candidates Tuesday morning su Antioch Chamber to host Coffee with the Candidates Tuesday morning digg Antioch Chamber to host Coffee with the Candidates Tuesday morning fb Antioch Chamber to host Coffee with the Candidates Tuesday morning twitter Antioch Chamber to host Coffee with the Candidates Tuesday morning