Torres-Walker’s suggested changes moves Ogorchock from District 3 to 4

By Allen D. Payton

During their special meeting study session on redistricting on Tuesday night, Feb. 22, 2022, the Antioch City Council, after voting against Map 91 again, and new Map 521, they chose to move that map forward along with a modified Map A, for consideration at another study session on March 8. A representative of Common Cause told the council the city could face a lawsuit from anyone in a neighborhood that is divided and warned them not do so in their final map choice.

Mayor Lamar Thorpe and District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker asked the consultants of Q2 Data and Research to make modifications to Map A. Torres-Walker’s changes moves the neighborhood in which District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock lives, into District 4.

Had Map 91 been adopted, it would have resulted in the neighborhood in which District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson lives being moved into District 3, which means she could not run for re-election, in the November election, or would have had to move in order to live within the new District 4 boundaries.

The council reviewed all the maps, including three drawn by the consultants of Q2 and 12 submitted by members of the public. The 12 included three new submissions since the council’s Feb. 8 meeting at which they rejected both Maps B and 91, and the majority returned to Map A which four of the council members had previously rejected.

“We have a total of 15 maps, now,” said consultant Karin Mac Donald, owner and senior researcher of Q2. “We hope, tonight you will choose a final map that you can vote on at the meeting on March 7.”

City Attorney Thomas Lloyd Smith asked MacDonald to review all of the maps for the council and public, which Jane Hood of Q2 did.

Public Comments Again Support Map 91

Antioch resident Mark Jordan was the first to speak during public comments chastising City Clerk Ellie Householder for not having the minutes of this year’s council meetings on the city’s website, just like was the problem, last year. (See related article)

“First, it would be helpful if the City Clerk would post the minutes on the City website,” he said.

“On the 25th of January, you voted on two final maps. On the mayor’s Facebook page he said there were two map finalists. Then the mayor, on his own volition, decided to start over again. That’s the very definition of authoritarianism. It’s not democratic. It’s not what the 115,000 people of Antioch want.”

“The law was changed in 2019. AB849 was passed,” Jordan continued. “There were very specific requirements that were changed. Anyone can petition the Superior Court. Currently, you’re violating your own rules by backing up” and reconsidering Map A.

Sandy Hartrick spoke against Map A because it was the only option the council majority said they would consider and it “clearly divides a community of interest.”

William Chapman spoke next, saying, “My concern is in the continuity of the areas. I have worked in the past with campaigns. We need boundaries that are definable…that keep people together. The map needs to have districts that are bound by normal conditions, major roads. The communities should stay together as communities…as they vote.”

“A resident for going on 37 years in Antioch. I know it pretty well,” said Mary Chapman. “The only comment I have, tonight is to see the final map show all the council members…and not favor a particular political candidate.”

“The redistricting…as mandated by the law should follow state law. So, I read AB849,” said Tom Hartrick. “The map shouldn’t favor political parties or candidates. The map moved forward at the last meeting doesn’t follow that. It appears the public is speaking…if we are ignored the council is opening us up to a lawsuit under the FAIR MAPS Act.”

Lindsey Amezcua also spoke about the FAIR MAPS Act and the requirement on keeping neighborhoods and communities of interest together.

“Most of the maps violate state law,” she said. “There are three maps left that follow state law. It’s fiscally reckless to adopt any map that doesn’t follow state law.”

Alicia Taylor said, “I like Map 21 and not 91. But I must stick with my original and support 91….it follows major roads.”

Former Antioch Mayor and current School Board Trustee Mary Rocha said, “I thought you had made a decision. I don’t understand. I want to speak on Map 91. This map does not divide any communities of interest. It follows the Voting Rights Act. I’m still in support of Map 91.”

On Zoom, Harry Thurston, who spoke in favor of Map B during last meeting, this time spoke in favor of Draft Map A. It “most closely represents the demographics in the city,” he said.

Francisco Torres from ACE organization, who also supported Map B, during the last meeting, also spoke in favor of Map A.

Another speaker spoke in favor of Map A. “There’s five different criteria. The key word at the beginning is ‘to the extent practical’. I believe Map A does the best job. Nothing’s going to be perfect,” she said. “Map A is the most perfect of all the other ones. It was made by the professional contractors. Those who are saying it’s against the law are saying the professionals don’t know what they’re doing.”

Gretchen Egen, a member of the Martinez Independent Redistricting Commission said, “I am in favor of Map 91. Map A completely does not follow the criteria. Map 91 follows Lone Tree Way. I sat in the chambers during the lawsuit against Martinez. The only reason we lost was the Assembly bill passed in October 2019 had not yet passed.”

She said the council will be sued if they choose Map A.

“Your demographers don’t live there. But they said, ‘we don’t know your city,” she continued. “I implore you to listen

Dave asked the council “to adopt Map 91. It does not violate state law and is in the best interests of the city’s residents.”

Kaelen Perrochet, regional with California Common Cause, said, “We’d like to disabuse that the requirements of the FAIR MAPS Act are parameters, as Mayor Thorpe said at a previous council meeting. Partisan gerrymandering is illegal under state law. The mandate is to preserve the communities of interest. If the council does not…anyone in your city will have standing to sue. California Common Cause urges the city council to prioritize respecting…preserving communities of interest.”

Phillip Mobina said, “I want to vote for Map 91, the non-gerrymandered map. It’s clearly not gerrymandered to keep council members in their seats, so they don’t have to move.”

Council Discussion, Two Make Modifications to Map A

Mayor Lamar Thorpe said, “we have until April to get this done. This made-up stuff of gerrymandering is nonsense. To question people’s motives is wrong. Members of the public can share their thoughts.”

“If you look at the school district’s map, it divides communities of interest a lot more than we’re doing,” he added.

However, the FAIR MAPS Act does not apply to redistricting of school or special district boundaries.

District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock then made a motion to adopt Map 91 and Mayor Pro Tem and District 4 Councilman Mike Barbanica seconded the motion.

The motion failed 2-3 with Thorpe, District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker and District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson voting no.

Torres-Walker then brought back up Map A.

“I support this map and I want to have a discussion about this,” she said.

The only concern I have about this, and I’ve had this concern for some time, and that’s the area south of James Donlon. I have had a concern that this portion of town now be in District 2. I’d like to look at the mapping tool…and see what that looks like.”

Consultant Jane Hood of Q2 then moved the Census Tracts south of James Donlon Blvd. from Districts 4 to 2, as in Maps 58, 91, 503, 512, 516 and 521.

Then Torres-Walker asked to keep using the mapping tool. She asked the consultant to move another section from Districts 3 to 4.

Thorpe then asked to move a section from Districts 2 to 3, using Garrow Drive instead of Lone Tree Way as the boundary.

“I’d like to look at 58, please because I believe that accomplishes that,” Barbanica then stated.

Thorpe then had Hood return to the area south of James Donlon Blvd. and divide the Mesa Ridge neighborhood between Districts 2 and 4.

“Silverado would be the street that would be the dividing line,” Thorpe said. “We can come back to this one.”

Barbanica then asked to look at 516 and 521. “Is there a difference between the two?”

“We have 512, 516 and 521. I said they are the exact,” said Hood. “They were slightly different and submitted by two different individuals.”

Barbanica then made a motion to adopt Map 521 and Ogorchock seconded the motion.

The motion would

“You can’t make that motion

“You can make a motion if that’s the final map he wants to select,” said Attorney Smith.

The motion failed 2-3 on the same split.

“I like what I’m seeing, here. I don’t mind bringing it back,” Thorpe then said. “We can bring back the one we’re working on.”

“I would like to bring the modified Map A, back,” Torres-Walker said.

“I think it’s still a working draft,” Thorpe responded.

Hood then showed the modified Map A.

“I would like to see that,” Torres-Walker said.

Both maps will be brought back at another study session on redistricting on March 8.

 

 

Fails to inform at least three council members about, invite two local media sources to press conference; not yet hired, must still go through background check and hiring process which could take weeks. Morefield still interim police chief.

“This is news to me. I had no idea this was going on and coming down, today.” – Mayor Pro Tem Mike Barbanica

Announces proposed new Deputy Chief position

By Allen D. Payton

During a press conference in the City Council Chambers at City Hall, Wednesday morning, Feb. 23, 2022, Antioch Mayor Lamar Thorpe announced a new interim chief of police, San Francisco Police Commander Dr. Steve Ford, but didn’t inform at least two council members, and the city’s public information officer failed to invite at least two local media outlets about it. Only the Times, regional TV stations, and Antioch resident Frank Sterling who works at KPFA radio station were invited to attend. Both Mayor Pro Tem Mike Barbanica and District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock were unaware of the announcement event until after. District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker was in attendance, but it’s unclear if District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson was.

When shown a screenshot of the Facebook Live video Thorpe posted on his official Facebook page and asked if he knew about the press conference after it had occurred, Barbanica responded, “This is news to me.”

“I spoke with the city manager last Friday for about 15 minutes and he didn’t say anything about this,” he continued. “I had no idea this was going on and coming down, today. The way I learned this happened was through you (referring to this reporter).”

Asked if he had received the same press release sent out by Rolando Bonilla, the city’s public information officer, that Judy Prieve of the East Bay Times said she received, yesterday, Barbanica said (while looking through his city council email account), “I cannot find a press release in here, at all, regarding this move.”

Ogorchock also said she didn’t know about the press conference until after it was over. Asked if she had received the press release from Bonilla, Orgorchock responded simply, “no, nothing.”

UPDATE #4 2/24/22: Dr. Ford has not yet been hired, as he must still go through the hiring process including a background check, which could take weeks. Morefield is still the city’s current interim police chief.

UPDATE #1: When reached for comment, Torres-Walker said she learned of the press conference from the Times’ Judy Prieve.

“Judy hinted to it as we were discussing a separate matter.She didn’t go into detail,” Torres-Walker said. “Another community member mentioned it, as well. So, I thought I would check it out.”

Announcement

Thorpe introduced Dr. Steve Ford, who according to his LinkedIn page is the Commander of Police, Community Engagement Division, since January 2021, for the San Francisco Police Department, where he said he has worked for 31 years. For the past 12 years he’s served in various leadership positions with the SFPD, including Commander of Police, Administration Bureau from 2019-21, Captain of Police, Strategic Management Bureau from 2018-19, Captain of Police, Bayview Station/Golden Gate Division, Operations Bureau from 2017-18, Lieutenant from 2010-2017 in which he held nine assignments within this rank. From 2015-16 he also served as Acting Captain of Police, Staff Services Division-Department of Human Resources.

Ford earned a Doctoral of Education degree in Educational Leadership from St. Mary’s College in 2020, a Master of Science degree in Emergency Services Administration from Long Beach State where he made the Dean’s List and a Bachelor of Science degree in Criminal Justice Administration from San Francisco State, where he also made the Dean’s List.

According to Thorpe, Ford’s doctoral dissertation was on community policing. He lives in Pinole, teaches at San Francisco State and plans to continue doing so.

Thorpe Takes Swipe at Department, Previous Police Chiefs

Before introducing Ford, Thorpe took a swipe at the Antioch Police Department and past chiefs hired from within.

“For far too long, Antioch’s Police Department’s pathway to the chief’s position was one that only looked inward from within the existing ranks, which does not work with the Antioch of today,” he said. “By taking the previous approach, our city has not been exposed to the best practices and the new ways of thinking which are so critical to an evolving police department and that are even more critical when wanting to change institutional culture.”

“Unit cohesion cannot be achieved when there isn’t a clear chain of command,” Thorpe continued. “Therefore, I will be advancing a measure that will immediately create a Deputy Police Chief position at the Antioch Police Department that focuses on long-term planning, particularly in addressing attrition, operational effectiveness and much more. We are no longer a small town on the Delta. We are one of the fastest growing cities in the Bay Area as well as one of the most racially diverse cities in the Bay Area.”

He then thanked “current Interim Chief of Police Anthony Morefield and the men and women of the police department for keeping our city safe.”

“I recognize that change is difficult,” Thorpe continued. “But that difficulty can never get in the way of our pursuit to become a better city. It is only through this pursuit that we will be able to keep our city safe while simultaneously making every single resident in our city feel positively connected to our police department.”

Ford Also Takes Swipe at APD, Claiming Need for “Restoring and Bolstering Community Trust”

During the press conference Ford spoke briefly saying, “First and foremost, thank you Mayor Thorpe for having the confidence in me to lead this organization…I certainly appreciate this incredible opportunity.”

It is not clear who made the decision to hire Ford. But the mayor doesn’t have the authority to hire the police chief or interim police chief, only the city manager does, who hires all the department heads in the City of Antioch. Interim City Manager Con Johnson has been given full authority and duties by the city council to hire and fire department heads.

“Restoring and bolstering community trust is critical and I look forward to establishing meaningful relationships with our schools, our businesses, our neighborhoods, our faith-based groups and most importantly and specifically, our youth,” Ford continued. “I look forward to bringing my experience as a practitioner and academic and researcher, to make these goals and aspirations a reality for this organization and our community, as a whole.”

“To Mayor Thorpe, again, our city council all inclusive, and City Manager Johnson, thank you, again sincerely for trusting me to lead this organization. It is truly an honor I don’t take lightly,” the new interim chief concluded.

More About Dr. Ford

On his LinkedIn page, Ford wrote about his background, “A highly accomplished, knowledgeable and hands-on law enforcement leader and academic administrator with extensive formal education, exceptional administrative/communication skills and extensive university administrative experience, seeking to contribute and utilize a multitude of skills and abilities in a leadership position within a progressive organization.”
Also on his LinkedIn page, Ford lists his Summary of Qualifications as:

√ Excellent communication and interpersonal abilities in leading, administrating, training, supervising and motivating employees to achieve uniform goals and objectives for the betterment of society.

√ Impeccable work ethic; prepared to go above and beyond the call of duty to ensure optimal performance.

√ Organized and detail-oriented; skilled at management of time and resources.

√ Diverse breadth of experience; demonstrated success in a wide spectrum of environments including with data-backed, community-centered solutions.

√ Proactive yet diplomatic attitude; interact effectively with superiors, co-workers and community members.

√ Keen investigative skills; oversee long-term investigations to bring resolution to a wide range of major criminal complaints.

√ Strong communicator; able to explain complex concepts in simple terms.

Finally, Ford lists his Core Competencies as: Law Enforcement Management, Diversity & Inclusion, Personnel Mentorship/Team-Building, Crime Data Interpretation, Governance & Oversight, Innovative Leadership, Strategic Planning, Budget Management, Community Liaison, Cultural Competency, Interviews & Interrogations, Multi-Agency Investigations.

According to his bio page on the SFPD website, “Commander Steven A. Ford grew up in San Francisco’s Ingleside district in the Oceanview and attended high school in Daly City. His law enforcement background spans over 30 years and includes assignments in Operations, Investigations, Administration, Special Operations, and Professional Standards-Strategic Management bureaus. Specific positions such as Internal Affairs, Professional Standards-Principled Policing, Staff Services, and serving as the Commanding Officer of Bayview Station resonate most. In addition, Commander Ford serves as adjunct faculty at San Francisco State University and City College where he instructs administration of justice and public administration course work. Moreover, Commander Ford is a published researcher-author in the areas of community policing theory, organizational structure theory, and participative management-procedural justice theory, as well as the nexus between those frameworks and what constitutes a “legitimate” community policing organization.

Commander Ford has also attended the California Police Chiefs Executive Leadership Institute, Drucker Mgt.-Claremont Graduate University, California POST Command College, California POST Executive Development, Sherman Block Supervisory Leadership Institute, and San Francisco Leadership-Chamber of Commerce.

Commander Ford considers his leadership and professional philosophy to be that of a contemporary leader who values the history of the profession, is focused on current challenges, and has a vision for the future of policing. Commander Ford is personable, approachable, nurturing, and responsive.”

Thorpe Wouldn’t Let Ford Answer Questions

Thorpe then took questions from those members in the media in attendance, and wouldn’t allow Ford to answer any of them, including those directed to him.

“I have absolute confidence that Dr. Ford will be able to carry them out,”

“We have an attrition problem in Antioch,” Thorpe said regarding the current lack of police staffing. As of last month, the department was down 21 sworn officers from the 115 approved in the budget, to just 94 actively working. (See related article)

Asked what Ford’s priorities would be, Thorpe answered saying, “

“Hiring externally is a change,” Thorpe said in response to a question about police reform.

Asked when the last police chief was hired from outside the department he responded, “I believe the last three were hired internally. But Chief Hyde was hired from the outside.”

Actually, it was the last two police chiefs, Allan Cantando and Tammany Brooks who were hired from within the department. Prior to Cantando, Jim Hyde was hired, and prior to him, Chief Mark Moczulski was hired from within the department.

Asked by Sterling “can we hear from the chief, at all on any of our questions? Is that possible, today or are we not hearing from the chief, anymore?” Thorpe responded, “I’ll be fielding the questions.”

“So, that’s a no,” Sterling asked, pressing further. “Yes,” said Thorpe.

Questions for Council, City Staff

Asked if Dr. Ford was introduced to Councilmembers as has been past practice, Ogorchock said, “the interim city manager did not even let me know about us getting a new interim police chief.”

Attempts to reach Wilson asking if she knew about the press conference, was invited to attend and in attendance were unsuccessful prior to publication time.

Current Interim Chief Tony Morefield was asked if he knew about the hiring of Ford and if he is the new deputy chief, he did not respond.

In addition, the following questions were sent to Thorpe, Johnson, Bonilla, the other four council members, City Attorney Thomas L. Smith and Morefield:

“Why hold a press conference announcing a major issue of the hiring of a new interim chief of police and not inform or invite at least two of the council members, including the current mayor pro tem, nor two of the three local members of the press who actually cover city government on a regular basis? While Tamisha was there, as Lamar pointed toward her and made a comment about her, was Monica informed of and invited to it?

As for Dr. Ford, who hired him? Was it Lamar or Con? Because the first thing Ford said was, “First and foremost, thank you Mayor Thorpe for having the confidence in me to lead this organization.” So, it sounds like it was Lamar’s decision. The mayor doesn’t have that authority, nor does the council, because the chief doesn’t answer directly to them. It’s the city manager’s job and Con has been given full authority to hire and fire department heads.

Also, when was the decision made to hire Dr. Ford?

Why wasn’t this announced at last night’s council meeting so all the council members could know about it and choose whether not to attend?

Why, as has been past practice, didn’t the council members have the opportunity to meet Dr. Ford before he was hired? Or were some of them offered that opportunity and not others?

Was Rolando instructed to not inform Mike Burkholder (of East County Today) and me of today’s announcement event?

Was, now former, Interim Police Chief Tony Morefield made aware of it before today’s announcement?

As for the attrition in the police department mentioned by the mayor during the announcement event, what do you think are the root cause or causes of it?

Dr. Ford said, ‘Restoring and bolstering community trust is critical.’ With whom in the Antioch community does the trust need to be restored and bolstered? Upon what is he basing that viewpoint?

Also, for Lamar, how can you claim the Antioch Police Department hasn’t followed best practices just because past police chiefs were hired from within?

They have had training by POST that Dr. Ford has according to his bio on the SFPD website and have had FBI training, as well.

What ‘best practice’ had the APD not been deploying?”

In addition, a formal Public Records request was made for any and all correspondence between any and all city staff and council members with and/or regarding Dr. Ford and his hiring as interim police chief.

UPDATE #2: Questions from the Public

More questions from members of the public about hiring Dr. Ford were asked of the same council members and city staff:

“Why do they need an interim chief when they already had one? Is it to slide him in without oversight as an ‘inside’ candidate so he doesn’t have to go through a formal process? Did they mention he and Con are friends and worked together for years in SF? How long did Con and Dr. Ford work together and in what capacity?

How was Ford selected? Was anyone else considered? Will they make him go through the same hiring process as any other lateral police officer coming to Antioch, including a full police officer background, polygraph, psych evaluation and medical?”

In addition, a formal Public Records Act request was made for any and all correspondence between any and all city staff and council members with and/or regarding Dr. Ford and his hiring as interim police chief.

UPDATE #3: Ogorchock Asks Similar Questions, Interviewed by TV News

In response Ogorchock wrote in an email Wednesday evening, “I gave an interview for KRON 4, it’ll run tonight. I asked those questions myself. Here are others I asked: Was there an interview process, or was this pre-planned? When was the first conversation with Dr. Ford about this position? Was this favoritism as they both came from SFPD?”

“Councilmember Torres Walker and the mayor made public statements about the need to hire the next police chief through a public process,” Ogorchock continued. “There was no transparency as I had no knowledge of this happening. Purely frustrated, the Interim City Manager should not be hiring the next police chief, that should be the responsibility of the CM as that individual and the Chief will be working together. We as council should have no say in PD matters as we have no experience in this field, only Mayor Pro-Tem Barbanica has. That is the sole responsibility of the CM.”

Please check back later for any updates to this report.

Also, extends distance from, clarifies limits on new tobacco retailers

“This is ridiculous to tell adults what they can put in their bodies” – Councilman Barbanica

By Allen D. Payton

During their Tuesday meeting on Feb. 22, 2022, on a 4-1 vote the Antioch City Council approved another marijuana business, this one growing, manufacturing, selling and delivering cannabis supplements. The council then voted to clarify thir xisting ban on additional tobacco retail businesses on a 5-0 vote and on a 3-2 vote approved a ban on the sale of certain tobacco products in the city.

Approve Natural Cannabis Supplement Business

The additional marijuana business will include growing, manufacturing, selling and delivering cannabis supplements. According to the city staff report, “The applicant proposes to operate a cannabis operations facility consisting of a Type 10 ‘Retail Storefront and Delivery’, a Type 11 ‘Distributor’, a Type 7 ‘Manufacturer’ and a Type 3A ‘Medium Indoor Cultivation’ license located at 2100-2300 Wilbur Avenue” which is currently an undeveloped dirt lot. Natural Supplements Cannabis Facility ACC022222

District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock offered the lone opposition vote.

Extends Distance From, Clarifies Limits on New Tobacco Retailers

The council then voted unanimously to require new tobacco businesses to be at least 1,000 feet from schools and similar uses, such as public parks, playgrounds, recreational centers, or childcare centers. and clarified the city’s existing limits on new tobacco retailers in Antioch. Prior to the vote, the City’s municipal code required at least 500 feet between a business selling tobacco and a school or aforementioned uses. Distances & Limits on New Tobacco Retailers ACC022222

Ban Certain Tobacco Product Sales

In addition, on a 3-2 vote, with District 4 Councilman Barbanica and District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker voting against, the council approved a ban on certain types of tobacco products in the city. According to the city staff report, the council approved the “Ordinance Amending Section 6-8.02 of the Antioch Municipal Code to Add the Definitions of Characterizing Flavor, Cigar, and Little Cigar (including Cigarillo) and Amending Section 6- 8.14 Both to Restrict Tobacco Retailers or Businesses from Selling or Providing Tobacco with Characterizing Flavor, Selling or Providing Electronic Cigarettes or E-Cigarettes, and To Regulate the Size and Price of Specified Packages of Cigarettes, Little Cigars, and Cigars.” Ban on Certain Tobacco Product Sales ACC022222

The proposed amendment would: Add the definition of “characterizing flavor”

Prohibit the sale of tobacco or tobacco products with characterizing flavor

Prohibit a tobacco retailer or business from selling, offering for sale, possessing with the intent to sell, offer in exchange for any form of consideration, or provide at no cost any electronic cigarette or e-cigarette for use with tobacco or tobacco products

Add the definitions of “cigars” and “little cigars,” with the latter including cigarillos

Prohibit a tobacco retailer or business from selling, offering for sale, possessing with the intent to sell, offering in exchange for any form of consideration, or providing at no cost any package of fewer than twenty little cigars, any package of fewer than six cigars and any package of cigarettes, little cigars or cigars at a price that is less than ten dollars per package, including applicable fees and taxes.

Speakers During Public Comments Opposed to Ban

Local retailers and an industry representative spoke against the ban encouraging the council instead wait for a vote on a statewide measure planned for the November ballot, so that there would be a level playing field should it pass.

Before the council vote, in opposing the ban Barbanica said, “it’s ridiculous to tell adults what they can put in their bodies.”

Torres-Walker supports in spite of pointing out “great concern” in her neighborhood

By Allen D. Payton

During their regular meeting on Tuesday, February 22, 2022, the Antioch City Council approved a transitional housing zoning overlay district on a 3-2 split vote for the Executive Inn on East 18th Street, moving forward a plan for the motel to be used for homeless residents. It allows the owner to apply for a use permit for the motel to be converted to a transitional housing facility. After first making a motion to approve the zoning change, Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock withdrew her motion and then along with Councilman Mike Barbanica, voted against it. Transitional Housing Zoning Overlay District ACC022222

Council Doesn’t Finalize Lease with Congressman McNerney

At the beginning of the meeting, City Attorney Thomas Lloyd Smith reported out of closed session that the negotiations with Congressman Jerry McNerney regarding the lease of office space in the Antioch Community Center at Prewett Family Park, “price and terms of payment, there was no reportable action.” The negotiations occurred following the attempt by Interim City Manager Con Johnson to evict the congressman whose lease runs through Jan. 3, 2023.  (See related article)

Transitional Housing Zoning Overlay District

Community Development Director Forrest Ebbs provided a brief overview of the transitional housing zone overlay district for only the Executive Inn at 515 E. 18th Street, which was proposed to be used for Antioch’s homeless residents during a press conference by then-Councilman Lamar Thorpe and then-Mayor Pro Tem Joy Motts in July 2020. (See related article)

“This is about a zoning overlay,” Mayor Thorpe said, attempting to narrow the focus of the public hearing. “There will be plenty of time to discuss the actual use at the planning commission.

Andrew Becker was the only member of the public to speak.

“I don’t think that the director dove into transitional housing and the requirements for transitional housing,” he said. “I sent him and the council…the state’s definition of transitional housing in 2007 the state of California and passed legislation, that mandated that cities allow for transitional housing…holding those developments to the same standards. That’s a permanent by-right transaction.”

“If you look at page A3 in your packet…you will see residential uses,” Becker continued. “You will see at the bottom this new transitional housing overlay. You will see all of these residential areas…in all of those columns it doesn’t show a permitted use for transitional housing. Instead, it shows one restrictive use for transitional housing for all the City of Antioch…that isn’t even residentially zoned. It’s zoned hospitality. You’ve said developers can come in and build a permitted development. It would allow the review and could be shot down by the planning commission. I equate that to redlining.”

“The housing element must have the same standards as other residential zoning,” he continued. Becker proposed zoning the entire city for transitional housing.

Council Discussion and Vote

Torres-Walker asked Ebbs to respond to what Becker said

“We have a new housing element coming forward that will…be fully compliant with all state laws,” Ebbs explained.

“Should we be waiting for the housing element before moving forward on this?” Torres-Walker asked.

“It wouldn’t affect this zoning change,” Ebbs responded.

“It would provide for commercial zone for just this property?” Torres-Walker then asked.

“We can always come back” for other changes, Ebbs said.

Ogorchock asked, “What about the neighborhood and Rocketship school?”

“We’ve met with them,” Thorpe said. “The city manager and assistant city manager met with them.”

“The parent group was notified of this meeting,” said Assistant City Manager Rosanna Bayon Moore.

“There will be a use permit hearing before the planning commission,” Ebbs pointed out.

Ogorchock then moved approval of the creation of the transitional housing zoning overlay district. It was seconded by Monica Wilson.

Barbanica then said, “I know I’ve been at odds with several people on this. I believe, as I’ve stated all along…it is my belief that this is harmful to that area, to the businesses.”

“This is just an overlay on that property. It says we can do this if we choose,” Ogorchock pointed out.

“Without this that would be a dead issue, correct?” Barbanica asked Ebbs.

“That’s correct. They could not apply for a use permit at this location,” Ebbs said.

“We can’t keep kicking this can down the road. I believe this overlay is the right direction,” Wilson said. “This has been an issue for many years. It has to be addressed. We need to stop and pause. We listen to people online bully us. Let’s vote on this.”

“I’m going to support this, tonight,” Torres-Walker stated. “What makes me not want to vote for this is it should be citywide, not just one property. Spreading out the responsibility citywide just makes sense. Nobody up here lives in that community. But I do and there’s great concern.”

“I don’t believe the can has been kicked down the road,” Barbanica responded pointing out what the current council has done to assist the homeless, providing them motel vouchers and helping some get into the county’s Delta Landing facility at the former Motel 6 in Pittsburg.

“Mayor, I withdraw my motion,” Ogorchock then said.

Thorpe then asked Wilson if she withdrew her second, saying, “if you don’t withdraw your second then the motion stands.”

Wilson said she didn’t.

However, Attorney Smith corrected him saying, “She can withdraw her motion, but obviously someone else can make a new motion.”

Wilson then made the motion to approve the overlay district.

“I just want to say, for years we’ve said, ‘it’s the county’s responsibility’,” Thorpe said. “We took our time to do our homework. We recognized…the city is not an expert in social services. We also realized if we continue to rely on the county, we’re going to be going in circles.”

“The biggest concern is…when we move them from corner to corner this is no place for them to go,” he continued. “They aren’t randomly showing up. They have a connection to this community. Those are the challenges that we face.”

“We are committed to solve homelessness, not put a bandaid on it,” Thorpe continued. “It’s never been about limiting. It’s about doing something, and we have to start somewhere.”

The motion then passed 3-2 with Wilson, Torres-Walker and Thorpe in support.

Final map “shall” not divide “neighborhoods and ‘communities of interest’” by state law; two new maps comply with requirement

By Allen D. Payton

After narrowing down the choices to redistricting Maps B and 91 before their last meeting on Tuesday, Feb. 8, and hearing from the overwhelming majority of speakers in favor of Map 91 during that meeting, the Antioch City Council majority chose to reject both and return to Map A which had been previously rejected by four of the five council members, as their final choice. Antioch-Redistricting-Draft-Map-A

However, for their special meeting study session, tonight, Tuesday, Feb. 22 beginning at 6:00 p.m., the council will consider three more maps drawn and submitted by the public since the last council meeting. Those maps end with the numbers 512, 516 and 521. All the previous maps are also included in the agenda item. Antioch Council Redistricting Maps 512, 516, 521

FAIR MAPS Act Requires Undivided Neighborhoods

According to the staff report for the special meeting by City Attorney Thomas Lloyd Smith, “Under the (California) FAIR MAPS Act, the City Council shall draw and adopt boundaries using the following criteria in the listed order of priority (Elections Code 21621(c)):

1. Comply with the federal requirements of equal population and the Voting Rights Act
2. Be geographically contiguous
3. Undivided neighborhoods and “communities of interest” (socio-economic geographic areas that should be kept together)
4. Display easily identifiable boundaries
5. Be compact (do not bypass one group of people to get to a more distant group of people)
6. Shall not favor or discriminate against a political party”

The California FAIR MAPS Act was passed in 2019 and took effect Jan. 1, 2020, after the current council district map was adopted in 2018.

Council Majority’s Map Choice Violates Requirement, New Maps Don’t

Both Maps A and B, supported by District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker, District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson and Mayor Lamar Thorpe divide neighborhoods and communities of interest, specifically homes in the same homeowners’ association. So, does new Map 512.

But Map 91 which is supported by Mayor Pro Tem and District 2 Councilman Mike Barbanica and District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock does not. Neither do new Maps 516 and 521, which are almost identical, except for a small section of land along Highway 4 west of Somersville Road and Auto Center Drive where no one lives.

However, Map 91 would result in Wilson living in District 3. While the location of an incumbent’s residence is not a criteria and is a political consideration, all the other maps leave the current council members in their current districts.

New Map 512

The comments made by the resident who drew and submitted Map 512, describing the boundaries for the four council districts, read, “Hopefully, this map will make everyone happy! It uses common sense boundary lines between districts. It uses Lone Tree Way as the boundary between Districts 2 and 3, and Districts 2 and 4. It uses the Delta DeAnza Trail/Contra Costa Canal between Lone Tree Way and Deer Valley Road as a boundary between Districts 3 and 4. It combines the Mira Vista Hills and all neighborhoods on both sides of James Donlon Blvd in District 2. It uses Deer Valley Road then Country Hills Drive between Deer Valley Road and Hillcrest Avenue, then Hillcrest Ave and Lone Tree Way as the boundary between Districts 3 and 4. The greatest population deviation between districts is 1.43% (between Districts 1 and 4). It’s clear to each resident in which district they live, and it doesn’t gerrymander to protect incumbents.”

New Map 516

According to the description for Map 516, “This map keeps all neighborhoods together while using common sense boundary lines. The boundary line between Districts 2 and 3 is Lone Tree Way. The boundary between Districts 2 and 4 is Lone Tree Way and Golf Course Road. The boundary between Districts 3 and 4 is Davison Drive, Deer Valley Road and Lone Tree Way. The greatest population deviation between districts is 2.15% (Districts 1 and 3).”

New Map 521

The resident who drew and submitted Map 521 wrote, “As no consensus could be reached and Map A is really no better than B, I tried to take the elements of both B & 91 that people seemed to like and combine for a new map.”

Districts in Place for Next 10 Years

How the district boundaries are drawn will determine who can run and be elected to the four council seats between 2022 and 2032.

Viewing Meeting & Public Comments

City Council meetings are televised live on Comcast channel 24, AT&T U-verse channel 99, or live stream at City Council Meeting LIVE – City of Antioch, California (antiochca.gov).

The public has the opportunity to address the City Council on each agenda item. No one may speak more than once on an agenda item or during “Public Comments”.

Members of the public wishing to provide public comments, may do so in one of the following ways (#2 pertains to the Zoom Webinar Platform):

1. IN PERSON Fill out a Speaker Request Form, available near the entrance doors, and place in the Speaker Card Tray near the City Clerk before the City Council Meeting begins.
2. VIRTUAL To provide oral public comments during the meeting, please click the following link to register in advance to access the meeting via Zoom Webinar: https://www.antiochca.gov/speakers

You will be asked to enter an email address and a name. Your email address will not be disclosed to the public. After registering, you will receive an email with instructions on how to connect to the meeting.

When the Mayor announces public comments, click the “raise hand” feature in Zoom. For instructions on using the “raise hand” feature in Zoom, visit: https://www.antiochca.gov/raise_hand. When calling into the meeting using the Zoom Webinar telephone number, press *9 on your telephone keypad to raise

your hand. Please ensure your Zoom client is updated so staff can enable your microphone when it is your turn to speak.

Speakers will be notified shortly before they are called to speak. When you are called to speak, please limit your comments to the time allotted (350 words, up to 3 minutes, at the discretion of the Mayor).

The City cannot guarantee that its network and/or the site will be uninterrupted.

3. WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENT If you wish to provide a written public comment, you may do so in one of the following ways by 3:00 p.m. the day of the City Council Meeting:

(1) Fill out an online speaker card, located at https://www.antiochca.gov/speaker_card,

Or (2) Email the City Clerk’s Department at cityclerk@ci.antioch.ca.us.

Please note: Written public comments received by 3:00 p.m. the day of the City Council Meeting will be shared with the City Council before the meeting, entered into the public record, retained on file by the City Clerk s Office, and available to the public upon request. Written public comments will not be read during the City Council Meeting.

Will now negotiate with Congressman’s office, U.S. House of Representatives’ legal counsel during closed door meeting Tuesday night

Also gave boot to local non-profit; to use it for Community Resources Department; Councilwoman Ogorchock not happy, expected to locate it inside Rivertown Resource Center instead

McNerney helped Mayor Thorpe with recall fundraising roast next day

By Allen D. Payton

In the first two weeks in his new position, Antioch’s Interim City Manager Con Johnson through Parks and Recreation Director Brad Helfenberger, attempted to evict Congressman Jerry McNerney from the office space he leases inside the Antioch Community Center at Prewett Family Park on Lone Tree Way almost 11 months earlier than the lease ends next January. In a Jan. 10, 2022, letter to McNerney, Helfenberger wrote, “Pursuant to Section 10 of the District Office Lease Attachment, the City of Antioch hereby terminates the District Office Lease Agreement effective February 15, 2022. You are required to vacate the premises…by 5pm on February 15th, 2022.” Helfenberger letter to McNerney 01-10-22  McNerney-Antioch Lease

In a Jan. 13 response the congressman, who is retiring at the end of this year and will no longer need the space, and whose district, CD-9, will no longer include portions of Antioch, wrote a letter to Mayor Lamar Thorpe – who McNerney helped with his recall campaign fundraising roast, the following day – Johnson and Helfenberger and copied each of the other four council members. McNerney wrote, “This letter is to inform you that I will not close this office on February 15, 2022. Our current lease does not expire until January 2, 2023, at which time we will vacate the premises. Section 10 of the District Office Lease Attachment, which you cited in your letter, does not establish the right of either party to end the lease before the expiration date.” McNerney response letter 01-13-22

McNerney’s Office Had to Get U.S. House of Representatives’ Legal Counsel Involved

In a follow up email to Johnson and Helfenberger dated Jan. 11, 2022, McNerney’s Chief of Staff Nicole Damasco wrote, “I have discussed this matter with the House of Representative’s Associate Administrative Counsel, Cecilia Daly. In her opinion, since the original 2013 lease, which has been extended without changes, does not include an early termination clause, section 10 does not apply. Cecelia, Chiakis, and I would like to schedule a conference call with you and the City’s legal representative tomorrow to discuss this in more detail.” McNerney-Antioch lease & eviction emails 01-22

That refers to Chiakis (Xiong) Ornelas, McNerney’s Senior Field Representative who works in his Stockton office.

Then in another email from Damasco on Jan. 13, she wrote, “We have spoken with the House Administrative Counsel’s office who assure us that section 10 of the District Office Lease Attachment does not confer an early termination clause for either party, and that we are legally entitled to stay in our space until January 2, 2023.

Additionally, we have been informed that it will not be possible to relocate our office by February 15, 2022, even if we chose to move. This is because House rules require that the General Services Administration (GSA) arrange to move House-owned furniture and equipment, and we are unable to coordinate with the GSA in the time allotted. Even though we are legally entitled to stay in the space until the current lease expires, Rep. McNerney is amenable to working together to find a solution that will ensure the best services for the residents of Antioch.”

Local Business and Organization Also Shown the Door

Emerald Consulting, owned by Keith and Iris Archuleta, who run the Youth Intervention Network, also had their lease terminated by the City for the office space they have been in the community center since May 2015. Keith is also the executive director of the Antioch Community Foundation, but that organization was not leasing the space.

“We allowed the community foundation to use the space for meetings,” Iris Archuleta told the Herald, last month. “We’re on a month-to-month, so we’re not going to dispute it. We just told them we’ll move out by the end of the month.”

“From what they say is, they’re going to put the person who they hired to run the youth programs,” she continued. “We received a letter and a phone call from the recreation department. We took our stuff out and removed our information from the door.”

Space to be Used for New Community Resources Department

The city plans to use the space for the Community Resources Department, created by the city council, last year, which will include a yet to be hired Community Resources and Public Safety Director, Antioch Youth Services Network Manager, Tasha Johnson, and the city’s Unhoused Resident Coordinator, Jazmin Ridley. The public safety portion of the new department will not oversee police services, but community crisis intervention response, violence intervention and prevention, animal services and code enforcement. The department will also include environmental resources and the city’s Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program.

The council will discuss forming an ad hoc committee to develop the details about the department during their Tuesday, Feb. 22 meeting under regular agenda item 10.

Councilwoman Ogorchock “Blown Away” by Johnson’s Efforts

In a Jan. 19 email, District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock, in whose district the Antioch Community Center is located, questioned Johnson over his effort to evict the congressman. She also asked him why the city wouldn’t use the Rivertown Resource Center on W. 10th Street, the old police station, that houses other non-profit organizations. Ogorchock email 01-19-22

Ogorchock wrote, “I am very surprised by this email. When did we start to look at the Community Center as a location for this new dept.? Why would we think that it would be ok to give a 30 day notice to a Federal elected official who has been there for quite sometime? Has the Congressman been there since we opened the Community Center?

Congressman McNerney sees our constituents there on a regular basis, and some of those individuals are our veterans.

How much research have you completed into those who lease portions of that building? Since you have only been CM for a short period of time, 15 days (?), I would assume you’ve not had ample time to properly vet the effects of these actions, one example of this would be the city attorney not being a party to the emails being forwarded. When did you come up with the notion to use the Community Center for this dept.?

We just approved on the consent agenda on Tuesday the expense of hiring an independent evaluation of the Resource building on 10th St., (old police building). Why would we spend money to do that when it was your intent to use the Community Center? We authorized up to $50k to have the evaluation completed, that would be a waste of taxpayers’ funds. That would not be financially sound move on our part.

Should we not have had the city attorney look at the lease prior to having the Director of Recreation reach out to the Congressman’s office? Why was it his responsibility and not yours or the city attorney’s.

To be totally honest with you I am blown away by this move, not sure that I am happy about it either. We need to maintain an amicable relationship with the Congressman, to make sure he is in our community so that he is accessible to our community.”

City Council to Negotiate New Lease Tuesday

Now, the city council will meet during closed session, beginning at 4:30 p.m., Tuesday, Feb. 22, 2022, to negotiate the lease of three of the rooms in the community center, according to the meeting agenda.

The closed session agenda Item 2 reads as follows: “CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATONS pursuant to California Government Code section 54956.8: Property: Antioch Community Center Rooms 125, 126, and 127 (consisting of 474 square feet of office space) located at 4703 Lone Tree Way, Antioch CA 94531; Agency Negotiation: Cornelius Johnson, City Manager, and Thomas Lloyd Smith, City Attorney; Negotiating Parties: Jerry McNerney, United States Congressman; Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment.”

Although three council members have requested it, two last July

By Allen D. Payton

At the end of the Antioch City Council meeting on Tuesday, Feb. 8, 2022, District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock became the third council member in seven months to request Mayor Lamar Thorpe place the hiring of additional sworn police officers on a council agenda. The mayor is required by council policy to place an item requested by any council member on a council agenda within six months of the request. But the agendas on Jan. 23, Feb. 8 did not include an item for discussing and approving the hiring of more officers, nor does the council meeting tomorrow night, Tuesday, Feb. 22, 2022, causing Thorpe to be in violation of council policy.

Previous Requests for Hiring More Police

On July 17, 2021, following crime problems in the Sycamore Square Shopping Center, District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker asked Thorpe to place on the next council meeting agenda the hiring of four additional police officers and to focus them on the Sycamore corridor. Earlier that same week, District 2 Councilman and now Mayor Pro Tem Mike Barbanica told Thorpe he was calling for increasing the Antioch police force by 2.5% per year until the department reaches the state standard of 1.48 sworn officers per 1,000 population. That would add about three officers per year over the next two years above the 115 currently allocated in the budget and give the city 170 total sworn officers.

Recent Requests for Hiring More Police

Then during the council meeting on Jan. 23, Barbanica again asked Thorpe to place the hiring of more officers on the agenda for discussion and a vote.

In comments about last month’s double murder of a woman and her 15-year-old stepson who Torres-Walker knew, as previously reported, the councilwoman wrote, “This didn’t have to happen, but I guess politics matters more than people.” She was referring to Thorpe not supporting or placing her proposal on a council agenda of hiring four more officers for the Sycamore area of Antioch, where the double homicide occurred. (See related articles here and here)

On January 31, following the double murder, Ogorchock told the Herald, “on the Feb. 8 council meeting agenda, the mayor needs to place the hiring of more police officers as Mayor Pro Tem Barbanica requested at the meeting of Jan 23rd. This is not a political issue. It’s a matter of public safety. Our residents should come before any individuals’ political agenda. The safety of our residents should be the number priority of this council. Only the mayor can place items on the agenda and this needs to become his priority.”

During the Feb. 8 council meeting, Ogorchock pointed out that City Attorney Thomas L. Smith had previously stated three council members can place an item on a council agenda or call a special meeting to discuss a matter they support if the mayor refuses to place it on a regular council meeting agenda.

Thorpe said he disagreed with that viewpoint.

No Additional Police in This or Next Year’s Budgets

While Thorpe has argued in the past that he’s not for defunding police, he continues to prevent the funding of additional officers, in spite of large increases in revenue in both this and next year’s budgets.

This year’s budget, which includes an increase in revenue of $5.6 million to the General Fund which pays for police, and next year’s budget shows a projected increase of $8.7 million in revenue. But the hiring of additional police officers was not included. Instead, the council majority on a 4-1 vote approved the creation of a new Community Resources Department and the hiring of 17 other city employees, including seven long desired Code Enforcement Officers. (See related article)

As previously reported, during the Nov. 23, 2021, council meeting, Antioch Finance Director Dawn Merchant said the city council will have an additional $2.3 million to spend in this year’s budget, with over $2.5 million additional from sales tax, including over $1.5 million more from Measure W’s 1% sales tax revenues. Plus, there were $6,425,217 less in expenditures than projected for Fiscal Year 2021. But the council did not spend any of it on hiring additional police. (See related article)

Antioch Police Staffing Half of Statewide Average

Currently the Antioch Police Department is at 1.0 officers per 1,000 population, half the 2.0 officers per 1,000 statewide average and much less than the 2.4 officers per 1,000 nationwide average.

“Palindrome days tend to be popular days for weddings at our office” – Acting Assistant Clerk-Recorder Wilson

By Dawn Kruger, Civic Outreach/Engagement Specialist, Contra Costa County Clerk-Recorder-Elections Department

The Contra Costa County Clerk’s Office is gearing up for a very special day on “Twosday,” with additional ceremonies available for the public on Tuesday, February 22, 2022. The Clerk-Recorder’s office has officiated weddings for couples on special palindrome dates in the past and traditionally, these days are very popular.  A palindrome day has the same numbers in the date forward and backward.

22 ceremonies will be performed at the Contra Costa County Clerk’s office, located at 555 Escobar Street in Martinez between 8:00 am and 4:00 pm.

“Palindrome days tend to be popular days for weddings at our office, and our staff is getting into the spirit this year with a very special “Twosday” coming up,” Acting Assistant Clerk-Recorder Laura Wilson said. “Sticking with the theme, we opened up additional appointments for county residents so we can officiate 22 appointments and they filled up almost immediately!”

Palindrome days don’t come around very often – this one only happens once each century – and when they do, the County Clerk’s Office sees an increase in wedding ceremony appointments.  The office is officiating almost double the number of ceremonies usually offered in order to accommodate interest.

As with all ceremony appointments currently being offered onsite, the Clerk-Recorder’s Office takes precautions to keep constituents and staff safe.  COVID-19 protocols will be in place.  Up to 5 guests may join the couple in the ceremony room.

All appointments for the “Twosday” ceremonies have been filled, and the County Clerk’s Office does not accept walk-in appointments at this time.

A marriage license must be obtained before a ceremony can be performed. Couples may purchase a license the same day as their ceremony appointment at the County Clerk’s office in Martinez. The fee for a public marriage license is $86, while a confidential license is $90. The civil marriage ceremony fee is $60.

For information about marriage license and ceremony services, go to https://www.ccclerkrec.us/ or call the office at 925-335-7900.

Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.