Archive for the ‘City Council’ Category

Ribbon cutting for renovated Antioch City Council Chambers Monday, Nov. 22

Saturday, November 20th, 2021

$2 million in improvements including plaza and Leo Fontana Fountain still under construction

By Allen Payton

The Antioch City Council Chambers renovation is finally complete. After spending about $1.5 million, the City invites the public to join the council and staff on Monday, November 22, 2021, from 5:00 – 6:00 PM for a ribbon cutting ceremony.

According to the various bids for the council chambers, walkway, plaza and Leo Fontana Fountain, the costs for renovations totals about $2 million and construction began in 2019. The plaza and fountain are still under construction which began earlier, this year.

Improvements

According to Swatt | Miers Architects, hired by the city council for the renovation redesign, “The City of Antioch has long been proud of their public buildings including the Police Facility, Animal Services Facility, and Prewett Family Park — all designed by Swatt | Miers Architects partner George Miers. So, when it came time to renovate their 1980’s Council Chamber, they awarded the commission to SMA.

This project included both the interior renovation of the existing Council Chamber and the enclosure of an existing open-air breezeway that connects the City Hall to the Council Chamber.

City of Antioch Council Chambers renovation view from the audience. Photo: Swatt | Miers Architects

Designed in 1980 by Mackinley, Winnaker and McNeil Architects, this well-used 3,083 SF, stand-alone facility was long overdue in meeting current code and modern functional requirements including ADA, audio-visual/closed circuit TV, modern lighting/energy design and acoustical attenuation. Additionally, public restrooms had not been provided in the Council Chamber structure. Rather, the public needed to leave the building via a covered walkway and use the main City Hall restrooms. Aside from the inconvenience, security was a significant City concern. Operating on a limited budget, the following design features were implemented;

  • The existing 450 SF covered walkway was converted into an enclosed interior Entry Vestibule linking City Hall and Council Chambers.
  • The existing semi-circular seating layout was redesigned to meet ADA accessibility and related requirements for all public, staff and Council member seating.
  • A comprehensive lighting design focusing on user and TV broadcast needs.
  • A comprehensive AV/TV broadcast design.
  • New seating, acoustical wall panels and floor finishes.
  • New dais, speaker podium and staff seating casework.
  • A new acoustical wood ceiling featuring a unique, tilted plane above the dais designed to enhance both acoustics and lighting.
  • Redirection of existing axial public entrance to the sides.”

View from the dais in the renovated Antioch Council Chambers. Photo by Swatt | Miers Architects

Antioch City Hall and Council Chambers are located at 200 H Street between W. 2nd and W. 3rd Streets in Antioch’s historic, downtown Rivertown.

 

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter

Analysis: Antioch Council to go for “woke” during special meeting Tuesday at 5:30 pm

Tuesday, November 16th, 2021

Only 28 evictions of renter households out of 13,221 in Antioch during COVID-19 moratorium. Yet, council members call for rent control and anti-tenant harassment ordinances.

By Allen Payton

During a special meeting Tuesday evening (today) at 5:30 pm – when most residents who commute to work aren’t yet home – the Antioch City Council will discuss several issues that will be sure to please those who claim to be “woke”, or rather progressive and champions of “equity”, who pursue equality of result rather than equality of opportunity, aka SJW’s meaning “social justice warriors”. It’s a Far-Left Wing wish list of ways to reshape Antioch’s society, and not for the better.

Two agenda items that don’t fit that description include the first one, which is about the celebration of Antioch’s 150th anniversary of cityhood, next year, known as the Sesquicentennial. Say it slowly and pronounce it: “sess”, “qui” (as in quick), and end with “centennial”, you know like bicentennial, which is a 200-year anniversary.

The council has already allocated $100,000 toward the estimated $201,500 in costs for the 2022 Sesquicentennial Celebration. Now, council members have to decide if they want to continue to work with the Celebrate Antioch Foundation to put on the various events proposed for next year, send out a request for proposal (RFP) for other groups that might be interested, hire an outside contractor or additional staff to plan the events, or just use existing City staff to handle it all. Sesquicentennial Celebration Next Steps ACC111621

They should go with the first choice, since the first event is on February 6, 2022, the actual anniversary of the City’s incorporation in 1872, and it’s a bit late to switch horses – especially since Celebrate Antioch Foundation isn’t doing it alone, but has help from the Antioch Historical Society, and other local organizations.

The other item on the agenda which is rather innocuous and shouldn’t be very controversial is item 3. Local Purchasing Ordinance. According to the City staff report on the agenda item, “Council Member Lori Ogorchock (District 3) stated an interest in the potential establishment of a local purchasing ordinance and requested that this topic be considered by the Antioch City Council.”

Who doesn’t support shopping local and keeping Antioch’s city funds spent with local businesses, growing our own economy, instead of Jeff Bezos’ pocketbook? FISCAL IMPACTUnknown at this time.

Woke Agenda Items

Beyond those, the other items on the agenda attempt to push a specific agenda, much like most of the police reforms approved by the council (many times only by three votes), earlier this year, without proving the need and basing them on findings and in opposition to the majority of those who participated in the Bridging the Gap forums.

  1. HOUSING POLICIES – RENT CONTROL AND TENANT PROTECTIONS

According to the City staff report on the agenda item, “A number of housing policies have been expressed as potential areas of interest by Antioch’s elected leadership. i. Mayor Lamar Thorpe identified the topic of rent control within the City of Antioch. ii. Council Member Tamisha Torres-Walker (District 1) and Mayor Pro Tem Monica Wilson (District 4) advanced the topic of tenant protections, specifically the establishment of a tenant anti-displacement policy and an anti-landlord harassment policy in the City of Antioch.” (See related article)

The council will hear a presentation by Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment (ACCE), and then is asked to provide staff direction based on their consensus. FISCAL IMPACT Unknown at this time. ACCE Tenant Protections presentation ACC111621

According to the organization’s website, ACCE “is a multi-racial, democratic, non-profit community organization that builds power to fight and stand for economic, racial and social justice. We take seriously our commitment to ground-up organizing to build a strong people’s movement that can create transformative community change.”

On the Who We Are What We Do page, under the topic of Racial and Economic Justice, their website reads, “We evaluate problems and solutions through a lens grounded in both economic and racial justice. We cannot resolve structural racism without changing our economic system and we cannot resolve economic inequality without addressing racism.” Also, under the topic of Systems Change it reads, “ACCE seeks to shift power relations by changing the systems that create oppression rather than just addressing the symptoms of oppression.

That’s who the council is looking to for guidance? An organization with a clear agenda based on incorrect assumptions of race and economic issues in Antioch?

Questions for council members to answer before giving any direction to staff: What structural racism exists in Antioch? What economic inequality is there and how is it based on racism in Antioch? Who in Antioch is actually suffering oppression?

According to the organization’s presentation, “In March 2021, a KQED investigative report found that during the pandemic, Antioch had the most evictions per renter households out of all nine Bay Area counties.” In addition, the presentation claims, “Antioch’s COVID-19 eviction rate was 207.2 per 100,000 renter households, nearly double that of Richmond, and approximately 50 times the rate of Oakland.”

That sounds really horrible but, it’s only 0.2072% – about the same percentage of Americans who have died from COVID-19 (all of which are sad and unfortunate). But if the council decides on any policy based on that statistic, it will just be another example of overreaction by government officials.

Furthermore, according to the American Community Survey, 2019 (1-Year Estimates) cited in the ACC presentation, “Antioch is more than a third renters: in 2019, there were 36,138 housing units in Antioch and 13,221 of them, or 36.6%, were occupied by tenants.” That means there were a total of 28 evictions of renter households out of all 13,221 in Antioch during the COVID-19 moratorium.

As for rent control, that just creates another level of costly bureaucracy and more government injection into the housing market that is a macroeconomic issue. Plus, I find it laughable that two of the three council members who are proposing it, just last year voted to endorse Measure T which would have reduced the supply of future housing in Antioch. Perhaps they’ve never learned about the law of supply and demand which demonstrates that the lower the supply of something while demand is high results in increased prices.

Questions for council members to ask and get answered before giving direction to City staff, if any: How does ACCE define tenant harassment? How do you define it? What are the reasons that landlords provided as the reason for evictions? Because evictions were allowed during the COVID-19 moratorium, but for other reasons other than non-payment of rent. With only 28 total evictions during COVID-19 citywide are such ordinances really necessary? Do you know why each of those tenants were evicted?

  1. LOCAL PREFERENCE FOR MINORITY AND WOMEN OWNED BUSINESS ENTERPRISES

According to the City staff report on the agenda item, “Mayor Pro Tem Wilson stated an interest in the potential establishment of a local preference for Minority & Women Owned Business Enterprises and requested that this topic be considered by the Antioch City Council.”

I would like to see Wilson lead by example on this, first and put her money where her mouth is. Does she make it a point to do business with minority and women owned business enterprises? I don’t recall seeing her in the restaurant for which I was the minor shareholder, and my partner who is Black and owned the majority share of the business – located right down the street from City Hall – not even for our Grand Opening, when she could have eaten for free.

Even better, how about Wilson try and start her own business and see what it takes to compete in the marketplace, create jobs, and create wealth?

Questions for council members: is Wilson claiming minority and women owned businesses can’t compete in Antioch against white male owned businesses? Do the sales tax dollars generated by the businesses in Antioch have a color other than green? What about residential and commercial property tax dollars?

That reminds me of when I joined the NAACP East County Branch, in I believe 1999. Since I wasn’t sure I could, because I’m white and Republican, one of the members asked me, “is your money green?” I said, “yes”. She said, “then you can join!” (She also pointed out it was white Republicans who helped form the NAACP. But I digress).

This is simply more divisiveness pitting some groups against others, namely the “evil patriarchy” which is full of white men holding others back and down. Yeah, right. I can tell you, as I’m out selling advertising to all kinds of businesses owned by minority owners, white owners, women and men owners, most all of them are struggling, these days. So, frankly they all need some help.

If Wilson and the rest of the council really cared about helping businesses, minority and women owned or otherwise, they would join with other council members in the county and pressure the Board of Supervisors and their out-of-control Public Health Officer, Dr. Chris Farnitano to lift the current health order requiring proof of vaccination to go to indoor restaurants, the health club, the El Campanil Theatre, indoor movie theaters and bowling alleys. That way they don’t have to spend extra money on staff to enforce the ridiculous and unnecessary order and keep our businesses from getting fined, further costing them money they don’t have.

Besides, what if the owner is white and identifies as gender non-binary? In which category do they fit? What if the owner is a man who identifies as a woman? Would his business qualify for the preference? Just how woke should such the policy be?

Just keep OUR tax dollars, that the City spends, IN Antioch following the Local Purchasing Ordinance proposed by Councilwoman Ogorchock, regardless of who owns it, their gender or ethnicity.

FISCAL IMPACT Unknown at this time.

  1. HUMAN RIGHTS AND RACIAL EQUITY COMMISSION

According to the City staff report on the agenda item, “Council Member Torres-Walker stated an interest in the potential establishment of a Human Rights and Racial Equity Commission and requested that this topic be considered by the Antioch City Council.”

Questions for Torres-Walker to answer and any other council members who support forming the commission: Which humans in Antioch are being denied their rights? What do they consider as a right beyond what is enumerated in the Constitution and Bill of Rights? How can the Antioch city government ensure and achieve racial “equity”, which is, again, equality of result instead of ensuring our government simply treats everyone equally and fairly? If it’s formed, will you actually listen to what the members have to say or simply ignore them and act like it doesn’t exist like the other commissions, including the Police Crime Prevention Commission and Economic Development Commission?

FISCAL IMPACTUnknown at this time.

  1. FOOD INSECURITY AND ACCESS TO HEALTHY AND AFFORDABLE FOOD OPTIONS AD HOC COMMITTEE

According to the City staff report on the agenda item, “Council Member Torres-Walker and Mayor Pro Tem Wilson stated interest in food insecurity, access to healthy and affordable food options and the potential formation of an ad hoc committee. It is requested that this topic be considered by the Antioch City Council.”

While food insecurity may have been a concern in Torres-Walker’s district earlier this year with the closing of Lucky grocery store on East 18th Street, since then Antioch Foods opened there and the Cielo Mexican Supermarket opened right down the street, giving the residents on the north side of Hwy 4 – which her district encompasses, two major food choices.

Questions for council members: how can the City of Antioch offer access to healthy and affordable food options? Can they do something about inflation? Do they support having more food giveaway lines on our major city streets like on A Street? Are the council members who proposed this suggesting city tax dollars be spent in addition to the federal funds spent on WIC and SNAP?

FISCAL IMPACTUnknown at this time.

Aren’t these the same two council members, along with Mayor Thorpe – in an attempt to show their environmental credentials – who foolishly voted against renewing the franchise agreement for one of the natural gas pipelines that runs through Antioch, potentially increasing the costs for people to heat their homes, their water for showers, baths, coffee and tea, as well as cook food both at home and in our restaurants?

First, they make decisions that increase our costs of living, then want to use our tax dollars to help those who can’t afford to pay for those cost increases. They’re self-inflicted problems and cause a downward spiral for our society.

Get Woke Go Broke

It’s pretty obvious some of the council members are simply ignoring what has happened with companies and other governments that have experienced the slogan, “Get Woke Go Broke”.

Plus, it’s really easy to show compassion when spending other people’s hard-earned money and play favorites with businesses using we the people’s tax dollars, when you’ve never owned a business, created jobs or created wealth, and only worked for either government agencies or non-profit organizations that exist off of donations from what other people have earned. Unfortunately, they just don’t have the necessary experience or knowledge to make the right decisions that will benefit our community – our entire community.

The bottom line is the best form of welfare and the best social program is a job. So, if they really want to help Antioch residents, the council members would focus on two things: public safety and economic development, by hiring more police and getting our crime under control and bringing employers with higher paying jobs to our city, to truly fulfill the City’s new slogan, “Opportunity Lives Here”. That doesn’t mean more cannabis businesses which further damages our city’s reputation beyond the crime and homelessness – about which they really haven’t done anything other than hire a consultant and a staff member – and actually works against economic development efforts to attract employers.

The issue isn’t about having compassion on others who are less fortunate. Most people, like me, do. The issue is how to go about truly helping them, and whether or not there actually is a problem with some of the proposals on tonight’s council meeting agenda.

The City isn’t doing well at the main thing they should already be doing, which is public safety. That’s no shot at the police department. It’s due to a lack of staffing. But this council didn’t approve even one additional sworn officers in this year’s budget or the next. That’s in spite of the fact that there’s an estimated $5 million more in this year’s budget and $8 million more in next year’s, thanks to the sales tax increases we the people approved mainly for more police!

Yet, some of the council members want our city government to try and do more things that are mostly out of their purview? Not wise. But we’ll see just how woke some of the council members will go.

Viewing

Members of the public can watch the meeting at https://www.antiochca.gov/live_stream, on Comcast Channel 24, or AT&T U-Verse Channel 99.

Public Comments

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

  1. Fill out an online speaker card by 3:00 p.m. the day of the Council Meeting located at: https://www.antiochca.gov/speaker_card.
  1. Provide oral public comments during the meeting by clicking 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.

  1. Email comments to cityclerk@ci.antioch.ca.us by 3:00 p.m. the day of the Council Meeting. The comment will be read into the record at the meeting (350 words maximum, up to 3 minutes, at the discretion of the Mayor). IMPORTANT: Identify the agenda item in the subject line of your email if the comment is for Announcement of Community Events, Public Comment, or a specific Agenda Item number. No one may speak more than once on an agenda item or during “Public Comments”.

All emails received by 3:00 p.m. the day of the Council Meeting will be entered into the record or the meeting.

Speakers will be notified shortly before they are called to speak.

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter

SFPD senior personnel clerk confirms interim Antioch city manager candidate is a retired lieutenant, not captain

Monday, November 8th, 2021

Cornlious “Con” Johnson from Mayor Thorpe’s official Facebook page. Photo of captain’s badge and Johnson’s retirement card provided by Thorpe.

“Regarding Cornelius Johnson’s retirement, the highest ranking was lieutenant.” – David Ng, SFPD Senior Clerk of Personnel

Further confirmed by SF Employees Retirement System

Mayor shares photo of Con Johnson’s captain’s badge and retirement card as proof

Thorpe, Johnson, city council members, staff refuse to provide resume; Johnson refuses to answer questions

By Allen Payton

On Monday, November 8, 2021 the San Francisco Police Department’s (SFPD) senior personnel clerk confirmed Cornelius “Con” Johnson, candidate for the position of Antioch interim city manager, did not retire as a captain, as Mayor Lamar Thorpe and city staff claim. He retired as a lieutenant, as has been reported by the Herald and other local media. (See related article)

The city staff report for the vote to appoint Johnson during Tuesday’s council meeting refers to Johnson as a retired captain. An announcement on his official Facebook page, Thorpe also referred to Johnson as a retired captain.

Questions were sent to the mayor on Saturday asking, if Johnson retired as a Lieutenant III how could he have been a captain over that department? Or was he the acting captain?

In response Thorpe wrote, “He’s a retired CAPTAIN, stop misinforming the public with information you have not verified.”

The mayor also shared a photo of an SFPD captain’s badge and Johnson’s retirement card as proof of his rank. The card appears to have been issued by SFPD and includes the chief’s name, title and signature.

Additional questions were then asked of Thorpe, including, when was Johnson promoted to the position of captain? What date and for how long? The mayor was also asked if Johnson went back to work after July 1, 2016 and get promoted to captain and to provide the documentation to back up his claim about Johnson retiring as a captain. This is the second time Thorpe has referred to Johnson as a retired police captain. The first time was when the mayor introduced Johnson as a member of Thorpe’s Transition Advisory Team, last December. (See related article)

The mayor was also asked why a press release wasn’t sent out and why Johnson’s resume wasn’t included for the public to have. Finally, he was asked for personal information about Johnson, including how long he’s lived in Antioch, his wife’s name and if they have any children, as part of the introduction to the community, or for Johnson to contact this reporter to provide it

Thorpe did not respond to any of the additional questions nor provide a copy of Johnson’s resume.

SFPD Personnel Staff Confirms Johnson Retired as Lieutenant

In a phone call with David Ng, Senior Clerk of Personnel for the SFPD Monday, he said, “regarding Cornelius Johnson’s retirement, the highest ranking was lieutenant. The system shows lieutenant. The job code is Q62 which is lieutenant.”

Asked about the 2016 retirement system report showing Johnson retired as Lieutenant III, Ng responded, “There are different levels, but my system doesn’t show which level he was at.”

Asked about the card showing he’s a retired captain, Ng said, “I don’t know anything about that.”

He then offered to have the head of the personnel department, Lt. Patrick McCormick, provide any additional details. An effort to reach McCormick on Monday was unsuccessful before publication time.

Retirement report for the San Francisco Employees Retirement System board meeting on July 13, 2016 shows Cornelius H. Johnson retired as a Lieutenant III on July 1, 2016. Source: SFERS

In addition, an email was sent to the San Francisco Employees Retirement System (SFERS) Monday morning asking for them to verify at what rank Mr. Johnson retired. They were also asked if he later returned to work for SFPD after July 1, 2016 and was subsequently promoted to captain, and if so, when did he retire, again. No response was received prior to publication time.

11/9/21 UPDATE 2: Stephen Worsfold, Administrative Analyst and media contact for the SFERS, responded on Tuesday, Nov. 9 further confirming the information from the SFPD senior personnel clerk.

“I did ask our records to check on the retirement of the person in question and we have it listed as a Q62 which is Lieutenant III,” he said.

Regarding the number three, Worsfold replied, “you’ll have to ask SFPD what the difference is in numerical numbers.” As for the Q62 he said, “it could could be a job code.”

Transparent California Confirms Johnson’s Pension is Paid as Lieutenant

11/9/21 UPDATE 3: A search of the online website TransparentCalifornia.com, which contains public compensation records of current and retired government employees, shows Johnson’s pension from the SFERS was paid in 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019 as a Lieutenant III.

Questions for SF Police Chief William Scott

Information and questions were also sent to SF Police Chief William Scott Monday afternoon, including the photo of Johnson’s badge and retirement card asking if he wasn’t ever promoted to captain, why would he have been issued the card showing he’s a retired captain and if that’s something the SFPD does for retired personnel, showing their highest rank, even if it was only in an acting capacity.

In addition, he was asked to confirm if either what the Antioch city staff report or Thorpe wrote about Johnson’s experience is correct or both.

The following automated response was received at 3:36 pm Monday: “Your email has been received by the general email account for the Chief’s Office of the San Francisco Police Department. This account is monitored during normal business hours, Monday through Friday, 8:00 am to 5:00 pm PST.”

Questions for Antioch City Staff

Questions were then emailed Monday afternoon to Antioch Administrative Services Director Nickie Mastay, City Attorney Thomas Lloyd Smith, City Manager Ron Bernal and Assistant City Manager Rosanna Bayon Moore asking for a copy of Johnson’s resume that was shared with city council members during their meeting, last week. They were also asked, why it wasn’t included in the staff report for the Interim City Manager item on tomorrow night’s meeting agenda for the public to read so they can provide more informed comments before the vote.

Also, they were asked about the discrepancy in what the city staff report included about Johnson’s experience with SFPD and what Thorpe shared in the announcement on his official Facebook page.

Regarding Mr. Johnson’s work experience, the staff report reads: “Collaborating with the Department of Health, Department of Youth Services and Juvenile Hall Center developing, planning, administering, overseeing the San Francisco Police Department city-wide Violence Intervention Program with a budget of $20 million and a staff of 60 mid managers and supervisor.” But in Mayor Thorpe’s announcement about tomorrow night’s vote, he wrote: “Having 17 years of managerial experience with the City and County of San Francisco, most recently as a captain in the San Francisco Police Department’s Field Operations Bureau, Johnson managed a $300 million budget and oversaw 600 staff members.”

They were asked if what the mayor shared is correct when he replied, “Both are correct” and if so, why what he shared wasn’t included in the staff report as it’s much more impressive with 10 times the staff members and 15 times the budget size.

Finally, the city staff members were asked who on city staff or the council did the vetting and a background check of Mr. Johnson and if any of them have the dates when he held either position of acting captain or captain.

11/9/21 UPDATE 1: A call was made and a formal Public Records Act was sent to Attorney Smith, Tuesday morning asking for a copy of Johnson’s resume that was presented to the council members during their meeting, last week. Another call was made at 2:55 p.m. to Smith’s office asking for it, again.

Questions for Johnson

Similar information and questions were sent via email to Johnson, Monday afternoon asking, “if you weren’t ever promoted to captain, why would you have been issued the card in the photo showing you’re a retired captain? Is that something the SFPD does for retired personnel, showing their highest rank, even if it was only in an acting capacity? Or did you go back to work for SFPD after you retired in July 2016 and were then promoted to captain, and retired again?”

Regarding the differences in his experience reported by Antioch city staff and the mayor, Johnson was asked which is correct or are both, and what dates they occurred. Finally, Johnson was asked to share personal information about his background, family and where he was born and grew up. He did not respond to multiple attempts to reach him for comment and to answer questions.

Questions for Council Members

Questions were also asked of all five Antioch council members late Saturday night. They included, “who did the vetting and background check of Mr. Johnson, including contacting the City of San Francisco Human Resources Department and SFPD to verify what he’s told you about his experience which includes the start and end dates of his various positions? Was it one of you or a city staff member?

“Did he provide you with his resume which shows you that information? If so, can you please provide a copy of it? If not, why wouldn’t you require that of an applicant for interim city manager, how was the information about his background shared in the staff report and the mayor’s announcement on his official Facebook page obtained and did you merely take Mr. Johnson at his word?

“Did you verify his education with the University of San Francisco and require him to provide a copy of his diplomas? What is the normal practice when the council hires the city manager and city attorney?”

None of the councilmembers responded by publication time.

Questions for University of San Francisco

11/9/21 UPDATE 4: An email was sent to the University of San Francisco Registrar’s Office on Tuesday afternoon, to verify information about Johnson’s higher education shared in the Antioch city staff report. They were also asked his GPA for both degrees and if he earned any honors, as well.

Personal Information from Independent Background Check

11/9/21 UPDATE 5: Information from a background check, shared with the Herald Thursday afternoon by an Antioch resident who chose to not be identified, shows Johnson is 61 years old and worked as a licensed, private security guard from Oct. 2016 to Oct. 2020. He is or was a part owner with his ex-wife of three businesses, including Siafu Enterprises, Inc. formed in Sept. 2017, Pyramid Security Services, LLC formed in 2008, and MJ Investment Group, LLC formed in Nevada in 2006. But information on the latter two show they are no longer active. Johnson has lived in Antioch and owned a home, here, since at least 2003 and possibly since 2001.

Please check back later for any updates to this report.

Watching Meeting and Making Public Comments

The meeting begins at 7:00 pm and can be viewed at https://www.antiochca.gov/live_stream, on Comcast Channel 24, or AT&T U-Verse Channel 99. Members of the public wishing to provide public comment may do so one of the following ways (#2 pertains to the Zoom Webinar):

  1. Fill out an online speaker card by 3:00 p.m. the day of the Council Meeting located at: https://www.antiochca.gov/speaker_card.
  2. Provide oral public comments during the meeting by clicking 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.

  1. Email comments to cityclerk@ci.antioch.ca.us by 3:00 p.m. the day of the Council Meeting. The comment will be read into the record at the meeting (350 words maximum, up to 3 minutes, at the discretion of the Mayor). IMPORTANT: Identify the agenda item in the subject line of your email if the comment is for Announcement of Community Events, Public Comment, or a specific Agenda Item number. No one may speak more than once on an agenda item or during “Public Comments”.

All emails received by 3:00 p.m. the day of the Council Meeting will be entered into the record for the meeting.

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

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter

Without announcing the public mapping tool is available Antioch Council already considering draft redistricting maps

Monday, November 8th, 2021

Antioch City Council Current Pre-Redistricting Map and Deviations by District. Source: City of Antioch

Will review during special meeting/study session Tuesday at 5:30 p.m.; challenges with and complaints about mapping tool

“I also understand that there has been NO one on the site, nor has anyone giving their ideas as to the drawing of the maps.” – Councilwoman Ogorchock

Source: City of Antioch

By Allen Payton

The Antioch City Council will hold a special meeting/study session on redrawing their district boundaries at 5:30 p.m. Tuesday night. They will be reviewing, discussing and receiving public comments on two draft maps even before the promised online mapping tool, on the city’s redistricting webpage, available to the public was announced. It can be accessed here: www.redrawmyantioch.publicredistricting.com.

A portion of District 3 north and east of Lone Tree Way is shown shifted into District 4. Source: City of Antioch

The draft maps on tomorrow night’s agenda offer two options and show slight changes to Districts 3 and 4, but no apparent changes to Districts 1 and 2. Districts must be within 5% of the average population of 115,580. The current district maps are based on the 2010 Census when Antioch had a population of 102,372. With more residential growth occurring in District 3 over the past 10 years and a population that is 6.08% greater than average of 28,895 population per district, some of the population had to be shifted to other districts. Since the population in District 4 is 4.63% less than the average some of the population from District 3 was shifted to District 4 for both Draft Maps A and B. Antioch City Council Redistricting Meeting Agenda 110921

Antioch-Redistricting-Draft-Map-A      Antioch-Redistricting-Draft-Map-B      Antioch-Draft-Map-Demographics 110921

A portion of District 3 north and east of the current boundary along the Mokulemne Trail is moved into District 4 in this scenario. Source: City of Antioch

Questions for City Council, Staff, Consultant

The following questions were sent via email Monday afternoon to all five council members, City Attorney Thomas Lloyd Smith and other city staff asking, “when did the online mapping tool become available? How was the public informed of it being available? Has any member of the public used it or submitted a proposed map? If not, isn’t it premature to be discussing draft maps before the public has had the opportunity to submit their own proposed maps?”

In addition, they were asked, “why are you holding these meetings at 5:30 p.m. when many residents are still commuting home from work, instead of having a special meeting next Tuesday night at 7:00 p.m. or on a Saturday and in person for people to attend and see the maps large and up close? Will you be holding more meetings on redistricting and in person?”

In addition, similar questions were asked of the consultant, Karin Mac Donald of Q2 Data and Research after work hours on Monday.

District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock was the only one to respond Monday evening.

“I don’t know who created these maps, I was told staff,” she wrote. “The interactive part came out on Tuesday. Not enough time for individuals to be able to start working on their thoughts. I also understand that there has been NO one on the site, nor has anyone giving their ideas as to the drawing of the maps.”

“I’ve asked for another meeting, in person, to get feedback. So far that’s been a no go. We’ll have to see,” Ogorchock added.

Screenshot of online mapping tool.

Challenges With Online Mapping Tool

After a third attempt using three different email addresses to sign up for the online mapping tool, this reporter was able to establish an account to create a map and save it for submission to the city council.

That information and the following additional questions were sent to council members and staff: “Can someone please get that fixed? If I can’t sign up and another person who told me they tried, how can you expect the public to submit proposed maps to provide you their input? What if others don’t have multiple email addresses? Might they just give up and not use the mapping tool? Did someone on city staff test it, first?”

“I totally agree with you,” Ogorchock responded. “I’ve gotten several complaints already. Plus, there is hardly any Spanish documents. Not good.”

Watching Meeting and Public Comments

The special meeting/study session can be viewed at https://www.antiochca.gov/live_stream, on Comcast Channel 24, or AT&T U-Verse Channel 99.

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

  1. Fill out an online speaker card by 3:00 p.m. the day of the Council Meeting located at: https://www.antiochca.gov/speaker_card.
  2. Provide oral public comments during the meeting by clicking 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.

  1. Email comments to cityclerk@ci.antioch.ca.us by 3:00 p.m. the day of the Council Meeting. The comment will be read into the record at the meeting (350 words maximum, up to 3 minutes, at the discretion of the Mayor). IMPORTANT: Identify the agenda item in the subject line of your email if the comment is for Announcement of Community Events, Public Comment, or a specific Agenda Item number. No one may speak more than once on an agenda item or during “Public Comments”.

All emails received by 3:00 p.m. the day of the Council Meeting will be entered into the record for the meeting.

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

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter

Antioch Council meets with more than one interim city manager candidate

Tuesday, November 2nd, 2021

But doesn’t negotiate contract during almost two-hour closed-door morning session

By Allen Payton

This morning, Tuesday, Nov. 2, 2021, the Antioch City Council held a special, closed session meeting at 9:00 a.m., to discuss the recruitment of and to negotiate with a potential interim city manager candidate, according to the agenda. However, the council met with more than one candidate. The council did not discuss the recruitment process for hiring a more permanent manager as was previously and incorrectly reported. (See related article)

It is the result of the announcement by City Manager Ron Bernal in September that he is retiring at the end of the year. (See related article)

The items on the agenda were publicly noticed as, “1) PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT: Recruitment of City Manager pursuant to Government Code section 54957, and 2) CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS pursuant to Government Code section 54957.6. Unrepresented employee: Interim City Manager Candidate.”

There were no public comments made about either item, prior to closed session. After almost two hours, the council returned to open session and City Attorney Thomas L. Smith said, “no reportable action was taken,” regarding the recruitment process.

Then on the matter of negotiating with a candidate to be interim city manager, Smith said, “it was not discussed by the city council and no reportable action was taken.” However, that was not completely accurate.

Questions were sent to Smith, City Manager Ron Bernal and Mayor Lamar Thorpe asking, “will the process for hiring an interim city manager and recruitment to fill the position be shared during a public council meeting? Will the candidates for both be interviewed in public, so the public will have the opportunity to comment on them, and will the council take their votes during a public meeting before they are hired, as has been past practice? Is that legally required?”

In addition, the following questions were also asked of Thorpe and all four council members: “why was the meeting held today and in the morning? Did you or the council change your minds and decide not to negotiate with an interim candidate? Why didn’t that occur? Did the candidate withdraw their interest in the position? Will you be voting in public when hiring the interim and filling the city manager position, and allow the public to give their input before you do?”

District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock responded with, “Please contact the city attorney to give you clarity.”

The city attorney was then asked about his report from the closed session regarding negotiations with the interim city manager candidate, including, “does that mean the council changed their minds and decided not to negotiate with an interim candidate and no candidate participated in the closed session? Or did the candidate withdraw their interest in the position?”

Attorney Smith was also asked, “did a candidate or more than one candidate for the position of interim city manager attend and participate in that part of the closed session and negotiate with the city council members? If so, that isn’t a matter of secrecy since it was agendized as such, correct?”

When reached for comment, District 2 Councilman Mike Barbanica said he spoke with Smith to get clarification. “Everything followed the agenda,” Barbanica said. “We did what the council agenda said.”

“Yes, we did in fact meet with potential candidates for the interim city manager position,” he confirmed. “But I can’t discuss the details of closed session meetings.”

“The other item was in terms of a contract with the interim candidates, and we never got to that,” Barbanica added. “That’s what Thomas was referring to.”

Smith later responded, further clarifying the agenda items and what transpired, “The meeting with candidates was covered under Item 1.  Item 2, terms of contract, was not discussed. Both items concern the Interim City Manager position.”

Additional questions were then sent to all five council members, asking, “How were the candidates with whom you met, this morning, recruited? Were any of them suggested by any of you? Was something posted somewhere publicly or internally to city staff?”

No responses to the other questions of council and staff were received prior to publication time.

Please check back later for any updates to this report.

 

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter

Antioch council to hold special meeting on recruiting new city manager, negotiate with interim candidate Tuesday

Friday, October 29th, 2021

No answers to questions of why the morning meeting and urgency for choosing an interim since Bernal isn’t retiring until end of year, how many candidates nor who they are

By Allen Payton

The Antioch City Council will hold a special 9:00 a.m. closed session meeting on Tuesday, Nov. 2, 2021, to discuss the recruitment of a new city manager and to negotiate with a potential interim city manager candidate. ACC110221 Special Mtg

The public can make comments on both items before the council adjourns into the closed session. The mayor will report out what actions were taken following the conclusion of their closed-door meeting.

Questions were sent to the mayor, council members, City Manager Ron Bernal, Assistant City Manager Rosanna Bayon Moore and City Attorney Thomas Lloyd Smith. They were asked, so that the public can provide informed public comment for your closed session meeting next Tuesday, who is the candidate with whom you will be negotiating for the Interim City Manager position, please?

They were also asked if it is Assistant City Manager Rosanna Bayon Moore, is it, as has been rumored, City Attorney Thomas Lloyd Smith, or someone else. Additional questions were also asked of Bernal, Mayor Lamar Thorpe, and Councilmembers Lori Ogorchock and Mike Barbanica why hold the meeting at 9:00 a.m. when most people would be at work, what the urgency was and why the  meeting couldn’t be held during their regular meeting the following Tuesday (since Bernal isn’t retiring until the end of the year). They were also asked if Bernal was leaving that day and using his accrued vacation time. (See related article)

Both Ogorchock and Barbanica said they didn’t know how many candidates their were for the interim position, nor why the meeting was being held next Tuesday in the morning. But each of them said they couldn’t say anything more about the matter.

Smith was out of the office on Friday and attempts to reach the mayor, the other council members and Bernal were unsuccessful throughout Friday afternoon.

Viewing

Members of the public can watch the meeting at https://www.antiochca.gov/live_stream, on Comcast Channel 24, or AT&T U-Verse Channel 99.

Public Comments

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

  1. Fill out an online speaker card by 7:00 a.m. the day of the Council Meeting located at:
  1. Provide oral public comments during the meeting by clicking 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.

  1. Email comments to cityclerk@ci.antioch.ca.us by 7:00 a.m. the day of the Council Meeting. The comment will be read into the record at the meeting (350 words maximum, up to 3 minutes, at the discretion of the Mayor). IMPORTANT: Identify the agenda item in the subject line of your email if the comment is for Announcement of Community Events, Public Comment, or a specific Agenda Item number. No one may speak more than once on an agenda item or during “Public Comments”.

All emails received by 7:00 a.m. the day of the Council Meeting will be entered into the record for the meeting. Speakers will be notified shortly before they are called to speak.

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter

Antioch city staff won’t respond to questions on councilwoman’s claims of interference by former police chief in investigation of her sons’ and her 2020 incident with police

Saturday, October 23rd, 2021

District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker, former Chief of Police Tammany Brooks and City Manager Ron Bernal.

Won’t allow former Chief Brooks to respond to her accusation

“to the extent that your email requested that the City provide answers to questions, the City is not obligated to do so and does not undertake to do so.” – City Manager Ron Bernal

By Allen Payton

After waiting the legal limit of 10 business days for a response to both questions and a California Public Records Act request for communications between the Antioch Police Department and Oppenheimer Investigations Group, regarding the investigation of the claims by District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker about the incident involving police officers, her sons and her on Dec. 29, 2020, City Manager Ron Bernal, citing state law, responded by saying he’s “not obligated” to answer any questions and the city will not provide any documentation. (See related article)

Bernal wrote in an email on Wednesday, Oct. 20, 2021:

“This is in response to your email sent on October 6, 2021, requesting:

The public is asking, what impropriety and unfairness – based on the terms used in your press release about the matter – that you recently discovered, which occurred with the first investigation of the police incident with Councilwoman Torres-Walker’s sons and her, last December that caused you to determine the need for a second investigation?

What did city staff and/or the investigator do wrong?

Why wasn’t that information included in the press release and why should that information be kept private if they are matters of process in how the investigation was handled?

Doesn’t the public have a right to know if a city employee or a contractor made a serious mistake that is costing more tax dollars and staff time? Especially when it’s in regard to an elected official?

Also, will you demand a refund of the money the city paid Oppenheimer, as Councilman Barbanica is calling for?

This is a formal public records request for all the communications between city staff members and staff of the Oppenheimer Investigations Group.

As an initial matter, please understand that the California Public Records Act (“CPRA”) does not require a public agency to create documents or provide written answers to specific questions.  (Gov. Code, § 6252, subd. (e); Consolidated Irrigation District v. Superior Court (2012) 205 Cal.App.4th 697; Haynie v. Superior Court (2001) 26 Cal. 4th 1061, 1075.)  As such, to the extent that your email requested that the City provide answers to questions, the City is not obligated to do so and does not undertake to do so.

With regard to your request for communications between City staff members and staff of the Oppenheimer Investigations Group, your request in its current form is vague and ambiguous because it fails to reasonably describe any identifiable record or records.  Consistent with its obligations under the CPRA, the City is interpreting your emails to be seeking records relating to communications between City employees and employees of Oppenheimer Investigations Group in connection with the investigation into the complaint made by Councilmember Tamisha Torres-Walker against the Antioch Police Department.  If you disagree with the City’s interpretation, please kindly advise us as soon as possible.

Consistent with its obligations under the CPRA, and based upon the City’s interpretation of your request, the City advises that it conducted a reasonable search consistent and has determined that identifiable responsive records are exempt from disclosure pursuant to: (1) Government Code section 6254, subsection (c), as “medical, or similar files, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy”; (2) Government Code section 6254, subsection (k), as “[r]ecords, the disclosure of which is exempted or prohibited pursuant to federal or state law, including, but not limited to, provisions of the Evidence Code relating to privilege,” because the records are protected by Penal Code sections 832.7 and 832.8, the deliberative process privilege, the official information privilege, the attorney-client privilege, the attorney work product doctrine, and/or Article I, Section 1, of the California Constitution; and (3) Government Code section 6255, because on the facts of the particular case the public interest served by not disclosing the record.  Consequently, the City will not produce records responsive to this request.

More Questions for City Staff

In response, an email was sent on Wednesday, Oct. 20 to Bernal, Brooks, City Attorney Thomas Lloyd Smith, Assistant City Manager Rosanna Bayon Moore, and Interim Police Chief Tony Morefield “specifically requesting the communications between former Chief Tammany Brooks and anyone at Oppenheimer Investigations Group in which he asked questions, offered suggestions or did whatever is being referred to as interference in the investigation of the complaint by Antioch District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker regarding the incident involving Antioch Police officers, her sons and her on Dec. 29, 2020 – either via email or in writing,” as well as, “whatever communication was sent by City Attorney Thomas Lloyd Smith to the members of the city council regarding Ms. Torres-Walker’s claim that former Chief Brooks interfered in the first investigation which triggered the decision for a second one.”

Some questions were repeated, and additional questions were asked, including if Torres-Walker violated any state law by sharing the information she received from the city attorney. Also, “if so, what are the potential repercussions against her? Does it require former Chief Brooks to sue her and the city for violating his rights? Also, has the second investigation begun and if so, who was hired to do that? Finally, is the city requesting a refund from Oppenheimer as Councilman Barbanica has called for?”

No responses were received as of publication time.

 

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter

Antioch Police Department selected for crime prevention initiative by U.S. Department of Justice 

Friday, October 22nd, 2021

One of only 10 new cities nationwide to participate in National Public Safety Partnership for coordinated, intensive training and technical assistance with focus on gun violence prevention

Councilman not happy mayor is attempting to takcredit for something “council had nothing to do with”

Announced by DOJ on Oct. 6, but press conference was held Thursday

By Allen Payton

Interim Antioch Police Chief Tony Morefield speaks during the press conference as District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock and a member of Moms Demand Action listen on Thursday, Oct. 21, 2021. Video screenshot

The City of Antioch is one of 10 new cities selected nationwide to participate in the U.S. Department of Justice’s (DOJ) National Public Safety Partnership (NPSP).  NPSP resources include aim to enhance the Antioch Police Department’s (APD’s) capacity to address gun violence, expand community engagement and, ultimately, prevent violent crime. To be considered for selection, a site must have sustained levels of violence that far exceed the national average and demonstrate a commitment to reducing crime and enhancing community engagement.

“Violence—gun violence in particular—has taken a heavy toll on communities across the country, and its impact has been felt most deeply in neighborhoods where resources have always been scarce and justice has historically been elusive,” said Amy L. Solomon, Acting Assistant Attorney General of the Justice Department’s Office of Justice Programs, whose Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) administers the PSP initiative.  “We are proud to join local leaders and our partners from across the Department of Justice as we work together to stem the tide of violent crime in these hard-hit communities.”

Officers will receive intensive training and technical assistance (TTA) from DOJ in the key areas of constitutional policing and community engagement to assess and implement collaborative strategies and a lasting coordination structure that prevent and combat violent crime, especially related to gun violence.

“The goal of this partnership is to gain better insight into the unique violent crime challenges in Antioch and inform future investments in what works,” Morefield said. “The guidance will help determine system-wide approaches to crime reduction and enhanced public safety.”

First Announced on Oct. 6

According to the NPSP website, the 2021 PSP sites were introduced by U.S. Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco at the Major Cities Chiefs Association meeting on October 6, in New Orleans, Louisiana. It was also announced in a press release that same day on the DOJ’s BJA website.

Yet, Mayor Lamar Thorpe and Interim Chief of Police Tony Morefield held a press conference, Thursday to inform the Antioch community about the initiative. They were joined by Mayor Pro Tem Monica Wilson, District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock and four members of Moms Demand Justice. Also in attendance were the city manager, city attorney, assistant city manager and economic development director. (See press conference video)

During the press conference Thorpe tied the program participation to the council’s police reform efforts earlier this year. However, the police department applied for the program in 2020.

“The collaboration between the Antioch Police Department (APD) and the DOJ National Public Safety Partnership is important to lowering crime rates in Antioch,” said Thorpe. “APD will receive support that will improve crime prevention strategies and improve our service to all of Antioch, including historically neglected neighborhoods.”

The Antioch City Council recently passed a resolution mandating the integration and enhancement of specific topics into the training matrix of Antioch Police Department sworn personnel. These topics include de-escalation strategies, crisis intervention and conflict resolution, procedural justice, implicit bias, and meaningful engagement with members of the LGBTQ+ and youth communities.

“The integration of these topics, along with APD’s partnership with PSP, provide a mechanism for increasing our community’s access to justice and better supporting crime victims in this City,” says Interim Chief Morefield.

This is the seventh year for the DOJ program.

“From five to now 50 jurisdictions in seven years, PSP has taught the Department a new way to work with communities.  We have learned that it is only by leveraging the power of community and using all our collective resources and dedicating all our efforts that we will reduce crime,” said BJA Acting Director Kristen Mahoney.  “We look forward to partnering with the 10 new sites to achieve what we are all working toward—safe places to live and work.”

Torres-Walker Offers Comments on Program

While she was not in attendance at the press conference, District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker posted a written and video message of congratulations on her official Facebook page in support of the program. “Congratulations Antioch for being selected as one of the 10 newest sites to be excepted [sic] into the Department of Justice’s Public Safety Partnership to advance racial equity reduce gun violence and promote Community engagement to build public trust and transparency,” she wrote. “We are ahead of the game in Antioch and for the first time in years, this city is ready to invest in violence intervention and prevention efforts that will get at the root cause of violence in our community.”

The focus has been on racial equity and community engagement to reduce violence, especially gun violence.

“This is an opportunity that comes with great resources, training and technical assistance towards violence prevention and intervention and creating public trust and transparency with our police department,” Torres-Walker said. She went on to speak about the council’s Community Violence Solution Ad Hoc Committee that was formed in June “with myself as the co-chair and the mayor as the chair” that has “met bi-weekly”. She also called for a review of “departmental policies where the police department can crack open the books and get someone to come in and do an honest look at violence but also look at our policies that aren’t racially equitable.”

Barbanica Wouldn’t Attend Press Conference

However, District 2 Councilman Mike Barbanica did not attend the press conference because he didn’t think the council should appear to take any credit for the program. “The city council had nothing to do with this and it wasn’t part of the police reform efforts, this year. APD applied for it in 2020.” But he does support the program.

About the National Public Safety Partnership

The PSP team supports local law enforcement and other key stakeholders in developing each site’s capacity to address its unique violent crime challenges to enhance public safety. Through a collaborative approach and data-driven decision making, the PSP approach ensures that local resources are maximized, and federal assets are leveraged where they are most needed. Implemented in 2014 as a pilot program, PSP has served more than 40 sites nationwide. The PSP team’s work is driven by local needs and priorities focused on increasing capacities to reduce violent crime and increase community engagement.

For more information, visit www.nationalpublicsafetypartnership.org.

The Office of Justice Programs (OJP) provides federal leadership, grants, training, technical assistance and other resources to improve the nation’s capacity to prevent and reduce crime, advance racial equity in the administration of justice, assist victims and enhance the rule of law.  More information about OJP and its components can be found at www.ojp.gov.

Rolando Bonilla, City of Antioch PIO, contributed to this report.

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter