Leaves it with city manager after Torres-Walker adds sunset clause opposed by Thorpe

By Allen D. Payton

During their meeting on Tuesday, Sept. 12, 2023, on the second reading of the ordinance for directly hiring the police chief, the Antioch City Council voted 2-3 after Mayor Pro Tem Tamisha Torres-Walker added an amendment to sunset the ordinance of 12 months or hiring a permanent city manager. Her compromise was supported by District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson but opposed by Mayor Lamar Thorpe.

During their meeting on August 22, the council voted 3-2 to changing the City’s organizational structure by transferring from the city manager to the city council the authority to appoint, supervise and remove the police chief, with District 2 Councilman Mike Barbanica and District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock voting no. But it required a second reading and vote.

During discussion of the motion before that vote, Torres-Walker proposed a time limit of possibly one year for the authority to revert back to the city manager which was supported by District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson. But that was not included in the motion the council adopted.

In a post on her official Facebook page on Monday, Sept. 11, Torres-Walker posted a video and reiterated her support for a time limit writing, “Chief of police oversight…after some refleacting [sic] I believe that the comprise I attempted to offer my colleagues on Council was a reasonable one.”

After Barbanica requested the item be removed from the Sept. 12th consent calendar so it could be voted on separately, Torres-Walker followed up on her commitment saying, “I offered the compromise because, one, most of us work full time. We also want to have a close eye and a transparent process for hiring of a new chief. But I just do not think this new policy should be the order of the day. I do think we need to have a term to time this policy out whether it’s 12 months or upon the hire of the permanent city manager. That is the compromise I’m offering today or else I will not be voting to move forward with this ordinance.” (See 3:06:40 mark of council meeting video)

But Thorpe said, “I’m personally sticking with the original proposal.”

“Then there will never be oversight,” he said about Torres-Walker’s proposal.

“The purpose of this was towards accountability, transparency and all that good stuff,” the mayor continued. “But I can’t personally support your policy. If you can’t support it without that in it then it just won’t pass.”

Torres-Walker responded, “then it just won’t pass, and we can move on.”

“Yep,” Thorpe replied.

District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson then offered her support for the compromise saying when it first proposed, “I was very interested. Over the last couple weeks…I’ve had an opportunity to think more and more about it and I’m in agreement with you. I support you with that.”

“Being reasonable is what I’m asking for,” Torres-Walker stated.

“We’d have to bring it back for a new reading,” said City Attorney Thomas L. Smith.

She then made a motion to amend the ordinance to add a sunset of 12 months and/or the hiring of a permanent city manager. But the proposed amended ordinance failed on a 2-3 vote with Thorpe joining Barbanica and Ogorchock in voting no.

“Seeing there’s no other motion we’ll move on,” Thorpe stated.

Antioch Council reverses course on directly hiring police chief

Leaves it with city manager after Torres-Walker adds sunset clause opposed by Thorpe

By Allen D. Payton

PUBLISHER’S NOTE: Apologies for the late publication of this article. I have been recovering from surgery over the past few weeks. Thank you for the prayers and well wishes to those readers who offered them.

During their meeting on Tuesday, Sept. 12, 2023, on the second reading of the ordinance for directly hiring the police chief, the Antioch City Council voted 2-3 after Mayor Pro Tem Tamisha Torres-Walker added an amendment to sunset the ordinance of 12 months or hiring a permanent city manager. Her compromise was supported by District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson but opposed by Mayor Lamar Thorpe.

During their meeting on August 22, the council voted 3-2 to changing the City’s organizational structure by transferring from the city manager to the city council the authority to appoint, supervise and remove the police chief, with District 2 Councilman Mike Barbanica and District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock voting no. But it required a second reading and vote.

During discussion of the motion before that vote, Torres-Walker proposed a time limit of possibly one year for the authority to revert back to the city manager which was supported by District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson. But that was not included in the motion the council adopted.

In a post on her official Facebook page on Monday, Sept. 11, Torres-Walker posted a video and reiterated her support for a time limit writing, “Chief of police oversight…after some refleacting [sic] I believe that the comprise I attempted to offer my colleagues on Council was a reasonable one.”

After Barbanica requested the item be removed from the Sept. 12th consent calendar so it could be voted on separately, Torres-Walker followed up on her commitment saying, “I offered the compromise because, one, most of us work full time. We also want to have a close eye and a transparent process for hiring of a new chief. But I just do not think this new policy should be the order of the day. I do think we need to have a term to time this policy out whether it’s 12 months or upon the hire of the permanent city manager. That is the compromise I’m offering today or else I will not be voting to move forward with this ordinance.” (See 3:06:40 mark of council meeting video)

But Thorpe said, “I’m personally sticking with the original proposal.”

“Then there will never be oversight,” he said about Torres-Walker’s proposal.

“The purpose of this was towards accountability, transparency and all that good stuff,” the mayor continued. “But I can’t personally support your policy. If you can’t support it without that in it then it just won’t pass.”

Torres-Walker responded, “then it just won’t pass, and we can move on.”

“Yep,” Thorpe replied.

District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson then offered her support for the compromise saying when it first proposed, “I was very interested. Over the last couple weeks…I’ve had an opportunity to think more and more about it and I’m in agreement with you. I support you with that.”

“Being reasonable is what I’m asking for,” Torres-Walker stated.

“We’d have to bring it back for a new reading,” said City Attorney Thomas L. Smith.

She then made a motion to amend the ordinance to add a sunset of 12 months and/or the hiring of a permanent city manager. But the proposed amended ordinance failed on a 2-3 vote with Thorpe joining Barbanica and Ogorchock in voting no.

“Seeing there’s no other motion we’ll move on,” Thorpe stated.

Deny current problems were “decades in the making”

“I am not aware of any city councils on which I have served committing any acts of murder. Additionally, I am not aware of any of my fellow city council members committing acts of arson, burglary, nor being arrested or cited for DUI – driving under the influence (with Blood Alcohol Levels of .121% and .124%) or allegedly sexually harassing any women resulting in any settlements with the county for $350,000 or in a fit of rage challenging any community members to step outside to fight.” – former Mayor Wade Harper (2012-16)

Thorpe does not back up claims, apologize

By Allen D. Payton

During the Antioch City Council meeting Tuesday night, August 22, 2023, Mayor Lamar Thorpe reacted angrily to comments by former councilman Ralph Hernandez, who accused the mayor and District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson of ignoring his accusations against Antioch police officers, including murder, before Thorpe was elected mayor. Thorpe claimed if they had it would have been illegal and that it was not appropriate to be done in a closed session meeting of the city council. Later in the meeting, the mayor accused Hernandez, who was elected in 1992, former Mayor Don Freitas, who served from 2000 to 2008 and all former councils of getting “away with murder, absolute murder, because of a lack of oversight of the police department.”

Thorpe’s Accusations

As previously reported, Thorpe said in his comments on the agenda item regarding the council directly hiring and supervising the police chief instead of the city manager (See 1:16:00 mark of council meeting video), “What has happened in our city…residents like them and city councils in the past have failed to provide oversight of the police department. Ralph Hernandez was a member of the city council. He failed to provide oversight of the Antioch Police Department because this was decades in the making,” he shouted, raising his voice louder. (Hernandez served on the city council from 1992 to 1995).

“Who was the mayor when you got beat up?” Thorpe asked a member of the audience. “Don Freitas was the mayor. He failed to provide oversight of the police department.” (Freitas was elected to the city council in 1998 and served as mayor from 2000-2008).

“So, you can come in here and point the finger all you want. I don’t give a damn,” Thorpe continued with a raised voice. “Because the residents of this community have demanded the change we’re making, here today if the council continues in this direction. Because for decades residents like you have allowed the council to get away with murder, absolute murder, in failure to provide oversight.”

Former Mayors and Councilmembers Respond

Those accusations aren’t sitting well with many former Antioch mayors and council members, including the two he mentioned directly by name, who were asked if they had a response.

Former Councilman Ralph Hernandez, who served on the council from 1992-95 responded to Thorpe’s direct accusation against him with, “both myself and my wife Norma Hernandez, who served on the council from 1996-1998, as well as other past Antioch Mayors and Council Members, served on the Antioch City Council and we never ‘swept under the rug’ or covered up any known or reported Antioch Police misconduct, especially any reported crimes or reported Murders by some of the Antioch Police.

As many of our citizens are now realizing, our current mayor, Lamar Thorpe, falsely tries to deflect his own questioned responsibility in doing so! He tries to deflect his own failures and potential crimes to others and again tries to rant and rave to his supporters, how everyone else is responsible.

I have repeatedly reported criminal police misconduct in accordance with the laws and can, and will, provide witnesses, evidence, circumstances, etc., to back up what I have reported over the years! This too I have done over the years via the F.B.I. and the D.A.’s Office, to include to our city council and past city manager! Not my/our fault that Mayor Thorpe and Councilwoman Monica Wilson did nothing known about it (the reported murders and other discovered felony crimes by a small ‘gang’ of Antioch Detectives/Officers). The suspected coverups of such serious matters includes recent past Antioch Police Chiefs who were reported to also, and the reporting will back it up as to their involvement!

It is overdue that a criminal Grand Jury be empaneled by the District Attorney’s Office to look into these matters, as I also have requested over these past years! Those responsible also, as accessories under the law, to include the suspected coverups by past identified Antioch police chiefs, Mayor Thorpe, Councilwoman Wilson, etc., need to be held accountable too!

Our Antioch community needs a serious cleanup from these unresolved matters, and bring back the Antioch community to a sane environment that we all deserve!”

Former Mayor Don Freitas, who was first elected to the city council in 1998 and then elected mayor in 2000 and again in 2004, responded to Thorpe’s direct attack on him with, “Here’s my response to Lamar’s comment about me: Lamar Thorpe is a very paranoid individual. If you are not hundred percent in lock step with him, he will do everything in his power to ridicule you, immediately call you a racist and try to slander your reputation.

His off the wall comments last night regarding oversight of the Police Department when I was Mayor is completely and utterly without merit. Clearly, he will lie and distort the truth only as an attempt to make himself politically popular in the community. How sad. How very sad. He needs help.”

Former Mayor Wade Harper, who was elected to the city council in 2010, then elected the City’s first Black mayor in 2012, issued a press release entitled ‘Lead With Excellence and Integrity’ to local media on Thursday, referring to himself as a “Private Citizen”, responding to Thorpe’s accusation.

“Allen Payton contacted me and asked if I had a response to the current mayor calling the previous city councils ‘murderers.’ I did not watch the city council meeting. I have since read the quote. There is a professional courtesy that former mayors extend to the current mayor. We realize that the current mayor has the mandated responsibility to make decisions for the city, along with his or her city council. I may privately disagree with certain decisions, but typically I avoid public criticism, because I understand that each administration faces unique challenges, and they must act according to their own judgment. I refrain from publicly criticizing the current administration. I think my stand of unity and support could be more beneficial to the city’s overall well-being rather than constantly criticizing everything this city council does.

When the current mayor was elected, I called him on election night and congratulated him. We shared a private laugh. I also offered that he could call upon me if he needed to. I could offer advice from what I learned from the challenges that I experienced.

Advice #1 Lead with excellence and integrity and be the leader that you want to see.

Advice #2 Don’t pass the buck – take accountability for what happens on your watch. It is easy to blame previous administrations. What I learned about blame is that there is always plenty to go around.

Advice #3 Show love to your community as well as your colleagues on the city council. And give a listening ear.

Like most Antioch residents, I am certainly saddened and angered by the acts and racist texts committed by certain police officers (not all officers). I am not always happy with this current city council. I understand that they have a tough job, navigating these uncharted waters of overt, racial discrimination, and criminal insensitivity.

Now, as far as the bashing of previous city councils, let me say this. To say that previous city councils have committed “murder” because of lack of police oversight is irresponsible. This is a very harsh and mean-spirit statement toward your former colleagues who led with integrity and excellence. Do not lead with anger, vendetta, and vitriol.

‘Residents like you have allowed the council to get away with murder, absolute murder, because of a lack of oversight,’ – mayor Lamar Thorpe to Hernandez, the main opponent of the change. (Emphasis included)

The Antioch city council has decided to grant themselves the authority to hire and fire the police chief. Now that you have made that decision, consider attending a Citizen’s Academy to learn more about the law enforcement profession so you can lead effectively. You will learn what the word ‘murder’ truly means and how families and lives are impacted by such a tragic crime. Antioch is hurting right now, and we need leaders who will lead. Return the hiring authority back to the city manager ASAP so that you won’t be tempted to put politics into the profession.

I am proud to have served the City of Antioch as mayor, alongside very fine city councils, city managers and police chiefs. I maintained open communication with the police chief and received regular reports on crime as well as plans on making the community safer. Yes, we also addressed personnel matters in closed sessions a few times. So, the current mayor should not blame past city councils for the unique problems and issues that this current city council now faces.

So, for the record, all past city councils, including myself, have made mistakes. But I am not aware of any city councils on which I have served committing any acts of murder. Additional I am not aware of any of my fellow city council members committing acts of arson, burglary, nor being arrested or cited for DUI – driving under the influence (with Blood Alcohol Levels of .121% and .124%) or allegedly sexually harassing any women resulting in any settlements with the county for $350,000 or in a fit of rage challenging any community members to step outside to fight.”

Former Mayor Joel Keller, who served from 1984-94, responded with, “You’re right. APD was a different department in the past. It might be helpful if someone unemotionally explained how the change occurred. The accused officers are assumed innocent until proven guilty, but the breath of the allegations suggest a breakdown of leadership. I don’t mean political leadership, but rather management. Let’s start with who approved the President of the APOA being responsible for disciplinary investigations. My mother who only had a primary education would say that’s like ‘putting the fox in charge of the henhouse.’ I don’t know who is responsible, but an action like that violates Human Resources best practices and any peace officer with administrative responsibilities would have been taught that when they were promoted to manager.

APD needs to change and needs responsible leadership. Mayor Thorpe may not be the best spokesperson for change, but he is right about the need for reform. I was a peace officer for 35 years and the Mayor of Antioch for 10. I am embarrassed by the almost daily revelations about alleged wrongdoing. (Really, tequila to fix tickets?)

Someone, maybe the Antioch Herald, needs to get past the name calling and investigate what changed at APD that enabled this despicable conduct to not only exist, but flourish.”

Former Mayor Mary Rocha, who served on the council a few times, and mayor from 1996-2000, and who is and the current Antioch School Board Area 5 Trustee, responded with, “He’s trying to point fingers at everyone else. But things didn’t start to fall apart until after he was elected then elected mayor. A good example is he took away our money to put the resource officers into the school system.” (See related article)

Former Mayor Jim Davis, who was elected to the city council in 1998 and mayor in 2008 said in a direct response, “Mr. Mayor, you owe every prior mayor and councilmember for the past 30 years an apology or at least a retraction. No council allowed anyone to get away with murder, your comments are slanderous against all of the citizens of Antioch. You should be held liable.”

Former Councilwoman Norma Hernandez added her own comments to those by her husband about Thorpe’s accusation saying, “Mayor Thorpe can’t blame the past councils in the City of Antioch for what is happening, today that he, himself ignored and has created. He has to stop blaming others from the past. He needs to look in the mirror. I have been here for years, and I have never seen Antioch in this condition, and it has escalated within the last few years, big time.

What he has to start doing is knowing what his job truly is and stop attacking people from the dais. That is not lawful for him to do so. Those people are not on the agenda, and he calls them by name.

We didn’t have these problems with the police department when we were on the council. He’s lying through his teeth. Any issue with the police, we took care of, and it was confidential because it was a personnel matter. We didn’t ignore anything. He’s full of it. There was never anything like this.

He’s covering up for his incompetence, currently. He’s following the old game of, ‘look over there, look over here’ while he’s the one destroying the community. He’s trying to get the focus off of him when the real problem is him. He’s blaming everyone else for his deficiencies as the mayor.

The bottom line is, all the people he’s holding responsible and criticizing, currently I would vote for any of them over him.”

“I never hear anyone on the council, or the city attorney tell Thorpe, ‘point of order’ when he’s breaking the rules by calling people out by name. He can’t do that. None of the council members can,” Hernandez stated. “Definitely, he needs to go away. Next year the voters can make that happen. All the people he criticized have supporters in this town and they no longer support him and want him to step down.”

Former Councilman and City Clerk Arne Simonsen responded with, “I find the actions of Antioch Mayor Lamar Thorpe to be unbelievable! During my eight years on the city council (2000-2008) I routinely visited the Antioch Police Department, speaking with officers, dispatchers and Community Service Officers. I doubt Thorpe ever did that. I also doubt if Thorpe, Wilson or Walker know anything about PORAC (Police Officers Research Association of California). I attended several statewide PORAC conferences. The council I served on all had great relations with our police officers. Moving the hiring of the police chief, and the police department under the control of the city council is simply wrong. It belongs under the direction of the City Manager who knows municipal and Human Relations laws and responsibilities.

We had a mayor and a couple council members who don’t even understand the Map Act, let alone what PORAC does. I can only hope that a referendum could overturn this ordinance or that a new council rescinds it as the first order of business. Arne Simonsen, MMC” (Master Municipal Clerk)

Former Councilwoman Joy Motts, when reached for comment about Thorpe’s accusation responded, “Well if that is true then he and especially Monica are part of the problem. The truth is that none of us were aware that there were issues within APD, I think a realization many communities came to in 2020 and over the last few years.”

She also wrote about the police body cameras and Thorpe’s initial opposition to them, and then his delay in getting them approved.

“What frosts me is, as one of the last actions in Nov. 2020 after I lost reelection was that I brought forward an opportunity to purchase body cameras for our police officers,” Motts continued. “Chief Brooks and the City Attorney encouraged me to bring forward a motion to use roll over funds that we were determining it’s use at that meeting to use for body cameras.  We had close to $400,000.  Body cameras were not in our budget, so this was a perfect opportunity to help APD and the citizens of Antioch.

Lamar, who had won his election for mayor, Monica and Sean and Lori voted it down.  So, we had an opportunity to bring body cameras six months before Lamar brought them forward the next year, delaying the much needed transparency the community wanted.  Why did he do this? Because it had to be him that brought forward the idea…rather than doing what was the most expedient and best for the community. It’s all about him!
It’s a matter of public record… our meetings were all Zoom, then. I am not sure of the exact date of the meeting or the exact dollar amount. But both Chief Brooks and Thomas, the city attorney were supporting this and so was I. I was shocked that Lamar, who was running on police reform, passed up on this opportunity and great first step. It’s on the record.”

Current District 2 Councilman Mike Barbanica also weighed in saying, “I think it was a ridiculous statement and I know we have three council members, including the mayor, who have served multiple terms while these issues were occurring. They need to step up, stop blaming others and take responsibility.”

Questions for Thorpe Go Unanswered, Opportunity to Apologize Ignored

Efforts to reach Thorpe via email and voicemail with questions Thursday evening were unsuccessful prior to publication time. He was asked who it was that he claims was murdered by Antioch Police officers, which officers is he claiming committed the murders, if they are those mentioned by Mr. Hernandez in his report which he claims Thorpe ignored and would not listen to in closed session. The mayor was also asked if he has any proof to substantiate his accusations.

Thorpe also claimed in his comments that it was illegal to consider personnel matters such as the allegations by Mr. Hernandez in closed session. The mayor was asked, “Isn’t that when and where personnel matters are supposed to be discussed?”

Finally, Thorpe was given the opportunity, after having a couple days to think about, and asked if he is willing to apologize to the past mayors and council members for his accusation against them.

But he did not respond prior to publication time. Please check back later for any updates to this report.

Approves contract for homeless encampment cleanup

“Gentrification only happens when filthy rich people push out people who rent,” Mayor Pro Tem Tamisha Torres-Walker

By Allen D. Payton

During their Tuesday, August 22, 2023 meeting, for the third time, the Antioch City Council, on a 3-1-1 vote, approved the residential tenant anti-retaliation and harassment ordinance and unanimously voted to approve spending $1.2 million more for electric vehicle charging stations throughout the city for use by both the City vehicle fleet and the public. The council also voted to give a one-year extension to the multi-family housing project on Wild Horse Road and approved the contract for Homeless Encampment Cleanup.

Council Again Adopts Residential Tenant Anti-Retaliation, Harassment Ordinance

After approving it twice previously, the council again approved the anti-retaliation, harassment ordinance on a 3-1 vote with District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock voting no and District 2 Councilman Mike Barbanica abstaining because he owns a property management company. The council had previously adopted the measure, but with District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson absent for the second reading, it passed on a 2-1 vote with changes. That required the item be brought back a second time for a first reading. (See related articles here and here)

“This legislation…is not the exact one we voted on weeks ago,” Thorpe stated. “No one is going to jail under this legislation. There is no provision for jail time. It doesn’t exist. There is no presumption of guilt in this legislation. Absolutely not. We have fixed that, and I think most parties are happy with that.”

“This is about the landlord’s intent if it’s in bad faith and it is, by the way, on the tenant to prove,” he added.

During another session of public comments – limited to just one minute each – on both sides of the matter, Mayor Lamar Thorpe warned members of the audience that the council meeting would end at 11 p.m. and if the council did not vote by then the item would be continued until the second meeting in September due to notification requirements for public hearings.

“Gentrification only happens when filthy rich people push out people who rent,” Mayor Pro Tem Tamisha Torres-Walker said during council discussion.

“As I’ve said before, I agree with the ordinance but there needs to be some changes,” Ogorchock said referring to a section on single-family residences. “There was something that was talked about seniors. The seniors are safe. We added that in here. Health facilities…are in, here. They’re safe.”

She asked for a few changes.

“We can remove that language and add ‘as determined by the court’ because the court can imprison you,” Thorpe said with a laugh. He asked about language in the ordinance regarding landlords towing tenant vehicles being considered harassment.

“If you remove it in bad faith, I get that,” he said. “You are the second lawyer. The first lawyer told us something different. A landlord has a right to say, ‘this car is in violation…and I have to get it towed’. It can’t be harassment.”

“All this section is saying if you remove the vehicle…if you’re not supposed to tow the car but you do it anyway, you’re in violation of the law,” City Attorney Thomas L. Smith responded. “So, why don’t we add something to that to give you some clarification.”

“If you have a parking stall, your lease requires your vehicle to be registered…to be on the property,” Torres-Walker said. “If it’s not registered then they will tow your car. When you have a single-family home…you’re also renting the driveway. So, if my car is in the driveway how can you tow it?”

“Antioch steals cars every day,” she continued. “My car almost got towed. Is that harassment?”

“What this is saying is describing something that constitutes harassment,” Smith interjected and offered additional language. “If applicable law allows for towing the vehicle, then it’s not harassment.”

“That’s all we’re looking for,” Thorpe responded. “So, we will add that.”

“I had 10 other changes,” he continued to laughter by Torres-Walker. “I’m lying. I had a few other changes.”

“This doesn’t give ACCE or any organization to just walk onto a property,” Thorpe said about another section.

“This is more complicated,” Smith responded. “What we’re saying is the landlord shall allow the to enter and organize.”

“I just want to be clear that ACCE, if they have not been invited by a resident, they have a right to go onto an apartment complex and start organizing residents,” Thorpe shared. “This will be the last thing for me.”

“This is an important one,” Smith stated. “Here it says, ‘you won’t prohibit a tenant from organizing activities…or other political activities.’ It is a question of access. This is saying, you have to allow access, but you can provide the time and location. A right to access is a property right. But there is a question there of what is the government intent? Are we granting an accesss right?  We should clarify tenants can invite you but we aren’t requiring they allow.

“Do we have to take a vote to extend the meeting,” Torres-Walker then asked.

“Yes,” Smith responded.

The council then passed a motion to extend the meeting by seven minutes on a 4-0 vote.

“Why don’t we say when hosted by a tenant?” Smith asked.

“Perfect language,” Thorpe responded who then made the motion to adopt the ordinance with the revised language.

But more wordsmithing continued to clarify the changes requested by Ogorchock and Thorpe.

Thorpe then said about the section on protecting senior residential homecare facilities, “I supported that change because I thought my colleague would support the ordinance. So, we’re striking that language.”

“That is my motion,” he stated.

The council then voted 3-1 to cheers from the audience, with Ogorchock voting against and Barbanica recusing himself. Audience members left the council chambers chanting, “this is what democracy looks like.”

Council Approves $1.2M More for Electric Vehicle Charging Stations

The council voted 5-0 to adopt a resolution approving an amendment to the Fiscal Year 2023/24 Operating Budget to increase the funding from the General Fund for the Zero Emission Vehicle Transition Project by $1,226,760 for a total amount of $1,361,814.

According to the staff presentation during the meeting, the state now requires 50% of all new cars purchased by local governments to be fully electric. If local governments are going to purchase two new vehicles, one of them has to be battery electric or fuel cell electric by state mandate, Thomas Paddon explained. “The City must act beginning next year.”

The charging stations will be available to both City vehicles and the public.

“It’s a good idea. But if 20 people have those kind of cars, then it’s not wise. I can’t afford it,” said resident Julia Emegokwae. “Elon Musk and the electric car companies should pay, not the City, not the taxpayers.”

“We’re just catering to two companies, Ford and Chevy. I just went and looked at Kias. Kia has EV cars,” another speaker said. “Other companies have EV cars and crossovers. So, I don’t know why they just want to stay on Chevy and Ford. When it’s time to buy that battery…it’s expensive every five years.”

Council Discussion & Vote

District 3 Councilman Mike Barbanica said, “you mentioned buy one regular car and buy one electric.”

“It’s a 50% procurement requirement. This is coming from CARB (California Air Resources Board,” Paddon said during the presentation. “It’s going to be an ongoing thing. All of your purchases cumulatively over the next 15 years have to be electric. Then it’s 100% after 2027. This is specifically for municipal fleets. This only applies to vehicles to heavy vehicles.”

This doesn’t apply to police Interceptors.

“If we’re only looking at F-250’s and above how many vehicles are we looking at?” Barbanica asked.

“66,” Paddon responded. “The electric vehicles will be more affordable, anyway. There are vehicles like Kia that we recommend in the light duty space.”

“The funds will come from CDC grant. It will be 25 percent cost share the city will have to come up,” he stated in response to a question by Barbanica.

“This $1.3 million is 25% of taxpayer money,” Barbanica stated.

“This is like a down payment on the infrastructure to power the entire fleet,” Paddon responded.

“The money is recommended coming out of the General Fund,” Acting Public Works Director Scott Buenting added.

“We always want to make sure we budget the money in a responsible way. So, we have to front the money. Whether we have the money or not we have to move in this direction,” Mayor Lamar Thorpe stated.

The motion to approve the additional funds for the program passed 5-0.

Gives Extension to Multi-Family Project, Approves Homeless Encampment Cleanup Contract

After passing a motion to adjourn, the council voted to reopen the meeting 4-1 with Barbanica voting against. They then passed a motion adopting the Consent Calendar except Items H and O.

On a separate vote on Item H, regarding a one-year extension of the vesting tentative map for the multi-family housing project on Wild Horse Road, Thorpe recused himself, again because his home is too close to the project.

“The motion to go union, since it’s a private project, the city doesn’t have any power to force a private landowner to go union,” Attorney Smith explained in response to a question by Barbanica.

“This was supposed to be commercial on the front of this site,” Ogorchock explained.

“All they’re asking for, here, city attorney, is an extension?” Barbanica asked.

The motion then passed 4-0-1.

The council then approved Item O awarding a Maintenance Services Agreement for On-Call Homeless Encampment Cleanup Services throughout the City to Sharjo LLC dba ServiceMaster Restoration Management for a three (3) year term from July 25, 2023, to June 30, 2026, in the amount of $1,365,000 with an option to extend two (2) additional years from July 1, 2026, to June 30, 2028, in an amount of $951,360 for a total contract amount not to exceed $2,316,360 over the five (5) year period.

The council had previously approved the budget item during their July 25th meeting on a split vote of 4-0-1 with Torres-Walker voting to abstain.

“I do agree we need to support our city workers,” she stated. “We should have worked with Safe Streets that could help homeless folks. We could have spent this million and some change in a better way…a way that is a lot more sustainable that could have got people off the streets.”

The motion to approve passed 4-1 with the mayor pro tem voting against.

The council then voted again to adjourn the meeting at 11:20 p.m.

Because the discussion and vote on the anti-retaliation and harassment ordinance item ran past 11 p.m., the council continued the remaining item regarding discussion of potentially hiring retired police officers to help the department until their next meeting.

“Do I want you to become a pseudo-police chief? No. You failed,” – Former Councilman Ralph Hernandez

“Residents like you have allowed the council to get away with murder, absolute murder, because of a lack of oversight,” – Mayor Lamar Thorpe to Hernandez, the main opponent of the change.

“I do not want the police department to become a political arm of the council. I would prefer a buffer.” – Councilman Mike Barbanica

By Allen D. Payton

During their meeting Tuesday, August 22, 2023, the Antioch City Council, on two split votes of 3-2, approved directly hiring and oversight of the police chief. During council discussion, an upset Mayor Lamar Thorpe accused past councils of allowing Antioch cops to get away with “absolute murder”. Mayor Pro Tem Tamisha Torres-Walker also falsely accused officers of murdering Angelo Quinto. A former councilman, speaking as the main opponent of the change, also accuses officers of three murders. Implementation of ordinance later delayed for 90 days. (See council meeting video)

Council Approves Direct Hire, Oversight of Police Chief

The council twice voted 3-2 to directly hire the police chief, and delayed implementation of the ordinance for 90 days so Acting City Manager Kwame Reed can complete the process of hiring an interim chief. District 2 Councilman Mike Barbanica and District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock opposed the change. Mayor Pro Tem Tamisha Torres-Walker proposed a time limit of possibly one year before the authority would revert back to the city manager which was supported by District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson. But that was not included in the motion the council adopted.

During the public hearing but before public comments, City Attorney Thomas L. Smith explained to the council that directly hiring would also include “supervision and performance evaluation of the chief of police. Another consideration would be the additional amount of work…and time allocated for it.”

The public comments allowed for one proponent and one opponent to each speak for 10 minutes,

“We have been brainwashed we need a lot of police,” Julia Emegokwae said as the main proponent. “They’ve had the green light to terrorize us.”

Mayor Lamar Thorpe interrupted her saying. “I want to remind you, Julia to stay on topic.”

She then spoke of officers “sitting there drinking coffee, eating donuts. They have no interest in us.”

“Julia, I’m just going to remind you again this item is about changing the reporting structure,” Thorpe interrupted her, again.

“Yes. Yes. This is related to it,” she responded and continued speaking.

Ogorchock made a point of order saying, “she’s off topic, Mr. Mayor. You’ve told her twice.”

“We want that funding to go more into safety net programs,”

Mayor Lamar Thorpe interrupted her saying. “I want to remind you, Julia to stay on topic.”

“We want that funding to go more into safety net programs,” Emegokwae continued. “I applaud the city that’s going to have more control of APD.”

Former Antioch Councilman Ralph Hernandez, the main opponent, said, “With the exception of Councilman Barbanica, I don’t think any of you are qualified to discipline and run the department. You need to have some kind of law enforcement background. The city manager, generally…would have more of it than you have. You guys have said you’re too busy and need secretaries to help you. Now, you’re wanting to add more responsibilities to your duties.”

“What you need to do is put it to a vote of the public,” Hernandez continued. “I met with you in June 2020 at your home and Monica Wilson was on speakerphone. I told you about…a group of six officers…and the police chief who blew it off.”

“I asked to meet with you in closed session…to enlighten you. It never came to pass,” he continued. “This was when you were a councilman before you became mayor. Monica you were a councilperson.”

“I need you to stay on topic,” Thorpe said interrupting Hernandez.

“In your packet, the duties of the police chief…that includes looking out for our community, safety. It is part of what we’re here to discuss,” Hernandez responded. “Your history already shows you did not do anything about those things that were affecting our community. So, do I want you to become a pseudo-police chief? No. You failed. I came before you with crimes, felony crimes that were committed. What did you guys do? Now, you want to become a substitute police chief, effectively? No. You can’t do it.”

“Do any of you have law enforcement backgrounds? You don’t. In the newspapers, in your press conferences, I haven’t heard you say, ‘you know Ralph Hernandez came here and told us about this sh*t,'” he continued.

Hernandez then spoke of the residents who Antioch officers are accused of violating their rights and said he read in the media, “Black, Black, Black” and mentioned someone of a different ethnicity that officers are accused of harming.

People in the audience started calling out.

“Hold on, we’re not doing this,” Thorpe said to stop it. “Mr. Hernandez, please finish your last minute-and-a-half.”

“In the meantime, you have failed,” Hernandez continued. “I want you to look inside yourself and ask, ‘have we done the right job?’”

“You’re still missing the two reported murders of our citizens of Antioch and a reported third by Antioch officers where they hid the body. I don’t know why you didn’t want to hear from me. I have the background…the professional training. The City Manager as you currently have it is the appropriate avenue.”

Thorpe responded by saying, “What he was asking was for us to do something illegal. Going into the closed session to discuss personnel matters is against the law. I do believe you filed that with the District Attorney’s Office. We’re not investigators up here.” However, the mayor was incorrect as it is in closed session when personnel matters are discussed. But they have no authority to hire, discipline or fire any city employee other than the city manager, city attorney and soon, the police chief.

All but one of the other speakers supported the change but with caveats.

“I don’t have faith in our council, as a whole to do the job. I don’t necessarily trust a former cop (referring to Barbanica). I do believe it should be your job as the head of Antioch,” said one woman while looking at the mayor.

“You guys represent us and our voices. The council, the mayor and the city manager should decide,” another woman said.

“I think the city manager should be included in the oversight of this,” said another speaker. “Some people back the blue. They could have a bias.”

Resident Tikki Flow said, “I agree with transferring the job to the city council. For 150 years nothing has changed. I’m for reimagining things. The city council is supposed to represent the people. If it’s added more work, then…they must feel they can do the job. I feel like you guys are well qualified.”

Robert Collins spoke next saying, “Angelo Quinto called me ‘dad’. We’ve had a police department with no accountability. To have the police chief only being accountable to the city council…I don’t know if that’s the right approach. If you can’t do a commission, then you should take on that role. We do know the previous structure did not work.”

The only member of the public who spoke against the change was David George who said, “I’m very disappointed in the way you’ve run this city. I think you’ve had a big hand in the problems, here. I don’t think you’re qualified.”

Lisa Elekwachi then said, “I don’t understand why the chief needs all of you as his boss. We don’t need a whole crew of people. Honestly, I think you should be his boss, the mayor. A lot of these problems with the police department stem from upper management. Hiring the best is what’s important.”

“If we can get it right, I would love for you to be in charge of the police chief,” she continued while looking at Thorpe. “You have a political career in front of you. We can hold you accountable at the state level, too. Who we hire should not be involved in cronyism.”

“Hiring a police chief is a heavy responsibility and involves a lot,” said resident Andrew Becker. “Resources start with our first responders. I think there’s a variety of ways the council can go about this. You should be unique that works for the community. The council majority can…put out an application. But you can have retired chiefs…community members to sit on that panel. They can be a part of the selection process. It’s about bringing those voices together. Looking at old processes I don’t think work for our community. I encourage the council to be diverse in that selection process. That single individual will be paramount for that department. That reporting…obviously will involve the city manager. The council does need to be a part of that decision. We do have to appreciate that we do have that diversity. If we just have noise on one side that’s not a conversation. I do hope we can bring in regional experts.”

Thorpe Gets Heated During Council Discussion

Thorpe then said, “this is one of the reforms we initiated in 2021 after the death of Angelo Quinto. What we decided was an open process. We wanted public involvement in the process. We also wanted some level of accountability. It was becoming apparent to me the city manager’s role…is taking us for granted.”

He said people have been asking, “’You’re going to now run the police department?’ We provide oversight for all of our departments.”

“What has happened in our city…residents like them and city councils in the past have failed to provide oversight of the police department,” Thorpe continued as he raised his voice. (See 1:16:00 mark of council meeting video)

“Ralph Hernandez was a member of the city council. He failed to provide oversight of the Antioch Police Department because this was decades in the making,” he shouted, raising his voice louder. (Hernandez served on the city council from 1992 to 1995).

“Who was the mayor when you got beat up?” Thorpe asked a member of the audience. “Don Freitas was the mayor. He failed to provide oversight of the police department.” (Freitas was elected to the city council in 1998 and served as mayor from 2000-2008).

“So, you can come in here and point the finger all you want. I don’t give a damn,” Thorpe continued with a raised voice. “Because the residents of this community have demanded the change we’re making, here today if the council continues in this direction. Because for decades residents like you have allowed the council to get away with murder, absolute murder, in failure to provide oversight.”

“The city attorney said, ‘you either have a chief of police report directly to you or report to the city manager’,” he stated. “There’s no hybrid process. This is the option that we have.”

“We have done little talking about gun violence in this community,” Torres-Walker stated, speaking next. “We can’t fool ourselves about violence and harm in our community. So, no matter what direction this council takes on this item, tonight it’s important we come together. Reform can continue but it shouldn’t continue the way it has in the past.”

“I’m for governmental destruction. It hasn’t worked, mainly for colored people in the past,” she continued. “We have to do things radically. It is the council’s responsibility when a police department harms the community. In their duty to protect public safety they actually put public safety in jeopardy.”

“I’m a governmental radically deconstructionist,” Torres-Walker stated.

“I want to thank Mr. Hernandez for making my mind up for me,” she said. “He asked, ‘who has been held accountable…in the past? Nobody.’ We have had council members who sit here and have acknowledged they did nothing. Crimes against the community have occurred under the current structure. So, what would you have us do?”

“If the council decides to move forward…is there a way to modify this recommendation to a term?” Torres-Walker asked the city attorney.

“To a specified period of time? Would it lapse back to the municipal code?” he asked in response. “Yes. You could do something like that. You would have to put in a definite period of time.”

“Like until a permanent city manager is hired?” she asked. “Could it be for a term of 12 months?”

“Yes. You would effectively be defining the powers of the acting city manager,” Smith responded. “When the time period lapses it could fall back to the municipal code. Both would be triggering affects.”

“I do want to recruit the strongest city manager we can…who is strong enough to manage the police chief,” Torres-Walker stated. “I would support this…if we can trigger it to go back to the city manager at some point.”

Barbanica spoke next saying, “My concern with this is I do not want the police department to become a political arm of the council. I would prefer a buffer. If we as council…have done a bad job in the past as far as holding people accountable, and I’m talking historically, then we need to change that.”

“I do not believe we should get into creating a political arm of the council. Should we hold officers accountable? Absolutely. Should we hold the police chief accountable? Absolutely,”

“I have to admit I was really on the fence on this because I could see both sides,” Wilson said. “What I’m really interested in is what I’ve heard from you the public. I am interested in creating a term. I know if this goes through it’s going to come back, not only for more council discussion but community. I’m not against. I just want to hear more so I can flush this out.”

“Just to be clear, I was not talking about not moving forward tonight,” said Torres-Walker. “I appreciate the process Oakland is going through. They’re going through a public process. We don’t need to slow this down. We’ve been going through a public process for the past 18 months since we found out Angelo Quinto was murdered in his family’s house.”

However, her statement is incorrect as it was reported by the county coroner’s that Quinto died three days later in the hospital from excited delirium due to the drugs in his system, while not in police custody. (See related article)

“I too have done a lot of research on this,” Ogorchock then stated. “I, too, do not want the police department to become a political arm. So, I’m not for this, tonight. I do believe the city manager should hire the police chief.”

Thorpe then explained, “The California League of Cities…this is where we get trained…in it’s resource guide it describes the relationship between the city council and the police department.”

“The police department exists within a political arena,” he said quoting the section.

“Listen, 2020 was about police reform. The previous mayor was running from the press because he didn’t want to answer questions about police officers,” Thorpe continued mentioning one officer by name, Lt. Michael Mellone.

“At the end of that process we got a new mayor,” he continued. “The city manager kept his job. The police chief kept his job. But there was no accountability for these officers that sparked these protests. We already have oversight of the police department.”

“The question is whether there should be a buffer…because of the actions of the police chief or the lack thereof,” Thorpe stated. “I am personally still for this because I am frustrated…we have been kept in the dark about the FBI investigation…and how many officers are actually on paid leave. Because there is a buffer between the police department and the elected body. I’m not for it.”

Torres-Walker then said, “I still agree with moving forward, tonight. But I still believe in checks and balances” and “returning authority to the city manager, as Mr. Hernandez properly stated.”

But she then made a motion to change the hiring, oversight and discipline of the police chief and that the chief serves at the pleasure of the city council without any time limit. It was seconded by Wilson.

“You can always come back and amend this ordinance,” City Attorney Smith said in response to a question by Torres-Walker.

The motion passed 3-2 with Barbanica and Ogorchock voting against.

“So, this will take place 30 days after its second reading. OK,” Thorpe then stated.

Council Majority Changes Motion to Delay Implementation for 90 Days

Following a break in the meeting, Thorpe then said, “I’d like to make a motion to reconsider our previous motion.”

Torres-Walker seconded the motion to reconsider.

“The city manager is in the process of hiring an interim chief. So, in that process, this would get in the way of that. I would ask you consider adding 90 days,” Thorpe stated.

“So, what we just did kind of negates what he’s doing?” Wilson asked.

“Mayor Thorpe is proposing the effective date be 90 days after the adoption,” Attorney Smith said.

“We’re looking at up to two, three months for a background check. I wanted to be respectful of his authority, now,” Thorpe responded.

Torres-Walker then made a new motion with the 90-day extension included.

Before the vote Barbanica stated, “I’m probably as shocked as you are that we are a week away from hiring an interim chief. I did not know that.”

The new motion passed, again on a 3-2 vote with Barbanica and Ogorchock voting against.

Nothing on agenda about search for new city manager; expected to finalize tenant anti-retaliation, harassment ordinance; spend $1.2 million more for City electric vehicle charging stations; another performance evaluation for city attorney

By Allen D. Payton

Under Item 6 on the Tuesday, August 22, 2023 meeting agenda, the Antioch City Council will consider directly hiring and overseeing the police chief, removing it from the responsibility of the city manager. The council will also consider hiring retired officers to supplement the current depleted force due to the 16 current vacancies and two investigations. In addition, the council, for the third time, attempt to finalize their decision on the tenant anti-retaliation and harassment ordinance. During closed session the council will again provide the performance evaluation for the city attorney. Finally, the council will consider spending an additional $1.2 million on electric vehicle charging stations for the City’s fleet.

No City Manager Hiring Process on Agenda

But there’s no item on the agenda regarding hiring a search firm for a new city manager. As previously reported, during the closed session before their regular meeting Tuesday, July 25, 2023, the Antioch City Council voted to give direction to the City’s Human Resources Director Ana Cortez regarding recruiting a new, permanent city manager. But no other details were provided. Mayor Lamar Thorpe said he wanted to wait and hold a press conference on the city manager recruiting process until after Acting City Manager chooses a new acting police chief. That occurred on Monday, August 7. Thorpe has not held a press conference about the matter since.

Hiring, Overseeing Police Chief Directly by Council

The staff report for Item 6. Reads “It is recommended that the City Council introduce by title only and waive further reading of the ordinance (1) amending section 2- 2.06(B)(2) of the Antioch Municipal Code removing the Chief of Police from the City Manager’s appointment, discipline, and removal power, and (2) adding a new Article 4 to Chapter 3 of Title 2 of the Antioch Municipal Code, so that the Chief is appointed by and serves at the pleasure of the City Council, and setting out some general duties and responsibilities of the Police Chief.”

Under Item 2., the council will discuss District 3 Councilmember Mike Barbanica’s proposal to hire retired police officers to supplement the force.

Revised Tenant Anti-Retaliation, Harassment Ordinance Returns

Under Item 5, the council will for the third time, “introduce by title only and waive further reading of the Ordinance adding Chapters 4 and 5 of Title 11 of the Antioch Municipal Code prohibiting retaliation and harassment of residential tenants.” The council first voted to pass the ordinance 3-1-1 with District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock voting against and Barbanica abstaining, as he owns a property management company in Antioch. Then, during their last meeting, with District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson absent, upon advice of the acting city attorney that a simple majority vote of those who were in attendance would serve as the first reading, the item with amendments was continued on a 2-1 vote, with Ogorchock opposing it, again. However, on Tuesday’s agenda is the first reading, again.

$1.2 Million More for Electric Vehicle Charging Stations

For the final item on the agenda, the council will consider City Council adopt a resolution approving an amendment to the Fiscal Year 2023/24 Operating Budget to increase the funding from the General Fund for the Zero Emission Vehicle Transition Project by $1,226,760 for a total amount of $1,361,814 for electric vehicle charging stations at various locations for the City’s fleet.

Another City Attorney Performance Evaluation

Prior to the regular meeting at 7:00 p.m., during closed session beginning at 6:15 p.m., the council will once again give City Attorney Thomas Lloyd Smith his performance evaluation. The item has been on multiple council meeting agendas over the year.

Public Comments

If you wish to speak about an item, you must do so in person. If the item is not on the agenda, the “Public Comments” section of the agenda is for you. Unagendized comments are provided until no later than 7:30 p.m. when the City Council moves on to agenda items. There is another opportunity for public comments at the end of the meeting.

To speak about an item on the agenda fill out a Speaker Request form, located at the entrance of the Council Chambers and place it in the tray near the City Clerk.

If you wish to provide a written public comment, you may email the City Clerk’s Department at cityclerk@antiochca.gov, by 3:00 p.m. the day of the City Council Meeting. 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.

Antioch City Council meetings are televised live on Comcast channel 24, AT&T U-verse channel 99, and streamed on the City’s website.

“you do not have a right to admonish people publicly and where they cannot respond.” – Joy Motts

Editor’s Note: At the Antioch City Council meeting on Tuesday, Aug. 8, 2023, comments were made by Mayor Pro Tem Tamisha Torres-Walker during the City Council Committee Reports and Communications portion and by Mayor Lamar Thorpe during his Mayor’s Comments, responding to public criticism, and by a resident, directed toward another public speaker. In response, former Antioch Councilwoman Joy Motts, a Rivertown resident and president of Celebrate Antioch Foundation sent the following email to the five council members Tuesday night. It was shared with the Herald, Wednesday afternoon. (For context, see the 1:35:10, 2:16:15 and 2:48:45 marks of the council meeting video)

Mayor and Council,

It was clear tonight, that some on Council are not aware that City Council meetings are held in public not for your benefit, but because these meetings are the business of the people. Whether you like what the people of your city have to say or not, they have every right to communicate to you, their feelings. And to admonish them publicly for expressing their views is to undermine their 1st Amendment rights and discourage residents to participate in our government.

And to say that prior Councils were not blamed or admonished by residents for Antioch’s current problems at that time is absurd. From the minute I was on Council I felt like everything that went wrong, the last 50 years was my fault. And the community let me know and all of us know. It was hard and it’s not easy to take but as a representative of all the residents of Antioch, it is your job.

And what is even worse is you have taught some that support you to bully and embarrass those that don’t agree with them. Andrew Becker should be admonished. He is a bully, how dare anyone disagree with him. He has no right to disparage residents that come to speak their mind at the people’s meetings! You have allowed that. This is not good or fair governance. You have become so accustomed to this behavior that I do not even think you realize it or maybe you like it this way.

You speak of unity, but you are actively discouraging this community to participate unless they agree with you. This never happened when I was on Council or prior councils. Lamar, we sat there and took it, and respected people’s rights. You have the ability to communicate your feelings on your personal pages, or Op Ed’s, or websites but you do not have a right to admonish people publicly and where they cannot respond.

I do not know why anyone who disagrees with a policy, or has a grave concern, or has an idea other than yours would attend a council meeting. And from what I have seen tonight no one will. There were people that came that wanted to speak tonight… but they left. Who would want to suffer the consequences of speaking up? A tragedy for Antioch.

Joy Motts

Antioch

To Aug. 22 meeting with one change; won’t have to start over

By Allen D. Payton

The renters in Antioch who have been seeking an ordinance on anti-harassment and retaliation from landlord will have to wait a little longer for it to pass and be implemented.

During their meeting Tuesday night, August 8, 2023, the Antioch City Council, with District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson absent and District 2 Councilman Mike Barbanica recusing himself, voted 2-1 to continue the second reading of the tenant anti-retaliation and harassment ordinance with one change, so the process won’t have to begin again. That occurred after Mayor Pro Tem Tamisha Torres-Walker refused any additional proposed changes by District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock, who again cast the only no vote as she did during the July 25th council meeting.

One change was requested by a representative of the California Apartment Association (CAA) and it was included in the motion.

Ogorchock also asked for changes saying, “I don’t want to start from scratch and see everyone come back.”

“I do think we need a due process when we’re talking about the burden of proof,” she stated.

“The burden is always with the tenant,” Mayor Lamar Thorpe responded.

“There are some things we wanted changed that weren’t changed,” he pointed out. “At this point I think we need to continue. If we make any changes outside of that, then we need to start over.

However, Acting City Attorney Ruthan Ziegler, who was contracted to serve in City Attorney Thomas L. Smith’s absence, rebutted the mayor.

“You can direct staff to make changes and then those can be brought back for another second reading,” she said “What you would be doing is treating this evening as another first reading.”

“Oh, then in 30 days it would be starting, anyway,” Thorpe responded.

Torres-Walker spoke next saying, “I spent my last, three years on the council, and have been in the process that have butchered some really strong policies. I do not plan to be a part of any more processes where we sit in front of the public…to participate in the process that butchers an ordinance.”

“Can you walk us through that one change?” Thorpe asked the CAA representative.

She offered a “clean-up item” regarding “the mandatory acceptance of rent in direct violation of state law…when a landlord is in the process of eviction.”

“I’m not supporting any new exceptions,” Torres-Walker reiterated.

Thorpe asked for a motion to postpone.

Ziegler explained the options of continuing the item or adding the one change and bringing back the ordinance for a second reading at the next meeting on August 22.

Torres-Walker chose to make a motion to amend the ordinance and continue the item for a second reading until the next meeting. It was seconded by Thorpe.

“There’s a lot of frustration in trying to get this done,” he then stated. “I think we need to get something down on the books as soon as possible. If there’s something that concerns me, I’m willing to sit down and talk.”

Torres-Walker then asked the acting city attorney to clarify how the council can approve the motion with two council members not available to vote.

“A resolution or ordinance must be passed by a majority of the council members,” Ziegler explained. “But a motion like this only requires the passing on a majority of a quorum.”

The motion was able to be passed 2-1 with Ogorchock voting against.

But no funds for improvements on James Donlon Blvd. or W. 10th Street

By Allen D. Payton

During their meeting on Tuesday, August 8, 2023, the Antioch City Council voted 4-0 to change the speed and spend $1.5 million on traffic calming improvements on several streets. District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson was absent.

The first item the council addressed was changing and maintaining the speed on several city streets. (See related article)

The council voted to reduce the speed on Laurel Road and Wild Horse Road by five MPH from 45 to 40.

District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock requested one more change, to reduce the speed on James Donlon Blvd. from 40 to 35 MPH.

“By law we’re only permitted to reduce the speed based off the 85 percentile,” said Consultant Traffic Engineer Charmine Solla. “We’re permitted to round down to 45 and reduce that by 5 miles per hour. James Donlon is outside of that range. Assembly Bill 43, the new addition to the law, allows us to maintain speed limits that would otherwise decrease.”

The 85 percentile for James Donlon is more than 7 MPH over the posted speed, she continued. However, in 2024 the City can change the speed not based on the 85 percentile.

If the City changed the speed limit outside the boundaries of state regulations, “It means not being able to shoot radar or laser, there which would prevent us from enforcing traffic laws,” District 2 Councilman Mike Barbanica explained.

The motion passed 4-0.

Traffic Calming Improvements

The council then voted to spend $1.4 million on traffic calming improvements to James Donlon Blvd., Sycamore Drive and W. 10th Street. They include lane narrowing, low-cost medians and “pork chop” islands formed with delineators, buffered bike lanes, buffered lanes to allow for parking, high-visibility crosswalks, advanced yield lines, warning signs with flashing beacons, Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons and speed feedback signs. (See city staff presentation) (See related article)

The improvements were approved by both the police and fire departments, Solla stated during the staff presentation on the item.

The costs for the improvements will be $425,000 for Sycamore Drive, $865,000 on James Donlon Blvd. and $220,000 on West 10th Street for a total of $1.51 million. There are currently no funds in the budget for the improvements on James Donlon Blvd. and W. 10th Street. The improvements on Sycamore Drive will be paid for from the City’s gas tax revenue.

Only four residents spoke on the item, two concerned about narrowing lanes on Sycamore Drive.

Mayor Pro Tem Tamisha Torres-Walker was the first to speak during the council discussion of the item saying, “I agree with every change that’s been suggested, here, tonight. Believe it or not, there are a lot of children and families along Sycamore Drive.”

She spoke of the lack of crosswalks on the street.

“That’s a huge challenge,” she said. “Is it possible to put a crosswalk on Manzanita…and Spanos?”

“There’s been complaints of speed on Mahogany,” Torres-Walker continued. “My concern is people will loop to avoid the traffic calming improvements.”

Solla responded, “The additional crosswalks, that’s something we can definitely look at. The state has requirements…pretty high pedestrian demand. We can look to see if the demand is there. It’s not uncommon for people to try and find other routes. So, we do have a way of studying if people are choosing new routes. We can definitely do that after a few months after the improvements are implemented.”

“Or we can go ahead and stripe Mahogany,” Mayor Lamar Thorpe said. “Mahogany runs parallel to Sycamore. Let’s not be fools. People use that, already.”

“Let’s start with a restriping. A study is going to take a long time. You can determine it,” he responded to a question from Acting Public Works Director Scott Buenting, narrowing the lanes to 11 feet as will be done on Sycamore Drive.

The motion passed on a 4-0 vote with the addition of the striping on Mahogany Way.