By Allen D. Payton

During their Tuesday, June 13, 2023, meeting, the Antioch City Council re-approved the revised tobacco product sales ordinance on a 3-2 vote and a rental registry with a future tax on landlords to pay for it on a 4-1 vote. With 12 items on the agenda and 19 items on the Consent Calendar, the meeting lasted until almost midnight violating the direction the council majority said they wanted to go at last Tuesday’s special meeting during discussion of the agenda items.

Re-Approve Revised Tobacco Products Sales Ordinance

On an expected 3-2 vote, with Mayor Lamar Thorpe and District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson voting against, the council majority re-approved the revision to the tobacco products sales ordinance which contains the following:

1. The terminology and definitions of flavored tobacco were amended to better align with State terms and definitions.

2. The prohibition on package size and price was eliminated. The prior language restricted the sale of small cigars (cigarillos) to minimum packs of 20, large cigars to minimum packs of 10, and required a minimum sales price for cigarettes of $10.

During the second reading of the ordinance, Mayor Pro Tem Tamisha Torres-Walker and Thorpe were absent. Instead of postponing the item, the remaining three council members voted 2-1 with Wilson voting no, as she had done during the vote on the first reading, requiring the item be brought back for a first vote, again. Although it was approved, the item must be brought back for a vote on the second reading at the next council meeting.

Approves Rental Registry with Future Tax on Landlords

The council also approved on another split vote the creation of a Rental Registry with a future Rent Program fee, or tax on landlords to pay for it.

According to the city staff report, the Rent Stabilization Ordinance (RSO) currently requires the establishment of a registry of regulated units. This ordinance will have a marginal fiscal impact in expanding application of the registry program, which would be funded through a Rent Program fee if adopted at a future date.

Staff determined that it would be prudent to require registration of all residential rental units in the City rather than only apartment complexes. If the City Council adopts additional tenant protections, such as just cause eviction, those protections would likely apply to a wider scope of rental units. Registration of such additional units would aid in the administration of the additional protection policies. A Citywide program would also allow the registration component to be a requirement for a complete application rather than an opt-in system.

The Proposed Ordinance would authorize a consolidated Citywide registration program to clarify and establish the authority of the Finance Department to administer the Rental Unit Registry and collect tenant program fees. It would also authorize the Rent Program and Finance Department to utilize an alternative means of registering rental units on properties containing five or more units.”

One of the speakers said she wants the system to also track evictions.

District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock moved approval and Torres-Walker seconded the motion.

Barbanica asked, “what information on this registry do you plan to include and

“The business license fee registers the owner at the property,” said Assistant City Attorney Rachel Hundley. “You get to know the units but you don’t get to know the details….more specific information such as the deeds…inspection violations.”

“So, you’re looking to really pry into those property owners’ personal business?” he asked.

“No,” she responded.

The motion then passed 4-1 with Barbanica, who is a real estate broker and property manager, voting against.

Later approves flying “Progress Pride” flag for remainder of the year on split vote

Direction given to city attorney on City Manager Con Johnson but no details provided

Thorpe explains process for placing council member requested items on meeting agendas

By Allen D. Payton

During their meeting on Tuesday, June 13, 2023, the Antioch City Council approved flying the “Progress Pride” flag at City Hall for the remainder of the year as they did last year for eight months and re-approve the revised tobacco products sales ordinance.

At the beginning of the regular City Attorney Thomas L. Smith reported out of closed session regarding City Manager Con Johnson that direction was given to the city attorney. No other details were provided. Johnson has been on paid administrative leave since March 17.

The council on a 4-0 vote, with Mayor Lamar Thorpe absent at roll call, approved a proclamation commemorating Juneteenth, June 19 as Freedom Day and the nation’s second Independence Day and recognizing June as “Pride” Month in the City of Antioch for the “lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (LGBTQ+) community”. The resolution was received by a self-described trans woman named Brittany, who said he has lived in Antioch his entire life, called for a gay parade in Antioch and asked the city council to also fly the transgender flag.

The resolution included the flying of the “Pride” rainbow flag at City Hall during the remainder of the month. Last year the council on a 3-2 vote with Councilmembers Mike Barbanica and Lori Ogorchock voting no, approved flying the “Intersex, Progress Pride” flag at City Hall for eight months.

Mayor Pro Tem Tamisha Torres-Walker chaired Tuesday night’s meeting until Thorpe’s arrival and displayed small “Pride” and “Transgender Pride” flags on the dais between her and Barbanica. (A report on today.com describes 17 different “Pride” flags but it does not include the “Intersex Progress Pride” flag which adds a circle inside the triangle on the left side of the “Progress Pride” flag.)

The council took a break at 7:15 p.m. to raise the “Pride” rainbow flag on the pole outside the Council Chambers. But that occurred three hours before the council discussed and voted on Item P on the Consent Calendar “to fly the Rainbow Pride Flag at City Hall throughout the month of June 2023 in recognition of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Questioning Community Pride Month in the City of Antioch” at about 10:15 p.m.

Torres-Walker made a motion to fly the “Progress Pride” flag instead and for the remainder of the year, again.

“We did this last year,” Thorpe said in support. “Given what’s happening in our country including some cities in our state…I think we need to keep leading on this issue.”

“I tolerate dogs,” he said in response to a public comment by a resident. “What we’re talking about here are human beings. We need to be accepting of our fellow human beings, not tolerant.”

The motion passed 4-1 with Ogorchock voting against.

Thorpe Reviews, Explains Placing Council Member Requested Items on Meeting Agendas

Thorpe was absent at the beginning of the meeting because he said he’s taking a certificate in government course on Tuesdays at 7 p.m. He arrived at about 7:45 p.m. During the Mayor’s Comments, in response to last week’s special meeting discussion and direction by his fellow council members, he explained and reviewed the six-month list of agenda items requested by other council members saying he doesn’t determine when they’re brought back and that it’s a staff decision. (See related article)

“A public hearing requires a two-week notification,” he said. “So, if we had brought it back at the last meeting, we would have been breaking the law.”

“I don’t manage the city. The city manager manages the city. The city attorney manages some of these projects, here. I don’t manage that. They come up with the timeframes,” Thorpe added.

He mentioned 87 city staff vacancies and said, “I’ve been considered of staff needs.”

“There’s about 20 items, here and we’re working on a lot of these,” Thorpe continued. “At the next special council meeting we’ll discuss them in a round robin format.”

“This is what I inherited. If people want to change the process, I’m open,” he added.

The council then received a presentation on a Budget, Staffing and Timeline for the City’s rent program and additional tenant protection policies.

35 officers currently on administrative leave

By Allen D. Payton

In a statement posted on his campaign website and shared on his official social media pages on Monday, June 12, 2023, Antioch Mayor Lamar Thorpe commented on the fatal shooting on Sunday morning that took the life of an 18-year-old female and wounded six others who were attending a birthday party. (See related article)

In it, he called for “the officers involved in the racist text-messaging scandal” to be fired immediately but Thorpe wouldn’t say how many officers that entails. Following is the post of his statement:

Statement by Mayor Lamar Thorpe Re. Mass Shooting

Antioch, CA- On June 6, 2023, Mayor Thorpe issued the following statement regarding the mass shooting in Antioch:

“Birthdays are one of the most intimate and sacred celebrations in everyone’s life. They represent growth, reflection, and appreciation for life’s gifts. Over the weekend one such celebration was cut short as a result of gun violence.

An 18-year-old young lady lost her life and 6 others were injured. My heart is with the victims and families of this horrific incident.

Across the US, there have been at least 290 mass shootings so far this year. I’m saddened to report that Antioch joins the growing list of cities that have experienced mass shootings in 2023.

Earlier this morning, I was briefed by Chief Steve Ford about this weekend’s incident. During my briefing, I reiterated to the Chief that the officers involved in the racist text-messaging scandal (who are currently on administrative leave) need to be fired immediately so we can free up those positions and hire new police officers directly from the academy.

Each day these officers are on leave is another day we are prevented from having a stronger police presence on our streets to deter and/or respond to gun violence.”

As of Tuesday afternoon, the date of his post is still incorrect as are the spelling of “Antioch” and “Bay Area” in the tags at the end.

Thorpe was asked via email Monday afternoon which of the officers in the text scandal does he want Chief Ford to immediately terminate. “All 45 of them Including those who received but did not respond to the offensive texts from some of the officers? Or just the officers who sent the texts?” He was also asked how many officers are currently on administrative leave during the investigation of the scandal. Thorpe did not respond.

When asked how many officers are on paid leave due to the text scandal, Antioch Police spokesman Corporal Price Kendall shared there are 115 authorized sworn officers, with 98 currently on staff. Of those 35 are on administrative leave total, but he would not specify what type, leaving 49 officers on full duty with 31 on patrol.

Regarding Thorpe’s call for the terminations Kendall added, “The Antioch Police Department is not handling the investigation. We have been recused from the investigation by the City Attorney. The City Attorney is handling the investigation. Chief Ford cannot make any decisions regarding those involved until the City Attorney completes his investigation. The mayor knows this.”

Elections attorney says if it’s possible it would require a citizens’ initiative but no case law; one resident calls switching to rotated mayor is “coup d’état”, part of “right extreme agenda”; Torres-Walker refutes

By Allen D. Payton

During the special Antioch City Council meeting on Tuesday, May 30, 2023, with Mayor Lamar Thorpe absent while on a trip to Mexico, the council moved forward on several changes to how their meeting agendas would be set. They also heard from an elections attorney that changing to an annually rotated mayor among council members instead of directly elected may not be possible mid-decade. If it’s possible, the council couldn’t place the matter on the ballot but would require a citizens’ initiative.

During public comments on the first item regarding the agenda setting process several residents spoke on both sides of the matter. Mayor Pro Tem Tamisha Torres-Walker who ran the meeting reduced the public speaking time from three to two minutes.

The first resident to speak, Erica Ralston said she wants police reform and rent control on the agenda.

“I do not want this to sidestep the biggest issue in Antioch at this time,” said resident Leslie May. “This is a game changer…a historic move with the police changes. I don’t want anything that happens tonight from the focus on the Antioch Police Department…to rid our police department of undesirables.”

Dr. Geoffrey Klingler said, “I salute you. This is an important topic. You have people in your districts whose concerns you’re supposed to represent. The process needs to be fair and equitable for all in this city. Hopefully, this is just the beginning for council members to take the personal biases out of running this city. Good luck.”

Resident Julia Aymachoque spoke in favor of a four-year term for the mayor saying, “We need unified leadership. This right extreme agenda calling for the mayor to serve only a one-year term must be stopped. We don’t welcome this covert coup d’état. If possible, we should only have one election district. We need…five representatives working together.”

Resident Andrew Becker said, “This is a long time coming to our community. What the council majority has asked for is a fair process for getting things on the agenda. It’s been difficult as a community member to watch those items get to the agenda from council members, I’ve requested them of. It’s not fair. It’s time we have a new process. I support the power of two…with one council member to get another council member to support bringing something forward to the council agenda.”

Frank Sterling spoke next saying, “I do wish we could have started off with your discussion so we could hear what you all are thinking. If you can’t do it, then it’s really tough to see our items get on the agenda.  However, it turns out, I’m kind of glad it’s happening. So, good luck.”

Devin Williams said, “This puts us all in an awkward position. The fact that we have a special meeting on bringing items on the agenda before the mayor…we have a system that is working. We have a process, and we have to wait whether it’s six months, nine months or a year. I don’t think you’re being misrepresented if you have to wait. If you want something to come up and the only person to bring it is the mayor, then organize. So be it. Come to these meetings. Go knock on doors. Come talk to your people. Mayor Thorpe is not going to work in bad faith against it.”

Resident Francisco Torres then said, “We can’t forget the accountability of the police. It’s going to be quite a while. Probably two years. Thank you for bringing this to the community. The way I view it is Government 101. Sometimes there comes a time when you need to look at things. In the end it’s what’s best for the community. I think it’s important the community knows what’s going on. People are starting to get involved more and more and that’s a good thing.”

Ralph Hernandez said, “Tonight’s meeting is another perfect example that you’re not listening to the public. You reduced it down to two minutes for tonight. Do you not have time for the public? When I was on the council public comments were five minutes. We worked until after midnight. Sometimes you reduce the public that shows up here…you cut it down to one minute. By the time they get their words together…times up. What more important things are there than listening to the public to come to you?”

“Yes, you shouldn’t have items that take six months to a year to come before you,” he added.

Resident Nichole Gardner said, “I just have to say on this agenda item, one, I think, I wish it didn’t even have to come to this. The voters that voted for the mayor knowing the authority he had. I don’t think it’s fair for you to take away his authority. Ya’ll staff is low. Staff is quitting left and right. That’s one of the reason Rosanna left. It’s just too much pressure on the staff. I think you all need to take that into consideration. Outside of the council he only has one vote. It undermines the voters. This is really, to me, this meeting is nonsense. I’m really surprised by the folks that wanted this to happen.”

Another resident, Tanita Travis said, “This just shows…more of a division instead of working on the things that should really come to the forefront like what is happening with the police. Number one is not that important to do in the middle of a term. It shows Antioch government is not a community of a whole as a council. It shouldn’t be. It’s not a good look. If you can’t get an item on an agenda…if there is a whole group of you. It doesn’t seem fathomable. There are other things that we could be meeting about. There are so many other issues we have. I just don’t understand it.”

Lucas Stewart-Chilcote then said, “I want to echo pretty much what the previous person said. It was puzzling to see when the agenda was posted. It is very odd to see the items on a special meeting. For agendas is it a lack of staffing? Can we have the agendas publicized a minimum of two weeks before? Can we bring back the virtual participation for public comments?”

Ronald Muhammad spoke next saying, “I moved to this city because I saw the opportunity, the potential.  I did not know the city is so…divisive. I would have never bought into this corporation called Antioch because I’m a shareholder. You guys are representatives of the people. But far too often you seem to be inputting your own things. You represent a base, a constituency base. People are waking up and they’re seeing the divisiveness. It shouldn’t be three-two votes every time. Can’t you agree on anything?”

Former Mayor Don Freitas said, “I’ve had the honor of being both council member and mayor. This item, and it has disturbed me for the past two years to see items not getting on the agenda. When I was mayor…I never, ever denied a council member from placing an item on the agenda. I would suggest anybody on the council, when you ask for something on the agenda, you have an action calendar…and you publish it as part of your agenda so people can see how long it’s taking. I have been greatly disturbed when you, all of you, have requested an item on the agenda and they don’t come for a month, several months.”

Resident Dorothy Ellis said, “I was disturbed, too by a special, called meeting. Is it distraction politics? Because what we should be focusing on is the police and healing. That is something that should be rectified among you. If we lose the police department because we can’t rectify this my property value takes a hit. I want to see us heal. I want to see us come together and not be divided by color. I want to see the community empowered by the people. If ya’ll can’t do that don’t run.”

Council Discussion on Setting Future Meeting Agendas

During council discussion of the item District 2 Councilman Mike Barbanica said, “I want to give you a bit of history of how this came about, tonight. It surprises some people when this comes about. Mayor Pro Tem Torres-Walker and I have kept in regular contact. We don’t always agree. We talk after council meetings sometimes, on the weekends. She asked me to call her. We talked for several hours about our frustrations over the past two years.”

“This has nothing to do with one person. This has to do with the governance of this community,” he continued. “Can all of us get items on the agenda? This is for future councils to come so council members don’t feel they can’t get things on the agenda. We both agreed, good luck getting this on a future agenda to talk about.”

“Once two of us speak, we’re done, we can’t talk with anyone else on the council about a specific item,” Barbanica explained. “So, we agreed that yes, we will call for a special meeting and if there’s support amongst the council we will proceed with a special meeting We brainstormed about problems we’ve had over the past two years.”

“You’re right. We have a staffing problem,” he continued. “But what we’re seeing is extensive, extensive agendas for the meetings. We talked about that very thing, what is this doing to staff…and how this is bogging down the system. Good luck getting your item on the agenda. So, we talked about the amount of items and the time we spent here, with the public. We bounced ideas back and forth…with the number of agenda items, the number of hours…in a meeting. Council can vote during that meeting to extend those hours. We also spoke about the possibility of 90 days…instead of six months to come back. In addition to that, we talked about limiting the number of agenda items from council members.”

“We’re not looking to take the entire thing away from the mayor’s office. We’re looking for a way to make sure that everyone’s item gets on an agenda,” Barbanica shared. “If we run out of time, instead of saying it will be on some future agenda, that item will be number one on the next agenda. These are some of the things we talked about. Reserving the spaces for council members’ items to come back.”

“Public hearings and presentations take on a large portion of the meeting. So, we’re talking about discussing limiting the number of public hearings on an agenda. Hopefully, we can come to a consensus tonight. Nobody’s looking to take total authority away from the mayor’s office…on the agenda and in a timely fashion,” the District 2 Councilman concluded.

District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock spoke next saying, “I didn’t know these were the list of items. When I got on council in 2014, Councilwoman Wilson was already on the council and we couldn’t get items on the agenda. So, we set up a six-month timeframe. These are things that come up…these are people calling us, emailing us. I’ve recently found out we really don’t have a policy for the mayor setting an agenda. It used to be the mayor and the city manager would set the agenda. But that’s not happening, either.”

“It’s been very frustrating as a District 3 representative,” she continued. “If I can’t get anything on the agenda for the constituents in that area, it’s not fair. It’s not to take something away from anybody. It’s to be fair across the board.”

District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson said, “I’m sorry for all the confusion of this non-emergency emergency meeting. I definitely agree this process needs to be transparent. I, too, see that the staff is overworked. Yes, I do agree that there needs to be a process. I do wish this was a meeting we were all here for. I’m not a fan of an agenda item that doesn’t have a report attached to it. Whoever calls it needs to explain it. I think there should be a little more time. Again, I apologize for this very vague…meeting.”

Torres-Walker then offered her reasons for the special meeting and agenda item saying, “Myself and Councilmember Barbanica have been talking about how the agenda is set. I asked (former city manager) Ron Bernal…why do we have a list of like 20, 30 things that haven’t been brought back. And then it could take up to six months before they’re even brought back and when they’re brought back it’s simply as a discussion and then we decide to move foward. That is a clear absence of voice and diversity when the person you elected to council can literally in their term not get anything done because it could take up to six months or more for items to come back to the agenda. I know, there were definitely things when I came on this council were more than a year old and the council members who asked for them were no longer on council by the they came back.”

“When we’re talking about a right-wing or left wing agenda I’m not a bird. So, I don’t know what a left wing or right wing is. Since the diversity in this community…the system isn’t working. This isn’t about…who eventually ends up in the mayor’s position. This is simply about good governance. We operate in bad faith in democracy when people don’t see themselves in public policy. I also want to say this council majority absolutely has the authority to do this. But for two-and-a-half years we have tried to say, ‘OK, let’s wait’. But it hasn’t been working. This is within our authority. I didn’t run for office to sell all my values to get something on the agenda. When you say ‘oh, the council is divided’… that didn’t just start. Day one there has been division. Not necessarily in personal relationships because some residents are surprised Councilman Barbanica have figured out to have an open dialogue and relationship. This is about how things can come back in a timely manner.”

“Fortunately, for me, I’m not looking to climb a political ladder so, I’m not afraid,” she continued. “I do think it’s reasonable to have a time to have things come back to the agenda. I do think it’s absolutely reasonable to look at the agenda and make sure that it’s not so packed.”

“When you have 10, 20 things on an agenda and we have to get through all of them in one night, you are going to get one minute to speak,” Torres-Walker stated. “This is probably the most diverse discussion this council has ever had. Why hasn’t this discussion never happened a long time ago. I’ve been able to move things through the agenda. I had to step back, my peers up here on the council should also be able to move some things on the agenda whether they have the votes or not.”

She then asked City Attorney Thomas L. Smith his thoughts “on how we can move forward in making some changes.”

“There is a municipal code that states these processes can be codified in a resolution,” he responded. “You seem to have several items…on those things you can reach consensus…that resolution could come back at a subsequent meeting.”

Ogorchock then said, “There have been several times and several meetings when things come up for discussion and there hasn’t been a staff report. We do this on a regular basis.”

“I have also seen some items come to this agenda with no background…for discussion,” Torres-Walker said. “Everything is urgent except better government. We are not dismissing that we have 18 incidents of firearms in our community. This isn’t overshadowing policing…housing and tenants’ rights. None of that. This is happening so we can have items come back on the agenda.”

Members of the audience yelled out from their seats attempting to disrupt the meeting.

“Calm down, calm down. This is just a discussion. We’re about to have a round robin to see what’s coming back. This isn’t going away,” Torres-Walker said trying to control the meeting but didn’t use the gavel. “This city has been understaffed and staff has been underpaid since 2017. Look if you want to fight for the mayor that’s another discussion.”

“We have not violated the Brown Act,” the mayor pro tem said in response to an accusation by a member of the public.

Barbanica then began reading through the seven points he and Torres-Walker developed.

He and Ogorchock agreed on 11 p.m. to be the meeting limit.

“That’s already in place,” Wilson said. “I didn’t say yes or no.”

People continued to yell out from the audience.

“I agree, as long as we start adhering to it,” Barbanica said.

“Anything not handled at a council meeting, those items will be on the next agenda and those items will be the first ones on the next agenda,” he added.

“I agree with that,” Ogorchock said.

Gardner continued to yell out from the audience.

“Placing a maximum of seven items on the agenda, three reserved for council members,” Barbanica said.

“I don’t know about this one, yet,” Ogorchock said. “I don’t know if I want to do a number of items. I just want to go back to the timeframe.”

“So, I say we stick to the timeframe,” Torres-Walker said.

“I’m fine with that,” Barbanica stated.

“Three items reserved for council members,” he than offered.

“The mayor and the city manager already set the agenda,” Torres-Walker said. “There be at least three of those that come back.”

Those in the audience continued to yell out.

“Wait. Just a second. So, I’m wondering. My thing is like, we done already heard the voices of people who agree and don’t agree,” Torres-Walker said, again trying to control those yelling out. “You can keep disrupting the meeting but it’s not going to disrupt the vote. This is just direction. I’m not going to say what I’m thinking because it won’t look good for your mayor.”

People continued to yell out.

Ogorchock then said, “If there were some really important things that need to come forward, like the budget…I’d like to have one or two things on there.”

“I’m OK with two,” Barbanica said.

Wilson said, “I prefer three. But, yeah. Whatever. I can deal with three.”

“The six-month list will be changed from a six-month to a 90-day list,” Barbanica then offered.

Wilson said she was concerned about emergency items that might come up.

“The six-month process is just not working,” Barbanica said.

“We would spend one council meeting just talking about all the items that are a year out,” Torres-Walker stated.

“It’s longer than that,” Ogorchock added who also said she was fine with the 90 days.

“I’m fine with the ninety days,” Wilson said.

Acting City Manager Forrest Ebbs said, “Speaking for staff, it always seemed strange to bring things back without a staff report…to give you some context for a discussion.”

“I know when Ron Bernal was here he said

“There are a lot of practices that have been handed down. But I think this is the right time to change things,” Ebbs said.

“Definitely within the next two meetings,” Attorney Smith said about bringing back the resolution on changing how agendas are set. “I’m very confident that it could be in the next two and if it’s possible, the next meeting. No later than June 27th and if possible, the next meeting June 13th.”

The other council members agreed to the timeline for the resolution to be brought back to the council for a vote.

Item 2 – Consider the process to transition to five council districts and switch from a directly-elected

“This came up because I was at an electoral event,” Torres-Walker said. “The next time I saw them they were the mayor. I asked them how does that work? We should discuss that in Antioch if other cities are doing it. Is it fair? Does it add diversity to the role? If it gets to rotate you get more diversity in the government. None of the other folks from Pinole and other councils seem to have a problem with it.”

“This was something that was voted on 10 years ago in Antioch and failed, miserably,” she added. “This isn’t the same community it was 10 years ago. I thought it would make sense to bring it back and discuss it, now.”

“We both know this would go to the voters. We would not make a decision up here.

It would be extremely unlikely this would affect the current mayor. This is about the future. This is not to remove a current mayor. That was never the discussion. Would it make to go to a fifth district as other councils.

Attorney Smith said he had an elections attorney available to answer questions during the meeting as a panelist on Zoom.

“It was voted down in 1994,” Ogorchock stated.

Also in 2012, someone added.

During Public Comments on the item resident Ramesh Shuman said, “This has been tried in so many cities and it has been very successful. I think this would be a good time to try it…to give each person a chance to bring new ideas that we have not heard in the past. But this would not be for this term.”

“This is a dictatorship in content. I do not want any of you mayor, ever,” said Julia Aymachoque. “But you are forcing yourself to that position, no matter what. Reducing the term of the mayor to one year…is a terrorist threat to all of us. An attack on Antioch Mayor Lamar Thorpe is an attack on all Antiochians, democracy and U.S. Constitution. The right extreme agenda, a systemically racist move and we want you to stop this monstrosity. Let the mayor be the mayor for four years. Defund the police, pay for the lawsuits, create instead social safety net.” (Nichole Gardner could be seen standing, clapping and saying, “yes” in response).

Andrew Beckers spoke passionately saying, “Council worked very hard to say this is not an attack on Mayor Thorpe. I think this item would come forward on next year’s ballot which we would all vote as a community. The good majority of cities in this state follow this practice. This city does not have a strong mayor. But our mayor has acted strongly for a long time. This mayor is a city council member who chairs a board. This same mayor that everybody is supporting is not here. Everybody deserves to have a voice, all of our elected officials and I applaud this.”

Frank Sterling said, “I understand we get to vote on it. I look forward to hearing…about how it works.”

Former councilman Ralph Hernandez said, “This is a item that I think really needs to be thought out. I’m not opposed to it. That depends. All of you represent a part of the community under this district voting, I call it B.S. I think we should eliminate district voting and go back to electing all council people. I don’t think we can really address this particular item, yet…until hearing from the public. When you have elected officials we want them to represent all of us.”

Resident Lucas Stewart-Chilcote said, “The previous agenda item I felt some equity. This is different. What are the advantages to this? Should we do the United States of America president as a one-year rotation? What other advantages is there to be the mayor to keep it fair? Are there other roles…what would you all get out of it?”

Francisco Torres said, “I also noticed most cities are going for five rotated mayors. I think that’s a good idea. That way each one of you gets the chance to be the mayor and run the agenda and run the meetings. Every district has a voice, and those voices need to be heard. We’ve only been doing it for 200 years. I do believe in district council people because you have to answer to 25,000 constituents. They have someone to go to. Good luck and see where it lands.”

Ronald Muhammad spoke next saying, “This is not about a person we’re talking about processes. That’s why I keep talking about the Brown Act. The people are being taken out of the process. ‘The people shall not give up their sovereignty’,” he quoted. “What constituency base brought this to you or did you bring this up? Whose stuff are you bringing forward or is it your stuff? That’s why I keep yelling Brown Act, Brown Act. It seems like other things are going on. If you want to beat Thorpe run against him. Beat him at the polls. Brown Act violation.”

Dorothy Ellis then said, “I totally disagree having four to five districts…it should not be a shared responsibility. If he’s not doing his job then it should be us voting him out. You haven’t provided us anything. You want us to take you at your word. We don’t want you to circumvent the process. This is called a special meeting and it’s only a discussion. You done took my time and you’re not voting on anything.”

Susannah Williams said, “I’m in support of districts. Mayor Pro Tem Torres-Walker’s district has a voice for the first time, ever. We voted to elect a mayor. I don’t think a rotated mayor works as good with districts. I see this as a little premature and distracting. If you have to go through that redistricting process it could be nowhere as fair as the districts are, today.”

Kimberly Kidd-Bailey spoke next saying said, “I’ve been an Antioch resident for 23 years and I just started coming to the council meetings. What’s going to happen with all the police stuff…with all the other items I heard? What all are you doing for the public? About the mayor thing…you guys are bickering amongst each other calling each other names. Why would I want you to be mayor for one year?

“I heard someone all you racist or white privileged last time,” she said looking at Ogorchock. “I don’t want you representing me if you’re like that.”

Resident Devin Williams said, “I believe in the democratic process. I believe we deserve to elect somebody and let them lead. Not everybody who is going to rotate into this chair will represent everyone. We need to have consensus when we go to the voting booths when we’re voting for the mayor. It was voted against I 2012. There are other issues we need to be worried about than this foolishness, tonight. I respect those wanting to do this but we shouldn’t have the discussion without the mayor here.”

Don Freitas spoke next saying, “The issue before us is not about Lamar Thorpe. The issue is do you want five districts or an elected mayor. The reason cities go to an elected mayor is when they get large and the issues are complex. Frankly, I would just strongly suggest you to not have a rotating mayor. You want someone who represents the entire community and is answerable to all the people. I’ve seen the squabbles with rotating mayors. There are just some people on council who should not be mayor. It’s a whole new level. It’s more complex. I really hope you don’t put this on the agenda next year.”

Allison Norris was the last from the public to speak saying, “I was the person that messaged you, Tamisha, and you got back to me. I’m in District 3, but first and foremost I’m an Antioch citizen. One of the reasons we’re divided, we’re divided on race. Just because I’m white doesn’t mean I don’t care about Tamisha’s districts. And comments like what was said about Lori, last week is not right.”

Council Discussion on Rotating Mayor

Elections attorney Mel Richardson co-chair of Walnut Creek-based law firm Best Best and Krieger’s election law practices group, joined the meeting via Zoom.

In response to questions from Barbanica he said, “these issues are governed by California Elections statute in the FAIR MAPS Act,” he said. “Of four plus one or five districts. There’s actually a threshold issue that needs to be addressed…whether or not it can even go forward.”

According to the bill, AB 849 which became law in 2019, FAIR MAPS stands for Fair And Inclusive Redistricting for Municipalities And Political Subdivisions.

“The FAIR MAPS Act was significantly revised before the last redistricting process,” Richardson continued. “After redistricting…a council shall not adopt new council district elections until after the next decennial census except in three instances: settlement of a lawsuit, or if the city boundaries change. This applies here because when you change from four districts to five districts you rejigger through redistricting. This statute is not perfectly clear because it says the council is prohibited from creating new council districts. It doesn’t address the initiative process. An initiative cannot accomplish what a council cannot accomplish. So, it’s possible that it couldn’t be accomplished by initiative. But that’s not been tested.”

When the council transitioned to districts in 2018, the FAIR MAPS Act became applicable,” he added.

“This would have to be brought to a ballot. This is not our decision. Then the people would have to decide. That is the pathway, correct?” Barbanica asked.

“Yes,” the elections attorney replied. “But we’d have to do a deeper dive. There is no case law. An initiative would have to be used. But it’s even possible that may not be allowed.”

“Government Code 34886 is exactly where you want to go for these different kinds of districts,” he said in response to a question from Torres-Walker. “But that section punts over to the MAPS Act and that is governed by the timing in the Elections Code.”

“We always understood this is not a council action,” Barbanica said. “We’ve received lots of feedback from members of the public over the last week.”

“Having discussions like these to understand what’s possible…I don’t change,” Torres-Walker said. “Even if we have a discussion about this, I’m not afraid to bring things up. I’m also not intimidated by this. Because the public has a right to know. Thank you, city attorney…because now we know the parameters.”

“I think the fear is very concerning to me,” she continued. “When you say we aren’t dealing with Black issues up here…I don’t remember police reform…tenant protections being brought up before.”

“Sometimes open communication is what actually opens relationships not closed minds,” Torres-Walker added.

She then moved to adjourn the meeting and the motion passed 4-0-1 at 9:01 p.m.

Posts message on his official Instagram account with vulgar translation; claims it was mistranslated, later adds his intended meaning of “Don’t mess around”; but Hispanic college board president says phrase is “almost…intimidation”; 6/1/23 UPDATE: Thorpe says he informed Torres-Walker he would be out of town for Tuesday night’s meeting

By Allen D. Payton

While facing the limiting of his powers by three of his fellow councilmembers, on Sunday, while in Ensenada, Mexico, Antioch Mayor Lamar Thorpe posted a photo of himself with a vulgar message on his official Instagram account. It reads, “antioch_mayor No chingen” which translated into English means “antioch_mayor Don’t give a f—“. The post comes three days after the agenda was made public for Tuesday night’s special council meeting, called by District 2 Councilman Mike Barbanica at the end of last week’s meeting, and supported by Mayor Pro Tem Tamisha Torres-Walker and District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock. The two items would both weaken one of the two powers of the mayor, to set meeting agendas, and completely change the position from being directly elected for four years to an annually rotated position among all five council members. (See related articles here and here)

Above the photo in which Thorpe appears serious and pensive, it reads “Valle de Guadalupe, Ruta del Vino, Ensenada” which is in Mexico.

He was sent questions via email late Monday night asking what he was referring to in his Instagram post on Sunday and specifically, “Why don’t you ‘give a f – – -‘?”

The mayor was asked if he is upset about what the three council members are attempting to do to weaken one of the powers of the mayor regarding setting meeting agendas and switching to an annually rotated instead of a directly elected mayor.

Thorpe was also asked, “as an elected representative, do you think it’s appropriate to use that kind of language in Spanish or English, especially on one of your official social media accounts?”

He was also asked about the trip and it’s timing: “Why are you in Mexico? How long have you had this trip planned? When did you book your flight? Or did you drive there and if so, when did you leave Antioch? If it was planned before last Tuesday night, why didn’t you mention that during the council meeting when Councilman Barbanica called for the special meeting for this Tuesday night, May 30 and it received the support from two other council members? Or will you be back from Mexico in time to attend the meeting?”

Finally, he was asked if he has anything else to share about the Instagram post or the two items on the special council meeting agenda.

Barbanica Didn’t Know Thorpe Would Miss Meeting

When asked about Thorpe being in Mexico, Barbanica said, “Had I known at the time when I called for the meeting that he was going to be out of town I would have moved it to another time. I would have loved to have everybody there. But at the time I didn’t know he was going to be out of town.”

Thorpe Claims Mistranslation by Instagram But Won’t See What He Meant

In response to the questions, Thorpe wrote the following via email Tuesday morning:

“So that I’m clear, if I had a public statement to make I’d make it. Right now, I have no statement regarding an issue that’s a non starter. I don’t send subliminal messages. You’re suggesting I’m on vacation not because it’s Memorial Day weekend (one of the busiest travel weekends in the nation) but instead because of a special meeting…after 6 years in elected office, I’ve never sent a ‘subliminal message’ as you’re suggesting.”

Thorpe then made the same claim of mistranslation about another post on his official Instagram page showing him standing in front of a painting of multi-colored wings.

“In case you wanted more examples of Meta broken translator: ‘Pintate de colores y buela como superman’ is also translated incorrectly,” he wrote.

That translated on his Instagram account to “Paint colors and grumble like Superman”.

He later provided his own translation of “Get outta here”.

More Questions Go Unanswered

Thorpe was pressed further asking him to explain what he meant since he claims it’s not intended to be a subliminal message and it’s been mistranslated. He was also asked, “if, as you claim, the Meta translator is broken and it’s an incorrect translation, what is the correct translation of ‘no chingen’?”

He was informed that the word in Spanish appears to be misspelled as the word found on SpeakLatino.com is “chinguen” which is conjugated from the word chingar meaning either: 1. to importune, disturb; 2. to have sex (offensive); or 3. to frequently have wine or drinks (colloquial)

Thorpe was then asked, if “no chinguen” is what he meant to write and if so, which of those meanings did he intend by his post. “Did you mean you don’t want to be disturbed? Or that you’re not drinking? Since that’s supposedly colloquial, and if the latter meaning is what you intended, wouldn’t a better word to use be ‘no beben’?”

He was also asked, “If ‘don’t give a f—-‘ is not what you intended to write, but is translated that way, why haven’t you yet corrected or deleted the comment or post?”

The mayor was asked what “Pintate de colores y buela como superman” translates to in English. Google Translator shows the meaning to be, “Paint yourself colors and ox like superman”.

Thorpe was asked again, if he will return in time for tonight’s council meeting and if not, when did he plan his trip and if planned before last Tuesday night’s meeting, why didn’t he mention it when Councilman Barbanica called for the special meeting to be scheduled for tonight.

Because of a concern that Thorpe intentionally misses certain meetings and the Public Comments portion of meetings he was reminded of being an hour late to the May 9th council meeting for which he missed the Public Comments period. Thorpe was asked if it was true that he was in the mayor’s office upstairs inside City Hall taking his online DUI class at the time.

Thorpe Continues to Refuse to Say What He Meant

The mayor replied, “Again, the issue is a none starter [sic]. So, I can’t ‘send’ a message, directly or indirectly, about something that does not impact the role of the elected mayor.”

One Last Attempt to Get Answers

Thorpe was then sent additional and some of the same questions once more asking, “since what you wrote in Spanish is clearly not understood by most of your constituents and you claim it was mistranslated how can they know it has nothing to do with your role as the elected mayor? What did you intend to write in Spanish that you claim was mistranslated into English? Did you check the translation before finalizing your post?”

He was informed that the SpanishDictionary.com shows the phrase he posted means “don’t f—” with a related phrase of “No chinguen conmigo o se van a arrepentir. – Don’t f— with me, or you’ll regret it.”

Thorpe was also informed that someone whose family is from Mexico and spends a lot of time there said it could mean, “I don’t care” or it’s a warning meaning “don’t mess with me”, “don’t say anything on this” or “you better let this go”.

He was then asked if one of those were the meaning he intended to send.

Thorpe was also asked to support his claim of mistranslation to provide the correct translation of his other post of him standing in front of a painting of angel wings and mentioning Superman. He was also asked now that he’s aware of the vulgar “mistranslation”, as he claims, why he hadn’t deleted the comment.

Again, the mayor was asked, “when did you plan your trip to Mexico? Did you just go for the weekend? Will you be back in town in time for tonight’s meeting? If not, is the trip to avoid attending tonight’s council meeting? Finally, again, if you planned the trip before last Tuesday night, why didn’t you mention it during the council meeting?”

He was also asked again about his hour-long absence at the beginning of the May 9th meeting, where he was, what he was doing and why.

Translation of Thorpe’s Post Changed, Finally Provides His Intended Meaning

At about 2:00 p.m. on Tuesday, the translation to English of Thorpe’s post was changed to read simply, “Don’t f—.”

Thorpe was asked if he had changed the translation or if the system had done that.

He responded, “I changed ‘chingen’ to ‘chinguen’. You said I misspelled it so I changed it. How it translates I don’t control.” Then Thorpe wrote, “Let me see if I can manually fix it.”

He was then asked once more what he meant by his post.

As of about 4:45 p.m. his post had been edited but still read, “No chingen” and translated to “Don’t give a f—-”.

Thorpe then wrote, “Looks like there’s a translate area in settings but can’t figure out how to turn off. I already told you the meaning in a previous email— don’t mess around.” 

“Can’t fix but added my translation at the bottom on both posts,” he added.

The final version of his post now includes the words, “Don’t mess around.”

Thorpe was asked again when he had planned his trip, if he is back in town and if he will be attending the meeting. The mayor did not respond.

Hispanic College Board President Says Phrase is “Almost…Intimidation”

Asked the meaning of the phrase Thorpe posted, Contra Costa Community College Board President Fernando Sandoval, who represents Antioch, said the meaning of the phrase is “don’t f— with me”.

“It’s almost a level of intimidation, especially being posted on there,” he added.

Thorpe Said He Informed Torres-Walker He Would be Out of Town During Special Meeting

6/1/23 UPDATE: After returning from Mexico, Thorpe said he had informed Torres-Walker after the meeting on Tuesday, May 23 that he would be out of town, this week and would not be attending this past Tuesday night’s meeting, and asked her to inform Barbanica.

The special council meeting begins at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers and can be viewed livestream on the City’s website.

Change in how mayor is chosen requires vote of people, would result in redistricting to five council districts

First ever special meeting called by three council members not the mayor set for Tuesday at 7:00 p.m.

By Allen D. Payton

At the request of District 2 Councilman Mike Barbanica, with the support of Mayor Pro Tem Tamisha Torres-Walker and District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock at the end of Tuesday night’s meeting, the Antioch City Council will have an unprecedented special meeting next Tuesday, May 30 at 7:00 p.m. to discuss two matters. It will be the first not called by the mayor. (See related article and May 30th agenda)

The first item, specifically requested by Barbanica at the end of the Tuesday, May 23rd council meeting, is a discussion on a proposed agenda setting process for future city council meetings. Currently the mayor sets the agenda with input from the city manager, and placing requests by other council members when he chooses. That is supposed to be done within six months of the request based on the council policy adopted during former Mayor Wade Harper’s term. However, it hasn’t always been followed.

Barbanica said he and Torres-Walker held two meetings on the matter and developed a seven-point plan which they will present during the meeting.

Proposed Switch to Rotated Mayor

The second matter for discussion, also proposed by Barbanica, is the consideration of a process to transition the city from four to five election districts and to change the process from designating the mayor from being elected directly, citywide for a four-year term to a mayor serving a one-year term on a rotating basis, as is currently done for the position of mayor pro tem.

Asked if the second proposal was his, Barbanica said, “I called for the special meeting on the one item. Afterwards, I was thinking about it and I added the second item about switching to a rotated mayor.”

“I called Tamisha to ask her thoughts about it and she said, ‘yes, let’s add it,’” he continued. “I called (City Attorney) Thomas (Smith). He got a third person to agree, and I spoke to him later in the afternoon so, he said we’re going to place it on the agenda.”

“We just agreed to place it on the agenda. No one has approved anything at this point,” Barbanica stated. “It would have to go to the voters, of course.”

“I initially brought this to her (Torres-Walker) on Saturday afternoon when I was sharing with her about the need for the EOC,” the councilman shared. “We came to an agreement on that. We also spoke about the MRAP. What I proposed is, we need to replace it, anyways, let’s get rid of it, but not now. Then why don’t we bring in a police department-based vehicle. The police department wanted it anyway. I reached out to the department, and they said we’re 100 percent on board.”

“I’m very appreciative of the time she and I spent discussing ideas. This was hours that we spent going over things,” Barbanica continued. “We came up with the seven-point plan together. We bounced ideas off each other.”

“She initially reached out to me to talk about the agenda. That turned into conversations about the EOC, the MRAP and how the agenda was put together,” he explained. “I was appreciative that we spent hours on this, together.”

“I don’t want to take full credit for this. It’s something we worked together on. She was very receptive to my ideas. It was a back-and-forth thing,” Barbanica wanted to make clear.

“This was very much a collaborative effort with both of us being willing to compromise,” he added.

If approved at a future council meeting switching to a rotated mayor would require a vote by the public and the city undergoing another redistricting process for future council elections with three seats up one year and the other two seats two years later. That’s how the process is handled in most of the 19 cities in Contra Costa County. Besides Antioch, only Richmond, San Ramon, Martinez and Brentwood have directly elected mayors.

“We’re consulting an elections attorney, right now to make sure we understand the process and determine the next steps if the council majority agrees we want to look into it further,” Barbanica added.

Powers and Duties of the Mayor

The mayor has only two powers that the other city council members don’t, which are to set council meeting agendas and nominate council members and residents to committees, commissions and boards. The appointments still require the support of at least two other council members. The mayor also gets to sign ordinances, resolutions and proclamations and represent the City at the monthly county Mayor’s Conference.

Attempts to reach Torres-Walker for comment on this were unsuccessful prior to publication time. Please check later for any updates to this report.

During discussion of previous council meeting vote on minutes; says he’s “not here to…appease white fragility”

By Allen D. Payton

After calling for the firing of the Antioch Police Officers involved in the racist text scandal last Friday, at Tuesday night’s Antioch City Council meeting, May 23, 2023, during discussion of Item A, which Mayor Lamar Thorpe removed from the Consent Calendar agenda, he requested the council reverse its previous 3-0 vote by Councilmembers Lori Ogorchock, Mike Barbanica and Monica Wilson, to have the city clerk add more details to the minutes with his verbatim comments during the April 11th council meeting. That was the night he yelled at a resident during public comments. The minutes described the mayor’s comments as, “Mayor Thorpe expressed his frustration with previous public comments and declared a recess at 7:55 P.M.” (See related article)

During the Consent Calendar at the beginning of the May 9th council meeting, for which Thorpe arrived an hour late and Torres-Walker was absent, Ogorchock said there were three people who had reached out to her saying, “the minutes did not reflect what was stated exactly under the mayor’s comments and his response. So, I’m asking that the comments come back with an accurate statement of what was said.”

“And I also received similar feedback from the public and that’s no reflection on the Clerk’s Office, at all,” Barbanica said. “But several people from the district that reached out to me requesting the same thing.”

Wilson, who was running the meeting as the ranking member, asked City Attorney Thomas L. Smith, “do you have anything to say on that point? Or we can just go ahead…”

“If that’s the wish of the council then the Clerk’s Office can make that adjustment,” he responded.

“Make that adjustment and bring those minutes back. OK,” Wilson stated.

“So, is that direction?” Smith asked.

“Yes,” Wilson responded.

The council then voted 3-0 to bring back the minutes from the April 9th meeting with the adjustment to Thorpe’s comments.

During last Tuesday night’s meeting, Thorpe objected and made a motion to rescind the previous vote to have the City Clerk’s Office change the April 9th meeting minutes. (See 46-minute mark of May 23rd council meeting video)

“The reason I’m doing this is because we typically do summary minutes. We have not gone outside of that,” he said. “If we’re going to start picking and choosing what we’re going to put in the minutes that are verbatim, then I’d ask that all the minutes come back and we review them and an put outbursts by Councilmember Ogorchock, we can put other things in there when I had to use the gavel.”

“So, if people want to play games, that’s fine. I’m not participating,” Thorpe added. “That’s my motion.”

“I don’t think we should do that. I think we should stick to the summary minutes format,” he later said in explaining his motion to Torres-Walker who seconded his motion.

Ogorchock then said, “This is not just a Councilmember Ogorchock thing, there were three votes, Mr. Mayor.”

“No, I’m pointing out your outburst,” Thorpe shot back.

“I didn’t have an outburst,” she responded.

“When you had your white privileged outburst and had your finger in my face,” he stated while pointing his finger at the councilwoman.

“I didn’t have a white privileged…” Ogorchock said as Thorpe continued by saying, “like (Arizona Governor) Jan Brewer did with Barack Obama, you absolutely did.”

When you had your finger in my face,” he repeated while again pointing his finger at her. “So…”

“Keep going,” she responded.

“No, I’m done. Now you’re turn,” the mayor said.

“I’m surprised you’re giving me time to talk. You gave me the floor and keep going,” Ogorchock retorted. “It was not just me. It was a 3-0 vote.”

“I didn’t say it was just you,” Thorpe stated.

“It was a 3-0 vote,” she repeated.

“OK,” he said.

“And the vote passed,” Ogorchock pointed out.

“And my motion was to rescind it,” Thorpe said.

In response to another question by Torres-Walker the mayor who became increasingly heated said, “this motion is to undo the political game they’re trying to play, here. That’s it. If it’s a no, then you want to play this game and have the minutes reflect the verbatim transcript which is more work on the Clerk’s Office, and unfair and unnecessary.”

“Because,” Thorpe continued while looking at and gesturing toward Ogorchock, “when you had your white privileged outburst I didn’t request that.”

She denied the accusation again and he repeated it, once more.

“So, I’m sorry. I’m not playing this game,” the mayor repeated. “So, please cast your votes.”

Following the 3-2 vote, with Wilson switching her position, to keep the summary of the incident in the council meeting minutes with Ogorchock and District 2 Councilman Mike Barbanica voting no, Thorpe added, “Alright and just so we’re clear, I’m not here to cave or to, you know, appease white fragility. I’m not.”

The meeting then continued.

Garners support of two councilwomen

Barbanica says he and Torres-Walker developed 7-point plan

By Allen D. Payton

At the end of the Antioch City Council meeting, Tuesday, May 23, 2023, during Council Communications, District 2 Councilman Mike Barbanica called for a special meeting to discuss when and how things are placed by the mayor onto a council agenda. He garnered the support of Mayor Pro Tem Tamisha Torres-Walker and District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock. (See 3:43:43 mark of the meeting video)

Barbanica said, “last council meeting I asked for the tobacco ordinance to come back to this meeting. It did not. Mayor Pro Tem Torres-Walker and I had two meetings. I’m calling for a special meeting on Tuesday, 5-30-23 at 7 p.m.

As the councilman was speaking, Mayor Lamar Thorpe left his seat at the dais.

Barbanica continued to speak saying he wanted the meeting in order “to revamp how our agenda is handled for council to give all council members much more say in what is placed on the final agenda. We’ve put together a seven-point plan.”

Currently, the mayor sets each council meeting agenda working with the city manager.

“I agree with the special meeting to discuss the agenda,” Torres-Walker stated. “Since I’ve been on this council, I’ve had an issue with the six-month timeline for items being placed on the agenda.”

Ogorchock then said, “I’ll support that.”

“In terms of the agenda, I’ve been pretty transparent about delaying things,” Antioch Mayor Lamar Thorpe responded. “One of the biggest challenges is the budget. What we’ll start seeing is I was planning on calling a special meeting for a six-month review. I’ve asked the city attorney what’s a realistic timeline for staff. I’ve heard some of the concerns that staff has. So, I get it from staff, and I hear what they say with their concerns we’re frontloading items. Then we lost Con Johnson. So, I’ve been very clear I’ve slowed things down.”

“We now contract out a lot of these ordinances,” he added.

“And I understand your comments. But I made a simple request at the last meeting. The council majority supported it, but it didn’t happen,” Barbanica stated. “So, my request for a special meeting, stands, and we’re going to completely revamp how this agenda is developed so that the council majority has a greater say.”

“I’ll say, again, the ordinance is coming back,” Thorpe responded. “But I’ve got to work with staff.”

With three councilmembers supporting the call for a special meeting, it must occur, according to past advice from City Attorney Thomas L. Smith.

The special meeting has been set for next Tuesday.