Recovered Monday morning; conflicting information from agencies of what occurred; no investigation by APD

By Allen D. Payton

According to Antioch Police Public Information Liaison Sgt. Price Kendall, on Tuesday, July 25, 2023, the body of the man missing in the river last Friday during a boating mishap was found.

Con Fire spokeswoman, Assistant Fire Chief Tracie Dutter said, “Someone reported a possible deceased male on the rocks near Fulton Shipyard Road on Monday at 7:48 AM. We were requested by PD to assist in recovering the body. We were on scene assisting at about 8:20 a.m. and by 8:40 a.m. the recovery was completed.”

According to Deputy Gonzalez of the Contra Costa County Coroner’s Office, the man was identified as 58-year-old Douglas Cross from San Leandro, based on his driver’s license information.

As previously reported, according to Jimmy Lee, Contra Costa Sheriff’s Office Director of Public Affairs, “On Friday, July 21, 2023, at about 1:51 PM, deputy sheriffs from the Marine Patrol Unit were dispatched to assist the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District and the United States Coast Guard with searching for a missing boater who was apparently trying to push his 20-foot vessel to shore near the Fulton Shipyard on the San Joaquin River. The U.S. Coast Guard and Sheriff’s Office drone team were also involved in the search. The missing boater, who is not being identified at this time, was not located. (See video)

The Marine Patrol Unit continued the search on Saturday, he added.

However, according to Coast Guard Public Affairs Specialist Schnabel, “We suspended the search after searching until around 7:30 pm. One man had fallen overboard from a recreational boat and the other man jumped in after him attempting to get him out of the water leaving the vessel unmanned. Neither had life jackets. One man was recovered by a Good Samaritan and taken to a local boat ramp.”

Asked if an investigation was being conducted to determine what occurred and if the other man had been interviewed to get his side of the story, Sgt. Kendall responded, “No investigation is being conducted by the Antioch Police Department.”

Lee was asked the same question but did not respond prior to publication time. Please check back later for any updates to this report.

By Allen D. Payton

07/22/23 UPDATE #2: According to Jimmy Lee, Contra Costa Sheriff’s Office Director of Public Affairs, “On Friday, July 21, 2023, at about 1:51 PM, deputy sheriffs from the Marine Patrol Unit were dispatched to assist the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District and the United States Coast Guard with searching for a missing boater who was apparently trying to push his 20-foot vessel to shore near the Fulton Shipyard on the San Joaquin River. The U.S. Coast Guard and Sheriff’s Office drone team were also involved in the search. The missing boater, who is not being identified at this time, was not located. The Marine Patrol Unit will continue the search today.”

07/22/23 UPDATE #1: According to Coast Guard Public Affairs Specialist Schnabel, “We suspended the search after searching until around 7:30 pm. One man had fallen overboard from a recreational boat and the other man jumped in after him attempting to get him out of the water leaving the vessel unmanned. Neither had life jackets. One man was recovered by a Good Samaritan and taken to a local boat ramp.”

———

A helicopter could be seen flying over the river and Waldie Plaza along the Antioch waterfront Friday afternoon. According to Con Fire PIO Steve Hill, “We responded in the noon hour to reports of a 55-year-old man in the water. In spite of searches by us, Sheriff’s Office Marine program and the Coast Guard we were unable to locate him. We are clearing at this hour, the Coast Guard remains on scene.”

As of 4:25 PM Coast Guard 11th District Public Affairs Specialist Hunter Schnabel said, “the search is ongoing for a male. We received a report from another male who was swimming with him after he got back to shore and called in a panic.”

“We have Station Rio Vista and Air San Francisco’s MH65 Dolphins (helicopters) in the search,” he added.

Please check back later for any updates to this report.

The Memorial Day holiday weekend traditionally marks the start of boating season on the Delta. A large number of people are expected to be on the water this weekend and throughout the summer to go fishing, boating or take part in water sports, like water-skiing.

“We want all boaters and those on the Delta to enjoy themselves, but to be safe,” said Contra Costa Sheriff David Livingston. “By following the laws and regulations, wearing a life-jacket, avoiding alcohol, and boating safely, you could help avoid an accident or tragedy on the water.”

The Contra Costa County Office of the Sheriff Marine Ser-vices Unit would like to remind all boaters to be safe, alert, and obey the rules. Here are some important rules and tips:

-Anyone 50 or under who oper-ates a vessel that is propelled by an engine, regardless of whether the engine is the principal source of propulsion, must have in their possession a California Boater Card issued by the state. By 2025, anyone operating a motorized vessel will be required to possess a California Boater Card. For more information on the California Boater Card, go to www.dbw.ca.gov.

-All vessels, including stand-up paddle boards (SUPs), must have a U.S. Coast Guard approved life jacket for each person. The life jacket must fit the person intending to wear it. Children under 13 must always wear a life jacket while aboard any vessel, regardless of length, unless they are surrounded by an enclosed cabin or bulkhead. We encourage every-one, regardless of age, to wear a personal floatation device at all times when on the water.

-You must be at least 16 years old to operate a power boat or personal watercraft. All persons on a personal watercraft are required to wear an approved life jacket.

-Boats 16 feet and larger are required to have a life ring or square type 4 throwable flotation device which must be immediately accessible.

-Always travel at a safe speed. Slow down in narrow channels and blind areas and navigate on the right side of the waterway. In crossing situations, the boat on the right has the right of way.

-The operator of a vessel involved in towing a skier must display, or cause to be displayed, a red or orange water ski flag to indicate: a downed skier, a skier in the water preparing to ski, a ski line extended for the vessel, or a ski in the water in the vicinity of the vessel.

-Blue Light law — Any vessel approaching, overtaking, being approached, or being overtaken by a moving law enforcement or emergency vessel operating with a siren or an illuminated blue light, or any vessel approaching a stationary law enforcement vessel displaying an illumi-nated blue light, shall immediately slow to a speed sufficient to maintain steerage. Boaters cannot make a wake near a law enforcement vessel displaying a blue light.

-Always have an emergency kit that includes a flashlight, warm clothing, cell phone, VHF radio and chart. For emergencies on the water, boaters should call 911 or Sheriff’s Dispatch at (925) 646-2441. Be sure to file a float plan before you depart. Go to this link for more information on float plans and how to fill one out:

https://uscgboating.org/recreational-boaters/floating-plan.php

-Be aware of potential carbon monoxide poisoning that can occur when the motor is running while occupying the swim platform or in vicinity of the vessel’s transom.

Boating under the influence (B.U.I.) enforcement is a high priority. Those arrested for B.U.I. will face similar consequences as those who drive a motor vehicle under the influence, including fines and possible jail time.

The ‘ABC’s of Boating’, a handbook of boating rules, is available from most boating shops. Boaters can go to the California Division of Boating and Waterways website at www.dbw.ca.gov for information on boating safety and the California Boater Card. If anyone has any questions about boating safety, please contact the Marine Services Unit at (925) 427-8507.

“The Tunnel Project will not save the Delta, and it probably will not save the State Water Project’s and Central Valley Project’s reliance on Delta exports either.” – letter from Restore the Delta on DEIR

 

Outlines actions needed now to invest in new sources, transform water management

Without action, state officials believe California’s water supply could diminish by up to 10% by 2040

Introduces former L.A. Mayor Villaraigosa as state’s new infrastructure czar

ANTIOCH – Hotter and drier weather conditions could reduce California’s water supply by up to 10% by the year 2040. To replace and replenish what we will lose to thirstier soils, vegetation, and the atmosphere, Governor Gavin Newsom on Thursday announced in California’s latest actions to increase water supply and adapt to more extreme weather patterns caused by climate change. Click here to read California’s Water Supply Strategy.

Thursday’s announcement at Antioch’s $110 million Brackish Desalination project follows $8 billion in state investments over the last two years to help store, recycle, de-salt and conserve the water it will need, generating enough water in the future for more than 8.4 million households by 2040.

The actions, outlined in a strategy document published by the Administration called “California’s Water Supply Strategy, Adapting to a Hotter, Drier Future” calls for investing in new sources of water supply, accelerating projects and modernizing how the state manages water through new technology.

This approach to California’s water supply management recognizes the latest science that indicates the American West is experiencing extreme, sustained drought conditions caused by hotter, drier weather. It means that a greater share of the rain and snowfall California receives will be absorbed by dry soils, consumed by thirsty plants, and evaporated into the air. This leaves less water to meet the state’s needs.

“The best science tells us that we need to act now to adapt to California’s water future. Extreme weather is a permanent fixture here in the American West and California will adapt to this new reality,” Governor Newsom said. “California is launching an aggressive plan to rebuild the way we source, store and deliver water so our kids and grandkids can continue to call California home in this hotter, drier climate.”

To help make up for the water supplies California could lose over the next two decades, the strategy prioritizes actions to capture, recycle, de-salt and conserve more water. These actions include:

• Creating storage space for up to 4 million acre-feet of water, which will allow us to capitalize on big storms when they do occur and store water for dry periods
• Recycling and reusing at least 800,000 acre-feet of water per year by 2030, enabling better and safer use of wastewater currently discharged to the ocean.
• Freeing up 500,000 acre-feet of water through more efficient water use and conservation, helping make up for water lost due to climate change.
• Making new water available for use by capturing stormwater and desalinating ocean water and salty water in groundwater basins, diversifying supplies and making the most of high flows during storm events.

These actions are identified broadly in the Newsom Administration’s Water Resilience Portfolio – the state’s master plan for water released in 2020 – but they will be expedited given the urgency of climate-driven changes. To advance the infrastructure and policies needed to adapt, the strategy enlists the help of the Legislature to streamline processes so projects can be planned, permitted and built more quickly, while protecting the environment.

Over the last three years, at the urging of the Governor, state leaders have earmarked more than $8 billion to modernize water infrastructure and management. The historic three-year, $5.2 billion investment in California water systems enacted in 2021-22 has enabled emergency drought response, improved water conservation to stretch water supplies, and enabled scores of local drought resilience projects. The 2022-23 budget includes an additional $2.8 billion for drought relief to hard-hit communities, water conservation, environmental protection for fish and wildlife and long-term drought resilience projects.

Newsom also introduced former Los Angeles Mayor and Speaker of the Assembly Antonio Villaraigosa as the state’s new infrastructure czar.

“With this influx of federal dollars, we have an incredible opportunity to rebuild California while creating quality jobs, modernizing crucial infrastructure and accelerating our clean transportation progress, benefiting communities up and down the state,” Newsom said. “Antonio has the extensive experience and relationships to deliver on this promise and bring together the many partners who will be key to our success. I look forward to his collaboration with the administration as we build up communities across California.”

Construction on Antioch’s desalination plant, located behind the city’s water treatment plant at 401 Putnam Street is expected to be completed next year, city Public Works Director John Samuelson shared following the governor’s press conference.

$24 million for clean water program

Money to restore San Francisco Bay and address impacts from climate change received a $24 million boost via the federal omnibus spending bill signed into law this week by President Biden.

The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2022 provides funds to implement the priority actions identified in the San Francisco Estuary Partnership’s Blueprint. Specifically, the money will go toward the U.S. EPA’s San Francisco Bay Area Water Quality Improvement Fund, which has focused work on removing pollutants, improving wetlands and reducing runoff.

The $24 million annual earmark is the biggest increase to the fund since it began in 2008, with a push from Sen. Dianne Feinstein. The Water Quality Improvement Fund currently receives about $5 million annually to advance wetland restoration, water quality improvement and green urban development projects.

“Thanks to the efforts of Rep. Jackie Speier and our members of Congress, the new law provides funds to implement the priority actions identified in the Estuary Blueprint,” said Caitlin Sweeney, Director of the Estuary Partnership. “This is a huge development and is critical for the long-term health of San Francisco Bay.”

With the support from the Appropriations Act, federal funding for San Francisco Bay will be on par with regional funding from sources like the Bay Area’s Measure AA, which passed in 2016 and dedicates $25 million annually to fund multi-benefit shoreline projects that protect and restore the bay.

The new law also provides a bump in funding for the National Estuary Program, bringing the San Francisco’s Estuary Partnership appropriation this year to $750,000, a $50,000 increase.

Enactment of the omnibus spending bill augments the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law passed by Congress in November 2021, which allocates approximately $5 million annually over the next five years to the Water Quality Improvement Fund and dedicates about $4.5 million over the same period to the Estuary Partnership for implementation of the Estuary Blueprint.

The San Francisco Estuary Blueprint — being updated for 2022-2027 and due out later this year — is a five-year roadmap for restoring the estuary’s chemical, physical, biological, and social-ecological processes to health. The Blueprint identifies the top actions needed for thriving habitats and wildlife, improved water quality for animals and people, increased scale and pace of climate change adaptation and planning, and healthier human and wildlife communities.

Hosted by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), the San Francisco Estuary Partnership is a collaboration of local, state and federal agencies; non-governmental organizations; and academic and business leaders working to protect and restore the San Francisco Bay-Delta Estuary. The Estuary Partnership was established in 1988 by the state of California and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under the Clean Water Act’s National Estuary Program when the San Francisco Estuary was designated as an estuary of national significance.

607-acre, 1,650-home development next to planned Thurgood Marshall Regional Park

SMD leader says motion for new trial “should be denied”

By Allen D. Payton

Last Friday, Feb. 25, 2022, attorneys representing Discovery Builders and their Faria new home development requested a new trial for the lawsuit by Save Mount Diablo, following a judge’s decision in favor of the environmental group to stop the project. As previously reported, on March 30, 2021, Save Mount Diablo filed a lawsuit challenging the City of Pittsburg’s approval of the 1,650-unit Faria project, on the ridgeline between Pittsburg and Concord. According to the agenda item documents, the master plan overlay district encompasses approximately 607 acres of land. (See related article)

The motion for a new trial was filed “on the basis that the Court’s decision is not supported by the evidence and controlling legal authorities. Specifically…that there were several portions of this Court’s February 10, 2022 Statement of Decision that may not have fully considered evidence in the administrative record.” In addition, the motion asks that the “Court vacate its Statement of Decision and enter a new decision denying SMD’s motion” and “conduct a new hearing”.  Faria project Motion for New Trial    Parsons Dec. ISO Mot for New Trial    Raskin Dec. ISO Mot for New Trial    Faria project new trial Proof of Service

A hearing date on the motion for a new trial has been set for April 14, 2022.

On the day of the decision, Save Mount Diablo issued the following press release about their legal victory:

“On February 10, 2022, the Contra Costa County Superior Court handed Save Mount Diablo a major victory in its legal challenge to the City of Pittsburg’s approval of the 1,650-unit Faria/Southwest Hills Project.

According to the ruling, the city’s environmental review was inadequate in numerous ways. Faria was proposed by Seeno companies/Discovery Builders, Inc./Faria Investors LLC on the spectacular and highly visible major ridgeline between Pittsburg and Concord and could include grading and houses visible across the ridge.

As a result, the City of Pittsburg is required to overturn approvals for the project and correct environmental review. The city and Seeno/Discovery Builders will also be required to pay Save Mount Diablo’s legal fees.

It remains to be seen whether the developers, Discovery Builders, Inc. and Faria Land Investors, LLC, or the City of Pittsburg will appeal the decision.

The Pittsburg City Council—then-Mayor Merl Craft; then–Vice Mayor Holland Barrett White; and Councilmembers Shanelle Scales-Preston, Juan Antonio Banales, and Jelani Killings—all voted to approve the proposal in February 2021. (The mayor and vice-mayor designations rotate among the councilmembers.) They ignored hundreds of letters and public comments that opposed the project. Save Mount Diablo filed a lawsuit challenging the project’s approval in March 2021.

If the project had moved forward, it would have meant the development of a major, new residential subdivision on 606 acres of ridgeline and hillside grazing land in what is currently unincorporated Contra Costa County, immediately south of the City of Pittsburg.

The biologically rich site supports sensitive wildlife species and rare plants and is in one of the most visible and most environmentally constrained areas of the county. The Faria project would have fragmented open space and damaged wildlife corridors.

The proposed housing development would have changed the beautiful green hills forever by annexing the property to the City of Pittsburg and locating 1,650 new residences far from jobs, transit, and services.

The Faria project would have also impacted the new East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD) Thurgood Marshall Regional Park – Home of the Port Chicago 50 at the Faria site’s southwestern edge, formerly part of the Concord Naval Weapons Station. Save Mount Diablo and its partners advocated for the creation of this new park over many years. The Faria project would have been located directly above the new park on a ridgeline, degrading views from surrounding areas.

The Contra Costa Superior Court ruled that the City of Pittsburg’s environmental review of the project was inadequate in four major ways:

1. It failed to analyze any impacts that would results from the 150 accessory dwelling units that were added by the City of Pittsburg at the last minute. This is important because the number of units affects every part of environmental review from traffic to water supply to schools, etc. and will make correcting the environmental review complicated;
2. It failed to include a baseline description of biological resources that could be impacted by the project, specifically special-status plant species;
3. It failed to consider the water supply impacts of adding 1,650 new housing units in the area, which is especially important given years of drought and increasing fire danger; and
4. It failed to adequately disclose or mitigate the project’s air quality impacts, including greenhouse gas impacts, without which development will continue to make the climate crisis much worse.

“The court’s decision says to developers: ‘You don’t get to kick the can down the road. You have to do a thorough analysis of your project’s impacts before you lock in project approvals,’” said Winter King, Save Mount Diablo’s attorney from Shute, Mihaly & Weinberger. “The court got it right.”

The court’s ruling means that the City of Pittsburg’s approval of the project is null and void.

The court also noted that additional impacts—such as geologic hazard impacts resulting from grading and filling, and impacts on streams and agricultural lands—would need to be addressed in more detail.

Save Mount Diablo Executive Director Ted Clement said, “Throughout the East Bay, residents have worked hard to protect our ridges and views, flora and fauna, and to defend our parks. In this case that was just decided in our favor, Save Mount Diablo had to stand up against some very powerful interests to help further the work of protecting these treasured resources, which add so much to our collective quality of life.”

“Although I’ve worked for Save Mount Diablo on this issue, I’m also a Concord resident,” said Juan Pablo Galván Martínez, Save Mount Diablo’s Senior Land Use Manager. “This project infuriated me as an open-space lover, a wildlife enthusiast, and someone who is deeply worried and taking action to stop catastrophic climate change. Since this affects both cities, I want both city councils to work together to protect the hills and ridgeline.”

“This is a major victory for Pittsburg’s hills,” stated Save Mount Diablo Land Conservation Director Seth Adams. “Open space, habitat for wildlife, and the community’s scenic views have won the day, and poorly planned development will not go forward, for now. We are very happy with the court’s decision.”

“On the other hand,” said Adams, “while our victory is costly for the city and Seeno/Discovery Builders in time and money, it does not stop the project forever. After correcting environmental documents, the Pittsburg City Council can approve Seeno’s huge project again if they choose. But now they have a second chance to make it better by protecting the ridgeline and neighboring regional park. We don’t have to argue about protecting ridgelines in other cities. The Pittsburg City Council should do the right thing.”

Save Mount Diablo Says Motion for New Trial “Should Be Denied”

Asked about the motion for a new trial, Save Mount Diablo Executive Director, Ted Clement responded, “Regarding the Seeno companies/Pittsburg request for a new trial, the Court has already rejected their arguments for reasons fully set forth in its decision. Their Motion for New Trial does not question the adequacy of the administrative record on which the Court properly based its decision (and which the City itself prepared) or suggest there was any other irregularity or unfairness in the hearing. Instead, they seek a second bite of the apple.”

“Their Motion reargues issues that were fully briefed and addressed in the Court’s Decision,” he continued. “They also seek to introduce irrelevant and improper extra-record evidence, violating black letter law that CEQA actions must be decided on the record that was before the agency when it made its decision.”

“Because their Motion provides no basis for this Court to order a new trial solely on the issues decided adverse to them, it should be denied,” Clement concluded.