Hears from Save the Yard supporters about proposed downtown park and event center

By Nick Goodrich

On Tuesday, December 13th, the Antioch City Council held its first meeting with a new Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem.

As a result of the November elections, Dr. Sean Wright oversaw his first council meeting, having unseated Wade Harper as Antioch’s Mayor, and Lamar Thorpe replaced Lori Ogorchock as Mayor Pro Tem. Wilson was re-elected to the council, and Ogorchock and Tony Tiscareno continue in their roles as council members.

Wright appeared comfortable and confident throughout the meeting, as the newly formed city council oversaw a number of public hearings, heard from residents about the historic Antioch Lumber Company lot, and grappled with the extending restrictions on marijuana within city limits.

Public Comments

The ongoing saga of the city’s deal to build townhomes on the site of downtown Antioch’s Beede Lumber Yard continued into the new council, as “Save the Yard” supporters once again showed up in force to protest the city’s decision to forego a park and event center on the site.

The council members were also nominated and appointed to various assignments representing the council on city committees and the city on regional committees.

Hoping to convince the new Council to reverse the direction of its predecessor, Leigh Ballesteros of Celebrate Antioch asked for the opportunity to privately build and manage the proposed park and event center for two years.

Celebrate Antioch’s goal, to prove to the Council that a new event center could be built and maintained with limited costs to the city, would require Antioch to cancel its deal with City Ventures, which currently gives the developer exclusive negotiation rights for the former Beede parcel.

Ballesteros noted that Celebrate Antioch already has much of the necessary funding for its project, and a plan in place to ensure its success.

Joy Motts, Celebrate Antioch’s Treasurer and Fundraising Chair, read from the City’s General Plan, which designates Antioch’s downtown waterfront as a possible “town square” and gathering place.

“Fulfill the wishes of the people you represent,” she told the council. “It’s time to talk about the Antioch Rivertown Town Square.”

Rick Stadtlander, Save the Yard’s Director of Fundraising, also pointed out that townhomes would detract from Antioch’s beautiful waterfront view.

Stadtlander spoke of his two grown sons, who have become disenchanted with Antioch and intend to leave, as an example of Antioch’s struggles in making the city an attractive and desirable place to live.

“The people don’t support homes on the Lumber Yard,” he said. “A park and event center will attract many more people, and their wallets.”

Interim Urgency Marijuana Ordinance Extended

The first public hearing overseen by the new Council involved the city’s policy on marijuana use, after the passing of Proposition 64 in November.

The council’s initial ordinance, adopted on November 8th, put a freeze on the status of all non-medical marijuana use within Antioch for a period of 45 days, while the city decided how to proceed on its marijuana policy, going forward.

On Tuesday, they chose to extend the interim ordinance for a period of 10 months and 15 days, with an expiration date slated for October 2017.

The continuation of the ordinance extends the ban on marijuana dispensaries and deliveries, prohibits outdoor cultivation for personal use, and essentially allows for no commercial activities involving the drug until Prop 64 takes full effect in January of 2018.

Under Prop 64, cities cannot prohibit indoor cultivation for personal use, but can “reasonably regulate” it. The Council directed city staff to explore ways to regulate indoor growing without outright discouraging or banning it, which is now illegal under California state law.

Despite a spirited discussion, the Council was united in its sentiment that recreational marijuana should be postponed in Antioch for as long as possible.

The council called on Antioch Police Chief Allan Cantando during the hearing to share his opinion.

Cantando was firmly of the opinion that Antioch should hold off on allowing non-medical marijuana until required to by state law in 2018. He cited a potential increase in crime as a major reason, in a city already plagued by a high crime rate and understaffed Police Department.

Cantando was also concerned by the difficulties he believed other states were experiencing after legalizing recreational marijuana.

“I think that we should postpone this for as long as we can,” he told the council.

Tiscareno and Thorpe, while not entirely in support of legalization, did note that most voting precincts in Antioch showed heavy support for Prop 64, with 65% of residents voting in favor of the measure.

Tiscareno also raised the question of increased tax revenue as a result of regulations, which the city could be missing out on for the next 10 months if the current ordinance stands.

Several Antioch residents stepped up to share their opinions, as well.

Mark Jordan, a real estate broker in Antioch, suggested that the city add cultivation to the rental registration process, and can perhaps add fees to growers. Brian Eloff noted Colorado’s $2.3 billion increase in tax revenue since it legalized recreational marijuana in 2012.

Ogorchock was the most firmly opposed to legalization, and stated it was “a quality of life issue” for Antioch residents.

Wright weighed in as well, calling it a “complicated issue” and electing to stand with Chief Cantando’s opinion for the time being.

A 4/5 vote from Council was required to prolong the ordinance, but wasn’t needed as they voted unanimously in favor of extending it.

The City can revisit the ordinance and choose to end it at any time until it expires in 2017.

By Allen Payton

In front of a standing-room-only crowd inside the Antioch City Council Chambers, Dr. Sean Wright and Lamar Thorpe were given their oaths of office to become the city’s new mayor and newest council member during ceremonies, Thursday night. They joined re-elected Councilwoman Monica Wilson who was sworn in to her second term on the council, and Council Members Tony Tiscareno and Lori Ogorchock, on the dais. As the council candidate with the most votes in the race, Thorpe was then unanimously voted in as the new mayor pro tem, replacing Ogorchock who served in the position for the past two year, and then the two switched seats, placing him to Wright’s right. (View the Facebook live video of the reorganization by clicking here).

The evening began with the outgoing council’s vote to accept the results of the election, followed by farewell speeches by both Councilwoman Mary Rocha and Mayor Wade Harper, as well as speeches by their fellow council members. They were each also presented with a variety of presentations and plaques from the Antioch School Board, and representatives of State Senator Steve Glazer, Congressman Jerry McNerney and Assemblyman Jim Frazier, as well as First 5, a non-profit organization that serves young children in Antioch and the county.

Both Antioch City Clerk Arne Simonsen and City Treasurer Donna Conley were sworn into their positions, again, having each been re-elected without opposition.

Mayor Wright Takes Office

A standing ovation greeted Wright, as he walked to the podium for his oath of office, which was administered by his uncle and current Mayor of Oakley, Kevin Romick.

“Don’t cry, Sean” some ladies in the audience said.

“Yeah,” shouted supporter Kip Stephens from the back of the room.

Following his oath, Wright said, “I just want to thank all of you guys for coming.”

“This family I have I love dearly and I know they’re going to be with me,” he continued. “I look out there and think of how many of you have become my family. That’s what we need to be as Antioch, a family.”

After Wright took his seat at the dais, Ogorchock welcomed him to the council and said, “I’m here to help you in moving this community moving forward.”

Tiscareno offered his congratulations to Wright.

“I’ve seen some close elections and landslides we were able to see both in this election,” he stated. “Antioch spoke and want to see some change.”

Wright then offered his thoughts in his new position as the community’s leader.

“Thank you all for coming out tonight,” he said. He then mentioned having “the opportunity to sit down with the council members, today” to discuss working together and city business.

Wright used an analogy of the rainy weather which greeted him after waking up, yesterday morning.

“It’s been raining and drizzly all day,” he said, but then interrupted his thought to say “Mayor Harper thank you so much for your service and Mary Rocha, you as well.”

Back to his analogy, Wright said about the rain,“It cleans things. It gives a fresh start and that’s what I see in Antioch. What an opportunity we have as a city to become one.”

“I personally am tired of friends moving away,” he continued on a previous theme. “I want to see people choose to stay here. Where people…work, worship and play all in one place. A school system that we can be proud of that is a college going atmosphere.”

“Let the rain come and the spring come up and make Antioch where we want to live,” Wright said, continuing his weather analogy.

He then said he approached his new position with “nervous trepidation and optimistic excitement,” recognizing that “65% of you didn’t vote for me” but that “65% of you voted for change” and mentioning an election he thought would never end.

“I ask you to confirm me as your mayor with your prayers,”

He thanked his supporters which were diverse and then offered to quotes about service.

“I will be a mayor of all the people,” he said and then offered a quote from Ghandi about service to others.

“The best way to find yourself is to lose yourself in the service of others,” Wright shared. He also said, “Service to others is the rent you pay for your room on earth,” quoting Muhammad Ali.

“Truth is the glue the holds government together,” he then stated. “I look forward to serving and to help shed light and bring us together.”

Wright spoke of how he will speak with “candor” and that “honesty is the best policy in the end.”

“Friends and neighbors a change is coming to Antioch,” he stated emphatically. “In the beginning I asked you to pray for me. In closing I ask for your prayers. I pray for the wisdom of Solomon.”

“I will serve Antioch with all my heart mind and strength,” Wright concluded.

Before the new mayor spoke, both Thorpe and Wilson gave their acceptance speeches.

Mayor Pro Tem Thorpe Sworn In

Thorpe was administered his oath of office by Diane Burgis, who was elected to the Board of Supervisors in November, with his wife Pat and their daughter Kennedy by his side. Burgis gave a high-five to Thorpe at the conclusion.

In introducing his family, he got choked up while trying to thank Pat.

“I want to thank her because she was the one who encouraged me to run this year,” Thorpe stated and then said to her, “Thank you for giving me the strength and encouragement.”

“I want to thank the current city council for their hard work,” he added then thanked his friends and family.

As he was heading to the dais, Ogorchock, who as the Mayor Pro Tem at the time, was running the meeting, after Harper had stepped down from his position, said “I got to say that’s the first time I’ve seen Lamar speechless,” to laughter from him and the audience.

After being seated in his new place, next to the mayor, Thorpe offered his formal thoughts about the election, saying “I was surprised by how many people voted for me,” and mentioning that on Election Night all he could say was, “Wow.”

He thanked County Supervisor-elect Diane Burgis and then gave thanks “to my mom who I know is watching over me today. She passed away a year ago.”

“She and my dad came here from Mexico. They took in foster kids. I was their very first.

“I want to make sure I represent the good people of Antioch not the special interests,” Thorpe stated. “Because this is your government.”

He then thanked his campaign manager and volunteers.

“There’s a lot of work that we’re going to have to get done,” he continued. “There are some tough challenges coming up in the next few years.”

He then thanked “the Archuletas (Keith and Iris) who have been invaluable,” and former Antioch Mayor Don Freitas.

“I want to focus on transparency and accountability,” Thorpe said. “We want to engage the community.”

He then spoke of his concerns with housing growth and the need for jobs in Antioch.

“ABAG (the Association of Bay Area Governments) has continued to fail Eastern Contra Costa County,” Thorp stated. “They’ve projected more houses and fewer jobs. That’s not sustainable. We must demand high quality jobs.”

He also spoke about the need for “smart growth and transit oriented development.”

“I’m not afraid to point it out because I don’t go along to get along,” Thorpe added.

He finished by saying he looked forward to working with the council and the community.

Councilwoman Wilson Takes Oath for a Second Time

Wilson was given the oath of office by her brother, Terrance, with their mother and Uncle Bob standing by his side.

She then mentioned how “Four years ago when I was sworn in it happened so fast and so quickly I forgot to invite my Uncle Bob.” This time she did and he was there for the ceremony. She also mentioned her “older sister Melony is watching live from New York City.”

After taking her seat on the dais, Wilson shared her thoughts on and thanks for her re-election.

“I want to say thank you Antioch for reelecting me back to the city council,” she said. ‘I do want to thank someone who is here in spirit I want to thank Councilman Gary Agopian.”

“I want to thank Don Freitas for your advice, words of wisdom,” Wilson continued.

She thanked a friend who told her during the campaign to “suck it up and get it done.”

“I want to thank my mom,” Wilson said, choking back tears. “Whose always been there for me…even when times are hard. She walked for me, with me in the rain and the sunny days. She fell…and even got bit by a dog.”

“This is Antioch and a city we need to be proud of. We’ve been divided. We need to let go of that nonsense. Antioch still has challenges,” she continued and then spoke about the economic opportunities the city has

One of us is not as smart as all of us. We come together to make this city great,” Wilson concluded.

Benediction

Dr. Lamont Francies of the Delta Bay Church of Christ in Antioch ended the proceedings by offering the following benediction:

“Almighty God in Heaven, it is with humble hearts that we approach your throne of grace, you are the God who sits on high and looks down low. We give thanks to you Lord, for you are good, your mercy endureth forever. Tonight, we rejoice in the city’s peaceful transfer of power. This city, incorporated in 1872,  was named after the biblical town of Antioch. A city noted for it’s cultural diversity, its trade and commerce, a refuge city for all seeking a better life. As we stand here on the dawn of a new day in Antioch, let us live up to that legacy and practice what we have been positioned to do. We are the light of the world, a city on a hill that cannot be hidden. For we know unless the Lord watches over the city, the watchmen stand guard in vain.

Bless this gateway to the Delta, to be a gateway to peace, partnerships and prosperity.

Let us put behind the politics of the past and look to the possibilities of the future. Help us to see the invisible so that we can do the impossible. Make this city one, as we strive for unity and not uniformity. Tonight we forsake who we are for the possibility of who we can become. Give our new mayor, Dr. Wright the wisdom to lead us with humility, the courage to lead us with integrity, and the compassion to lead us with charity. Bless and protect him, his wife Lani and their five children…place a hedge around their home and a pledge in their hearts.

When the city was sick Lord, you sent us a doctor, but we know that before he was elected, he was selected, raised up by you for such a time as this. You not only gave him sight but insight, You gave him a vision. The bible says without a vision, the people perish. So together like Moses we lift up his hands, for we do not know what the future holds but we do know who holds the future.

Now unto him that is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think, according to the power that worketh in us. I pray this in the name of the one that’s called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, the Everlasting Father and the Prince of Peace, let us all together say  Amen.”

Wright then adjourned the meeting, and then along with Thorpe and others attended the Antioch Chamber of Commerce Chairman’s Mixer underway at Tailgaters, where they celebrated with friends and supporters. Wilson held a gathering at her home with family, friends and supporters.

Please check back later for additional photos, speeches and public comments.

 

 

But, City Attorney says legal and financial ramifications if changes in contracts are attempted by new council

By Allen Payton

Last week the Antioch City Council voted unanimously to give all city staff increases in pay and benefits for the next five years. This week, City Manager Steve Duran admitted that if the city’s half-cent sales tax, known as Measure C, isn’t renewed four years from now, the city will face “massive layoffs” in police and Code Enforcement.

Duran responded to questions to him and the council members, about the new contracts and their timing after the election, even though all but one had expired prior to the election.

In an email Duran wrote, “Contract negotiations are very complex and time consuming. They took how long they took. It’s not unusual in any city for labor negotiations to go beyond the term of the existing agreements.”

He then provided an answer to the question of what the council’s plans are should Measure C not be renewed or if the city’s revenue hasn’t increased enough by then to cover the amount received from Measure C.

“As for the impacts of the new labor agreements on the City’s finances, the increases are pretty close to what we projected in our last budget and amount to a very small impact compared to the projected annual Measure C revenue of $7 million an year,” he responded. “The bottom line is that if Measure C is not extended, massive cuts will again have to be made to staffing, especially Police and Code Enforcement because that is where we have made significant increases in staffing since the passage of Measure C.”

The contracts approved by the Council are only tentative and won’t be finalized until early next year.

In the staff report on the contracts, it states, “If the City Council adopts the Tentative Agreement, the parties will continue to prepare an MOU to memorialize and replace the Tentative Agreement. The existing MOU will continue as modified by the terms of the Tentative Agreement until the MOU is completed. When completed, the MOU will be submitted to City Council for approval and adoption.”

When asked when the MOU’s would be placed on a Council agenda for a vote, Nickie Mastay, the City’s Administrative Services Director, wrote, “This will be a January – February timeframe. Since there are five Memorandums of Understanding, we are continuing to confer with the unions to ensure accuracy of the Memorandums of Understanding.”

Asked if a new council majority could renegotiate the contracts to reduce their length to three or four years, or if they have to just vote down the MOU’s, City Attorney Michael Vigilia said, “That’s something they can certainly discuss with their labor negotiators. I don’t know. I’ll have to look at the MOU a little closer. Usually, if you want to reopen the negotiations it’s because there’s been a change. Perhaps new council members would be considered a change.”

“That’s really more of a policy issue. There’s not really a legal issue,” he continued. “I can’t think of any legal issues off the top of my head. We’ll cross that bridge and deal with legal issues if there’s a council policy.”

“It’s something that labor negotiators would have to take up in closed session,” Vigilia stated. “New council members have the prerogative to say what they want about the MOU’s. If they can get a third council member to go along with them, then we would talk with the labor negotiators.”

“There are all sorts of policy issues that need to be worked through. It’s really more of a policy thing,” he added.

UPDATE: However, in emails received later, Vigilia backpedaled on his earlier comments.

“To follow up on our conversation…while it’s true that this is primarily a policy issue, there are also significant legal risks associated with a City Council potentially deciding to attempt to re-negotiate a tentative labor agreement that has already been approved by both a union and the City Council,” he said.

Duran also responded with similar comments.

“The tentative agreements contain all business terms that were negotiated in good faith by the parties over many months,” Duran wrote. “They constitute, in writing, the business terms that the MOUs must contain, and have been ratified by the unions and approved by the City Council. Nickie and I have consulted with our professional labor negotiator and our City Attorney on this matter. Trying to change any of the business terms to which the parties have agreed is wrought with rather unpleasant legal and financial dangers to the City.

Vigilia, Duran and Mastay were then asked if since the agreements are tentative and not finalized until the MOU’s are voted on, then how can there be legal ramifications if a new council majority wants to reopen negotiations and do something such as shorten the period?

Vigilia responded with, “To put it simply, the parties have reached a meeting of the minds as to the major terms of the MOU’s and each party has relied on the representations of the other party in deciding to agree to the terms. Once there is a meeting of the minds there is an enforceable legal obligation which would be very risky to break. The City, at the very least, risks breach of contract claims being asserted against it. Additionally, to attempt to renegotiate the terms exposes the City to potential charges of unfair conduct from the Public Employee Relations Board, which enforces collective bargaining laws covering public employees. This exposes the City to potential fines. As Steve and I stated, there are significant legal ramifications.”

The new council member, Lamar Thorpe and possibly a new mayor will begin their terms on Tuesday, December 13 following an oath of office ceremony expected that night. The final vote count in the Mayor’s race is expected to be provided by the County Elections office, tomorrow, Friday, December 3 by 5:00 p.m.

By Allen Payton

At last week’s Antioch School Board meeting an attempt was made by Trustee Fernando Navarro to place an urgency item on the agenda, regarding the scheduling of meetings for the required public hearing and final vote for Rocketship Education’s charter school petition. Both of his attempts during the meeting were denied by Board President Diane Gibson-Gray in violation of the state’s Ralph M. Brown Act Open Meeting law.

Navarro’s efforts were blasted on social media by faculty and staff of the district, writing such things as how the meeting was difficult to watch and how they wished the meetings had been televised so the public could see how bad he was.

Yet, it was Gibson-Gray who was wrong in how she handled things. Navarro, one of the newest members of the Board and only serving in his first year in office, was actually the one who was doing things properly.

His first attempt at making the urgency item motion was during the discussion of the minutes from the previous meeting, was a bit awkward, but allowable. Gibson-Gray pointed out to him that it was not the right time for his motion, even though Trustee Alonzo Terry had seconded the motion and no other motion including one to approve the minutes had been made. Yet, it was in the minutes from the previous Board meeting on October 12th, that it was discovered a vote by the Board at that meeting on receiving the Rocketship charter petition, did not include the dates discussed for the public hearing and final vote.

So, Gibson-Gray could and should have allowed Navarro’s motion at that time, especially since it was seconded and no other motion was on the table.

A discussion, about the Rocketship charter petition meetings, was held at the October 12th meeting and it was understood that November 2nd was the date proposed by district staff for the public hearing and November 28th for the final vote, and at least verbally agreed to by Board members, including Gibson-Gray. This reporter included the dates in the article about that night’s meeting.

However, in an email response to questions sent to her following the meeting, last week, Superintendent Stephanie Anello claims the meeting dates were not included in the motion during the meeting on October 12th.

“No dates were agreed to at a previous meeting,” she wrote.

Therefore, with “the clock ticking” as Trustee Walter Ruehlig mentioned in his email response to questions of Gibson-Gray and the rest of the Board members, the matter was urgent. That’s because once the Board had received the charter petition, they had 30 days to set a public hearing and 60 days within which to schedule the final vote.

Yet, even after the vote on the minutes from the previous meeting was taken, Gibson-Gray didn’t immediately bring Navarro’s effort to make his urgency agenda item motion back to the table for discussion, as she should have. When he did attempt to make his motion, later in the meeting, she again denied him, being told by district staff that it violated the Brown Act.

Instead, the Board scheduled a special meeting for last Friday at 4:00 p.m. to discuss the matter of the Rocketship charter petition meetings for the public hearing and final vote. At that meting, the board approved the public hearing be set for Wednesday, November 9th and the final vote on December 7th.

Asked why Navarro’s urgency item couldn’t have been placed on the agenda on Wednesday night’s meeting, Anello responded, “Navarro wanted to discuss the issue tonight but the item was not agendized nor did he request that it be placed on the agenda prior to tonight’s Board Meeting. The Board is conducting the public’s business so the public must always be afforded the opportunity to provide input on the topics contained on the agenda. Since the public was unaware that Mr. Navarro wanted to discuss the item because it was not agendized, discussing it last night would have been a violation of the open meeting laws as outlined in the Ralph Brown Act.”

However, both Anello and Gibson-Gray, as were those who wrote against Navarro’s efforts on social media, were wrong.

Urgency Items Are Allowed

The fact is the Brown Act does allow for urgency items to be placed on an agenda during a meeting, as happens periodically at Antioch City Council meetings. They require a few things. First, that the matter meets the narrow definition of an “emergency situation”, with one meaning being that it arose after the meeting agenda was set. Second it requires a 2/3’s vote of members, which means four of the five members of the school board have to approve the urgency item.

According to a guide on the Brown Act, published by the League of California Cities, “The Brown Act generally prohibits any action or discussion of items not on the posted agenda. However, there are three specific situations in which a legislative body can act on an item not on the agenda:

• When a majority decides there is an “emergency situation” (as defined for emergency meetings);
• When two-thirds of the members present (or all members if less than two-thirds are present) determine there is a need for immediate action and the need to take action “came to the attention of the local agency subsequent to the agenda being posted.” This exception requires a degree of urgency. Further, an item cannot be considered under this provision if the legislative body or the staff knew about the need to take immediate action before the agenda was posted. A new need does not arise because staff forgot to put an item on the agenda or because an applicant missed a deadline; or
• When an item appeared on the agenda of, and was continued from, a meeting held not more than five days earlier.

The exceptions are narrow, as indicated by this list. The first two require a specific determination by the legislative body. That determination can be challenged in court and, if unsubstantiated, can lead to invalidation of an action.

A legitimate immediate need can be acted upon even though not on the posted agenda by following a two-step process:

First, make two determinations: 1) that there is an immediate need to take action, and 2) that the need arose after the posting of the agenda. The matter is then placed on the agenda.

Second, discuss and act on the added agenda item.”

10/31 10:44 AM UPDATE: In an email response from Anello, she wrote, “You are correct that exceptions can be made to discuss a non-agendized item, but the scope of the exception is very limited as stated below. No emergency situation existed as evidenced by the fact that the BOE met 48 hours after the meeting and the issue was resolved. The purpose of a Special Meeting (distinct from an Emergency Meeting) is to discuss or take action on an item prior to the next Regularly scheduled BOE Meeting. I think the following statement from below sums it up nicely, ‘The prudent course is to place an item on the agenda for the next meeting and not risk invalidation.’”

10/31/16 3:10 PM UPDATE: An email was sent to Anello with the following questions: Who is the school board’s parliamentarian? Is it you? Is it the district’s attorney? Was the attorney in attendance on Wednesday night to advise President Gibson-Gray on the matter of Navarro’s urgency item? If not who made the determination that it wasn’t allowed?

Anello responded, “The Board’s President is the parliamentarian. The District’s attorney was not present at the regularly scheduled meeting.”

Yet, according to the National Association of Parliamentarians, a parliamentarian is to be someone who “is an expert in interpreting and applying the “Rules of Order” for meetings.  A parliamentarian’s main function is to give advice on parliamentary procedure to the president, officers, committees, and members of a group or organization. Parliamentarians also have knowledge of the nomination and election process, which can be of great assistance in close or difficult elections.”

The Board President who chairs the meeting, can’t effectively or objectively hold both roles.

Navarro’s Matter Was an Emergency Situation

Because Fernando’s motion was about adding an item to the agenda after it was discovered that the minutes did not reflect a vote on the schedule of meetings for the Rocketship charter in the motion and action by the Board at the previous meeting, after the agenda was set and distributed, and because the matter included the need for setting the public hearing prior to the next scheduled regular board meeting, it can easily be argued that the matter was one of emergency.

Plus, since the Board subsequently held a special board meeting to discuss the matter, just two days later, it was definitely a matter of urgency, and thus another argument to support it being an emergency item for being placed on Wednesday night’s agenda.

Gibson-Gray is now serving in her eighth year on the school board, and she previously served on the City of Antioch Planning Commission. Yet, it appeared she didn’t understand the Brown Act or how to run a meeting, and prevented Navarro, as a Board member – whom she voted to appoint – from making his motion and doing what he thought was necessary to properly represent the public.

This is the second time Gibson-Gray operated outside of the bounds of proper procedure for running a school board meeting. Earlier this year, during the matter of hiring the new superintendent, she was going to allow Navarro to offer his comments after the vote. This writer had to make a point of order and explain that Robert’s Rules of Order, under which the Board operates its meetings, does not allow discussion after a vote is taken. The proper procedure is a motion is made and seconded, discussion is held and a vote is taken. Then the agenda item is completed with no more discussion allowed.

There has been a concern that there was an effort to postpone the Rocketship charter petition vote to a date after the new board members will take office, following the November 8th election. When asked if staff was attempting to make that happen, Anello simply replied, “No.”

Board Member Responds

In response to questions about Navarro’s urgency item effort, why Gibson-Gray denied it, if they were they not aware of the Brown Act allowing them, and why they held a public Board meeting during a week day, twice emailed to all of the Board members, Ruehlig, who is the Board Vice President, was the only one to respond.

“Because we had future meetings and future agenda times still ahead of us on that night’s agenda and because I was determined come hell or high water to stay with the original direction, as was recommended by Staff, and given a nod of consent by Trustees, to calendar two public meetings before the Board changed composition I thought an emergency inclusion for that meeting might not be necessary,” he wrote. “That said, there is a good argument to be made that since it was a lingering ‘confusion’ from the past meeting and since by not clearing it up we would have to call another meeting it may have been an emergency.

“Certainly the clock was ticking on a public hearing and time was already lost,” Ruehlig continued. “Emergency or not, there is no doubt in my mind that we could have spared energy and avoided the messiness of:  a) all that meeting commotion; b) the irritating inconvenience of coming back yet for a meeting yet again when we thought direction was clearly set on who was to vote on the application; c) loss of citizen attendance due to short notice of a special meeting and one in the afternoon all by inserting right then and there.”

The Board members and Anello were also asked who the parliamentarian is, if it’s the school district’s attorney and if their attorney was present at last Wednesday’s meeting, and who made the determination that Navarro’s motion was not allowed. They were also asked why does it make sense to hold a meeting to discuss the matter at a time when most of the public couldn’t attend, instead of placing it on the agenda during a public meeting when the public is actually there to witness the discussion and possibly give input before the vote, and how is that keeping with the spirit of the Brown Act Open Meeting law. No responses were received as of the time of publishing of this report.

Please check back later for any updates.

 

 

Applications now available to fill vacancy on Governing Board by Provisional Appointment-Trustee Ward IV

The Contra Costa Community College District (District) is accepting applications to serve as an appointed member for Ward IV of the Governing Board until the next regularly scheduled election for Governing Board members in 2018. The vacancy was created by the recent death of Trustee John Nejedly.

Applicants must be registered voters and residents of Ward IV, which includes Blackhawk, Byron, Danville, Diablo, Discovery Bay, San Ramon, and parts of Alamo, Antioch, Brentwood, Clayton, and Concord.

The Governing Board gave approval at its October 18, 2016, special meeting, to fill this position by provisional appointment instead of the more costly option of an election. Applications are being sought from candidates who have the ability and time to fulfill the responsibilities of being a member of the Board, which includes:

• full participation in the work of the Board by attending all Board meetings and key college and District events, studying and discussing policy issues, and participating in trustee education programs;
• knowledge of the communities served by the colleges and willingness to act on behalf of and for the benefit of those communities;
• commitment to community colleges and their missions; understanding of educational, social, and economic policy issues;
• balancing the needs of many diverse groups; being able to build consensus; and
• contribution to effective Board functioning and supporting the authority of the Board as a whole.

Those interested in applying shall complete and submit a cover letter, application form, resume, and no more than three letters of reference by 4:30 p.m., November 15, 2016, to the Human Resources Department, c/o Mr. Eugene Huff, Contra Costa Community College District, 500 Court Street, Martinez, CA, 94553.  All forms are located on the District website at www.4cd.edu, or can be picked up at the District Office.

A special Governing Board meeting will be held on November 29, 2016, to review all applications and determine persons to be interviewed.  Another special Governing Board meeting will be held on December 1, 2016, to interview three finalists.  If a third special meeting is needed, it will be held on December 5, 2016.

The goal will be to administer the oath of office for the new member at the regular Governing Board meeting on Wednesday, December 14, 2016, at 6:00 p.m.

For more information, please contact the Communications and Community Relations department at (925) 229-6823.

Honored for Work on Resolution Rectifying Mistreatment of African-American Servicemen in WWII and for Calling Attention to Veterans’ Suicides

Sacramento, CA – Sen. Steve Glazer, D-Orinda, was named 2016 California Legislator of the Year by the AMVETS Department of California for his support of U.S. Veterans and his commitment to ensuring their concerns are heard.

The AMVETS honor is awarded to legislators “who have gone the extra mile to support California’s veterans and their families.”

Glazer authored SR 69, which called on the President of the United States to exonerate 50 African-American U.S. Navy Seamen and overturn their unjust convictions for mutiny. Glazer also won praise for bringing attention to the issue of 22 veteran suicides per day by participating in a challenge of doing 22 pushups each day for 22 days throughout his district and in Sacramento.

“Upon taking office, Senator Glazer immediately supported veterans by signing onto a legislative letter regarding funding for country veterans service officers, even before he had hired a staff,” said Lorraine Plass, the legislative chairperson of Team AMVETS. “Since then, he has enthusiastically fought to bring awareness to the epidemic of veteran suicides.”

Glazer said he’s been honored to work on behalf of veterans.

“These men and women deserve our respect and gratitude for serving our country and putting their lives on the line to keep our freedoms intact,” Glazer said. “I want veterans to know that I have their back and will stand up for them at every opportunity.”

 

Discusses revisions to policy on Limits of Board Member Authority

By Allen Payton

At their regular meeting on Wednesday, October 12, 2016, the Antioch School Board voted unanimously to receive the petition by Rocketship Education, to establish a public, non-profit charter school in Antioch. The board also dealt with a recently adopted policy believed to be restrictive of board members. Plus the board heard complaints from the public of police interrogations of students, the negative comments about the school district and a vote against Prop. 55 by Trustee Fernando Navarro.

On September 30th, Rocketship presented a charter school petition to Antioch Superintendent Stephanie Anello for a K-5 school. Once the board received the petition, it started both a 30-day timeline for a public hearing and a 60-day timeline to make a decision to approve or deny the charter, according to a report by Chris Learned, Associate Superintendent for Business and Operations.

He said the time-frame was “a little difficult because of the holidays and election.”

“If this board holds a public hearing it only seems right that the current board makes the decision,” Learned stated.

So the Board and staff settled on Wednesday, November 2nd for the public hearing and Monday, November 28th for the vote. Staff is proposing the hearing be held at Deer Valley High because of the capacity.

Three speakers, including two teachers, spoke against the charter for Rocketship, including one, Sara Savacool, who, along with others in the audience, was wearing a yellow T-shirt with the words “No Rocketship” across the front.

“Charter schools are a complicated issue,” she said. “There’s a lot of law. There are different types. You really need to do your homework.”

Savacool mentioned “corporate interests, profit and a very stripped down education for our students.”

“We fought them at Mt. Diablo (Unified School District),” she continued. That board “voted 5-0 against.”

“I’m very disappointed they’re bringing their brand of second-rate education to our community,” Savacool concluded.

Ken Kent, a fifth grade teacher at Kimball Elementary School in Antioch, was the next to speak.

“Antioch has some very good grassroots and research-supported (charter) schools versus a cost analysis model,” he stated. Then he mentioned who are on Rocketship’s board of directors, including one person with an education degree, a financial analyst and for-profit education executives.

Kent said students in Rocketship schools spend “a significant portion of their day behind a (computer) screen.”

“This is not a moral thing to do,” he continued. “Rocketship has had some numbers of improved API scores. But they haven’t held true” and then asked about “how much we’re having to give up for that?” and “Why are we pressing this so fast, now?”

Before the third public speaker shared his thoughts, Marie Gill, the Bay Area Regional Director for Rocketship spoke, offering her own background and local connection, and that she was “coming back to Antioch after 20 years.”

Rocketship has “over 6,000 parents from the Bay Area with students in our schools,” Gill stated. “We’re happy to host you at one of our schools. We want you to be informed as board members.”

She said “we’d like to extend an invitation to tour our facility and school in San Jose.”

Willie Mims, a regular critic of the Antioch School District, representing the NAACP East County Branch and the Pittsburg Black Parents, was the last to speak during public comments.

“I and Rocketship have crossed paths over the past five years,” he stated. “Is there a need? You have some serious issues, here.”

Then referring to test scores, Mims said “they are atrocious. Charter schools are circling. You only have to blame yourself for Rocketship being here. If you don’t address them, then you’ll have more Rocketships.”

Then he explained the process.

“If the Board denies and the County Board denies, the State will help them get their charter approved,” Mims shared. “Once they move you can’t stop it.”

The Board members then shared their thoughts on the matter, with Trustee Debra Vinson speaking first.
“Having a charter school problem for the district isn’t new, since we fought for Dozier-Libbey,” she stated. “We have a mandate to improve academic outcomes for all students. Are they an option? Are they the solution?”

“I’m going to research…and do what is in the best interests of this District,” Vinson added.

Board President Diane Gibson-Gray said “the clock starts, today” referring to the timelines.

“Between the 2nd and 14th (of December) three Board members may have no power,” speaking in favor of the shortened timeline for the hearing and decision.

Trustee Fernando Navarro spoke next, saying “I have to echo what Mr. Mims said. Nature abhors a vacuum and unfortunately we’ve provided a vacuum.”

“They will get it at the state level,” he continued. “I’d rather work with them than work against them.”

Trustee Walter Ruehlig said there are “three most difficult decisions” as a Board member: “hiring a new superintendent, closing a school and considering a petition like this.”

The Board then voted 5-0 to receive the charter school petition and set the hearing and meeting dates for a decision.

Public Comments

Before the discussion on the Rocketship charter school, the Board heard from the public, with both Mims having some concerns and Kent criticizing Navarro for his vote on Prop. 55.

“Looking at the budget,” Mims began, “you’re transferring $400,000 of grand fund for deferred maintenance. That was an illegal move. I found the $400,000 deep into the budget, and now into the General Fund.”

He then complained about “some serious increases in classified (employees) of 22%. An increase of over $4 million.”

His third and final issue had to do with “complaints of police interrogating our children.”

“You faced a lawsuit over that several years ago,” Mims stated. “You have to be careful. They need to be read their rights.”

Gibson-Gray referred Mims to staff, saying he could talk with Dr. Adam Clark, the district’s new Associate Superintendent for Educational Services, who was in attendance at the meeting.

Contra Costa County School Board Member Jeff Belle spoke next, as “a private citizen,” he said.

“A famous general once asked ‘what’s the difference between appeasement and surrender’” Belle stated. “It’s time.”

“It’s time we step up to the plate,” he continued. “There’s activities. But, it’s time that we start getting outcomes for our students. The outcomes do not match the investment. The City’s economic stability and security is dependent on our education system.”

“Before you blink, tomorrow becomes today,” Belle added. “Let’s do a better job than what we’re doing.”

Antioch resident Velma Wilson then spoke about wanting to be more positive.

“I just want to applaud the efforts of the AUSD,” she shared. “2016-2017 has so far been a phenomenal school year. I’m welcoming parents who are coming to me crying. I’m so tired of all the negative from people who are not at our school campuses.”

“I invite you to come out and see the smiling faces,” Wilson continued. “PBIS (Positive Behavior Intervention and Support) is in full effect.”

To those being negative she said “go sit somewhere.”

“I’m always about let’s continually promote the positive,” Wilson added.

Then Kent spoke, chastising Navarro for voting against the Board resolution in favor of Prop. 55 on the November ballot, which would extend by 12 years, the three-year temporary income tax increase, that will expire this year.

“Thank you Board for your vote in support of Prop 55,” Kent said. “I was disappointed to hear that Trustee Navarro voted against it. You have put forward your own ideology ahead of the needs of our students. Shame on you. We need a caring school board member. You are not that board member.”

Michael Sagehorn who teaches history at Deer Valley High and at the Performing Arts Academy said “I’m the one who brought with me the students, tonight.” He spoke of helping students become “artists as activists” and “my history students are participating in government.”

“I really try to implement integrated education, Sagehorn continued. “There’s a rumor going around that it’s going away.”

Restorative Justice

On the issue of ratifying a vendor agreement with Rita Alfred for Restorative Justice, Mims had a question and comments for the Board and staff.

“What are you proposing the outcome with restorative justice,” he asked.

Dr. Clark responded with “this particular goal is part of the LCAP building in inclusive and safe communities.”

He explained that the district is hoping to “lower suspension rates by 10%, and for African American students by 20%.”

Clark shared that the process will include conducting an on-site workshop, three days of training and six days of classroom monitoring.

“My concern is who restorative justice is on,” Mims responded. “Training should be for people who are meting out justice. There needs to be a clear understanding of what restorative justice is.”

Board Member Authority

At Navarro’s urging, the Board discussed concerns and proposed revisions to a new policy they adopted, earlier this year, known as Board Policy 9200 – Limits of Board Member Authority.

Navarro suggested changes to section two regarding interactions with schools and school employees. He was concerned that the policy is “not allowing us to be a listening entity.”

He also suggested eliminating section four, which requires a Board member to inform the Superintendent before volunteering in their own child’s classroom.

“I still retain the right as a parent and my First Amendment rights,” Navarro stated.

“I think a board member retains all of their parental rights,” Vinson shared.

“It’s a very new board policy,” Navarro continued. “It restricts our ability to represent the voters. We should be able to listen to them” referring to teachers, parents and staff.

Gibson-Gray responded with “I have conversations with parents, teachers…I don’t see where this restricts your ability.”

“Why all of a sudden this new board policy?” Navarro asked.

Superintendent Stephanie Anello responded.

“Every other district has this policy,” she explained. “We were missing this policy. It is my job as Superintendent to recommend policies to the Board that are in compliance with state law, which this policy is.”

Vinson then suggested her own alternative language to the policy, to what Navarro proposed.

“I was trying to address some of Fernando’s concerns as to Board authority,” she said. “It didn’t seem like the policy was clear English.”

“I did quite a bit of research on Board policies form other districts,” Vinson continued. She suggested changes “So it doesn’t look like we’re limiting Board authority” and “they’re hands are tied.”

Gibson-Gray then address Navarro, stating “For the get go, you can to talk to anyone you want.”

She then said “I suggest you both send your recommendations to the Superintendent.”

In an email conversation following the meeting, Anello was asked about a concern voiced by residents that teachers and staff in the district have been told they aren’t allowed to speak with Board members.

“Regarding the policy discussed last night about communications between board members and faculty or staff, it’s one thing for Diane to tell Fernando as a board member that he’s free to talk to whomever he wants. It’s another if faculty and staff have been directed not to speak with board members,” this reporter wrote.
Anello was then asked if there have “been any directives from either you or anyone in the administration to any faculty or staff members that they are not allowed to speak with board members.”

She responded with, “Staff has not been directed not to talk to BOE (Board of Education) Members. If you have any further information such as who may have said this and/or who may believe this to be true, I am happy to look into it.”

The next Board meeting will be held on Wednesday, November 26 at 7:00 p.m. at the School Services Building, 510 G Street in downtown Antioch. For more information about the District, visit www.antioch.k12.ca.us.

Assemblymember Jim Frazier (D-Discovery Bay) is co-sponsoring two free learning opportunities this month for businesses in Assembly District 11.

On Thursday, Oct. 13, business owners and operators can gain expert advice about worker’s compensation and paid sick leave laws during a Link and Learn session co-sponsored by the Pittsburg Chamber of Commerce. Representatives from the California Department of Industrial Relations will lead the workshop, which will be held from 10 a.m. to noon at the Chamber office, 985 Railroad Avenue in Pittsburg. Register online at http://bit.ly/LinkLearn.

On Wednesday, Oct. 19, a Small Business Seminar & Resource Expo will be presented by the California State Board of Equalization from 9 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. (check-in begins at 8:30 a.m.) at the Brentwood Community Center, 35 Oak Street in Brentwood.

With a theme of “Strategies for Success in Today’s Economy,” the seminar will cover such topics as sales and use taxes; loan programs; forms of ownership; record-keeping; how to distinguish an employee from an independent contractor; and resources for marketing.

Invited presenters include the California State Board of Equalization; the U.S. Small Business Administration; California’s Employment Development Department and Franchise Tax Board; the Internal Revenue Service; the Small Business Development Center; and the Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development (GO-Biz).

In addition to Frazier, the Small Business Seminar is co-sponsored by State Board of Equalization Members Fiona Ma and George Runner; Brentwood Mayor Robert Taylor, and the City of Brentwood. Register online at www.boe.ca.gov/seminars or by calling 1-888-847-9652.

For more information about either event, call Assemblymember Frazier’s office at 925-513-0411.

To contact Assemblymember Jim Frazier please visit his website at www.asmdc.org/frazier or call his District Office at 925-513-0411. Follow him on Facebook and “Like” him for updates on events and happenings in the 11th AD.