Neither will say why; contributed $500 to Becton’s re-election campaign last year

Councilwoman blames police, claiming “my family and I have gone through a hell… we feared for our safety from the very people who on some level we trust to protect us from harm.”

“Antioch police officers are not targeting Councilwoman Torres-Walker.” – Rick Hoffman, President, APOA

Council candidates Motts, Gibson-Gray support release of body cam video; police dep’t, city attorney continue to stonewall release claiming it’s “privileged”

By Allen D. Payton

The Contra Costa District Attorney’s Office confirmed on Thursday, Sept. 1 that the charge against Antioch District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker for interfering with police outside her home on October 3, 2021, had been dropped in August. Neither DA Diana Becton nor Torres-Walker will say why.

Asked about the decision, CCDA Public Information Officer Ted Asregadoo simply responded, “The misdemeanor case against Tamisha Torres-Walker was dismissed on 8/8/2022 in the Interest of Justice or Furtherance of Justice (PC 1385). The DA’s Office isn’t commenting on the reason for the dismissal.”

According to reports, police were dispatched to Torres-Walker’s Antioch home shortly after midnight Saturday night, following calls to APD of noise complaints including dirt bikes riding in the street, loud music and gunshots. When officers arrived multiple shell casings were found in front of her home, she emerged from the house, appeared intoxicated, confronted and berated the officers, and interfered in their investigation, including taking the papers of a woman to whom they were speaking to at the scene, from one of the officer’s hand.

The official statements from the Antioch Police following a Public Records Act request by the Herald on Nov. 8, 2021, read, “Officers responded to the 500 block of Gary Ave on October 3, 2021 at 0027 hours, for a report of a loud party and shots heard, in the area.  There were no victims, no injuries, and no property loss determined at the time of officers’ arrival.  As mentioned, this is an open and continuing investigation at this time.”

Torres-Walker was later pressured by Mayor Lamar Thorpe and fellow council members to resign from her position as chair of the council’s Police Oversight Committee. There were also calls by Mayor Pro Tem Mike Barbanica and others for her to resign from the city council. Torres-Walker chose to do the former and remain on the council. (See related articles here and here)

Then, in a response to a second request in March 2022, Antioch Police Captain Trevor Schnitzius wrote, “the requested records are statutorily exempt from disclosure, at this time” due to the ongoing investigation. But he further wrote, “the public interest served by not disclosing clearly outweighs the public interest served by disclosure of the record.” APD response to T Torres-Walker video PRA 032822

Torres-Walker Claims She and Family “Feared” Antioch Police

Last year, Torres-Walker contributed $500 to DA Diana Becton’s re-election campaign. In another, recent news report she was quoted as saying Antioch Police were targeting her family. Then, on Friday, September 9, 2022, Torres-Walker posted comments on her official Facebook page further attempting to turn on the police both the Oct. 3, 2021 incident at her home and the previous Dec. 2020 incident with her sons, for which she’s being sued by the two APD officers who were involved. (See related article)

“It took me some time to respond to residents and the press because I want to be sensitive to the challenges our police department faces related to multiple outside investigations. I also needed time to reflect with my family and reaffirm my commitment to reimagining public safety here at home in Antioch,” Torres-Walker wrote. “I moved to Antioch more than 8 years ago and even then the silence coming from CITY HALL related to police misconduct and use of force was deafening. It wasn’t till May of 2020 that residents of Antioch some of whom for years have been crying out for help even heard a peep.

This is why one of my first tasks as a newly elected leader was to get straight to work fighting for a police oversight body to foster transparency and accountability as it relates to policing serves. I worked tirelessly on the Council to establish the new department of public safety and community resources.

For the last several months, my family and I have gone through a hell that I wouldn’t wish on anyone’s family, as we feared for our safety from the very people who on some level we trust to protect us from harm.

What is even more appalling is the fact that what I went through is exactly what I hear from many of our residents daily.

We cannot expect Antioch to be its very best when large segments of our population are afraid to speak out.

I finally can leave a series of sad unfortunate incidents behind me and continue working to create an Antioch where everyone feels safe.

Despite what some try to say about me, I fully support public safety measures that meet the needs of all our residents.

Antioch is no longer a small sundown town. We are the second most diverse City in the Bay Area and we deserve policing services that reflect that diversity.

To our residents, I will not stop working until everyone feels safe not just from state-sanctioned violence but from community-based violence as well.

Leadership focused on people and solutions, not just the fight.”

Police Body Cam Video Again Requested from Antioch Police, City Attorney

On Saturday, September 10, 2022, another request to the Antioch Police Department for release of the police body camera footage was made. Interim Police Chief Steve Ford, copying Captains Tony Morefield and Trevor Schnitzius, and City Attorney Thomas L. Smith, was asked, “now that the charges against Councilwoman Torres-Walker for the incident at her home on Oct. 3, 2021, have been dropped by the DA’s office and the investigation has concluded, will you release the officer(s) body dash camera footage of the incident?”

Questions for Torres-Walker Go Unanswered

In addition, Torres-Walker was sent questions on Saturday, Sept. 10 asking, “Are your comments in response to the DA’s Office dropping the charges against you of interfering with police during the Oct. 3, 2021 incident outside your home, as well as the charges against both your sons being dropped in the Dec. 2020 dirt bike chase and traffic stop incident?

Regarding the Oct. 2021 incident, do you know why the charges were dropped? Did anyone at the DA’s Office give you their reason?

What is your side of the story of what occurred that night? Did you grab something from the officer’s hand and interfere with that officer’s questioning of another person? Were you inebriated at the time as has been reported? Do you believe you did anything wrong? If so, will you apologize to both the police officer(s), the department and the public? If not, if you don’t believe you did anything wrong, why did you resign as chair from the council’s Police​ Oversight Committee?

Do you really believe you and your family have been targeted by Antioch Police officers and that they knew who your sons were during the dirt bike chase and traffic stop incident in Dec. 2020 and in responding to gunshots outside your home and noise complaints during the Oct. 2021 incident?

Do you know if either or both of the incidents involved any of the officers that are currently under investigation by the FBI and DA’s Office?

For the purpose of transparency do you support the release of the police officer(s) body camera video footage of the​ Oct. 2021 incident in front of your home?”

The incumbent councilwoman did not respond by publication time.

Questions for Police Officers Association President

In response to Torres-Walker’s latest Facebook comments, questions were also sent to Antioch Police Officers Association (APOA) President Rick Hoffman asking the following: “Have Antioch officers been targeting the councilwoman and her family members?

Did the officers who pursued her sons riding on their dirt bikes on city streets in Dec. 2020 and pulled over the younger one, know they were Torres-Walker’s sons while in pursuit of them?

Did the officer or officers who responded to the incident in Oct. 2021 do so because they knew it was her house before they arrived and if so, is that why they went there?

Does your organization support the release of the body camera video footage from that incident?

Are the two officers, Andrea Rodriguez and Calvin Prieto, who are suing the City and Torres-Walker still on medical leave?

Are either they or any of the officers involved in the Oct. 2021 incident part of those under investigation by the FBI and DA’s Office?

Do you have any additional comments regarding the councilwoman’s latest comments posted on Facebook?”

APOA President Hoffman Responds

APOA President Rick Hoffman responded, “No, Antioch police officers are not targeting Councilwoman Torres-Walker. To do so would not only be foolish, but illegal and would be condemned by the APOA.

To the best of my knowledge, the officers involved in the pursuit of Councilwoman Torres’ sons did not know they were her sons while they were in pursuit of them.

I can say that the officers involved in the response to Councilwoman Torres’ home were responding to a call for service. They were not targeting her or her home.

The APOA supports accountability and transparency for all members of city government. This would include members of the APOA as well as city leaders. APOA members were excited to have finally been given body worn cameras and are eager for the public to see the good work that we do. The APOA would fully support the release of the bodycam footage during the incident at Councilwoman Torres-Walker’s home as we believe it would be important to further the discussion of transparency and accountability.

To the best of my knowledge, Officers Rodriguez and Prieto have been on medical leave since late last year.

I cannot comment on whether or not any officers involved in the FBI investigation responded to Councilwoman Torres-Walker’s home in October 2021. I do not have information as to the extent of that investigation however, I believe that the release of the body camera footage will show all the officers involved and their conduct.

I do not have any comments on Councilwoman Torres’ post. I would only like to reiterate that the APOA is eager to have a good working relationship with all city officials, including Councilwoman Torres-Walker, and hope to better open up the lines of communication so we can work together in the future.”

Both Challengers Also Support Release of Police Video

Both of Torres-Walker’s challengers in the November election, Joy Motts and Diane Gibson-Gray, support the release of the police body camera video of the incident at the District 1 councilwoman’s home in Oct. 2021.

“We’ve gone through all this legislation for transparency and accountability for civilians and our police department. I just don’t understand why that information is not available in particular situations,” Motts said. “I asked for body cams before I left council. Nobody supported it, then. This is all part of the reformations of holding our police to higher standards.”

“I think it’s a privilege to be on council and you have to hold yourself to the highest standards and accountability,” she continued. “The truth is it’s inconvenient right now. That’s how it appears to me. There’s just not equity, truth and accountability.”

“If nothing went wrong, if the body cam footage substantiates dropping the charges, then why not make it available?” Motts asked.

“I would like to know from the city attorney is transparency discretionary and who gets to make that decision,” she added.

When asked about the video camera footage Gibson-Gray said, “I’ve requested it myself and was denied. It’s basically not available to the public. I’m naturally for it.”

Antioch Police Admit to Having Video, Won’t Release Claiming It’s “Privileged”

On Monday afternoon, Sept. 12, the Antioch Police Department’s Police Records Supervisor Amanda Nelson issued, on Interim Chief Ford’s letterhead, the response to the Herald’s request for release of the video included the following reasons for denying the request: “Consistent with its obligation under the CPRA (California Public Records Act), the City advises it has conducted a reasonable search and determined that we possess identifiable records that fall within the scope of your request. The City further advises that it has determined that the requested records are statutorily exempt from disclosure pursuant to: (1) Government Code (section) 6254(a), as “[p]reliminary drafts, notes, or interagency or intra-agency memoranda that are not retained by the public agency in the ordinary course of business”; (2) Government Code (section) 6254(f), as “[r]ecords of complaints to, or investigations conducted by, … any state or local police agency, or any investigatory or security files compiled by any other state or local police agency’; (3) Government Code (section) 6254(k), as “[r]ecords, the disclosure of which is exempted or prohibited pursuant to federal or state law, including, but not limited to, provisions of the Evidence Code relating to privilege,” because the records are privileged under the attorney-client privilege, the attorney work product privilege and/or the deliberative process privilege, the closed session privilege; and (4) Government Code sections 6254.3 and 6254.21 as home address, telephone number, and birth dates of public employees/elected or appointed officials.” APD response to T Torres-Walker video PRA 091222

However, the letter then reads, “Consistent with its obligation under the CPRA, the City provides the following information: 10/3/21 12:27 am at *** Gary Ave. Reports of a loud party in the area and 5-6 shots heard.”

It ends with, “The following person is responsible for this determination after consult with the office of the City Attorney: AMANDA NELSON, POLICE RECORDS SUPERVISOR.”

Additional Questions for Interim Police Chief, City Attorney

Additional questions were then sent to Ford, Smith, copying Morefield, Schnitzius and Nelson asking, “Instead of leaving the​ decision up to a lower-level staffer, such as the Police Records Supervisor to determine what will and won’t be released, thus playing the Pontius Pilate game of washing your hands of it, why don’t you make the leadership decision and release the video which you know is the​ right thing to do for the purpose of transparency for the​ benefit of the public you claim you want the Antioch Police Department to serve and to avoid the appearance of both showing favoritism to a sitting council member facing re-election and a cover up, both coordinated with the Contra Costa District Attorney’s Office?

Why did on one hand the APD inform me, previously in Nov. 2021, they couldn’t release the video due to the ongoing investigation, then in March 2022, Captain Schnitzius wrote, ‘the requested records are statutorily exempt from disclosure, at this time’. But he further wrote, ‘the public interest served by not disclosing clearly outweighs the public interest served by disclosure of the record’, yet now, after the investigation is over and the charges have been dropped, the reason is conveniently changed to continue to conceal from the public what they have a right to see and know? How does not disclosing the video clearly outweigh the public interest in disclosing it? Isn’t just the opposite?

Instead of hiding behind what you’ve determined is ‘statutorily exempt’ why not simply release the video and let the public decide whether or not they think either the councilwoman or the officer(s) acted appropriately?

What is the point of having police officer body cameras if the videos are rarely if ever released since only one has been, so far in over a year of operating them?

How are the records ‘privileged under attorney-client privilege’, ‘attorney work product privilege’, ‘the deliberative process privilege’ or a ‘closed session privilege’ by any means since the city attorney did and does not represent Councilwoman Torres-Walker in this incident which occurred at her private residence and her actions were outside of her official duties, and aren’t a matter of closed session? Who is it that is participating in the so-called ‘deliberative process’ preventing you from releasing the video?

Ford and Smith were also asked, “are you claiming the video footage from Antioch Police officer body cameras aren’t retained? Or are you claiming they’re not part of “the ordinary course of business” when they’re supposedly automatically deployed whenever an officer leaves his patrol vehicle?”

Additional Public Records Act Requests Made

Another Public Records Act request was then made on Monday night, Sept. 12, 2022, of any and all reports by any and all Antioch Police officers who responded to any and all calls for service at Tamisha Torrs-Walker’s home (at *** Gary Avenue in Antioch, California) on Oct. 3, 2021.

Then due to reports that there have been multiple police calls for service at the councilwoman’s Antioch home, a separate Public Records Act was made Monday night, for the same type of aforementioned reports for any other Antioch Police call for service at any other time at Tamisha Torres-Walker’s current or any other, previous Antioch home(s) from Jan. 1, 2020, through today.

The department has 10 days to respond and can delay their response by up to another 14 days.

Please check back later for any updates to this report including responses from Torres-Walker, Ford or Smith.

Note: Torres-Walker’s home address was intentionally not included in this article and redacted in the letter from APD by the Herald.

17 warrants served, 10,451 unlicensed indoor cannabis plants, $23,355 in cash, six guns confiscated during two-day, multi-agency effort

By Darryl Saffold, Public Information Officer, Antioch Police Department

On Wed., August 31 and Wed., September 7, 2022, the Antioch Police Department assisted the California Department of Cannabis Control (DCC) with the service of several search warrants related to unlicensed indoor cannabis cultivations.

According to residents who witnessed the police action said several homes on Sanger Peak Way, Vallecito Way and Forty Niner Way were included, some red tagged with the message “Unsafe to Occupy” and some had their garage doors removed. (See photos, below)

With the assistance of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, the Drug Enforcement Agency, and Antioch Code Enforcement, approximately 10,451 unlicensed indoor cannabis plants were seized with an estimated value of $7.3 million. Additionally, $23,355 in cash was asset seized as well as six firearms were confiscated during the 17 warrants that were served throughout the city of Antioch.

The Antioch Police Department is dedicated to keeping the community safe and is devoted to capitalizing on any opportunity to work collaboratively with other agencies.

The Department of Cannabis Control (DCC) is the California state agency that licenses and regulates cannabis businesses. DCC regulates the:

• Growing of cannabis plants
• Manufacture of cannabis products
• Transportation and tracking of cannabis goods throughout the state
• Sale of cannabis goods
• Events where cannabis is sold or used
• Labeling of goods sold at retail

To learn more about the Department of Cannabis Control or the laws pertaining to cannabis, please visit: www.cannabis.ca.gov.

Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.

 

By Allen D. Payton

On June 29, 2022, Antioch Mayor Lamar Thorpe entered pleas of not guilty to the charges of Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol and DUI with Blood Alcohol Content of .08% or higher, for his arrest in the early morning of March 19. A Readiness Conference has been scheduled for Sept. 29 with a trial date set for October 12 at 8:30 a.m. in the criminal division of the Wakefield Taylor Courthouse in Martinez. (See related articles here and here)

Since in a video Thorpe posted on his official Facebook page on March 19, he admitted to having one drink with dinner, he was asked, via email in August why he didn’t plead guilty, accept his punishment and get this behind him for the benefit of himself and the city. He was also asked what he was hoping to accomplish by a jury trial, if he was hoping to be found not guilty and isn’t the trial just a waste of taxpayer funds and the court’s time. Thorpe did not respond.

An effort to reach Thorpe’s attorney, listed as Greg Scanlon, was unsuccessful. However, Walnut Creek-based criminal defense attorney Peter Johnson, the co-author of the California DUI Defense book, was asked why someone who admitted publicly that they had an alcoholic beverage prior to an arrest for DUI would plead not guilty and take their case to trial.

“A drink with dinner doesn’t put you under the influence,” he stated. “There’s no law against drinking and driving. He didn’t admit to the crime. They have to prove he was guilty.”

“Chemical testing for alcohol is not necessarily reliable. There are errors involved with the testing,” Johnson continued. “Just because a person blows into a machine, that’s not necessarily an accurate number. Why should somebody plead guilty or no contest if they didn’t commit a crime?”

“There are substantial problems with estimating a person’s blood alcohol level from either a blood or a breath test,” he added.

Following is the information provided to the Herald about the case: Details.Lamar Thorpe DUI Case # 01-22-00647

Thorpe, Lamar Anthony
Description Statute Level Date:

1VC23152(a)-M: Driving Under Influence of Alcohol 000214658023152(a) Misdemeanor 03/19/2022

2VC23152(b)-M: Driving Under Influence of Alcohol 000214658123152(b) Misdemeanor 03/19/2022
01-22-00647 | The People of the State of California vs. Thorpe, Lamar Anthony
Case Number:01-22-00647
Court: Criminal – Martinez-Wakefield Taylor Courthouse
File Date: 05/20/2022
Case Type: Misdemeanor
Case Status: Own Recognizance
06/29/2022 Plea
Judicial Officer :Stark, Nancy Davis
1 – VC23152(a)-M: Driving Under Influence of Alcohol 0002146580
Not Guilty
2 – VC23152(b)-M: Driving Under Influence of Alcohol 0002146581
Not Guilty
05/20/2022 Initial Complaint Filed
05/23/2022 Notice to Appear
05/23/2022 District Attorney’s Arraignment Position
06/15/2022 Miscellaneous
Comment – Documents copied and sent to, GREG SCANLON.
06/29/2022 Arraignment on Complaint
Original Type – Arraignment on Complaint
Judicial Officer – Stark, Nancy Davis
Hearing Time – 8:30 AM
Result – Held
09/28/2022 Readiness Conference
Judicial Officer – Hiramoto, Joni T
Hearing Time – 8:30 AM
10/12/2022 Misdo Jury Trial
Judicial Officer – Hiramoto, Joni T
Hearing Time – 8:30 AM

“…Antioch Police officers engaged with Quinto in a manner that was lawful and objectively reasonable under the circumstances…an internal examination showed no bone fractures or damage to Quinto’s larynx and trachea…” – Contra Costa District Attorney

Quinto died in the hospital three days later not in police custody

By Allen D. Payton

The Contra Costa District Attorney’s Office announced Friday, Sept. 2, 2022, that it had concluded there is no evidence of criminal offense by Antioch Police officers in the December 2020 death of 30-year-old Angelo Voithugo Quinto. The D.A.’s Office released a 39-page Law Enforcement Involved Fatal Incident (LEIFI) report as part of Contra Costa County’s protocol to investigate incidents when officers or civilians are shot or die during an encounter with law enforcement. The report is available on the District Attorney’s website and here: Angelo Quinto LEIFI Report Final

The incident occurred on December 23rd and Quinto died in the hospital while not in police custody three days later on Dec. 26th.

According to the CCDA, the purpose of the report is to independently determine criminal liability in fatal incidents when law enforcement is involved. During a criminal trial, the District Attorney’s Office – which represents The People of the State of California — has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that a death was not justified.

Part of the LEIFI report contains a legal analysis of the evidence in the death of Quinto. That analysis determined the Antioch Police officers engaged with Quinto in a manner that was lawful and objectively reasonable under the circumstances. Moreover, the report notes that the officers utilized reasonable force during their contact with Quinto [PC 835a(a)(3)].

The report confirms what both the Contra Costa County Coroner’s Office and then-Antioch Police Chief Tammany Brooks said during a March 2021 press conference and is in spite of the rush to judgment by Antioch Mayor Lamar Thorpe and Councilwomen Monica Wilson and Tamisha Torres-Walker, and the accusations by Quinto’s family members that the police officers caused his death. It also undermines the naming of the legislation, AB 490, entitled the Angelo Quinto Act, banning law enforcement from restraint techniques that cause asphyxia. (See related article here)

Brooks said that officers did not kneel on his neck during the incident. In addition, he said, “according to the results of a preliminary investigation, at one point during the handcuffing, an officer did briefly – for a few seconds – have a knee across a portion of Angelo’s shoulder blade. This is a common control technique taught at CA POST approved Police Academies for prone handcuffing.  At no point did any officer use a knee or any other body part to gain leverage or apply pressure to Angelo’s head, neck, or throat, which is outside our policy and training.”

Then, in August 2021, a Contra Costa Coroner’s Inquest Jury found that Quinto’s death was an accident. (See related article)

Background

The circumstances surrounding this incident were initiated with a 911 call from Angelo Quinto’s sister on December 23, 2020, at around 11:10 pm. Quinto’s sister wanted law enforcement’s help after Quinto was being erratic, physically aggressive, and harming his mother. Quinto’s mother could be heard in the background of the call saying “I can’t breathe. Stop it.” while Quinto’s sister told the 911 operator that he was strangling Mrs. Quinto.

Antioch Police officers arrived about a minute later. They were met by Quinto’s sister, who was clutching a hammer to protect herself from her brother. Officers heard a commotion coming from Quinto’s bedroom. When they entered the room, they saw Quinto’s mother struggling with him in a bearhug hold on the ground. Officers separated the two. One officer kneeled and placed one knee on Quinto’s shoulder to handcuff him while the other held onto his legs. This was the extent of force utilized by the two officers to restrain Quinto, and to prevent him from harming himself, family members, or the officers.

Police told Mrs. Quinto that her son was not under arrest. Rather, emergency responders were on their way to transport him to a hospital for any physical injuries. He would also receive a mental health evaluation while being treated at the medical facility. While one officer went to his patrol vehicle to get the needed paperwork, emergency medical crews arrived on the scene. They rolled Angelo over and noticed he was unconscious, his face was purple in color, and there was blood on the floor and his face. The officers did not strike Quinto in any way, and the autopsy revealed bite marks to Quinto’s inner cheek and tongue. Life-saving measures were administered, and Quinto was transported to a hospital in Antioch — where he died on December 26th.

An autopsy was performed on December 28th by the Contra Costa County Coroner’s Office. The cause of death was Excited Delirium Syndrome due to drug intoxication, psychiatric conditions, physical exertion, and cardiac arrest.

A toxicology report by the Coroner’s Office showed that Angelo Quinto had the presence of caffeine, Levetriacetam (a therapeutic for adults and children with epilepsy), and Modafinil – a drug to stimulate wakefulness – in his system. The County of Santa Clara Medical Examiner-Coroner reviewed the autopsy findings and agreed with its conclusions.

The Quinto family commissioned an independent autopsy, and its findings note the cause of death was restraint asphyxiation. The private autopsy lists petechial hemorrhaging as the basis for such conclusion. An independent toxicology report also found the presence of Fentanyl in Quinto’s blood – in addition to Modafinil and Levetiracetam.

However, of critical importance to the investigation, an internal examination showed no bone fractures or damage to Quinto’s larynx and trachea. While there are conflicting medical opinions as to the cause of death, the accounts of what transpired in the bedroom are consistent among all witnesses in that no police officer applied pressure to Quinto’s neck.

After reviewing the evidence, the method of restraining Angelo Quinto by Antioch Police officers on December 23rd was objectively reasonable under the totality of the circumstances. Therefore, when applying the applicable law and the California District Attorney’s Uniform Crime Charging Standards, there is no evidence of a criminal offense committed by the Antioch Police officers involved in restraining Angelo Quinto.

Contra Costa District Attorney’s Office will take no further action in this case.

Contra Costa District Attorney’s Office PIO Ted Asregadoo contributed to this report.

By Antioch Police Department

On Sunday, September 4, 2022, at approximately 11:49 PM, Antioch police officers responded to the report of gunshots fired in the 1100 block of Macaulay Street. It was also reported that one person had been shot.

Numerous officers responded to the scene. When officers arrived, they located one male victim near the front yard of a residence suffering from at least one gunshot wound. Evidence at the scene indicated the incident occurred outdoors in a drive-by style shooting. Officers immediately began administering first aid and called for emergency fire department and AMR paramedics.

Unfortunately, the victim succumbed to his injuries at the scene, and he was pronounced deceased. The suspect vehicle fled the scene and has not been contacted.

Antioch Police Department’s Investigations Bureau, consisting of Crime Scene Investigators and detectives with the Violent Crimes Unit, responded to the scene and took over the investigation.

Currently, detectives are interviewing witnesses and working to identify any suspects or persons-of- interest. The investigation is still active, and evidence is being collected.

Anyone with information is asked to call the Antioch Police Department non-emergency line at (925) 778-2441, or Detective Gerber at (925) 779-6943. You may also text-a-tip to 274637 (CRIMES) using the key word ANTIOCH.

 

By Jimmy Lee, Director of Public Affairs, Contra Costa County Office of the Sheriff

Sunday morning, September 4, 2022, at about 11:20 AM, it was discovered that two inmates had escaped from the Marsh Creek Detention Facility (MCDF) located at 12000 Marsh Creek Road.

MCDF is a minimum-security facility that houses sentenced prisoners and those who are facing lower-level charges that would likely result in a sentence served locally.

An emergency count was conducted, and a comprehensive search of the facility and the immediate area was carried out. Law enforcement agencies in the area were notified and an alert was sent to residents in the area.

The two are identified as:

33-year-old Gerardo Ramirez-Vera of Richmond. He was sentenced on weapon, burglary, and vandalism charges. He was due to be released in the first week of January 2023.

28-year-old Jorge Garcia-Escamilla of Pittsburg. He was being held on charges that include vehicle theft, possession of a stolen vehicle, possession of burglary tools, and drug possession. He had a future court date in three weeks.

Both men are now facing felony charges of escape from a county detention facility and face a potential state prison sentence.

The search for the two is ongoing. Anyone with information on their whereabouts or who might have seen them is asked to call Sheriff’s dispatch at (925) 646-2441.

Instead of $6 million and no General Fund money; Torres-Walker, Wilson won’t say why they didn’t attend

By Allen D. Payton

During their August 9, 2022, Antioch City Council meeting, the three council members in attendance approved spending $4 million in state and federal funds on a transitional housing program in addition to the one previously approved at the Executive Inn on E. 18th Street. The original proposal was to spend $12 million for the program at the motel previously approved by Mayor Lamar Thorpe and Districts 1 and 4 Councilwomen Tamisha Torres-Walker and Monica Wilson, who were absent. (See related article)

Both councilwomen were asked the next day why they missed the meeting but neither responded.

The plan included purchasing the motel, and according to the staff report, the council considered committing $6 million in city funds, yet to be budgeted, as matching funds for an application for funds from Round 3 of the California Department of Housing & Community Development Homekey Program.

On May 10, 2022, the City Council authorized staff to pursue a Homekey application for interim housing associated with 515 East 18th Street, the location of the Executive Inn. But because the City was unable to negotiate acceptable terms for a purchase, Council support was requested for a change in approach to the City’s pursuit of State funds.

The city will instead lease the motel and has moved forward on terms with the owner.

The staff report explained the new approach which included identifying “available city-owned parcels for interim and/or permanent supportive housing opportunities for Antioch’s unsheltered residents.” It “involves the City’s solicitation of a developer partner who, once selected, will jointly apply to the State of California for funding to accomplish interim and/or permanent supportive housing in alignment and coordination with Contra Costa County’s homelessness response system. It is noted that a key distinction of interim housing is a 15-year covenant versus a 55-year covenant associated with permanent supportive housing. In either or both arrangements, participation in the Contra Costa County Continuum of Care (CoC) and Coordinated Entry System are required.” Homeless Transitional Housing program ACC080922

The new approach “intends to inspire creativity in the development community,” Assistant City Manager Rosana Bayon Moore stated.”

“This is an incredible opportunity…it’s taken us awhile to get to this point,” said local homeless advocate Andrew Becker. “But Homekey is a grant opportunity that develops housing. We rely on developers to come in and provide opportunities for our community and we’ve seen its non-existence out here in East County.”

However, a 394-unit, low- to moderate-income housing apartment project was approved by the city council in 2019 and built by a developer off East 18th Street in Antioch. (See related article)

“The state has given us an opportunity to capitalize off their dollars,” he continued. “This is a different structure…and what we can create, here can be lasting beyond what the Executive Inn is or can be in the future. These are lasting covenants for housing.”

Three other residents spoke in favor of the additional program.

Council Discussion and Decision

During the council discussion on the item, District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock asked, “can we use ARPA funds on Homekey projects?”

“We would have the ability to use ARPA funds in connection with this work, as long as the timeframe is within the eligibility period,” Bayon Moore responded.

“I’m hugely for this. I see all the properties listed. I’d like to add L Street to that list,” Ogorchock continued. “I think Homekey grant can help us build homes for vets and seniors, along with the homeless, and it can help those most vulnerable not to become homeless.”

“There is more money, and I gave that report at the last meeting, from the governor and the funds that were now available,” she stated. “So, I hope we go after more of those funds.”

Mayor Pro Tem Mike Barbanica then asked Bayon Moore, “On the $6 million, is that a one-time all in or is there going be more in the future?”

“The intention would be to identify a ceiling, a financial commitment that we would incorporate into the solicitation, so that when we signal to the development community that the city is supportive of the effort, that those dollars are available to support the project,” the assistant city manager responded. “Now depending upon the project…six million is the cap.”

“My stance on this is we’re spending a lot of money. This council is going through a lot of money,” Barbanica stated. “We’re opening new departments, where we just spent $2.5 million on the Executive Inn, we have a commitment to Motel 6 which is per use, and I understand it’s a more cost effective way to go. But we’re not funding things like the Emergency Operations Center. We’re not funding things like the pool at the water park which is a safety issue. We’re not doing that, but we can spend $2.5 million on the Executive Inn and we can commit to another $6 million but we don’t have an Emergency Operations Center that’s up to date. I do not support this.”

Ogorchock then said, “I know this council wasn’t here when Tabora Gardens was built. But we did the same thing with $1 million…that we had to pledge…and we did commit those funds.”

“And I understand what you’re saying, and I agree 110% with you,” she said to Barbanica. “And I believe those items that you brought up were on the ARPA funds to possibly be spent on those. But again, if I’m looking at ARPA funds and we can use ARPA funds with Homekey then I think this is a doable project.”

“The state is coming up with quite a bit more money…there’s a lot of money that’s coming forth,” Ogorchock continued. “So

“There’s further nuance, and we may not end up spending $6 million because a developer will say ‘I will eat up those costs’,” Thorpe said.

“Would there be possibility to lower this dollar amount and not commit to the six million?” Barbanica asked. “Andrew had mentioned two million to commit out of ARPA funds.”

“I don’t think today, we’re setting parameters for an RFQ,” Thorpe responded. “If a developer responds and says, ‘I can meet all of that,’ we’ll have another one of these and we’ll decide then. I think we’re saying we’re willing to commit up to $6 million.”

Bayon Moore then explained “one small dimension of that. The reason for the ceiling is for us to signal to the world of developers is the city is committed to bringing this online…not to exceed $6 million. If something comes below that, that’s fantastic.”

“What we did internally is work to establish a figure that we could defend,” she continued. “We looked at some…financial models and we came to the conclusion that $6 million was a safe figure to pledge. The market will ultimately speak to us whether or not that value is one that produces a partnership.”

“We just spent $2.5 million…and now we’re looking at committing to six,” Barbanica stated. “I cannot support a $6 million commitment even if it doesn’t come in at that.”

“If we are to lower the amount to maybe $2 million?” Ogorchock asked Barbanica. “It still leaves the ARPA funds on the table. I agree with you. I will fight for the EOC and the pool to get those items done because they’re safety issues.”

“If we were to at least reduce it to two million to start there would that be something that’s doable?” Ogorchock further asked.

“Specifically pulling it from ARPA funds and not the city’s general budget?” Barbanica asked in response.

“Yes,” the councilwoman responded.

“Yes,” he responded.

The council then took up all three matters associated with the agenda item, including the solicitation for the city-owned parcels, recognizing that the city land could be the location or privately owned, the pledge of the city’s financial commitment set at a ceiling of $2 million from ARPA funds and the council’s support of pursuing Homekey.

Ogorchock tried to get the city owned lots on L Street near the police department added to the list of parcels.

“That’s going to be Veterans Park,” Thorpe said.

“Not that I’m aware of,” Ogorchock responded.

“They came in and spoke to us and we gave direction,” Thorpe stated.

Ogorchock agreed to not including the L Street parcels.

Following one last effort by the city’s homeless consultant, Focus Strategies, to get the council to commit to $6 million, a motion was made by Ogorchock, seconded by Barbanica to approve the proposal with a $2 million cap and it passed on a 3-0 vote after Thorpe said, “No. Just kidding. Yes.”

“The funds can either be used for interim and permanent supportive housing,” Bayon Moore later explained. “The application will be jointly done by the city and a developer,”

The hope is to leverage the local funds and/or the value of the city-owned properties to obtain the state grant funds.

“They’re not necessarily dollar for dollar match,” she added.

Brentwood teen arrested, first; Pittsburg man arrested in Antioch last week; victim from Antioch was innocent bystander

By Brentwood Police Department

During the course of the investigation into the deadly shooting that occurred at the 24-Hour Fitness in Brentwood on Thursday, August 11, 2022, at approximately 1:54 a.m., Brentwood Police investigators positively identified 20-year-old Pittsburg resident Faatino Arona Tauane as the second shooter in this case.

On Wednesday, August 24, 2022, at approximately 4:45 a.m., Tauane was peacefully taken into custody at a home in the 900 block of Myrtlewood Drive in Antioch. He was later booked at the Martinez Detention Facility for murder. To date, one firearm has been recovered and the vehicle Tauane used to flee the scene is now in police custody. A second firearm used in the shooting remains outstanding.

On Friday, August 26, 2022, the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office charged Tauane with one count of murder with enhancements and additional felonies.

On Thursday, August 11, 2022, the first of two suspects detained during the early stages of the investigation had been positively identified as one of the shooters who was wounded during the altercation. The suspect, a 17-year-old Brentwood resident was booked into the Contra Costa County Juvenile Detention Center for murder. His name is being withheld due to age. The second suspect was released from police custody after it was determined he was not a shooter.

The decedent has been identified as, 21-year-old Antioch resident, Cesar Arana. Our hearts go out to the family and friends impacted by his untimely death.

Arana was an innocent bystander not involved in the initial altercation. He was struck by gunfire while trying to help a person who had fallen to the ground during a physical fight outside.

Additionally, our agency would like to thank those who came forward with additional video footage and the staff at 24 Hour Fitness for their full cooperation throughout the entire investigation.

According to localcrimenews.com, Tauane was also arrested by Pittsburg Police in December 2020, for carrying a concealed weapon in a vehicle and when not the registered owner.

Anyone with information regarding the outstanding firearm or any additional information related to this investigation is asked to contact Detective Greene at 925-809-7797.

Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.