“We’re celebrating our 150th anniversary, next year. It’s time.” – Save The Yard leader, Joy Motts

Torres-Walker supports a “green space”; using it for a “420″ pot smoking festival so Antioch residents don’t have to travel to San Francisco for the annual event on April 20th in that city

By Allen Payton

After years of advocating for a park and event center on the former Antioch Lumber Company lot in the city’s historic, downtown Rivertown, former Antioch Mayor Pro Tem Joy Motts and members of the group, Save The Yard, got the go ahead from the city council. All five council members agreed to pursue the idea during their meeting Tuesday night, Nov. 23. The City’s downtown hasn’t had a large park, but only the smaller Waldie Plaza, since the much larger Barbara Price Marina Park was replaced with the marina boat launch and parking lot in 2012.

Motts, local theater director Lee Ballesteros and Area 1 Antioch School Board Trustee Antonio Hernandez spoke about their vision of a Rivertown Town Square, bordered by W. 2nd, W. 3rd and E Streets, during the group’s first, formal presentation to the council. Rivertown Town Square presentation ACC112321

“Our ask this evening is that the city council decide on the disposition of this property…rather than leave it as an eye-sore,” Motts said.

Following the presentation, Thorpe said, “the goal is to have a conversation with Save The Yard folks.”

Joe Goralka spoke during public comments in favor of the project and against “selling a prime piece of property to a developer for a few condos.” He also said, “a few more residents isn’t going to bring about significantly more traffic to downtown businesses”…”The city should not sell out Rivertown businesses” and called the town square project “an asset to downtown.”

His wife, Martha Goralka said, “everywhere Joe and I have visited had gathering places.”

“There’s nothing that we can’t do as a united community,” she added.

Rick Stadtlander, wearing a “Save The Yard” T-shirt gave eight reasons for the council to approve the town square: beauty, walkability, ideal location, a focal point, pride, community, our voice, health. “Residents deserve much better than an empty lot,” he stated.

“Be the council that is bold and has vision. Let’s save the yard. Let’s build a town square,” Stadtlander concluded.

Former Antioch Planning Commissioner Kerry Motts spoke in favor of the project and suggested a farmer’s market at the proposed town square

“The City is not considering housing on this lot, right now and we do not have any applications for it,” Mayor Lamar Thorpe said. “I want the public to understand that.”

“Thank you, so much for the presentation and all the hard work you put into the presentation, tonight,” District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker said. “Not sure if the previous process included youth voice. Since the report in 2014…there might be more diverse opinions other than housing.”

“If this moves forward, it will be their park, too,” she said about those

“My concern about people not being policed in public spaces,” Torres-Walker stated. “I’m definitely not a supporter of building homes on contaminated land. But then I’m also concerned about building a space to bring children and their families on land that is contaminated,” mentioned by Ballesteros.

“Soil contamination is easily mitigated,” Ballesteros responded. “All of this is on the City’s website in the Downtown Specific Plan. It’s a 179-page report. You can look at cancer clusters…where people spend a length of time. There is mitigation that can be done if you want to put housing there. Green space adds positive air because of trees.”

“It’s just a vision. This isn’t the plan. We put this together to ask the council to make a plan,” she stated. “Give everyone in the city positivity. We’re coming out of two years of misery. Let’s make the river belong to everyone.”

“It’s just time for the whole community to gather together for events,” Joy Motts then said. “It will be an economic engine for downtown. We’re celebrating our 150th anniversary, next year. It’s time.”

Torres-Walker then mentioned people not having to “go to San Francisco for 420 fests”, which is a large, annual pot smoking event. “We should do it, here like we do all these other things.”

“I was one of the ones in the past who was unsure about this,” said Mayor Pro Tem Monica Wilson, then mentioned “equity in access to public spaces.”

“I’ve come to be open to this,” she said. “I’m glad to talk to you, Joy about this and Antonio, you’ve educated me about this, too.”

Joy Motts then publicly thanked Brian Halloran, a landscape architect, for drawing the site plan pro bono.

“I don’t think it’s a secret that I’ve been a supporter,” Thorpe said. “I’d like to step back, because this isn’t a plan, it’s a vision. I believe if the public steps up and demands something, the government needs to look into it. I believe the council needs to make a decision about the direction we want to go. Do we want an RFP process…or direct our resources for a town square project?”

“I’ve had multiple people talk to me about this,” District 1 Councilman Mike Barbanica said. “What has struck me as odd is, I don’t know if this is the highest and best use of this land. This is the third time you’ve spoken to us about this but where are they? The people of our community are telling us this is what they want. We, as a city, have had years to do something about this, but we haven’t. I just believe we need to listen to the community.”

“You can sell me on anything, Lee but not this, yet,” said Lori Ogorchock to Ballesteros. “I’m looking at Waldie Plaza. I’m looking at City Park on A Street. I’m not sure I’m sold, yet. It is something I will hold open. At this point, I don’t know what’s the best use of this property. I will keep an open mind.”

“This is the first time you’ve presented to council,” Thorpe said.

“That’s correct,” Joy Motts said. “The mayor said he would bring it forward, this year. We didn’t have to think about it too hard because it’s in our heart.”

“In the past we’ve looked at housing,” Thorpe said. “We can look at a community gathering place. But I need direction in what we envision for this property.”

“I would envision a process that would include more voices,” Torres-Walker said.

“First, we have to decide what this process would do,” Thorpe responded.

“I’m saying, yes, this should be green space,” Torres-Walker stated.

“I would say some kind of gathering space,” Wilson added.

“I agree with that. I don’t believe we should decide, tonight on moving forward with a community space,” Barbanica said. “If we are going to build houses, then let’s build houses. But if this is what the community is asking for, then we need to move forward instead of just talking about it. If we are truly going to explore this idea, then let’s fully explore it.”

“I’m all for exploring,” Ogorchock added.

“Community gathering space is what we’re talking about,” Thorpe stated.

“We can begin a process for exploring a community gathering space, a green space,” City Manager Ron Bernal said.

“Congratulations,” Thorpe said to those in the audience to squeals, cheers and applause.

Householder finally provides specifically what she wanted corrected; delays signature gathering for another 10 to 12 days

By Allen Payton

On Monday, Nov. 22, the organizers for the recall of Antioch Mayor Lamar Thorpe received another letter in the mail from City Clerk Ellie Householder rejecting their petition, for a third time. It will further delay gathering of the approximately 9,400 signatures to place the recall on the ballot. But unlike in her previous two response letters, this time she provided specifics of what needed to be corrected. (See related article)

The city clerk also provided two pages along with her denial letter outlining the corrections.

“So, we followed what revisions she asked of us and submitted the revised petition to her at about 4:30 on Monday,” said organizer Kathy Cabrera.

“Her big thing is on our petition Ellie wanted what is on that to match what was on the notice we served Lamar with and filed, including my phone number. Honestly, I don’t think it’s a necessary item,” Cabrera stated. “Arne agrees it’s not a necessary item. But we went ahead and put it on there, because that’s what she’s asking.”

“When we went in with the corrected version I said, ‘Thank you for providing the revisions needed on the recall petition,’” Cabrera shared. “How can Ellie reject it this time if we provided exactly what she’s asking for? But she has another 10 days to respond – and that includes holidays. So, she has until 5:00 p.m., Dec. 2nd to provide her response letter. If she mails it, again, we expect to get it on Saturday the 4th.”

Cabrera was asked how can you be required to provide a list of Top Funders when the committee hasn’t been formed, yet and you don’t know who they will be?

“Agreed,” she responded. “But we included the Top Funders declaration page, even though we didn’t think it was necessary, answering ‘none’ to each of the three questions.”

Multiple attempts to reach Householder were unsuccessful prior to publication time. She was asked why she didn’t provide the corrections to the petition that she wanted made by the organizers in her first two letters, how can she expect them to list the potential Top Funders for the committee if it hasn’t been formed, yet, will she take the full 10 days to respond and if it really takes 10 days for her and her staff in the city clerk’s office to review the revised petition.

On their way out of City Hall, Cabrera said Thorpe was there for both the candlelight vigil for a homeless man who had been killed by a train, last Friday night, and for the ribbon cutting for the renovated council chambers.

“Lamar yelled at us across the lobby, ‘did you get all your signatures, yet?’” Cabrera stated, who was there with another person helping with the petition paperwork. “I turned and asked, ‘did he just say that?’ He was laughing. He thinks it’s all a big joke. So, we just kept walking.”

Thorpe did not respond to a efforts asking him about the interaction before publication time. He was asked if it is true? If so, why, and was he just trying to be funny, or was you poking fun at them knowing they had just submitted their revised petition for his recall for a fourth time.

Please check back later for any updates to this report.

Special Visitor Center activities planned, one at Black Diamond Mines Regional Preserve in Antioch

By Dave Mason, Public Information Supervisor, Public Affairs, East Bay Regional Park District

For the past seven years, the East Bay Regional Park District has celebrated Green Friday, the day after Thanksgiving, as a healthy outdoor alternative to Black Friday holiday shopping. To encourage time in nature, the Park District is again making Green Friday a FREE Park Day, meaning all District fees are waived for park entrance and activities, including parking, dogs, horses, boat launching, fishing, as well as entry to Ardenwood Historic Farm.

“Time in nature improves physical and mental health and is a great way to relieve holiday stress,” said Park District Board President Dee Rosario. “The day after Thanksgiving is a great opportunity to get outside and spend time with family and friends.”

The fee waiver does not include State fees for fishing licenses and watercraft inspections for invasive mussels or privately operated concessions such as the Tilden Merry-Go-Round and Redwood Valley Railway steam train.

The Park District’s Green Friday is part of the “#OptOutside” movement that started in 2015 when REI closed its doors on Black Friday and encouraged its employees and the public to explore the outdoors instead of shopping. Millions of people and hundreds of organizations now participate in #OptOutside each year.

Visitor Center activities planned for Green Friday include:

• Feast Your Eyes On Nature Hikeat Black Diamond Mines Regional Preserve, 9-11:30 a.m. (Registration Required)
• Post Thanksgiving Hike It Offat Reinhardt Redwood Regional Park, 9-Noon
• Ojo De Diosat Ardenwood Historic Farm, 12:30-2:00 p.m.
• Animal Feedingat Ardenwood Historic Farm, 3-3:30 p.m.

To find a park or activity, visit www.ebparks.org/parks.

The East Bay Regional Park District is the largest regional park system in the nation, comprising 73 parks, 55 miles of shoreline, and over 1,300 miles of trails for hiking, biking, horseback riding, and environmental education. The Park District receives more than 25 million visits annually throughout Alameda and Contra Costa counties in the San Francisco Bay Area.

$1.1 million in civil penalties; 113 tanks statewide, seven in Contra Costa County

By Bobbi Mauler, Executive Assistant, Contra Costa County Office of the District Attorney

Contra Costa County District Attorney Diana Becton announced today that the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office, together with 22 other California District Attorneys and City Attorneys, have reached a settlement with the Orange, California-based Hassan & Sons, Inc., H&S Energy, LLC and H&S Energy Products, LLC (formerly known as Colonial Energy, LLC),  (collectively referred to as “H&S Energy”) over allegations that the companies violated state laws regarding the operation and maintenance of motor vehicle fuel underground storage tanks (“USTs”). The settlement includes $1,100,000 in civil penalties, and investigative costs. H&S Energy has 113 fueling stations in California, of which, seven locations are in Contra Costa County. The settlement follows an investigation by local environmental health agencies of H&S Energy stations’ non-compliance with many provisions of the UST regulations.

The companies, started in 1996, have built and acquired gasoline and convenience stores throughout the state under the Chevron, Texaco, Shell, Extra Mile, and their own, Power Market brand, including locations in Bay Point, Brentwood, Oakley, Pittsburg and Martinez.

“UST owners and operators must comply with the applicable regulations in order to prevent potential harm to the environment,” said D.A. Becton. “H&S Energy was cooperative with the People’s investigation and expended significant resources in order to bring their stations into compliance.”

Under the settlement, which includes a Final Judgment and Permanent Injunction entered in Solano County Superior Court Case No. FCS057332 by the Honorable E. Bradley Nelson, H&S Energy must implement certain compliance assurance programs including hiring an environmental compliance manager and bi-annual environmental audits and reports submitted to the People. In addition, H&S Energy must pay $900,000 in civil penalties and $200,000 in costs. $550,000 is due within five days after entry of judgment, and the remaining $550,000 is due October 22, 2022.

Allen Payton contributed to this report.

 

All five Contra Costa Congressmen vote in favor; DeSaulnier praises passage calling it historic investment in American families; likely to be changed in the Senate, where support of all 50 Democrats is needed; CBO says it will increase deficit by almost $800 billion over next five years

By Allen Payton

The U.S. House of Representatives passed President Biden’s $2.2 trillion Build Back Better Act, H.R. 5376, also known as the budget reconciliation package, on Friday, on a mainly partisan vote of 220-213 with all Republican members and only one Democrat voting no. It now moves on to the Senate.

According to Roll Call, “Two key holdouts —West Virginia’s Joe Manchin III and Arizona’s Kyrsten Sinema — have yet to offer a public endorsement of the package. Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer, (D-N.Y.), set a Christmas deadline for final passage.”

The 2,702-page bill passed following a record-breaking, 8 1/2-hour filibuster speech by Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, (R-Bakersfield). He said, “it’s the most irresponsible spending bill in the history of America.”

According to the Summary of Cost Estimate by the Congressional Budget Office the legislation will increase the deficit by almost $800 billion through Fiscal Year 2026. However, “The CBO estimates that enacting this legislation would result in a net increase in the deficit totaling $367 billion over the 2022-2031 period, not counting any additional revenue that may be generated by additional funding for tax enforcement.”

However, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, the legislation could result in a net deficit increase of $2.2 to $2.7 trillion if temporary provisions are made permanent without offsets.

DeSaulnier’s Statement on Passage

On Friday, Congressman Mark DeSaulnier (D, CA-11), who  represents portions of Antioch, issued the following statement upon passage of the Build Back Better Act (H.R. 5376), which passed the U.S. House of Representatives by a vote of 220-to-213.

“Today’s passage of the Build Back Better Act is a victory for families across the country and in Contra Costa. Through its historic investments in early, primary, and secondary education and childcare, we are finally ensuring that all children have the opportunity to thrive both in and out of the classroom, no matter where they live or how much their parents earn. From free preschool for three- and four-year-olds to lowering the cost of high-quality childcare, this bill would give over 90% of parents with young children the opportunity to reenter the workforce knowing their children are safe, cared for, and learning.

By finally calling on the wealthiest Americans and big corporations to pay their fair share, every provision in this bill is paid for and we are making a statement that our children are our priority. I urge the Senate to pass the Build Back Better Act without delay to deliver this much needed relief to families as quickly as possible. American families are counting on it.”

In addition, Build Back Better would:

• Provide monthly payments of $300 per child under 6 and $250 per child ages 6 to 17 for more than 35 million families under the Child Tax Credit;
• Devote the necessary resources to combat the climate crisis through expanded tax credits for clean energy and programs to drive down pollution;
• Lower the cost of prescription drugs and expanding Medicare, Medicaid, and the Affordable Care Act;
• Bring down costs of long-term care and supporting care workers;
• Expand opportunities for workforce development programs; and
• Create affordable housing.

Unpopular Provisions in Bill

According to polling, only 39% of battleground voters support “Build Back Better” while 46% oppose it.

Some of the most unpopular items in the bill include:

• A natural gas tax that will increase home heating costs, electricity rates, and raise gas prices.
• An eighty-thousand-dollar tax break to wealthy homeowners in New York, New Jersey, and California.
• A $3,600 a year child tax credit to illegal immigrants for every child they bring into America or give birth to after arriving.
• 87,000 new IRS agents to increase audits of taxpayers that will look through the bank accounts of every American earning or spending more than $600 per year to make sure they are paying enough taxes, disproportionally affecting small business owners.

What’s In the Bill

According to the National Review, the legislation includes:

$555 billion in subsidies to move America from one source of energy to another, including up to $12,500 per new electric car purchase;

$220 billion for clean energy & climate resilience;

$190 billion to establish or expand clean energy & electric tax credits;

$60 billion to establish or expand clean fuel & vehicle tax credits;

$75 billion to establish or expand other climate-related tax benefits; and

$10 billion to enact infrastructure & related tax breaks;

$400 billion for universal pre-school and day care, including $18 billion in the first three years to create universal pre-kindergarten. Then, the program would be funded by a mixture of federal and state funds;

$300 billion for restoration of the state and local tax (SALT) deduction eliminated in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017. According to CNBC the bill, “raises the cap on the state and local tax deduction from $10,000 to $80,00 in 2021, which will benefit the richest households in the country, according to the Tax Foundation.”

$200 billion to extend and expand both the Child Tax Credit and the Earned Income Tax Credit, for four weeks of paid parental, sick or caregiving leave;

$90 billion for what the White House describes as “Equity and Other Investments”;

$38 billion in new energy taxes;

$9 billion to higher-learning institutions for “qualified environmental justice programs”;

$7 billion for service groups for projects related to “climate resilience and mitigation”;

$3.5 billion for ports to purchase “zero-emission” equipment;

$3 billion to fund pandemic preparedness;

$3 billion for better records and hospitals for veterans;

$3 billion in “climate justice block grants” that go into projects in disadvantaged communities. The criterion for grants is based on the race of the projects’ sponsors;

$450 million for nontraditional climate apprenticeship programs;

$350 million to “rebuild” the National Labor Relations Board and $321 million to “rebuild” the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission;

$275 million to upgrade the health-care system in Hawaii which also gets $5 million to save endangered plants;

$200 million to preserve Native American languages;

$150–$250 million (estimated) as tax credits to “local” news organizations, excluding government entities, except NPR and PBS. Note: “Local” is broadly defined, and appears to include almost all news organizations, including the New York Times and Washington Post. The bill also contains a rich new deduction for trial lawyers;

$124 million to combat substance abuse;

$85 million for studying the risks of climate change for “pregnant, lactating or post-partum individuals”;

$50 million to train and certify more doulas; and

$5 million to save desert fish.

According to CNBC, “To pay for the bill, House Dems are proposing increasing some taxes on businesses and the wealthiest Americans. It includes a 5% surtax on adjusted gross income (AGI) over $10 million for individuals and an additional 3% on AGI over $25 million.”

See more details on the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget website.

Executive Order on Implementation of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act

NOVEMBER 15, 2021

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to effectively implement the historic infrastructure investments in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (the Act), it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1.  Background.  The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act is a once-in-a-generation investment in our Nation’s infrastructure and competitiveness. It will help rebuild America’s roads, bridges, and rails; expand access to clean drinking water; work to ensure access to high-speed Internet throughout the Nation; tackle the climate crisis; advance environmental justice; and invest in communities that have too often been left behind.  It will accomplish all of this while driving the creation of good-paying union jobs and growing the economy sustainably and equitably for decades to come.

Critical to achieving these goals will be the effective implementation of the Act by my Administration, as well as by State, local, Tribal, and territorial governments.

Sec. 2.  Implementation Priorities.  In implementing the Act, all agencies (as described in section 3502(1) of title 44, United States Code, except for the agencies described in section 3502(5) of title 44), shall, as appropriate and to the extent consistent with law, prioritize:

(a)  investing public dollars efficiently, working to avoid waste, and focusing on measurable outcomes for the American people;

(b)  increasing the competitiveness of the United States economy, including through implementing the Act’s Made-in-America requirements and bolstering United States manufacturing and supply chains;

(c)  improving job opportunities for millions of Americans by focusing on high labor standards for these jobs, including prevailing wages and the free and fair chance to join a union;

(d)  investing public dollars equitably, including through the Justice40 Initiative, which is a Government-wide effort toward a goal that 40 percent of the overall benefits from Federal investments in climate and clean energy flow to disadvantaged communities;

(e)  building infrastructure that is resilient and that helps combat the crisis of climate change; and

(f)  effectively coordinating with State, local, Tribal, and territorial governments in implementing these critical investments.

Sec. 3.  Infrastructure Implementation Task Force.  (a)  There is established within the Executive Office of the President the Infrastructure Implementation Task Force (Task Force).  The function of the Task Force is to coordinate effective implementation of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and other related significant infrastructure programs within the executive branch.

(b)  The Assistant to the President for Economic Policy and Director of the National Economic Council shall serve as Co‑Chair of the Task Force.

(c)  There is established within the Executive Office of the President the position of White House Infrastructure Coordinator, who shall serve as Co-Chair of the Task Force.

(d)  In addition to the Co-Chairs, the Task Force shall consist of the following members:

(i)     the Secretary of the Interior;

(ii)    the Secretary of Agriculture;

(iii)   the Secretary of Commerce;

(iv)    the Secretary of Labor;

(v)     the Secretary of Transportation;

(vi)    the Secretary of Energy;

(vii)   the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency;

(viii)  the Director of the Office of Management and Budget;

(ix)    the Director of the Office of Personnel Management;

(x)     the Assistant to the President and Director of the Domestic Policy Council;

(xi)    the Assistant to the President and National Climate Advisor; and

(xii)   the heads of such other executive departments, agencies, and offices as the Co-Chairs may from time to time invite to participate.

(e)  The Co-Chairs may coordinate subgroups consisting of Task Force members or their designees, as appropriate.

Sec. 4.  General Provisions.  (a)  Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i)   the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii)  the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b)  This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c)  This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

JOSEPH R. BIDEN JR.

THE WHITE HOUSE,

November 15, 2021.

 

State Elections Code only requires it be “in writing”; Householder ignores organizers repeated requests to receive letter via email; refuses to answer questions, admit her mistake in second response letter

By Allen Payton

Antioch City Clerk Ellie Householder, a political ally of Mayor Lamar Thorpe, has once again chosen to mail her printed response letter to proponents of his recall, further delaying the signature gathering. On Friday, Nov. 19, 2021, organizer Kathy Cabrera was informed that Householder had mailed her response letter This is the third time the city clerk has chosen to do so. (See related article)

It was on the 10th day since they submitted their recall petition for the third time, which is the legal limit for Householder’s response.

The second time the city clerk was due to provide her response letter to the petition on Oct. 21, fellow organizer and former Antioch City Clerk Arne Simonsen, who earned the advanced, professional designation of Master Municipal Clerk from the International Institute of Municipal Clerks, emailed Householder, writing, “In accordance with Elections Code 11042, the lead proponent, Kathy Cabrera, will pick up the Elections Official’s response to the Recall Petition of Lamar Thorpe.” He further shared the language from that code section.

In an email response that same day, Householder, who has not yet earned the lesser designation of Certified Municipal Clerk wrote, “For clarification, I received the copies of the petition and proof of publication in the Clerk’s office on the 3rd floor. I even opened the door for Ms. Cabrera when she arrived. Further, your understanding of EC11042 (b) is incorrect. In accordance with section (b), the petition response letter was sent in writing today via certified mail. Please find the attached receipt confirming the petition response letter was mailed today.” (The designation of MPP Householder uses in her email correspondence refers to her Master in Public Policy degree.)

However, the state’s Elections Code section 11042 (b) only requires, as both Simonsen and Householder pointed out that, “The elections official…shall…notify the proponents in writing of his or her finding.”

Following is the complete subsection they referenced.

Elections Code Section 11042 “(b) At the time of the filing of the two blank copies of the petition, the proponents shall also file proof of publication of the notice of intention, if the notice of intention was published, or an affidavit of posting of the notice of intention, if the notice of intention was posted.  The elections official or, in the case of a recall of a state officer, the Secretary of State, shall, within 10 days of receiving the blank copies of the petition, notify the proponents in writing of his or her finding.”

Questions for Householder Go Unanswered

A voicemail was left on Householder’s cell phone Friday afternoon and an email was sent to her Friday night asking why she mailed the response letter instead of emailing it, as Cabrera has repeatedly asked Householder, including in emails sent on Sept. 27, Nov. 2, 3, 4 and 16. Emails_Cabrera Householder

Additional questions were asked of Householder in the Friday night email, including, “can you please provide the requirement that ‘in writing’ means on a physical piece of paper to support your reasoning? Also, where does it require you to mail your response letter? If it must be printed on a piece of paper, couldn’t you have called Ms. Cabrera and let her know she could meet you or your staff at the City Clerk’s office for one of you to hand it to her the day you issued it? If so, why didn’t you instead of making her and the other recall proponents wait two or three more days to receive it in the mail?”

Householder was also asked, “Did it really take you and/or your staff 10 days to review their petition? If so, what took so long? Asking again, why couldn’t you follow the petition template provided by the County Clerk’s office that was used for your recall, instead of the template provided by the California Secretary of State’s office? Finally, will you admit to making a mistake in your last response letter requiring them to provide the names of the Top Funders when they have yet to form a campaign committee?”

Householder did not respond prior to publication time on Saturday afternoon.

Cabrera expects to receive Householder’s response letter by Monday, Nov. 22, almost two months after Thorpe was served with his recall notice on Sept. 24. (See related article)

Please check back later for any updates to this report.

By Allen Payton

On Oct. 5, without any fanfare and long before the redistricting process has been completed, former Antioch Mayor Pro Tem and Councilwoman Joy Motts posted on her Community Advocate Joy Motts Facebook page that she will be running, again for District 1 in 2022. She was first elected to the council in 2018 for a two-year citywide seat, but lost for re-election last year for another two years by 212 votes to current District 1 incumbent Tamisha Torres-Walker, placing second in a three-way race with former Antioch Mayor Pro Tem and Councilman Manny Soliz, Jr. (See related article)

A former Antioch School Board Trustee, Motts was elected in 2010 and served until 2014, but lost for re-election placing fourth in a race for three seats. She ran again in 2016 but lost, placing fourth, again in the race for three seats. Motts then set her sights on city council and was elected as the top vote-getter in a six-person race in 2018, for a two-year, citywide seat, resulting in her being chosen by the council as Mayor Pro Tem during the first year of her term. Following redistricting, District 1 where she and her husband live, and District 4 were chosen as two-year seats, when all four seats were up for election, along with the mayor’s seat in 2020. (See related article)

In her Facebook post, Motts wrote:

“Dear Friends and Community Members,

I am excited to announce today that I will be running for Antioch City Council in 2022 as your representative for District 1. For over 20 years I have been a dedicated and passionate advocate for Antioch and especially for the residents of north Antioch. Serving in many capacities over the years as your School Board member that spearheaded the renovation of Antioch High School, as your Councilwoman who supported our business community and public safety, as the President of the Celebrate Antioch Foundation bringing back Antioch’s 4th of July and many other celebrations to Antioch’s families. I am tenured, experienced and I will continue to fight for a safer and better quality of life for all of Antioch’s residents.

I will be your leader who works hard, shows up, governs with respect, does the research, listens to my constituents, and knows that building relationships and collaboration are the key to achieving what is in the best interest of our community. We have many challenges in our community, but we also have so many opportunities on which to build upon. I hope to have your support in this journey. More to follow.”

Then on Oct. 26, she posted a photo of her from the last campaign showing the endorsement by the East Bay Times.

As she mentioned, Motts, a lifelong Antioch resident, currently serves the community as president of Celebrate Antioch Foundation which organizes the events, mainly in Rivertown, including the July 4th and Holiday Delites Celebrations. She is also leading the effort to use the former Antioch Lumber Company lot, known as The Yard, for a new town square, for which she will make a presentation to the city council during next Tuesday’s meeting.

The council election will be held November 8, 2022.