Still required on public transit

Joined by governors of Oregon, Washington to offer more updated health guidance for the three western states

SACRAMENTO – With declining case rates and hospitalizations across the West, California, Oregon and Washington are moving together to update their masking guidance. After 11:59 p.m. on March 11, California, Oregon and Washington will adopt new indoor mask policies and move from mask requirements to mask recommendations in schools.

State policies do not change federal requirements, which still include masks on public transit.

Statement from California Governor Gavin Newsom: “California continues to adjust our policies based on the latest data and science, applying what we’ve learned over the past two years to guide our response to the pandemic. Masks are an effective tool to minimize spread of the virus and future variants, especially when transmission rates are high. We cannot predict the future of the virus, but we are better prepared for it and will continue to take measures rooted in science to keep California moving forward.”

In California, starting March 1, masks will no longer be required for unvaccinated individuals, but will be strongly recommended for all individuals in most indoor settings. After March 11, in schools and childcare facilities, masks will not be required but will be strongly recommended. Masks will still be required for everyone in high transmission settings like public transit, emergency shelters, health care settings, correctional facilities, homeless shelters and long-term care facilities. As always, local jurisdictions may have additional requirements beyond the state guidance.

Newsom also presented his COVID SMARTER Plan introduced on Feb. 17, which stands for Shots, Masks, Awareness, Readiness, Testing, Education and Rx.

Statement from Oregon Governor Kate Brown: “Two years ago today, we identified Oregon’s first case of COVID-19. As has been made clear time and again over the last two years, COVID-19 does not stop at state borders or county lines. On the West Coast, our communities and economies are linked. Together, as we continue to recover from the Omicron surge, we will build resiliency and prepare for the next variant and the next pandemic. As we learn to live with this virus, we must remain vigilant to protect each other and prevent disruption to our schools, businesses, and communities––with a focus on protecting our most vulnerable and the people and communities that have been disproportionately impacted by COVID-19.”

In Oregon, the Oregon Health Authority rules requiring masks in indoor public places and schools will be lifted after 11:59 p.m. on March 11. Other state and federal requirements, such as those for health care settings, public transit, and other specialized settings, will remain in place for a period of time.

Statement from Washington Governor Jay Inslee: “We’ve continued to monitor data from our state Department of Health, and have determined we are able to adjust the timing of our statewide mask requirement. While this represents another step forward for Washingtonians, we must still be mindful that many within our communities remain vulnerable. Many businesses and families will continue choosing to wear masks, because we’ve learned how effective they are at keeping one another safe. As we transition to this next phase, we will continue to move forward together carefully and cautiously.”

In Washington, indoor mask requirements will be lifted as of 11:59 p.m. on March 11. This new date does not change any other aspect of the updated mask requirements Inslee announced last week. Masks will still be required in certain settings including health care, corrections facilities and long-term care facilities. The Washington State Department of Health will be issuing new guidance for K-12 schools next week so schools can prepare to implement updated safety protocols.

 

Used for storage, vandalized, Board declared it “obsolete”

By Allen D. Payton

The house owned by the Antioch Unified School District, located at 6600 Deer Valley Road south of Dozier-Libbey Medical High School and southeast of the Antioch Kaiser Medical Center, will be torn down after years of sitting vacant and being “terribly vandalized” according to AUSD Superintendent Stephanie Anello. The board voted to demolish it.

In a recent comment on Facebook, Cambria Dejesus wrote, “Rant… Demo to be done on the school property on Deer Valley Rd.  A beautiful home built in the late 80’s or early 90’s, remodeled for use for the school board, which they no longer use, voted to be destroyed due to vandalism.  It has permanent seating in the yard for at least 100 people, gazebos, and it’s an absolute shame that it set to demo.  I lease property from AUSD and offered to lease it so it can remain to possibly introduce FFA or some agriculture program to the curriculum but was told the board already voted to demo. There is minimal damage to the home from vandalism but something that would stop if occupied.   I think it’s a crying shame it’s going to be destroyed.   Shouldn’t the money be spent on the students, some use planned for the property that will give Antioch’s students a place to get away from it all and perhaps save a few from taking the wrong path.  Country heals.  Rant over.”

Questions were sent to AUSD Superintendent Stephanie Anello asking, “is this true? If so, has the district been using the home? If so, how? If it’s not being used why hasn’t the district been renting it out to someone to create a revenue stream? What are the plans for the property and how many acres does it include?”

According to Anello, “The Board declared the home on the property as ‘obsolete’ at a Board Meeting, as the home has not been used or occupied in decades and has been terribly vandalized over the years. I am not aware of any money being used in the past to renovate the property as stated” in the comment. “To clarify, it has been used for storage, just not used for staff or students.”

“Right now, it is being leased for grazing and we have no immediate alternative plans,” she added. “Our plans will, of course, change depending on the development of the area.”

The property consists of 20.98 acres.

By Allen D. Payton

A Walk Against Violence in Antioch’s Sycamore neighborhood, which has been the city’s highest crime area for over two decades, will be held on Saturday, Feb. 26 at 2:00 p.m. It begins at Contra Loma Estates Park. The meet-up location is at the apartment complex adjacent to the park at 2405 Sunny Lane.

“It’s a community event by a group of individuals and local leaders who recognize the need to reduce crime in the Sycamore neighborhood and to come alongside them and encourage the residents if they see something to say something. We want to share a message of being responsible to love and care about our neighbors, said Kibibi Columbus. “We also need to keep our community lifted up in prayer.”

Antioch District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker, who represents the Sycamore neighborhood and has called on Mayor Lamar Thorpe to add the hiring of four more police officers to the budget to focus on that part of the city, will be in attendance.

“I’m just inspired by this effort,” she said. “I hope this brings the community together, and I will be there to support.”

Safe Return Project and Lift Up Contra Costa are some of the organizers, Columbus shared.

Screen Time Use Among U.S. Adolescents During the COVID-19 Pandemic Findings From the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study

By Antonia Ehlers, PR and Media Relations, Kaiser Permanente Northern California

In today’s world, it’s not uncommon for children to be connected to their phones and laptops. Some sneak devices on their laps under the dinner table, while others are slow to respond to real conversations when they’re texting their friends. It’s a whole new world, but increased screen time might be leading to more mental health issues, according to “Screen Time Use Among U.S. Adolescents During the COVID-19 Pandemic Findings From the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study” published in the Journal of the American Medical Association-Pediatrics (JAMA-Pediatrics).

“During the COVID-19 pandemic, many children increased screen time use due to online school, stay-at-home orders and general social isolation,” said Richard Freed, Ph.D., a clinical psychologist at Kaiser Permanente Antioch Medical Center. “JAMA-Pediatrics recently reported that children nearly doubled their screen time use during the pandemic. Unfortunately, this increase is posing mental health risks for kids because it displaces the activities we know are helpful to children and adolescents, including quality time with family, physical activity, and engaging with their teachers and school communities.”

The cumulative effect of excessive screen time is leading to ongoing mental health issues for children.

“Children are experiencing anxiousness and stress in part because screen time has remained elevated even as pandemic restrictions are lifted,” Freed added. “It’s important for parents to understand how too much screen time can negatively impact children’s mental health, and there are ways parents can help reduce the amount of time their children spend on screens.”

Below are some tips for helping your child cut back on his or her screen time use:

• Help children and adolescents engage with the activities we know support their mental health, including time with family and physical activity, as that leaves less time for screens.
• Kids might need parent support and structure to get back into school routines, such as shutting down screens and completing homework.
• Cutting back on screen time use does not mean no screen time at all. Try setting some limits on children’s usage and work on a plan to limit the amount of time per day they are on their screens.
• Don’t allow children to have use of their screens before bedtime, which can disrupt sleep. Encourage them to read books or play quiet games instead.
• Model good behavior. Put your own screens away and show children the importance of finding other activities to occupy their time.
• Encourage children to play outdoors or take up a new hobby. Find ways to expand their in-person social interactions, such as joining a club or an after-school activity.
• Go on walks, have family game nights, start a family book club, or work on puzzles. Find other ways to keep your children occupied and engaged.
• Talk to your children about the importance of staying engaged with others and how screens prohibit them from developing the social skills they need to be successful.
• If your child continues to withdraw or seems anxious or stressed, talk about what might be happening and offer solutions to help.
• The American Academy of Pediatrics has a tool at healthychildren.org/MediaUsePlan to help you create a plan for screen time.

 

Torres-Walker’s suggested changes moves Ogorchock from District 3 to 4

By Allen D. Payton

During their special meeting study session on redistricting on Tuesday night, Feb. 22, 2022, the Antioch City Council, after voting against Map 91 again, and new Map 521, they chose to move that map forward along with a modified Map A, for consideration at another study session on March 8. A representative of Common Cause told the council the city could face a lawsuit from anyone in a neighborhood that is divided and warned them not do so in their final map choice.

Mayor Lamar Thorpe and District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker asked the consultants of Q2 Data and Research to make modifications to Map A. Torres-Walker’s changes moves the neighborhood in which District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock lives, into District 4.

Had Map 91 been adopted, it would have resulted in the neighborhood in which District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson lives being moved into District 3, which means she could not run for re-election, in the November election, or would have had to move in order to live within the new District 4 boundaries.

The council reviewed all the maps, including three drawn by the consultants of Q2 and 12 submitted by members of the public. The 12 included three new submissions since the council’s Feb. 8 meeting at which they rejected both Maps B and 91, and the majority returned to Map A which four of the council members had previously rejected.

“We have a total of 15 maps, now,” said consultant Karin Mac Donald, owner and senior researcher of Q2. “We hope, tonight you will choose a final map that you can vote on at the meeting on March 7.”

City Attorney Thomas Lloyd Smith asked MacDonald to review all of the maps for the council and public, which Jane Hood of Q2 did.

Public Comments Again Support Map 91

Antioch resident Mark Jordan was the first to speak during public comments chastising City Clerk Ellie Householder for not having the minutes of this year’s council meetings on the city’s website, just like was the problem, last year. (See related article)

“First, it would be helpful if the City Clerk would post the minutes on the City website,” he said.

“On the 25th of January, you voted on two final maps. On the mayor’s Facebook page he said there were two map finalists. Then the mayor, on his own volition, decided to start over again. That’s the very definition of authoritarianism. It’s not democratic. It’s not what the 115,000 people of Antioch want.”

“The law was changed in 2019. AB849 was passed,” Jordan continued. “There were very specific requirements that were changed. Anyone can petition the Superior Court. Currently, you’re violating your own rules by backing up” and reconsidering Map A.

Sandy Hartrick spoke against Map A because it was the only option the council majority said they would consider and it “clearly divides a community of interest.”

William Chapman spoke next, saying, “My concern is in the continuity of the areas. I have worked in the past with campaigns. We need boundaries that are definable…that keep people together. The map needs to have districts that are bound by normal conditions, major roads. The communities should stay together as communities…as they vote.”

“A resident for going on 37 years in Antioch. I know it pretty well,” said Mary Chapman. “The only comment I have, tonight is to see the final map show all the council members…and not favor a particular political candidate.”

“The redistricting…as mandated by the law should follow state law. So, I read AB849,” said Tom Hartrick. “The map shouldn’t favor political parties or candidates. The map moved forward at the last meeting doesn’t follow that. It appears the public is speaking…if we are ignored the council is opening us up to a lawsuit under the FAIR MAPS Act.”

Lindsey Amezcua also spoke about the FAIR MAPS Act and the requirement on keeping neighborhoods and communities of interest together.

“Most of the maps violate state law,” she said. “There are three maps left that follow state law. It’s fiscally reckless to adopt any map that doesn’t follow state law.”

Alicia Taylor said, “I like Map 21 and not 91. But I must stick with my original and support 91….it follows major roads.”

Former Antioch Mayor and current School Board Trustee Mary Rocha said, “I thought you had made a decision. I don’t understand. I want to speak on Map 91. This map does not divide any communities of interest. It follows the Voting Rights Act. I’m still in support of Map 91.”

On Zoom, Harry Thurston, who spoke in favor of Map B during last meeting, this time spoke in favor of Draft Map A. It “most closely represents the demographics in the city,” he said.

Francisco Torres from ACE organization, who also supported Map B, during the last meeting, also spoke in favor of Map A.

Another speaker spoke in favor of Map A. “There’s five different criteria. The key word at the beginning is ‘to the extent practical’. I believe Map A does the best job. Nothing’s going to be perfect,” she said. “Map A is the most perfect of all the other ones. It was made by the professional contractors. Those who are saying it’s against the law are saying the professionals don’t know what they’re doing.”

Gretchen Egen, a member of the Martinez Independent Redistricting Commission said, “I am in favor of Map 91. Map A completely does not follow the criteria. Map 91 follows Lone Tree Way. I sat in the chambers during the lawsuit against Martinez. The only reason we lost was the Assembly bill passed in October 2019 had not yet passed.”

She said the council will be sued if they choose Map A.

“Your demographers don’t live there. But they said, ‘we don’t know your city,” she continued. “I implore you to listen

Dave asked the council “to adopt Map 91. It does not violate state law and is in the best interests of the city’s residents.”

Kaelen Perrochet, regional with California Common Cause, said, “We’d like to disabuse that the requirements of the FAIR MAPS Act are parameters, as Mayor Thorpe said at a previous council meeting. Partisan gerrymandering is illegal under state law. The mandate is to preserve the communities of interest. If the council does not…anyone in your city will have standing to sue. California Common Cause urges the city council to prioritize respecting…preserving communities of interest.”

Phillip Mobina said, “I want to vote for Map 91, the non-gerrymandered map. It’s clearly not gerrymandered to keep council members in their seats, so they don’t have to move.”

Council Discussion, Two Make Modifications to Map A

Mayor Lamar Thorpe said, “we have until April to get this done. This made-up stuff of gerrymandering is nonsense. To question people’s motives is wrong. Members of the public can share their thoughts.”

“If you look at the school district’s map, it divides communities of interest a lot more than we’re doing,” he added.

However, the FAIR MAPS Act does not apply to redistricting of school or special district boundaries.

District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock then made a motion to adopt Map 91 and Mayor Pro Tem and District 4 Councilman Mike Barbanica seconded the motion.

The motion failed 2-3 with Thorpe, District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker and District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson voting no.

Torres-Walker then brought back up Map A.

“I support this map and I want to have a discussion about this,” she said.

The only concern I have about this, and I’ve had this concern for some time, and that’s the area south of James Donlon. I have had a concern that this portion of town now be in District 2. I’d like to look at the mapping tool…and see what that looks like.”

Consultant Jane Hood of Q2 then moved the Census Tracts south of James Donlon Blvd. from Districts 4 to 2, as in Maps 58, 91, 503, 512, 516 and 521.

Then Torres-Walker asked to keep using the mapping tool. She asked the consultant to move another section from Districts 3 to 4.

Thorpe then asked to move a section from Districts 2 to 3, using Garrow Drive instead of Lone Tree Way as the boundary.

“I’d like to look at 58, please because I believe that accomplishes that,” Barbanica then stated.

Thorpe then had Hood return to the area south of James Donlon Blvd. and divide the Mesa Ridge neighborhood between Districts 2 and 4.

“Silverado would be the street that would be the dividing line,” Thorpe said. “We can come back to this one.”

Barbanica then asked to look at 516 and 521. “Is there a difference between the two?”

“We have 512, 516 and 521. I said they are the exact,” said Hood. “They were slightly different and submitted by two different individuals.”

Barbanica then made a motion to adopt Map 521 and Ogorchock seconded the motion.

The motion would

“You can’t make that motion

“You can make a motion if that’s the final map he wants to select,” said Attorney Smith.

The motion failed 2-3 on the same split.

“I like what I’m seeing, here. I don’t mind bringing it back,” Thorpe then said. “We can bring back the one we’re working on.”

“I would like to bring the modified Map A, back,” Torres-Walker said.

“I think it’s still a working draft,” Thorpe responded.

Hood then showed the modified Map A.

“I would like to see that,” Torres-Walker said.

Both maps will be brought back at another study session on redistricting on March 8.

 

 

Fails to inform at least three council members about, invite two local media sources to press conference; not yet hired, must still go through background check and hiring process which could take weeks. Morefield still interim police chief.

“This is news to me. I had no idea this was going on and coming down, today.” – Mayor Pro Tem Mike Barbanica

Announces proposed new Deputy Chief position

By Allen D. Payton

During a press conference in the City Council Chambers at City Hall, Wednesday morning, Feb. 23, 2022, Antioch Mayor Lamar Thorpe announced a new interim chief of police, San Francisco Police Commander Dr. Steve Ford, but didn’t inform at least two council members, and the city’s public information officer failed to invite at least two local media outlets about it. Only the Times, regional TV stations, and Antioch resident Frank Sterling who works at KPFA radio station were invited to attend. Both Mayor Pro Tem Mike Barbanica and District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock were unaware of the announcement event until after. District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker was in attendance, but it’s unclear if District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson was.

When shown a screenshot of the Facebook Live video Thorpe posted on his official Facebook page and asked if he knew about the press conference after it had occurred, Barbanica responded, “This is news to me.”

“I spoke with the city manager last Friday for about 15 minutes and he didn’t say anything about this,” he continued. “I had no idea this was going on and coming down, today. The way I learned this happened was through you (referring to this reporter).”

Asked if he had received the same press release sent out by Rolando Bonilla, the city’s public information officer, that Judy Prieve of the East Bay Times said she received, yesterday, Barbanica said (while looking through his city council email account), “I cannot find a press release in here, at all, regarding this move.”

Ogorchock also said she didn’t know about the press conference until after it was over. Asked if she had received the press release from Bonilla, Orgorchock responded simply, “no, nothing.”

UPDATE #4 2/24/22: Dr. Ford has not yet been hired, as he must still go through the hiring process including a background check, which could take weeks. Morefield is still the city’s current interim police chief.

UPDATE #1: When reached for comment, Torres-Walker said she learned of the press conference from the Times’ Judy Prieve.

“Judy hinted to it as we were discussing a separate matter.She didn’t go into detail,” Torres-Walker said. “Another community member mentioned it, as well. So, I thought I would check it out.”

Announcement

Thorpe introduced Dr. Steve Ford, who according to his LinkedIn page is the Commander of Police, Community Engagement Division, since January 2021, for the San Francisco Police Department, where he said he has worked for 31 years. For the past 12 years he’s served in various leadership positions with the SFPD, including Commander of Police, Administration Bureau from 2019-21, Captain of Police, Strategic Management Bureau from 2018-19, Captain of Police, Bayview Station/Golden Gate Division, Operations Bureau from 2017-18, Lieutenant from 2010-2017 in which he held nine assignments within this rank. From 2015-16 he also served as Acting Captain of Police, Staff Services Division-Department of Human Resources.

Ford earned a Doctoral of Education degree in Educational Leadership from St. Mary’s College in 2020, a Master of Science degree in Emergency Services Administration from Long Beach State where he made the Dean’s List and a Bachelor of Science degree in Criminal Justice Administration from San Francisco State, where he also made the Dean’s List.

According to Thorpe, Ford’s doctoral dissertation was on community policing. He lives in Pinole, teaches at San Francisco State and plans to continue doing so.

Thorpe Takes Swipe at Department, Previous Police Chiefs

Before introducing Ford, Thorpe took a swipe at the Antioch Police Department and past chiefs hired from within.

“For far too long, Antioch’s Police Department’s pathway to the chief’s position was one that only looked inward from within the existing ranks, which does not work with the Antioch of today,” he said. “By taking the previous approach, our city has not been exposed to the best practices and the new ways of thinking which are so critical to an evolving police department and that are even more critical when wanting to change institutional culture.”

“Unit cohesion cannot be achieved when there isn’t a clear chain of command,” Thorpe continued. “Therefore, I will be advancing a measure that will immediately create a Deputy Police Chief position at the Antioch Police Department that focuses on long-term planning, particularly in addressing attrition, operational effectiveness and much more. We are no longer a small town on the Delta. We are one of the fastest growing cities in the Bay Area as well as one of the most racially diverse cities in the Bay Area.”

He then thanked “current Interim Chief of Police Anthony Morefield and the men and women of the police department for keeping our city safe.”

“I recognize that change is difficult,” Thorpe continued. “But that difficulty can never get in the way of our pursuit to become a better city. It is only through this pursuit that we will be able to keep our city safe while simultaneously making every single resident in our city feel positively connected to our police department.”

Ford Also Takes Swipe at APD, Claiming Need for “Restoring and Bolstering Community Trust”

During the press conference Ford spoke briefly saying, “First and foremost, thank you Mayor Thorpe for having the confidence in me to lead this organization…I certainly appreciate this incredible opportunity.”

It is not clear who made the decision to hire Ford. But the mayor doesn’t have the authority to hire the police chief or interim police chief, only the city manager does, who hires all the department heads in the City of Antioch. Interim City Manager Con Johnson has been given full authority and duties by the city council to hire and fire department heads.

“Restoring and bolstering community trust is critical and I look forward to establishing meaningful relationships with our schools, our businesses, our neighborhoods, our faith-based groups and most importantly and specifically, our youth,” Ford continued. “I look forward to bringing my experience as a practitioner and academic and researcher, to make these goals and aspirations a reality for this organization and our community, as a whole.”

“To Mayor Thorpe, again, our city council all inclusive, and City Manager Johnson, thank you, again sincerely for trusting me to lead this organization. It is truly an honor I don’t take lightly,” the new interim chief concluded.

More About Dr. Ford

On his LinkedIn page, Ford wrote about his background, “A highly accomplished, knowledgeable and hands-on law enforcement leader and academic administrator with extensive formal education, exceptional administrative/communication skills and extensive university administrative experience, seeking to contribute and utilize a multitude of skills and abilities in a leadership position within a progressive organization.”
Also on his LinkedIn page, Ford lists his Summary of Qualifications as:

√ Excellent communication and interpersonal abilities in leading, administrating, training, supervising and motivating employees to achieve uniform goals and objectives for the betterment of society.

√ Impeccable work ethic; prepared to go above and beyond the call of duty to ensure optimal performance.

√ Organized and detail-oriented; skilled at management of time and resources.

√ Diverse breadth of experience; demonstrated success in a wide spectrum of environments including with data-backed, community-centered solutions.

√ Proactive yet diplomatic attitude; interact effectively with superiors, co-workers and community members.

√ Keen investigative skills; oversee long-term investigations to bring resolution to a wide range of major criminal complaints.

√ Strong communicator; able to explain complex concepts in simple terms.

Finally, Ford lists his Core Competencies as: Law Enforcement Management, Diversity & Inclusion, Personnel Mentorship/Team-Building, Crime Data Interpretation, Governance & Oversight, Innovative Leadership, Strategic Planning, Budget Management, Community Liaison, Cultural Competency, Interviews & Interrogations, Multi-Agency Investigations.

According to his bio page on the SFPD website, “Commander Steven A. Ford grew up in San Francisco’s Ingleside district in the Oceanview and attended high school in Daly City. His law enforcement background spans over 30 years and includes assignments in Operations, Investigations, Administration, Special Operations, and Professional Standards-Strategic Management bureaus. Specific positions such as Internal Affairs, Professional Standards-Principled Policing, Staff Services, and serving as the Commanding Officer of Bayview Station resonate most. In addition, Commander Ford serves as adjunct faculty at San Francisco State University and City College where he instructs administration of justice and public administration course work. Moreover, Commander Ford is a published researcher-author in the areas of community policing theory, organizational structure theory, and participative management-procedural justice theory, as well as the nexus between those frameworks and what constitutes a “legitimate” community policing organization.

Commander Ford has also attended the California Police Chiefs Executive Leadership Institute, Drucker Mgt.-Claremont Graduate University, California POST Command College, California POST Executive Development, Sherman Block Supervisory Leadership Institute, and San Francisco Leadership-Chamber of Commerce.

Commander Ford considers his leadership and professional philosophy to be that of a contemporary leader who values the history of the profession, is focused on current challenges, and has a vision for the future of policing. Commander Ford is personable, approachable, nurturing, and responsive.”

Thorpe Wouldn’t Let Ford Answer Questions

Thorpe then took questions from those members in the media in attendance, and wouldn’t allow Ford to answer any of them, including those directed to him.

“I have absolute confidence that Dr. Ford will be able to carry them out,”

“We have an attrition problem in Antioch,” Thorpe said regarding the current lack of police staffing. As of last month, the department was down 21 sworn officers from the 115 approved in the budget, to just 94 actively working. (See related article)

Asked what Ford’s priorities would be, Thorpe answered saying, “

“Hiring externally is a change,” Thorpe said in response to a question about police reform.

Asked when the last police chief was hired from outside the department he responded, “I believe the last three were hired internally. But Chief Hyde was hired from the outside.”

Actually, it was the last two police chiefs, Allan Cantando and Tammany Brooks who were hired from within the department. Prior to Cantando, Jim Hyde was hired, and prior to him, Chief Mark Moczulski was hired from within the department.

Asked by Sterling “can we hear from the chief, at all on any of our questions? Is that possible, today or are we not hearing from the chief, anymore?” Thorpe responded, “I’ll be fielding the questions.”

“So, that’s a no,” Sterling asked, pressing further. “Yes,” said Thorpe.

Questions for Council, City Staff

Asked if Dr. Ford was introduced to Councilmembers as has been past practice, Ogorchock said, “the interim city manager did not even let me know about us getting a new interim police chief.”

Attempts to reach Wilson asking if she knew about the press conference, was invited to attend and in attendance were unsuccessful prior to publication time.

Current Interim Chief Tony Morefield was asked if he knew about the hiring of Ford and if he is the new deputy chief, he did not respond.

In addition, the following questions were sent to Thorpe, Johnson, Bonilla, the other four council members, City Attorney Thomas L. Smith and Morefield:

“Why hold a press conference announcing a major issue of the hiring of a new interim chief of police and not inform or invite at least two of the council members, including the current mayor pro tem, nor two of the three local members of the press who actually cover city government on a regular basis? While Tamisha was there, as Lamar pointed toward her and made a comment about her, was Monica informed of and invited to it?

As for Dr. Ford, who hired him? Was it Lamar or Con? Because the first thing Ford said was, “First and foremost, thank you Mayor Thorpe for having the confidence in me to lead this organization.” So, it sounds like it was Lamar’s decision. The mayor doesn’t have that authority, nor does the council, because the chief doesn’t answer directly to them. It’s the city manager’s job and Con has been given full authority to hire and fire department heads.

Also, when was the decision made to hire Dr. Ford?

Why wasn’t this announced at last night’s council meeting so all the council members could know about it and choose whether not to attend?

Why, as has been past practice, didn’t the council members have the opportunity to meet Dr. Ford before he was hired? Or were some of them offered that opportunity and not others?

Was Rolando instructed to not inform Mike Burkholder (of East County Today) and me of today’s announcement event?

Was, now former, Interim Police Chief Tony Morefield made aware of it before today’s announcement?

As for the attrition in the police department mentioned by the mayor during the announcement event, what do you think are the root cause or causes of it?

Dr. Ford said, ‘Restoring and bolstering community trust is critical.’ With whom in the Antioch community does the trust need to be restored and bolstered? Upon what is he basing that viewpoint?

Also, for Lamar, how can you claim the Antioch Police Department hasn’t followed best practices just because past police chiefs were hired from within?

They have had training by POST that Dr. Ford has according to his bio on the SFPD website and have had FBI training, as well.

What ‘best practice’ had the APD not been deploying?”

In addition, a formal Public Records request was made for any and all correspondence between any and all city staff and council members with and/or regarding Dr. Ford and his hiring as interim police chief.

UPDATE #2: Questions from the Public

More questions from members of the public about hiring Dr. Ford were asked of the same council members and city staff:

“Why do they need an interim chief when they already had one? Is it to slide him in without oversight as an ‘inside’ candidate so he doesn’t have to go through a formal process? Did they mention he and Con are friends and worked together for years in SF? How long did Con and Dr. Ford work together and in what capacity?

How was Ford selected? Was anyone else considered? Will they make him go through the same hiring process as any other lateral police officer coming to Antioch, including a full police officer background, polygraph, psych evaluation and medical?”

In addition, a formal Public Records Act request was made for any and all correspondence between any and all city staff and council members with and/or regarding Dr. Ford and his hiring as interim police chief.

UPDATE #3: Ogorchock Asks Similar Questions, Interviewed by TV News

In response Ogorchock wrote in an email Wednesday evening, “I gave an interview for KRON 4, it’ll run tonight. I asked those questions myself. Here are others I asked: Was there an interview process, or was this pre-planned? When was the first conversation with Dr. Ford about this position? Was this favoritism as they both came from SFPD?”

“Councilmember Torres Walker and the mayor made public statements about the need to hire the next police chief through a public process,” Ogorchock continued. “There was no transparency as I had no knowledge of this happening. Purely frustrated, the Interim City Manager should not be hiring the next police chief, that should be the responsibility of the CM as that individual and the Chief will be working together. We as council should have no say in PD matters as we have no experience in this field, only Mayor Pro-Tem Barbanica has. That is the sole responsibility of the CM.”

Please check back later for any updates to this report.

Also, extends distance from, clarifies limits on new tobacco retailers

“This is ridiculous to tell adults what they can put in their bodies” – Councilman Barbanica

By Allen D. Payton

During their Tuesday meeting on Feb. 22, 2022, on a 4-1 vote the Antioch City Council approved another marijuana business, this one growing, manufacturing, selling and delivering cannabis supplements. The council then voted to clarify thir xisting ban on additional tobacco retail businesses on a 5-0 vote and on a 3-2 vote approved a ban on the sale of certain tobacco products in the city.

Approve Natural Cannabis Supplement Business

The additional marijuana business will include growing, manufacturing, selling and delivering cannabis supplements. According to the city staff report, “The applicant proposes to operate a cannabis operations facility consisting of a Type 10 ‘Retail Storefront and Delivery’, a Type 11 ‘Distributor’, a Type 7 ‘Manufacturer’ and a Type 3A ‘Medium Indoor Cultivation’ license located at 2100-2300 Wilbur Avenue” which is currently an undeveloped dirt lot. Natural Supplements Cannabis Facility ACC022222

District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock offered the lone opposition vote.

Extends Distance From, Clarifies Limits on New Tobacco Retailers

The council then voted unanimously to require new tobacco businesses to be at least 1,000 feet from schools and similar uses, such as public parks, playgrounds, recreational centers, or childcare centers. and clarified the city’s existing limits on new tobacco retailers in Antioch. Prior to the vote, the City’s municipal code required at least 500 feet between a business selling tobacco and a school or aforementioned uses. Distances & Limits on New Tobacco Retailers ACC022222

Ban Certain Tobacco Product Sales

In addition, on a 3-2 vote, with District 4 Councilman Barbanica and District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker voting against, the council approved a ban on certain types of tobacco products in the city. According to the city staff report, the council approved the “Ordinance Amending Section 6-8.02 of the Antioch Municipal Code to Add the Definitions of Characterizing Flavor, Cigar, and Little Cigar (including Cigarillo) and Amending Section 6- 8.14 Both to Restrict Tobacco Retailers or Businesses from Selling or Providing Tobacco with Characterizing Flavor, Selling or Providing Electronic Cigarettes or E-Cigarettes, and To Regulate the Size and Price of Specified Packages of Cigarettes, Little Cigars, and Cigars.” Ban on Certain Tobacco Product Sales ACC022222

The proposed amendment would: Add the definition of “characterizing flavor”

Prohibit the sale of tobacco or tobacco products with characterizing flavor

Prohibit a tobacco retailer or business from selling, offering for sale, possessing with the intent to sell, offer in exchange for any form of consideration, or provide at no cost any electronic cigarette or e-cigarette for use with tobacco or tobacco products

Add the definitions of “cigars” and “little cigars,” with the latter including cigarillos

Prohibit a tobacco retailer or business from selling, offering for sale, possessing with the intent to sell, offering in exchange for any form of consideration, or providing at no cost any package of fewer than twenty little cigars, any package of fewer than six cigars and any package of cigarettes, little cigars or cigars at a price that is less than ten dollars per package, including applicable fees and taxes.

Speakers During Public Comments Opposed to Ban

Local retailers and an industry representative spoke against the ban encouraging the council instead wait for a vote on a statewide measure planned for the November ballot, so that there would be a level playing field should it pass.

Before the council vote, in opposing the ban Barbanica said, “it’s ridiculous to tell adults what they can put in their bodies.”