By John Crowder

The January 27, 2015 meeting of the Antioch City Council included a report by Chief of Police Allan Cantando detailing crime statistics for the year 2014, and a handful of residents speaking out about a proposal to create a downtown event center.

According to Cantando, the city experienced a reduced level of criminal activity in 2014 as compared to the previous year. Total reportable violent crime was down 9.7%, and total property crime was down 5.6%. Only one category of crime, rape, saw an increase. However, as Cantando explained, this increase was not due to an upsurge in the crime, but rather was a result of a new FBI definition as to what acts constitute the crime.

A highlight of the crime report was the amount of volunteer work being done. Antioch Police Department (APD) volunteers worked over 10,000 hours in 2014. Volunteers worked primarily in field services (over 8,000 hours) and records (over 1,500 hours), but also contributed time to investigations and work in professional standards. Cantando said the value of the work done by volunteers was estimated at approximately $235,000.

Discussing an area that has been somewhat contentious at council meetings over the last year, especially when it involved feral cats, Cantando said that Animal Control had received almost 2800 calls for service in 2014.

Cantando also noted that calls for service were relatively flat over the last year, with APD receiving 80,407calls in 2014, as compared to 79,939 in 2013. Response times also remained relatively flat, with response times for Priority One calls in 2014 averaging 10 minutes, 36 seconds compared to 10 minutes, 30 seconds in 2013.

With respect to the number of police officers employed by the city, Cantando said that there were currently 90 full-time positions filled, and that three recruits began the Academy on January 26, 2015. The full report can be viewed as part of the City Council Meeting Agenda, by clicking here. Annual year-to-year Antioch crime statistics and maps can be viewed by clicking here.

Downtown event center backers speak

Not on the agenda, but addressed by four members of the public, was an idea put forward repeatedly at council meetings over the past few months by a group of residents who want to create an event center by combining the downtown Senior Community Center with development of the approximately two-acre lot, known as the old Beede lumber yard property.

Joy Motts, a leader in the effort, read a letter to the council written by her brother, Kerry Motts, Vice Chair of Antioch’s Planning Commission. In the letter, Motts spoke of the historical significance of the Beede site, saying it was, “indispensable as the one site that incorporates all of Antioch’s finest assets,” referencing the views it affords of the Delta, and proximity to the water, downtown shops, and founding location of the city. Motts painted a vivid word picture of their vision for the project, calling it a great idea that meaningfully reflects, “the history and traditions of our town.” The letter concluded by saying that the idea has, “the power to bind people together and bring unity under a goal and a vision that is stronger and more lasting than any short-term gain from selling our citizens’ best asset.”

Lee Ballesteros, who, along with her husband, John, founded and operate the nonprofit Drama Factory in Antioch, also spoke in favor of the event center proposal. Ballesteros quoted mayors of two other cities recognizing the importance of open, recreational space to a community. She said that research shows that high-quality parks, “spur economic development by attracting home buyers and boosting residential property values.” Ballesteros also argued that the proposal for an event center, “written by the people and for the people,” would serve as a “green engine” to “help address nearly every critical urban need from health to housing, to education and environmental justice” and that it would also help to counter sprawl and combat crime.

Wayne Harrison, a 15-year resident of Antioch, and President of the Celebrate Antioch Foundation, also spoke in support of the event center proposal.

“These citizens deserve a chance,” he said.

Alluding to complaints that their proposal has been largely ignored by city staff, he said, “I urge you to give this group the respect that they deserve.”

Event center supporters had an artist rendering of the proposed project available for members of the public to view.

The next regular city council meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, February 10. Meetings are held in the City Council Chambers, located at 200 H Street, next to City Hall, on the second and fourth Tuesdays of the month, beginning at 7:00 p.m. They can be viewed live on Comcast Channel 24 or on the city’s website via live streaming, at www.ci.antioch.ca.us/CityGov/citycouncilmeetings.htm. They are also archived, there, as well.

On December 17, 2014, the Contra Costa Water District (CCWD) Board of Directors unanimously approved Connstance Holdaway to fill the Board vacancy left by the passing of Director Karl Wandry.  Holdaway participated in her first Board meeting representing Division 5 on January 7, 2015.  The Division 5 seat will be up for election in November 2016.

Holdaway lives with her family in Oakley and currently works as a paralegal in Oakland. She will represent residents in most of Antioch and Oakley, and parts of Brentwood. (see Division 5 map, CCWD Division5 map)

CCWD received applications from eleven candidates, and from those, selected six individuals for interviews conducted at the December 10 meeting. Seven Antioch residents applied, including Richard Hobin and Josuwa Bernardo, who made the final round, as well as Dennis Gonden, Angel Luevano, Lamar Thorpe, Julian Isham and Mark Foley. At their December 17 meeting, the Board appointed Holdaway to represent Division 5.

“Board members agreed that Connstance will uphold the Board’s commitment to represent the needs of our customers and provide high-quality water service,” said CCWD Board resident, Joseph L. Campbell.

Holdaway is a 2008 graduate of Cal State Hayward (now East Bay) in Criminal Justice Administration, and received a certificate in Paralegal Studies from JFK University in 2011. She is a former Manager for Safeway in Clayton and has been a Team Parent since 2012 for the Delta Youth Baseball & Softball League.

All applications and documents related to the selection process were made available for public review on the website and at the District offices.

For more information visit www.ccwater.com.

OAKLAND, Calif., – The Metropolitan Transportation Commission – the Bay Area’s transportation planning, financing and coordinating agency – is recruiting interested Bay Area residents to fill three vacancies on its Policy Advisory Council. In Contra Costa County, there is an opening for an individual representing disabled interests. In Santa Clara County, the vacancy is for an individual to represent either the economy or the environment. And the third vacancy is an at-large seat, to be filled by an individual representing either the economy or the environment from any of the nine Bay Area counties. The Council meets the second Wednesday of the month from 1:30-3:30 p.m. in Oakland, and advisors are reimbursed for their transportation to and from the meeting.

Created by the Commission in November 2009 to advise MTC on transportation policies in the San Francisco Bay Area, the Policy Advisory Council incorporates diverse perspectives relating to the environment, the economy and social equity. The Council advises MTC on a range of dynamic topics, including:

• Regional planning efforts linking transportation, housing and land-use plans to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

• Public transit service productivity improvements to produce more efficiency from the region’s existing transit investments.

• Pursuit of new revenues to support a transportation system that better serves all Bay Area residents.

  “The Commission wants and needs to hear various viewpoints when making transportation policy and investment decisions,” said MTC Chair Amy Rein Worth. “Incorporating different perspectives enhances our decision-making process. The Policy Advisory Council helps the Commission to improve mobility for all Bay Area residents.”

Applications for the three vacancies will be accepted through February 9, 2015. No specific educational background is needed for most seats – just a background in the specific application category, and an interest in transportation and how it affects residents in the nine Bay Area counties. Experience working on public policy issues or community-related issues is desirable. Appointed advisors are expected to attend monthly meetings at MTC’s offices in Oakland and will serve through the term ending in July 2017. While positions are voluntary, advisors do receive a small stipend for their attendance at certain meetings.

MTC’s appointing Commissioners will review the applications, and the full Commission is scheduled to approve the selections in March. The selected applicants will attend their first meeting on April 8, 2015. To apply for a vacant position or to learn more about the Policy Advisory Council, visit www.mtc.ca.gov/get_involved/advisory or call (510) 817-5757.

By Allen Payton

In spite of polls showing an overwhelming number of Americans oppose taxpayer funding of abortion, both Congressmen representing Antioch voted against a new ban on the practice on Thursday, January 22. The vote occurred on the 42nd anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s Roe vs. Wade decision legalizing abortion.

Until the passage of Obamacare in 2009, the federal government had not allowed the funding of abortions using federal funds, with exceptions for rape, incest and life endangerment of the mother, since the passage of the Hyde Amendment in 1976. That is passed every year as part of a spending bill. But, this bill would make that law permanent. It also ensures that Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, faithfully conforms with the Hyde Amendment as promised by the President.

In one of his first votes as a new Member of Congress, Mark DeSaulnier (D, CA-11), along with Jerry McNerney (D, CA-9), serving in his fifth term in the U.S. House of Representatives, voted with the other 176 of the 188 Democrats in the House, plus one Republican, to oppose the bill. It passed mainly along party lines with 239 Republicans and three Democrats voting in favor, and five Republicans and seven Democrats not voting. It’s the third time the House has passed a bill with the same language.

If passed by the Senate and signed by President Obama, who has threatened a veto, the bill, HR-7, entitled “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act of 2015,” will end the four year practice using federal tax dollars for abortions, with exceptions for rape, incest or when the mother’s life is endangered.

The text of the bill reads in “Sec. 301. Prohibition on funding for abortions, “No funds authorized or appropriated by Federal law, and none of the funds in any trust fund to which funds are authorized or appropriated by Federal law, shall be expended for any abortion. In Sec. 302, the bill includes a “Prohibition on funding for health benefits plans that cover abortion – None of the funds authorized or appropriated by Federal law, and none of the funds in any trust fund to which funds are authorized or appropriated by Federal law, shall be expended for health benefits coverage that includes coverage of abortion.”

However, Section 308 read “Treatment of abortions related to rape, incest, or preserving the life of the mother, The limitations established in sections 301, 302, and 303 shall not apply to an abortion– (1) if the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape or incest; or (2) in the case where a woman suffers from a physical disorder, physical injury, or physical illness that would, as certified by a physician, place the woman in danger of death unless an abortion is performed, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself.”

According to the bill’s author, Rep. Chris Smith (R, NJ-4) “On September 9, 2009 President Obama stood 6 feet from where I stand now and told lawmakers and the American public in a specially called joint session of Congress on healthcare reform that ‘under our plan, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortion.’

“Turns out that those ironclad promises made by the President himself are absolutely untrue,” Smith stated. “An extensive audit by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released in September of last year found that 1,036 Obamacare exchange plans covered elective abortion. GAO also found that separate billing of the abortion surcharge – required by the Act – is not being enforced by the administration and the abortion-funding premium is again being illegally rolled into the total plan cost.”

“Health care consumers are therefore buying health insurance with little or no knowledge that they are purchasing abortion subsidizing plans,” Smith added.

Based on numbers reported by the Guttmacher Institute from 1973-2011, with projections of 1,058,490 for 2012-14, almost 57.5 million abortions have been performed in the U.S. since the Roe vs. Wade decision. The Guttmacher Institute estimates a possible 3 percent under reporting rate, which is factored into the overall total.

According to the Centers for Disease Control, in the most recent year reported on their website, “Among the 28 areas that reported cross-classified race/ethnicity data for 2010…, non-Hispanic white women and non-Hispanic black women accounted for the largest percentages of abortions (36.8% and 35.7%, respectively), whereas Hispanic women and non-Hispanic women in the other races category accounted for smaller percentages (21.0% and 6.5%, respectively). Non-Hispanic white women had the lowest abortion rates (8.6 abortions per 1,000 women aged 15–44 years) and ratios (141 abortions per 1,000 live births), whereas non-Hispanic black women had the highest abortion rates (31.8 abortions per 1,000 women aged 15–44 years) and ratios (483 abortions per 1,000 live births).”

For more information and the complete text of the bill on the Clerk of the House’s website, click here.

By John Crowder

Over the last few months, Antioch residents supporting a proposal to convert the old Beede lumber yard property bordered by Second, Third and E Streets, a roughly two-acre parcel that has been vacant for years, into a permanent outdoor event center, have been speaking out at city council meetings, asking for a hearing on their proposal. The January 13 meeting of the Antioch City Council was no exception, as Joy Motts, one of the leaders in the effort, once again pleaded their case to council members.

In her statement, Motts lamented the lack of response from city staff to their repeated requests for a discussion of the idea. She began by outlining the now two-year history of requests for consideration put forward by her and other community members.

“Over two years ago Sean Wright, Kerry Motts, myself and a few Rivertown developers came together to discuss plans for an event center for downtown Antioch on the vacant Beede lumber site property at the corner of 2^nd and E Street,” she said. She went on to say that her group had been asked to postpone moving forward by the former city manager, Jim Jakel, in order that the “full attention of the council” could be given to the passage of Measure C during the November, 2013 election, and that they had agreed to do so.

Motts related that in early 2014, her group had been excited to meet with the new city manager, Steve Duran, but were disheartened to learn that, “Mr. Duran has had no interest in our proposal, or in listening to the community as to their wishes for downtown and went forward with a plan for multi-unit properties on the site we believe is the natural, and most economical, place to create a downtown community event center…just like every community around us has or is in the process of creating.”

She went on to say that the plan Duran had conceived was only slowed through, “numerous citizens’ requests.”

Motts said that, the past seven months had seen, “dozens of speakers at council meetings, over 1,000 signatures…asking for this topic to be [placed on the city council agenda] for discussion, and yet here we are, January 2015, and we have received absolutely no response from you or your staff.” Motts concluded by listing several of the groups in support of the event center proposal, including Rivertown residents, the Rivertown Preservation Society, and the Celebrate Antioch Foundation.

Following the meeting, Motts stated, “The community and Rivertown residents deserve a chance to discuss with the City the economic vitality and permanent legacy an event center would bring to Rivertown in contrast to the multi-unit development that is currently proposed.”

When Duran was asked about the delay in bringing the idea before the city council, he provided the following comments via email to Herald staff:

“The City Council approved a Request for Qualifications and Proposals (RFQ/P) process that is looking for residential development on that site based on extensive studies over the years and on my recommendation. Staff is currently carrying out that process, and has advised all along that it would take months before we would come back to the City Council with recommendations, as noted in my Monthly Report (See the City web site). Staff is in discussions with a number of qualified developers and will be for several more weeks.

The Beede site is zoned for residential development and has been since at least as far back as the last General Plan update in 2003. General Plans, of course, go through an extensive public process, including Environmental Impact Reports, and are approved by the Planning Commission and City Council. In addition, there have been a number of studies done by the City over the years, the most recent and promising of which is the 2006 ‘Arcadis’ plan, called ‘Antioch Rivertown Waterfront Development.’ Like all the preceding plans, the Beede site was designated to be predominantly residential.

The ideas that Ms. Motts has brought forth have been listened to and heard over the years and I have certainly done the same. Staff has reviewed the proposal her group presented and, when we have finished considering all the ideas and proposals we are exploring, staff will be making a complete report with our recommendations to the City Council.

It’s the staff’s job to analyze and make recommendations to the Council, aided as necessary with additional professional expertise. It would not be fair for any contender for the development of that site, or any City-owned site, to end run the process the City Council directed or to have the City Council consider one idea in isolation with no input from myself, our staff or our consultants that have extensive experience in real estate, redevelopment and downtown revitalization. All ideas and/or proposals, and the developers, need to be scrutinized by staff and consultants so that the Council can make a well informed decision.”

Duran also provided the following links for reference:

General Plan:

http://ci.antioch.ca.us/CityGov/CommDev/PlanningDivision/docs/Antioch_Adopted_General_Plan.pdf

Arcadis study:

http://ci.antioch.ca.us/CityGov/Finance/EconDev/Rivertown-Waterfront-Development.htm

By John Crowder

Following are the questions from this reporter and the answers provided by Antioch City Manager Steve Duran regarding city staff’s acknowledged discrepencies in police staffing levels, and city employee contract negotiations, this last year. (See the previous Herald article regarding this issue, here).

Q – I’m following up to see if you can provide me with the information about who was on the respective negotiating teams listed in my earlier email (see below), or direct me to whoever might have that information.

A – The current Negotiating Team for the City is Glenn Berkheimer of IEDA, Administrative Services Director Michelle Fitzer and Human Resources Analyst Denise Haskett.  For the Management Unit was Mike Bechtholdt and Ryan Graham.  For the Confidential Unit was Carol Cline and Tammy Leach.

Local 1’s current agreement was negotiated on behalf of the City by Glenn Berkheimer, former Human Resources Director Deborah McHenry, and Denise Haskett.  The Local 1 representatives were Roland Katz, Business Agent, and employee representatives Todd Northam, Wayne Burgess, Dennis Celoni, Brandon Chalk, Ron Colefield, and Manuel Hicks.

OE3’s current agreement was negotiated on behalf of the City by Austris Rungis of IEDA, Glenn Berkheimer (Letter Of Understanding 2011), and former Human Resources Director Deborah McHenry.  The OE3 representatives were Carl Carey, Chief Negotiator, and employee representatives Larry Munn, Annette Mefford, Harold Jirousky, and Phil Hoffmeister.

Q – Also, were you ever able to get H.R. to sort out the discrepancy with the police staffing numbers over the last couple of years? 

A – An error was discovered in the payroll report originally pulled.  Although the report showed 76 employees, in researching the question it was discovered that employees who had separated between the effective date of the information (October 2013) and the date the report was pulled from the payroll system (October 2014) were dropped from the report.  So, although the requested information was as of October 2013 it did not capture employees who had since separated.  The actual number, excluding per-diem employees and Trainees, was 84.  We have implemented a double checks and balance protocol in an attempt to ensure that this type of error does not occur again.

Q – Can you also tell me on what date management ratified the new MOU which was referred to during the last council meeting, in which they were said to have agreed to reinstatement of the 10% pay cut effective in January, 2015? 

A – Ms. Fitzer was notified of the Management Unit vote ratifying the Agreement on October 21, 2014.

Q – Finally, in reading the Management MOU and the letter regarding the economic triggers, I’d like to know on what basis you believe the trigger letter remained in effect after the sunset date?  This appears to be a separate agreement, covering a certain period of time during which a trigger would have provided for an increase in salary to management employees.  I don’t see that it is incorporated into the benefit agreement at all, or that its sunsetting could realistically be construed as a basis for the furloughs themselves ending. 

A – In accordance with current labor laws, all terms and conditions of employment found in a negotiated collective bargaining agreement (aka Memorandum of Understanding – MOU) remain in full force and effect until a successor Agreement is negotiated, or terms and conditions are imposed following the appropriate impasse procedures.  The Tentative Agreement with the Management Unit that included the trigger language mirrored the termination date of the Benefit Document Agreement – September 30, 2013.  The entire Tentative Agreement had that date, not just the trigger language section.  Had the trigger section specifically stated that the provision sunset on its own as of 9/30/13, the same argument would apply to the entire agreement that authorized the furloughs. However, again, the furlough was always tied to the trigger.  There is no separate language authorizing the furlough 10% salary reduction in the agreements. Therefore, the City would not have had any document to point to as authorization to continue the furlough salary reduction without agreement from the bargaining unit.  Had the City attempted to remove the trigger language outside of the collective bargaining process, or before the completion of bargaining and the appropriate impasse procedures, if necessary, the City would likely face a per se violation of the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act and an Unfair Labor Practice Charged filed with PERB.

Washington, DC – On Wednesday, January 21, Congressman Mark DeSaulnier (CA-11), who represents portions of Antioch in the U.S. House of Representatives, announced that he will serve on the Oversight and Government Reform Committee in the 114th Congress. Last week DeSaulnier announced his assignment to the Education & Workforce Committee.

“The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee has broad authority to investigate matters and conduct aggressive oversight to maintain a well-functioning government and to keep the public informed. One of my top priorities in the California legislature was to ensure government is transparent, that proper oversight occurs, and that taxpayer dollars are judiciously used. I appreciate the opportunity to bring this experience to federal matters and look forward to working with Chairman Jason Chaffetz and Ranking Member Elijah Cummings and all of my colleagues on the Committee,” said Congressman Mark DeSaulnier (CA-11).

“With over 20 years of public service, Congressman DeSaulnier will bring strong leadership, expertise, and a fresh perspective to the Oversight Committee. I look forward to working with him to reach responsible solutions to the issues affecting our nation and ensure that the federal government works for the American people,” said Oversight and Government Reform Ranking Member Elijah Cummings.

“Rep. Mark DeSaulnier has been a stalwart leader in holding government accountable and protecting the interests of taxpayers and the public. He is incisive, persistent and fair.  He asks the right questions, the tough questions and expects nothing short of open, honest and complete answers. California taxpayers have benefited directly and immensely from his leadership on transparency, accountability and good government, and now all U.S. taxpayers will enjoy the same,” said Jim Wunderman, President and CEO of the Bay Area Council.

For more information about Congressman DeSaulnier, visit his official House website by clicking here. To learn more about the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, click here.

By John Crowder

At the January 13, 2015 meeting of the Antioch City Council, members of the public spoke about a proposed card room ordinance and the feral cat situation, while Mayor Pro Tem Lori Ogorchock pushed for a future agenda item to discuss the hiring of Community Service Officers (CSO’s).

Card rooms

Stemming from direction given by the city council at a meeting last November, a proposed card room ordinance was presented by city staff. The proposed ordinance called for limiting the number of card rooms in Antioch to two, and requiring applicants desiring to operate a card room in Antioch to obtain a State Card Room License prior to the council considering such a request.

Also included in the staff report was a five-point letter received by the city on December 10, 2014, in which 30 prominent Antioch residents requested the council consider, “several options for strengthening our card room ordinance.” These included the following:

1. Asking voters about new licenses and any expansion of gambling

2. Consider what games are allowed and how many tables

3. The location of gambling

4. The process by which a license to conduct gambling is obtained

5. Providing the police department with enforcement tools

Steve Scudero, representing the card room 19^th Hole, noted that the state allowed them to expand from 6 to 8 tables with the approval of the council. He requested that a vote of the people not be required for such a “minor” change. He noted that he and his two partners were in their 31^st year of ownership of the 19^th Hole, and that, over the last 30 years, they had raised over $1.5 million for local charities.

Following Scudero’s comments, council member Mary Rocha immediately moved to accept the staff recommendation for the proposed ordinance. During discussion by the council, Mayor Wade Harper asked city attorney Lynn Tracy Nerland if the council would be able to “come back with some stronger language,” as referenced in the December 10 letter, if they were to approve the motion put forward by Rocha. Harper also emphasized that, “I don’t want to have any negative impact on the 19^th Hole.” Even so, Harper said, “I want to limit the card rooms from being within a certain [number of] feet of churches, schools, day cares, that type of thing.” Nerland recommended they approve the currently proposed ordinance, and come back with additional proposals at a later date. Following further discussion, the motion to approve the ordinance, as presented by city staff, was passed on a 5-0 vote. After the vote, staff was directed to bring back language that would restrict where card rooms would be placed, while ensuring that the 19^th Hole would not be negatively impacted by such a revision.

Feral cats

Also at the meeting, the council received an animal services update, focusing on the ordinance banning the feeding of feral cats except on one’s own private property. The update began with Antioch Police Chief Alan Cantando introducing Lieutenant Tony Morefield, currently managing Animal Services, and providing background. Cantando noted that the council had directed, several months ago, that staff meet with animal rights advocates concerned about the ordinance. Cantando thanked all who participated in the meetings, and noted the passion with which participants advocated for their cause.

Morefield started his presentation by stating that an ordinance was passed by the council in April of last year prohibiting the feeding of feral cats on other than someone’s own property. He said that, at that time, the council had directed staff to meet with groups conducting Trap, Neuter, and Release (TNR) programs, to see how such programs could be continued “under provisions” of the ordinance. He noted that several meetings had taken place.

Morefield summarized his written report by saying, “We did discuss a number of topics surrounding the issue of feral cats, but unfortunately, we were not able to come to a consensus on how to proceed.” He went on to say, “Essentially, these groups have made it clear to staff that they are in opposition to the ordinance.” Morefield continued, “Furthermore…it has become clear to staff that the advocate groups do not agree with the ordinance, nor are they wanting to conform to it. On the contrary, over these months, permanent cat feeding structures have been erected and subsequently removed, the regular feeding of feral cats continues…the blight of feeding feral cats is evident all over the downtown area, and ultimately, the feral cat population in Antioch persists.”

Following Morefield’s remarks, council member Tony Tiscareno, who said that he had been in attendance and observed one of the meetings between the feral cat advocates and city staff, asked if there had been any advocacy groups willing to work with the city within the confines of the ordinance. Morefield said that there was no site outside public lands that the advocacy groups found acceptable as a place to feed the animals.

During public comments, most speakers expressed opposition to the ordinance banning the feeding of feral cats. They focused on two main points, removing the ban on feeding and directing police resources to other areas.

Typical of the comments were those expressed by Karen Kops, President of Homeless Animals Response Program (HARP), who said, “A feeding ban and TNR is not compatible.” “We’re asking that the feeding ban of feral cats be repealed.” “Please do not spend any more money to impede the work of volunteers.”

With respect to allocation of police resources, Leslie Ward, among several others, said that Antioch should focus on its crime problem, including the numerous shootings that have taken place in the city, and not on feral cats.

Some of the speakers, though, did support the ordinance banning the feeding of the feral cats. Fred Hoskins said, “There’s a big ballyhoo again,” and that, “we’re going in circles.” He said these, “concerned citizens” should implement a, “Trap, Neuter, and Take Home” program. “Our city needs no more blight,” he said.

Paul Shore commended the council for adopting the ordinance, and for giving the feral cat advocates six months of discussions. Shore emphasized the number of birds killed each year by feral cats. He said, “It has been proven, TNR does not work in controlling feral cat predation.” “Well-fed cats are also predators. Even though they’re fed, that does not diminish their desire to hunt and kill,” he said. “Putting feeding stations is going to promote more cats in that area, and especially along the waterfront, it’s going to impact the birds. I strongly urge you to implement the ban.”

Lisa Kirk, of the Homeless Animal Lifeline Organization (HALO), brought up another issues. She said, “You do have 20,000 feral cats,” but the ordinance prevents the city from obtaining grants to deal with them.

Following the public comments, City Manager Steve Duran said, “I think the intent in the six months, which ended up being more than that, was to try to, within the context of the ordinance which was passed by the council, after much review, and much research and much testimony…the intent was to try and work within the contents of this ordinance to find a TNR group that would be willing to work with the city in that context.” “We felt that there could be a way to work with the most reasonable we could find of these groups to establish a certain number of feeding stations so the cats could be trapped. I think the problem in the whole thing is, what caused the problem in the first place, that led to the ordinance, is unfettered feeding of cats, along our very environmentally sensitive waterfront where there are species that cats naturally would hunt, not to mention the feces and the cleanup of the cat food and things like that. The problem is also…with rogue feeders.” He also said that the feral cat advocates drew, “a line in the sand,” taking the stand that the city must repeal the ordinance. Duran said there was hope to get something done, but not if people just “dig in their heels” on the ordinance, which he characterized as illogical, as it would lead to people “feeding cats anywhere, anytime,” and said there are currently people who just dump food for the cats in the middle of the street. “It’s irrational to think that if you just have, unfettered, no rules, that somehow it’s gonna make it better.”

Following Duran’s statement, Rocha, clearly frustrated, called for a neutral person to intercede, saying, “I think you need a mediator.” “We can’t continue to do this,” she said.

Rocha also said that she wanted to see HALO’s Lisa Kirk involved in any further meetings.

Following council discussion, the council agreed, on a 5-0 vote, to direct Duran to continue the dialogue with the respective TNR organizations, to include Lisa Kirk, and report back in three months.

Community Service Officers

During council comments, Ogorchock raised the topic of hiring additional CSO’s. She said that the elimination of furlough Friday’s had been proposed to be funded by Measure O at a council meeting in September of last year. With this now being funded by additional property taxes, that freed up about $440,000 which could be put toward the hiring of CSO’s. She stated that she wanted to see this added to the agenda at the next council meeting.

Following her statement, however, Harper began to comment, but then Duran, “through the mayor” said, that the council needs to agree to put something on the agenda. Harper then said, “it takes at least three of us to agree,” before an item can be placed on an upcoming agenda. “They have to have the council’s consensus and direction,” he said.

The next city council meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, January 27. Council meetings are held at the council chambers at City Hall, 200 H Street. The meetings begin at 7:00 p.m. They can also be viewed live stream online at www.ci.antioch.ca.us.