No commissioners attended Jan. 6th meeting, 7th meeting since Julythat couldn’t be held
By Allen D. Payton
During their meeting, tonight, Feb. 3, 2025, the Antioch Police Oversight Commission (APOC) will discuss their 2024 Annual Report to Council which recommends three additional policies for the department’s policy manual. They will also elect a new chairperson and vice person.
The last meeting of the APOC at which they had a quorum of at least four members was on Dec. 2, 2024. Video screenshot.
The meeting follows the cancelled meeting on Jan. 20 and none of the commissioners showing up for the Jan. 6th meeting, for which the following was posted on the Commission’s page of the City’s website: “NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the regularly scheduled Antioch Police Oversight Commission Meeting for Monday, January 6, 2025, has been ADJOURNED due to lack of a quorum.” That left only City Clerk Melissa Rhodes and then-City Attorney Thomas L. Smith seated at the dais. It was the fourth meeting without a quorum of members since Oct. 10th and seventh since July 1st.
According to the 2024 Annual Report, the “APOC has identified key areas that need to be addressed in the APD policy manual. This report highlights three critical recommendations for inclusion: the Angelo Quinto Crisis Response Team (AQCRT), Officer Mental Health, and a comprehensive community engagement policy. These additions address gaps that impact community safety and trust, aligning the manual with modern best practices.”
However, the city council learned last week that one-time federal COVID-related funding used for the Crisis Response Team runs out at the end of October. Yet, the council members stated a desire to find grant funds to continue operating the program.
Proposed Antioch Police Policy Manual Additions Under the Crisis Response Team:
Deployment Protocols: Clear guidelines for dispatchers to determine when AQCRT is deployed versus law enforcement.
Operational Collaboration: Frameworks for how APD officers and AQCRT professionals coordinate during overlapping or escalated incidents.
Under the Community Engagement Policy:
Community Outreach Standards: Establish clear expectations for APD participation in town halls, neighborhood meetings, and collaborative events.
Engagement Programs: Develop and formalize initiatives such as youth outreach programs, cultural competency workshops, and public forums to strengthen relationships.
Measurement and Accountability: Implement metrics to evaluate the effectiveness of community engagement activities and their impact on public trust.
Under the Officer Mental Health and Wellness Policy:
Mandatory Mental Health Check-ins: Require officers to participate in regular, confidential mental health check-ins with licensed professionals.
Therapeutic Support Programs: Provide access to ongoing therapy services, including trauma-informed counseling and stress management resources. We already do this. We have a contact with a counseling firm.
Mental Health Education: Integrate mental health and wellness training into officer development programs, emphasizing resilience and coping strategies.
Confidentiality Assurance: Ensure that participation in mental health services is protected and does not negatively impact an officer’s career. This is also already done and is codified in CA law.
Rationale: • Improved Officer Performance: Mental wellness supports sound decision making and situational judgment. • Reduced Burnout and Stress: Regular access to mental health care mitigates job-related stress and reduces the risk of burnout. • Enhanced Public Safety: Mentally healthy officers are better equipped to handle high-stress situations calmly and effectively. • Long-term Resilience: Fostering a culture that prioritizes mental health helps officers sustain long and productive careers.
The commissioners also want Ongoing Training for the Commission asking the council to “Allocate funding from the current budget to support the training and development of APOC members, ensuring effective oversight.”
Finally, the commissioners want “a thorough evaluation of the upcoming budget cycle, with a focus on transparency, resource alignment, and investment in critical programs.”
Looking Ahead: 2025-2027 Budget APOC plans to conduct a comprehensive review of the proposed 2025-2027 budget once it is presented in January 2025. This review will prioritize: • Greater transparency in budget allocation and reporting. • Expanded funding for critical initiatives such as the Angelo Quinto Crisis Response Team (AQCRT) and community engagement programs. • Ensuring resources are aligned with both community safety and equity goals.
Commissioners The current commissioners include Chairperson Porshe Taylor, Vice Chairperson Devin Williams, Commissioners Treva Hadden, Alicia Dianne Lacey-Oha, and Leslie May with two vacancies.
The meeting begins at 6:30 p.m. inside the Council Chambers at Antioch City Hall, 200 H Street in historic, downtown Rivertown. It can be viewed via livestream on the City’s website.
Help shape the future of Antioch’s Police leadership!
By Antioch Police Department
Join us for a Community Meeting on the recruitment of our next Antioch Police Chief! This is your opportunity to share your thoughts on the qualities and experience you believe are essential for our city’s next law enforcement leader.
Saturday, February 8th at 11:00 AM Antioch Community Center, 4703 Lone Tree Way
Don’t miss this chance to make a difference in our community!
Contra Costa Health (CCH) announced Tuesday, Jan. 28, 2025, that it has received a grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) for continued support of its Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Program.
The program will promote safety among pedestrians and bicyclists and emphasize the drivers’ responsibility to look out for people using roads and paths. The grant program runs through September 2025.
Local data show an increase of nearly 30% in fatal crashes involving pedestrians over the past decade in Contra Costa County, and that pedestrians and bicyclists are 2.4 times more likely to be seriously injured or killed in a traffic crash compared to drivers. The OTS grant funds multiple efforts to improve safety for pedestrians and bicyclists.
“The safety of people walking and biking on our roads is a top priority for our office,” OTS Director Stephanie Dougherty said. “Everyone moves, and not always by car. It’s important that we invest in efforts to protect people walking, biking and rolling that helps establish a strong traffic safety culture where everyone on California roads can travel to and from places safely.”
Graphics source: CA OTS
Grant funds will support various activities focused on bicycle and pedestrian safety: • Support for local jurisdictions to include public health principals in road safety plans and address the community conditions that create unsafe environments for non-motorized road users. • Promote the CCH traffic safety campaign, “Slow Roads Save Lives.” • Community bicycle and walk “audits” of streets with high rates of pedestrian or bicyclist fatalities and serious injury crashes. • Bicycle training courses that teach youth skills to help them stay safe on the road. • Community events that promote bicyclist and pedestrian visibility and the importance of sharing the road, slowing down, and staying alert to bicyclists and pedestrians while driving.
Funding for this program was provided by a grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety, through the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
Antioch Unified’s new interim superintendent Dr. Matt Wayne. Source: LinkedIn
After Acting Superintendent Martinez claims board failed to communicate with him, withdrew name from consideration
Dr. Matt Wayne has doctorate in Education, two Masters degrees in English Education and Education in Public School Administration, is fluent in Spanish; contract is for 6 months at $1,500 per weekday
By Allen D. Payton
During a special meeting on Friday afternoon, Jan. 24, 2025, the Antioch School Board hired the former embattled San Francisco Unified School District superintendent for the interim position. Dr. Matthew R. Wayne faced opposition from the City’s then-Mayor London Breed and the public over his school closure plan.
After returning from Closed Session during which the board took no reportable action, they heard from three executive search firms on the hiring of a permanent superintendent. They then returned to Closed session and at 4:53 p.m. Boad Chair and District 1 Trustee Antonio Hernandez called the meeting back to open session. He said, “We do have a reportable action from Closed Session, the board voted in a vote of 4-1, with President Hernandez, Vice President Rocha, Trustee Colbos-Smith and Trustee Brown voting ‘yes’ and Trustee Dr. Lathan voting ‘no” to see, to appoint Matt Wayne as the interim superintendent for the Antioch Unified School District.” (See 3:54:00 mark of the meeting video)
His contract is for six months, and he will be paid $1,500 per weekday.
The board’s action followed the request by then-Acting Superintendent Dr. Rob Martinez to return to his position as the District’s Human Resources Office after Hernandez withdrew the item from their Dec. 18, 2024, board meeting agenda. The district official issued a letter to the community on Tuesday, January 28, 2025 explaining his decision:
Dear Antioch Unified School District School Community,
It has been an honor and privilege to have served the students, staff, and broader Antioch Unified School District Community as “Acting Superintendent” and Chief Human Resources Officer since May of 2024. During my tenure as “Acting Superintendent”, I was able to confirm thousands of students with their High School Diplomas, welcome back over 15,000 students to our schools and programs in the fall of 2024, and I was able to initiate and oversee the Governing Board’s selection of McPherson and Jacobson as the search firm to assist the District with finding a long-term superintendent. I have also continued to oversee and manage both the Classified and Certificated Human Resources Departments as we have strived to fill many positions in the District. One of my primary focus areas has been to ensure that all our scholars were able to attend school every day in educational environments where they are welcomed, feel safe and secure, and where they can continue to excel in their academic and developmental pursuits and grow in peace.
“In December of 2024, I strongly urged the Antioch Unified School District Governing Board to formally place me into the Interim Superintendent position for the remainder of this academic year. However, the Board chose to not formally appoint me into that position, and pulled the agenda item from the December 18, 2024, Board meeting without any formal public discussion. Since that time, after numerous attempts to communicate with the Board, with minimal returned responses, or limited direct communication from the Board members, I decided that the Antioch School Community might be better served if I were to step back into my Human Resources role alone, and away from the ‘Acting Superintendent’ position.
“The betterment of the school community and how our scholars are impacted on a daily basis has and will always be my main focus, and it is with this thought in mind that I hope that the new Interim Superintendent will have more success with communicating with the Board, receiving clear direction and goals from the Board, and in receiving input from the Board with regards to the difficult budget decisions that lay ahead. Hence, I advised the Board on January 10, 2025, that effective on February 1, 2025, I would return solely to my initial contractual position as the District’s Chief Human Resources Officer.
“On Friday, January 24, 2025, the AUSD Governing Board announced that they would be appointing Mr. Matthew Wayne as Interim Superintendent. It is anticipated that a formal contract for Mr. Wayne will be presented to the Board for review and potential approval at the January 29, 2025, Governing Board Meeting.
“Respectfully submitted, with care for students, and thoughtful consideration of all,
Dr. Robert A. Martinez, Acting Superintendent / Chief Human Resources Officer Antioch Unified School District”
Controversy Surrounding Wayne
According to an October 17, 2024, report by Mission Local, Wayne agreed to resign due to his controversial “school closure and consolidation plan. The long-running mishandling of this effort — culminating in Wayne releasing a list of potential school closures and transfer sites on Oct. 8 that differed from what the mayor’s office, her school stabilization team and the Board of Education anticipated he’d release — appears to have been the final straw that will curtail Wayne’s two-year tenure. He has two years remaining on his contract.”
According to an SFGate news report, “Wayne inherited the district in a chaotic state, including troubling payroll system issues, a massive budget deficit, teacher recruitment and retention challenges, and a declining number of students. Since taking the superintendent role, Wayne has been accused of poor management, as the district’s issues have only gotten worse.”
In his message to the “SFUSD Community” on Oct. 18, 2024, Wayne wrote, “I am writing to share the difficult decision to leave the San Francisco Unified School District as of October 18, 2024. I am incredibly grateful for the opportunity to have served SFUSD and proud of all that has been accomplished during my almost two-and-a-half years leading the District.
“I am an educator first and foremost. During the last two years under my leadership, the District has established clear outcomes for student learning, implemented districtwide standards-based assessments, adopted a new literacy curriculum, expanded instructional coaching to all elementary schools, is piloting a new math curriculum, now offers Algebra in the 8th grade, and has expanded career pathway opportunities, reduced chronic absenteeism and increased early literacy rates, particularly for African-American and Pacific Islander students.
“With a new Board of Education being seated soon as well as our ongoing significant fiscal issues, I believe the time is right for new leadership in the District. From day one, every decision I have made has been to benefit the students, families, and staff of SFUSD, including this one. I appreciate the opportunity to have served this community during such challenging times.”
About Dr. Wayne
According to a San Francisco Standard news report and information from his LinkedIn profile, Wayne began his position with SFUSD in July 2022. Prior to that role he had served as superintendent of the Hayward Unified School District.
According to a May 25, 2022, SFUSD press release, he worked as the HUSD superintendent for six years and, “served as Assistant Superintendent for Educational Services in the district. Prior to his tenure in Hayward, Dr. Wayne was an Executive Director of Elementary Schools in SFUSD for two years.” At that time, HUSD had 18,000 students enrolled.
He “is fluent in Spanish, began as an English Language Arts teacher in 1997 at The Riis Upper School at PS 126 in New York City. In addition to serving five years as a teacher in New York City, Dr. Wayne served as an assistant principal and an elementary principal in West Contra Costa USD in San Pablo, CA before beginning his role as Executive Director in SFUSD in 2010.”
Finally, the press release shared, “Dr. Wayne earned an undergraduate degree in rhetoric and his doctorate in Educational Leadership from UC Berkeley. He also earned a Masters of Arts in English Education and a Masters of Education in Public School Administration from Teachers College, Columbia University.” He earned his Bachelor’s degree in Rhetoric from U.C. Berkeley in 1995.
According to SFUSD, it “is the seventh largest school district in California, educating over 52,000 PreK-12 students every year.”
From 2011 to 2015, Wayne worked as “A lecturer in UC Berkeley’s Leadership for Educational Equity Program, supporting doctoral students in their development of their dissertation topics.”
Trustees Explain Process
When reached for comment about the appointment process of the new interim superintendent and not appointing Martinez, Area 5 Trustee Mary Rocha said, “What he says is that he was on the agenda to be appointed all the way to the end of the school year. There was a change of interest which is why it was pulled. It went forward to consider other candidates, so we would have choices.”
Asked if what Martinez said about the lack of communication from the Board, Rocha responded, “That was up to the chair. It’s the chair’s responsibility to be the contact person. The chair is also the contact person for the attorney. It’s always been that way. He’s the spokesperson.”
“The attorney brought it to the chair, Antonio reviewed them and of the five candidates, we were given a couple of people to review that he brought to us before the meeting. During the review we interviewed the two candidates, and we settled on Mr. Wayne. We were supposed to see all five,” she added. “The other trustees seemed to know about the other three candidates.”
However, when reached for comment Area 4 Trustee Olga Colbos-Smith refuted that responding with, “As you know, it is inappropriate to discuss closed session. But what I can tell you is we all were given the same information to review. After reviewing all five of the candidates’ CV’s (curriculum vitaes or resumes) and interviewing Dr. Wayne, I am fully committed to my affirmative vote.”
An effort to reach Area 2 Trustee Dr. Lathan asking why she voted against Wayne was unsuccessful prior to publication time. Please check back later for any updates to this report.
Issue Community Message on the Implementation of Immigration Lawsin English & Spanish
Exceptions to law allow officers discretion to cooperate with immigration authorities
“The priorities will focus on public safety threats, national security threats and fugitives… Harboring or concealing undocumented immigrants is a federal crime.” – Tom Homan, Director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)
By Allen D. Payton
In response to the recent executive orders by President Trump on enforcing the nation’s immigration laws and expected mass deportations, The Antioch Police Department issued the following statement on Thursday, January 30, 2025, regarding their cooperation with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
“The Antioch Police Department is committed to the safety and protection of our entire community, regardless of immigration status.
We do NOT participate in ICE raids or the enforcement of federal immigration laws.
We do NOT ask people about their immigration status for law enforcement purposes. (APD Policy 424.4)
We do NOT detain people for civil violations of immigration. (APD Policy 424.5)
Under California Law (SB 54) and our APD Policy (424.2):
Officials cannot use state databases to enforce immigration laws. (APD Policy 424.4.1, 424.4.2)
Victims and witnesses will not be questioned about their immigration status when reporting a crime. (APD Policy 424.3)
Applications for federal immigration assistance must go through a supervisor and are only considered in emergency cases. (APD Policy 424.6)
Public safety for all is our priority. Feel free to contact us—our officers are here to protect and serve, not enforce immigration laws.
Do you need help? Call (925) 778-2441 (or 911 in an emergency) or visit www.antiochca.gov/police.”
District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker posted the announcement on her official Facebook page and wrote, “I am encouraged about how our police department is addressing the concerns of our immigrant neighbors in Antioch. Look how far we have come.”
Acting Chief Joe Vigil and Lt. Michael Mellone of the department’s Professional Standards were asked when the policies mentioned were adopted and for where they can be found online. Mellone responded, “Our policies can be found here: https://www.antiochca.gov/fc/police/apd-policy-manual.pdf#page336.” He said they were adopted sometime in 2017 after the passage of the bill. In the manual, the policies mentioned in the statement under Immigration Violations are found on pages 336-339.
Exceptions to State Sanctuary Law
However, there are exceptions to SB 54, California’s sanctuary law. According to the bill passed by the legislature and signed into law by Governor Newsom in 2017, law enforcement officials have discretion to cooperate with immigration authorities when dealing with criminal illegal immigrants convicted of either a misdemeanor or felony punishable by imprisonment in a state prison. The following section provides the exceptions:
SEC. 2. Section 7282.5 of the Government Code is amended to read: 7282.5. (a) A law enforcement official shall have discretion to cooperate with immigration authorities only if doing so would not violate any federal, state, or local law, or local policy, and where permitted by the California Values Act (Chapter 17.25 (commencing with Section 7284)). Additionally, the specific activities described in subparagraph (C) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of, and in paragraph (4) of subdivision (a) of, Section 7284.6 shall only occur under the following circumstances: (1) The individual has been convicted of a serious or violent felony identified in subdivision (c) of Section 1192.7 of, or subdivision (c) of Section 667.5 of, the Penal Code. (2) The individual has been convicted of a felony punishable by imprisonment in the state prison. (3) The individual has been convicted within the past five years of a misdemeanor for a crime that is punishable as either a misdemeanor or a felony for, or has been convicted within the last 15 years of a felony for, any of the following offenses: (A) Assault, as specified in, but not limited to, Sections 217.1, 220, 240, 241.1, 241.4, 241.7, 244, 244.5, 245, 245.2, 245.3, 245.5, 4500, and 4501 of the Penal Code. (B) Battery, as specified in, but not limited to, Sections 242, 243.1, 243.3, 243.4, 243.6, 243.7, 243.9, 273.5, 347, 4501.1, and 4501.5 of the Penal Code. (C) Use of threats, as specified in, but not limited to, Sections 71, 76, 139, 140, 422, 601, and 11418.5 of the Penal Code. (D) Sexual abuse, sexual exploitation, or crimes endangering children, as specified in, but not limited to, Sections 266, 266a, 266b, 266c, 266d, 266f, 266g, 266h, 266i, 266j, 267, 269, 288, 288.5, 311.1, 311.3, 311.4, 311.10, 311.11, and 647.6 of the Penal Code. (E) Child abuse or endangerment, as specified in, but not limited to, Sections 270, 271, 271a, 273a, 273ab, 273d, 273.4, and 278 of the Penal Code. (F) Burglary, robbery, theft, fraud, forgery, or embezzlement, as specified in, but not limited to, Sections 211, 215, 459, 463, 470, 476, 487, 496, 503, 518, 530.5, 532, and 550 of the Penal Code. (G) Driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, but only for a conviction that is a felony. (H) Obstruction of justice, as specified in, but not limited to, Sections 69, 95, 95.1, 136.1, and 148.10 of the Penal Code. (I) Bribery, as specified in, but not limited to, Sections 67, 67.5, 68, 74, 85, 86, 92, 93, 137, 138, and 165 of the Penal Code. (J) Escape, as specified in, but not limited to, Sections 107, 109, 110, 4530, 4530.5, 4532, 4533, 4534, 4535, and 4536 of the Penal Code. (K) Unlawful possession or use of a weapon, firearm, explosive device, or weapon of mass destruction, as specified in, but not limited to, Sections 171b, 171c, 171d, 246, 246.3, 247, 417, 417.3, 417.6, 417.8, 4574, 11418, 11418.1, 12021.5, 12022, 12022.2, 12022.3, 12022.4, 12022.5, 12022.53, 12022.55, 18745, 18750, and 18755 of, and subdivisions (c) and (d) of Section 26100 of, the Penal Code. (L) Possession of an unlawful deadly weapon, under the Deadly Weapons Recodification Act of 2010 (Part 6 (commencing with Section 16000) of the Penal Code). (M) An offense involving the felony possession, sale, distribution, manufacture, or trafficking of controlled substances. (N) Vandalism with prior convictions, as specified in, but not limited to, Section 594.7 of the Penal Code. (O) Gang-related offenses, as specified in, but not limited to, Sections 186.22, 186.26, and 186.28 of the Penal Code. (P) An attempt, as defined in Section 664 of, or a conspiracy, as defined in Section 182 of, the Penal Code, to commit an offense specified in this section. (Q) A crime resulting in death, or involving the personal infliction of great bodily injury, as specified in, but not limited to, subdivision (d) of Section 245.6 of, and Sections 187, 191.5, 192, 192.5, 12022.7, 12022.8, and 12022.9 of, the Penal Code. (R) Possession or use of a firearm in the commission of an offense. (S) An offense that would require the individual to register as a sex offender pursuant to Section 290, 290.002, or 290.006 of the Penal Code. (T) False imprisonment, slavery, and human trafficking, as specified in, but not limited to, Sections 181, 210.5, 236, 236.1, and 4503 of the Penal Code. (U) Criminal profiteering and money laundering, as specified in, but not limited to, Sections 186.2, 186.9, and 186.10 of the Penal Code. (V) Torture and mayhem, as specified in, but not limited to, Section 203 of the Penal Code. (W) A crime threatening the public safety, as specified in, but not limited to, Sections 219, 219.1, 219.2, 247.5, 404, 404.6, 405a, 451, and 11413 of the Penal Code. (X) Elder and dependent adult abuse, as specified in, but not limited to, Section 368 of the Penal Code. (Y) A hate crime, as specified in, but not limited to, Section 422.55 of the Penal Code. (Z) Stalking, as specified in, but not limited to, Section 646.9 of the Penal Code. (AA) Soliciting the commission of a crime, as specified in, but not limited to, subdivision (c) of Section 286 of, and Sections 653j and 653.23 of, the Penal Code. (AB) An offense committed while on bail or released on his or her own recognizance, as specified in, but not limited to, Section 12022.1 of the Penal Code. (AC) Rape, sodomy, oral copulation, or sexual penetration, as specified in, but not limited to, paragraphs (2) and (6) of subdivision (a) of Section 261 of, paragraphs (1) and (4) of subdivision (a) of Section 262 of, Section 264.1 of, subdivisions (c) and (d) of Section 286 of, subdivisions (c) and (d) of Section 288a of, and subdivisions (a) and (j) of Section 289 of, the Penal Code. (AD) Kidnapping, as specified in, but not limited to, Sections 207, 209, and 209.5 of the Penal Code. (AE) A violation of subdivision (c) of Section 20001 of the Vehicle Code. (4) The individual is a current registrant on the California Sex and Arson Registry. (5) The individual has been convicted of a federal crime that meets the definition of an aggravated felony as set forth in subparagraphs (A) to (P), inclusive, of paragraph (43) of subsection (a) of Section 101 of the federal Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. Sec. 1101), or is identified by the United States Department of Homeland Security’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement as the subject of an outstanding federal felony arrest warrant. (6) In no case shall cooperation occur pursuant to this section for individuals arrested, detained, or convicted of misdemeanors that were previously felonies, or were previously crimes punishable as either misdemeanors or felonies, prior to passage of the Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act of 2014 as it amended the Penal Code. (b) In cases in which the individual is arrested and taken before a magistrate on a charge involving a serious or violent felony, as identified in subdivision (c) of Section 1192.7 or subdivision (c) of Section 667.5 of the Penal Code, respectively, or a felony that is punishable by imprisonment in state prison, and the magistrate makes a finding of probable cause as to that charge pursuant to Section 872 of the Penal Code, a law enforcement official shall additionally have discretion to cooperate with immigration officials pursuant to subparagraph (C) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 7284.6.
ICE Director Gives Enforcement Focus, Warning to Sanctuary States, Cities
According to Governing.com, Tom Homan, Director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), said in December, “The priorities will focus on public safety threats, national security threats and fugitives,” those who “got due process at great taxpayer expense and the federal judge ordered them removed, but they didn’t leave, and they became a fugitive.”
He also said, “sanctuary policies can shield dangerous criminals. Harboring or concealing undocumented immigrants is a federal crime.”
Homan said, anyone who “harbors or conceals illegal aliens from federal law enforcement officers” are committing a crime, and federal immigration law, Title 8 USC 13.24 iii, requires officials to do so.
According to a statement on the ICE website on Sunday, Jan. 26, 2025, “U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, along with federal partners, including the FBI, ATF, DEA, CBP and the U.S. Marshals Service, began conducting enhanced targeted operations today in Chicago to enforce U.S. immigration law and preserve public safety and national security by keeping potentially dangerous criminal aliens out of our communities.”
Celebrate your love story in style this Valentine’s Day in Martinez
By Dawn Kruger, Civic Outreach and Engagement Coordinator, Contra Costa County Clerk-Recorder’s Office
Martinez, CA — Start your love story or renew your vows in an unforgettable way this Valentine’s Day! The Contra Costa County Clerk’s Office is thrilled to announce its annual Valentine’s Day Destination Weddings, hosted this year at the iconic Cobra Experience Museum in Martinez on Friday, February 14, 2025.
Nestled in the heart of Martinez, the Cobra Experience Museum offers an elegant unique automotive setting for your special day. Surrounded by beautifully restored classic cars and a vibrant atmosphere, couples will have the opportunity to exchange vows in a venue that exudes charisma and charm. Whether you’re a car enthusiast or simply looking for a one-of-a-kind, memorable location, this hidden gem is the perfect place to say, “I do.”
The Cobra Experience is a non-profit museum educating future generations and celebrating Shelby American’s world dominance in sports car racing.
Event Details: • Date: Friday, February 14, 2025 • Location: Cobra Experience Museum, 777 Arnold Drive, Suite 200, Martinez • Appointments: Limited appointments available – secure your time by calling 925-335-7900.
“Valentine’s Day is a celebration of love, and we are excited to offer couples a truly special way to commemorate their union,” said Kristin B. Connelly, Contra Costa County Clerk-Recorder and Commissioner of Marriages. “The Cobra Experience Museum provides a stunning and unique setting that makes every ceremony unforgettable.”
Whether you’re planning an intimate elopement or a romantic vow renewal, the Clerk’s Office staff is here to make your day seamless and stress-free. Spaces are limited and filling quickly, so don’t wait to reserve your spot.
How to Reserve To schedule your wedding or vow renewal, contact the Contra Costa County Clerk’s Office at 925-335-7900. Our team will assist you in securing your appointment and answering any questions you may have. The Clerk-Recorder’s office has also opened additional wedding appointments at our office to accommodate the high demand on Valentine’s Day.
A marriage license must be obtained before a ceremony can be performed. Couples must purchase a license before their ceremony appointment at the County Clerk-Recorder’s office in Martinez. The fee for a public marriage license is $95, while a confidential license is $100. The Destination Wedding Ceremony fee is $120.
Celebrate your love story in style this Valentine’s Day. The Contra Costa County Clerk’s Office and the Cobra Experience Museum are ready to make your dreams come true.
About the Cobra Experience Museum The Cobra Experience Museum is dedicated to showcasing the history and legacy of Shelby American’s iconic cars. With a stunning collection of classic vehicles and engaging exhibits, the museum provides a dynamic and visually striking environment for any occasion.
For more information about this event or other Clerk’s Office services, please visit www.contracostavote.gov or call 925-335-7900.
Antioch, Calif. – On Tuesday, Jan. 21, 2025, the Antioch Police Department conducted an enforcement operation focused on drivers suspected of violating the hands-free cell phone law.
Under current law, drivers are not allowed to hold a phone or electronic communications device while operating a vehicle. This includes talking, texting, or using an app. Using a handheld cell phone while driving is punishable by a fine. Violating the hands-free law for a second time within 36 months of a prior conviction for the same offense will result in a point being added to a driver’s record.
“A driver’s focus should be on the road, not their phone,” Sergeant Rob Green said. “That text, phone call, email or social media post is not worth the risk to yourself and other people on the road.”
If you have an important phone call or need to program directions, pull over to a safe parking spot. Before driving, either silence your phone or put it somewhere you can’t reach.
The Antioch Police Department will hold another distracted driving enforcement operation in April as part of Distracted Driving Awareness month.
Funding for this program is provided by a grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety through the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
Albers Ranch proposed 294-home project Land Use Map. Source: City of Antioch
Changes only one of eight requested conditions
By Allen D. Payton
During their regular meeting on Tuesday, January 28, 2025, the Antioch City Council on four 5-0 votes approved the latest new home development project in the Sand Creek area, after almost 31 years of planning. The 294-unit Albers Ranch project, which will include a future commercial area and senior care facility on Deer Valley Road received overwhelming support from the community. Many of the members of the public spoke in favor of the project due to the senior care facility and many asked the council to waive the eight conditions of approval requested by the developer, Lucia Albers. But the council only included one exemption, for the Emergency Vehicle Access (EVA) road on her property, off of Deer Valley Road.
Albers Ranch Project Approved 5-0 with One Following the Proclamations under Item 1 on the meeting agenda, District 3 Councilman Don Freitas asked the council to move up the public hearing on the Albers Ranch new home development project under agenda Item 5.
“Lucia Albers has been waiting 31 years,” he said. “We have about 20 people in the audience who have to get up early in the morning.”
The council approved moving up the item to be discussed before Item 2, Announcements of Civic and Community Events and the remainder of the agenda.
Former Antioch Mayor and BART Board Director, Joel Keller, Albers’ consultant on the project, spoke on her behalf. He read a letter by Albers outlining all the problems she’s faced through the years, as previously reported.
All But One Public Comment in Support The first resident to speak was local businessman Jim Lanter saying, “I’ve never got involved in projects. This one kind of struck my nerve because of the assistant living portion. I think every project going forward in Antioch needs a component for assisted living because we don’t have the space. There aren’t the rooms. It will do one thing. It will provide more and provide competition which will drive down costs.”
“I’m kind of concerned about the future date. I’m hoping we can peg that. We’d love to continue to live in Antioch,” he added.
Ray Devlin, a commercial real estate agent with Collier’s said, “Lucia Albers has hired me to sell her project. It’s an absolutely beautiful project…beautiful property because of the hillsides. With the hillsides come costs. The conditions of approval will be handed off to our hopeful, homebuilder. Those costs will be handed off to the 294 folks who will be buying the homes, there. As Joel said, many of the conditions of approval add needless costs to the project.”
Eric Haynes, a business representative with Sheetmetal Workers #104, said he was, “representing hundreds of Antioch residents…speaking as an advocate for high-quality union construction. I’m here asking you to support Albers Ranch. It’s a multiple generational project…it allows seniors to stay in the neighborhood as they age.”
“Hundreds of area residents will be employed for the construction. Many will be apprentices…meaning more training for youth,” he added. “I would also ask for the conditions of approval to be waived. Please approve this.”
Former Antioch Mayor Pro Tem, Councilman, and local investment advisor, Manny Soliz, Jr. spoke next saying, “I’ve been a friend of Mrs. Albers and her late husband for many years. This project has been on the books for 30 years. Could you imagine if you wanted to put in a new driveway or patio at your house, you paid your fees and then a list of things was added that you had to check off? That’s a long time, 30 years. I think the additional conditions for the project should be waived. Anything added to the project will make it more expensive to build on that land.”
“Those units are going to be more expensive and artificially so,” he continued. “I’m looking at it more fundamentally. I think any of us who buy a house or buy a piece of property comes with the fundamental right to develop it and make a profit. So, I think any additional costs added to the project adds to her boat, her canoe and her canoe is getting lower and lower into the water.”
“Do they add anything of value to the project? If they don’t then don’t include them,” Soliz stated.
Long-time resident Richard Solack said, “It would be great if we could work on this project. I travel half my workday on the road. Most of my time is spent away from home. Being able to build and work in my home city…would be amazing. Just having that opportunity would be great. So, I recommend approving this project.”
Dale Paris spoke next saying, “I’ve been a life-long resident of Antioch. I’ve been a 50-year construction worker. My father, my brother and I could have worked on this project. But that’s no longer possible. As it stands, I will be able to work on this project with my son and my grandson. It’s been long enough.”
“I’ve had maybe five years total inside the city of Antioch,” he added. “Please, get this through.”
Trustee Mary Rocha spoke next saying, “This is history. Joel Keller, Don Freitas, Manny Soliz. We’ve seen this project for the past 30 years. It seems all these developers have gone on through the process. But for some reason Mrs. Albers is still here. I hope you go forward with this project.”
Johnny Impenko said, “I’m in support of the Albers project. It would be good to work closer to home, to do some coaching and be involved in the community.”
Julian Venetieri, a member of a local union, said, “There are about 15 members of electricians and a few apprentices. We really thank the Albers family for including these workforce development aspects in their project.”
“There’s something different when you have the opportunity to build a project in your own community,” he stated. “They taks a strong sense of pride with this.”
Former Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock spoke next saying, “It hasn’t been 30 years for me. In the last 10 years I’ve become good friends with Lucia and her husband Monte. This project has been near and dear to the council. This is a very good project. It’s intergenerational. Where else in the city of Antioch can you live.”
“We need more projects like this,” she continued. “We’re getting older. We need places we can go live with our families. There’s 49 acres of open space on this project. I don’t know of any other project that has that much open space. Three acres of parks. Tons of trails. This is just something that’s really, really good for Antioch.”
“I know council should support this. I have faith and trust in all of you to do the right things on those,” Ogorchock concluded.
Lucia Albers spoke next saying, “As you know, working with attorneys, consultants, engineers, project managers, all the money I made with the other project is gone.” She went on to reiterate what Keller read earlier and was previously reported. “I had to mortgage my ranch to have to pay for it. So, right now I’m not going to make any money when I sell it. I have over 200 conditions of approval…I am appealing the ones developers have brought to my attention. If you want to see the project like my neighbors want to and I want to, please waive the eight conditions of the 200 conditions so I am able to find a buyer for this project. Right now, I don’t have one. Just the EVA road costs $3 million.”
“They expect me to help pay for a road that was in the General Plan 30 years ago that’s supposed to go all the way to Balfour Road. But it may never go to Balfour Road,” she continued. She was referring to Hillcrest Avenue.
“My sewer, my utilities, everything is coming from Hillcrest. Why should I have to pay for improvements to Sand Creek Road?” Albers asked.
“The park fees are over $400,000. However, I am providing parks, open space and trails,” she added before running out of time limited to five minutes per public speaker.
Resident Velma Wilson spoke next saying, “I do approve this project. But I would also like to hear intentionalities…what are we going to do with our young people…in supporting our schools? Building our schools in real time. Make sure we’re doing everything we can for our students. We need to make sure we’re bringing communities like this where our young people can come to the forefront. Also, our seniors. So, please, let’s not belabor this any longer and approve this project.”
Mary Chapman and Nora VonUbin from An Elderly Wish Foundation spoke next. Champman said, “We’re obviously interested that this is going to be for seniors. This is so wonderful that you have the older people mixed with the younger people.”
“Thank you for the consideration…for the openness,” VonUbin said. “We hope to see this come to fulfillment.”
Debbie Toth, president of Choice in Aging said, “I’m here in support of the project for a myriad of reasons….the 8-80 concept because it’s good for 8-year-olds to 80-year-olds. We seem to cut grandpa and grandma out. This project is visionary. It’s beautiful. It will be an absolute Disneyland in Antioch.”
“Can we do this while Mrs. Albers is still alive? I think 30 years is time served. Wipe those conditions,” she added.
A member of the Board of Directors of Choice in aging who said she is a gerontologist spoke next saying, “This is an amazingly smart project. One of the biggest fears of my clients is aging out of their homes and their communities. It’s a shame. I’m listening here that this has been a 31-year process. As diverse a city as Antioch is, we need to move forward with this project.”
According to City Clerk Melissa Rhodes, 22 more residents who submitted comments but did not wish to speak were in support of the project.
Local affordable housing advocate Andrew Becker was the only person to speak against the project. He said, “I didn’t want to speak as an opponent on the project…but there are some issues. Developers do not set prices on homes. Builders do. Developers create communities. This isn’t putting in a driveway. It’s 300 homes. That’s thousands of individuals. What frustrates me is affordability is spoken a lot, here. What drives the price? The developer may come in and say, ‘this is what it costs to build. Now, how much can we get out of this community. Affordability is what you need in this community.’”
“To have the developer come up and say we shouldn’t be responsible for improving the road that comes up to my property,” he continued. “I do support housing but there has to be an affordability component.”
However, Albers was speaking about the costs of the Emergency Vehicle Access road and helping pay for Hillcrest Avenue beyond her and the neighboring projects.
Council Discussion During city council discussion of the item, Freitas spoke first saying, “This is a very difficult request to make at the last minute to make eight changes. I am the last person who wants to delay this project. But the requests being made may sound doable. But there’s another side. I’ve spent two hours speaking with Joel Keller and Lucia Albers and said I could not support waiving the conditions.”
“We love Lucia and Monte Albers. But fair is fair,” he continued. “I want to support this project. But I will not vote for the eight exemptions. We have worked with staff for the last 31 years and have had these same exemptions. I think this project should be approved but these exemptions should not.”
However, that’s incorrect. The condition that Albers help pay for improvements to Sand Creek weren’t included until 2019 during the preliminary review of her project by the council.
District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson spoke next saying, “Ms. Lucia, I think I’ve known you longer than I’ve been on this council. I’m in support of the workforce development piece. You know I think what Mrs. Albers is asking for appeals to me. I think her requests are reasonable.”
“Why should she have to pay for Sand Creek Road when her access is Hillcrest. I would approve this project?” she asked
“I think you’re the only female developer since I’ve been on this council who’s come before us,” Wilson added. “Thank you for hanging in there. I’d like to see this project go through and move my mother up there.”
“I think we all know Lucia Albers and her family,” District 2 Councilman Louie Rocha said. “I’m in favor of supporting the project. I have some concerns and questions about the conditions of the project. I’m not sure how we can mitigate that. I think we should move forward with an approval, tonight. But I think our staff should look at that. These are issues that have come to us in the past few days. I don’t want to hold up this project. It seems to me, some of the issues can be met. I’m not sure all of them can.”
Freitas then asked, “If the council sees fit to approve the project as is, can we come back and visit the issues. There’s a master plan for transportation. Is that legally possible?”
“If you entitle the project tonight, then you have a vested project for a developer with rights,” Acting City Attorney Derek Cole said. “So, the answer is, ‘yes’. If we grant some of these conditions, then we have to come up with the money for Aviano. That becomes an obligation of the General Fund. You as a City may end up having to pick up that price.”
“These conditions that we’re requiring are standard…of developers in this City and Contra Costa County,” he continued. “If we do this for this project what does that say for future projects?”
Bernal asked about the curb and gutter on the EVA access road, “Is there a way to eliminate that?”
“That condition of approval was what was shown on the cross-section. So, we didn’t ask them to do it,” a City staff member responded. “But because of the hillside it needs to be done.”
Kevin Van Katwyk, senior civil engineer with Interwest, said, “The applicant proposed the curb and gutter. The EVA is pretty risky, it goes up a hill that’s steep. You might want to control it and you do that with curb and gutter at least on one side.”
“Can you do a concrete V-ditch?” Bernal, a former Antioch City Engineer asked.
“That’s one way to deal with it,” he said.
Jason Vogan of engineering firm Carlson Barbee and Gibson then said, “There are multiple ways to accommodate the drainage. This is a private improvement. So, it will be the responsibility of the homeowners’ association to maintain this.”
“This is the only one, tonight that I think, can be addressed,” Bernal stated.
“Yes. We, as staff can work with the developer,” said Acting Public Works Director Scott Buenting.
“I think that would be a good compromise,” Bernal stated.
“Can we approve this tonight, with this one exemption?” Freitas asked.
“Yes,” Bernal said. Freitas then made a motion to approve, and Rocha seconded it.
“The motion was adopted,” said City Clerk Melissa Rhodes, but did not announce the vote but then announced a recess at 9:25 p.m. However, the council didn’t approve each of the four items on the agenda for the project.
At 9:40 p.m. Bernal called the meeting back to order and asked for direction from the acting city attorney.
“I’ll shake off the rust here. I think we need a vote for each of the four items,” Cole said. “I know there was some discussion on the EVA. That can be addressed in the Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map. It gives authority to staff to work with the developer on a cross section. I apologize for not catching this before we broke and doing a mass, one motion.”
“I apologize, also,” Bernal said.
The council then approved each of the four items on 5-0 votes for the Albers Ranch project including, adopting a resolution certifying the Albers Ranch Project Environmental Impact Report; adopting findings of fact and statement of overriding considerations, and adopting the mitigation monitoring and reporting program; adopting a resolution approving a General Plan Amendment to amend the City of Antioch General Plan (GP-19-04); introducing and waiving the first reading of the ordinance rezoning the property to Hillside Planned Development (HPD); and adopt a resolution approving a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map, Master Development Plan and a Resource Management Plan, and to direct staff to work with the applicant to work on the EVA.
“Congratulations, Ms. Albers,” Bernal stated.
After the meeting Albers said, “I want to thank everyone from the community for all the support they gave me, who came to the hearing and those who spoke in favor of the project. It was almost unanimous.”
“I don’t feel that I have to improve a road that has no nexus to my project,” she continued. “I would have preferred to have access to Sand Creek Road. It would have been much cheaper than connecting to Hillcrest. But the County Flood Control eminent domained my land and built the berm, blocking the road and utilities between Sand Creek Road and my property. When the City made the agreement about funding the road with Aviano (the development north of Sand Creek Road) I didn’t know about it. By that time, I no longer had access.”
“While I appreciate the council’s approval, and their consideration of working with City staff on lower cost options for the EVA, the remaining conditions are very costly, so unnecessary and make it harder to market the project, decreasing my ability to get a buyer,” Albers added. “Especially, the costs to reimburse Aviano.”
“We look forward to working with City staff to work things out on the EVA,” she concluded.
While the Tentative Map was approved, one thing that wasn’t finalized was a Development Agreement that will extend the approval of the project for up to 10 years, Keller explained later.
“We’ll continue to work with the City on the EVA and on the Development Agreement,” he added.
