Dear Editor,

As one of the applicants some months ago to fill the empty seat on the Antioch School Board I want to state that I agree with your Payton Perspective that Julie Young should be appointed for the current vacancy.

I have listened to Julie at the previous selection process and also at other community meetings and she has a great comprehension of what the school system needs. Also, she was one of the most knowledgeable applicants.

It is also my opinion that she would give an excellent point of view concerning the selection of the new superintendent, one that may be different from the other Board Members. And, a different point of view always makes the discussion and decision more interesting.

Julie Young would be an excellent interim selection and would only benefit the Antioch School system.

Mark Jordan

Antioch

Dear Editor:

I was surprised by the negative comments about Hillary’s qualifications made by Mr. Ralph Hernandez (my good friend) in a letter to the Antioch news paper.  I think he believes the propaganda put out by Republicans to discredit her.

I believe she is well qualified to be president of the United States. She served under President Obama as Secretary of State and did a very good job, contrary to the what the Republicans say. She was in Washington eight years with President Clinton and is well aware as to what goes on there.

My wife and I worked for the Antioch Democratic Club for many years.  My wife represented this area in the Conventions in Washington and Florida. I served as president and treasurer of the Democratic club for years and supported the Clintons for years.

Sincerely,

Joseph T. and Carolina M. Zamora

Antioch

Dear Editor:

Every parent with a child that has attended a California school should be aware of this important issue.

On February 1st, Judge Kimberly Mueller ordered that the CA Department of Education release the student records of all students that attended any CA school since January 1, 2008 to the Plaintiffs in the lawsuit Morgan Hill Concerned Parents Association and Concerned Parents Association v. CA Department of Education.

The court ordered that only the parties, their attorneys and consultants and the court would have access to the records and when they were done they would be returned or destroyed.  They claim that no student’s identifying records will be disclosed to the public. I do not want my children’s information to be disclosed to some people in Morgan Hill involved in a lawsuit I know nothing about.

We should not be so naïve to think security breaches never happen.  We all remember Target or Bank of America. I do not want my children’s information to be disclosed to some people in Morgan Hill involved in a lawsuit I know nothing about.

There is no reason to believe that the security precautions taken here will be any better than those taken by large corporations which have been subject to security breaches.

Examples of information that is stored on CA Department of Educations’s databases and network drives includes name, Social Security number, home address, demographics, course information, statewide assessment results, teacher demographics, program information, behavior and discipline information, progress reports, special education assessment plans, special education assessments/evaluations, Individualized Education Programs (IEPs), records pertaining to health, mental health and medical information, student statewide identifiers (SSID), attendance statistics, information on suspensions and expulsions, and results on state tests.

There is one way to make sure that your child’s information is not included in this and that would be to fill out an opt –out form and mail it to the court by April 1, 2016. The form can be found at http://www.cde.ca.gov/re/di/ws/documents/form2016jan26.pdf

Julie Young

Antioch

Dear Editor,

When the government fails to act to protect the people, citizens have a right to petition their government for changes. I deeply cherish and understand this right because I defended it for 8-years as a member of the U.S. military. In 2013, the Antioch City Council rushed to issue a gambling license after receiving campaign contributions from a well-connected businessman who soon after plead guilty to money laundering on behalf of drug dealers.

As a result, in 2014 more than 20 Antioch citizens signed a letter to the City Council asking them to close the dangerous loopholes in the City’s card room ordinance. The Council made a halfhearted effort that did not go far enough.

First, the Council failed to change the ordinance to keep card rooms from our churches and schools. The initiative I’m supporting keeps gambling 1,000 feet away from any school, place or worship, alcohol or drug recovery center, mental care facility, park, library or other card room.

Second, the Council failed to restrict the conversion of our traditional card rooms with poker games into mini-casinos. In other cities, card rooms have put in fast paced casino games with super-sized “tables” that can accommodate dozens of players at each table.My initiative requires at least half the card room tables to be used for poker games and no more than 10 players per table.

Third, one of the card rooms in Antioch, Kelly’s, which was going to be used as a front for drug money laundering, was closed by State officials. Under this measure it would stay closed.  This initiative would keep the 19th Hole card room and the games we have now, and allow modest growth unless voters allow more gambling.

And to that end, in December of 2015 the coalition we formed turned in more than 9,302 signatures of Antioch registered voters to enact the necessary reforms. Prior to collecting signatures, our representatives had face to face meetings and/or conference calls with members of the City council. As a matter of fact, one council member signed our petition.

In 2015, when the petitions were circulated, the title and summary on the petitions were prepared by the City and accurately explained how this initiative would change and improve our laws and gambling regulations.

This has been a 2-year effort. No one bullied the Council. Just like no one bullied Councilmember Lori Ogorchock in having a face-to-face meeting with our representative to discuss these efforts. The Council was asked in 2014 to close these loopholes but did not. This is why the voters need to be in control of gambling expansion and not politicians open to influence.

This measure will prevent future City Councils from foolishly pursuing gambling at the expense of other local businesses that better contribute to our overall economy. In that same vein, this should serve as notice to the City Council that enough is enough. We need to attract high-quality businesses to Antioch, not more gambling, smoke shops, 7-Elevens, liquor stores, etc.

The coalition behind this campaign includes community leaders, business leaders, taxpayers and citizens from all over Antioch. Responsible card club owners also back this campaign. They are concerned about ethically challenged casino operators who create a bad image for the entire industry.

Lamar Thorpe

Citizens Initiative Against Gambling Expansion

Dear Editor:

I wanted to respond to your “Perspective” concerning the Card Room issue and Commissioner Thorpe which will move to a ballot measure at a sizable cost to the citizens of Antioch.

I will not stand to criticize Mr. Thorpe or to analyze his position; nor will I defend him. I do not know if he was used or was an active participant, and truly I don’t care one way or another. What I do know is that Commissioner Thorpe serves at the pleasure of the Council and may continue or not based on an evaluation of his whole work for the City by the Mayor and Council.

The question is: How did the Council not see this coming? With the issues raised concerning Kelly’s Card Room, it’s failure and the reaction of the City something like this initiative was bound to come along.

There was a filing and a collection of signatures wasn’t there? This didn’t happen in a vacuum did it? Where was the City Administration to advise the Council? Where was the City Manager? Where was the oversight? Where was the leadership?

So we end up in a “bind”. “Bullied”? Well, that is because there is a lack of leadership and vision. After all, when you don’t keep your eye on the ball, you miss. Big miss here. Just swinging at air.

Throughout your article there is frustration almost to the point of anger. I understand. The cost to our City is substantial, but you and I both know businesses love monopolies and a lack of competition. It produces big profits. And there is obviously big money involved or an out of town Casino wouldn’t have stepped in and spent time and money creating this situation.

Bottom line this may be the most current time the City of Antioch is placed in this type of situation but without improvement in leadership and vision, I assure you that it will not be the last.

Mark Jordan

Antioch

Editor:

This month brought us Law Enforcement Appreciation Day. On the calendar it’s only one day, the 9th of January. But in the eyes of the families and friends of police officers, it is every day, because they, like nurses, have earned it.

I honor, not only my family members and friends, but all who suit up in blue every day, not knowing, in these trying times, if they will come home to their families that night.

My opponent has previously garnered the endorsement from local Police organizations in both Solano and Contra Costa County. However, In this last legislative session, Assemblyman Frazier and his Democrat allies in the state legislature, passed SB-227, a bill which in essence denies due process to police officers.

“the bill would prohibit a grand jury from inquiring into an offense or misconduct that involves a shooting or use of excessive force by a peace officer, as specified, that led to the death of a person being detained or arrested by the peace officer, unless the offense was declared to the grand jury by one of its members, as described above” TEXT of SB 227

What has happened in this bill is nothing more than “a knee jerk, not in my back yard” reaction to the incident that took place in Ferguson, Missouri. Police officers should be afforded the same due process as the criminals that they protect us against. But, this new law that Frazier voted for has destroyed that.

That bill, SB-227, that Mr. Frazier voted for, is not only a massive slap in the face to police officers everywhere, but wholly unconstitutional as well.

The 5^th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states:

“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger;…”

Only after a Grand Jury has reviewed evidence of wrongdoing, should an indictment be handed down to the criminal court. This is our process. This is a check against prosecutorial misconduct at the behest of political expediency. The Grand Jury is impaneled to stay malicious prosecution, to ensure that a prosecutor can actually make a case for indictment. Without it, a politically driven prosecutor could indict for anything with no facts to back up their claim simply in the hopes of garnering public support and or notoriety. That’s because indictments are generally front page news, while acquittals get shuffled to the middle.

I would think we should all remember that you are innocent until proven guilty. Unfortunately Mr. Frazier, and other Democrats in Sacramento, seem to have discarded this tenet which is not only black letter constitutional law, but also sets us apart from many other nations in the world. And they have discarded it at the expense of our Police Officers.

In short, police officers place their lives on the line every day to both protect and serve the populations they work for. Criminals make the choice to do the nefarious criminal acts they do, that endanger both police officers and themselves. When a police officer is confronted with a criminal who attempts to harm the officer, I will back the police officer 100% of the time. For it is the job of the police to apprehend that alleged criminal, but also to get home to their families every night. And we should not treat our police officers worse under the law than we treat those whom they protect us from.

The symbol of our judicial system is a woman, named Justice. She holds in her hand a balanced scale and she is blindfolded. The blindfold represents objectivity, in that justice is or should be meted out objectively, without fear or favor, regardless of money, wealth, power, identity, race, creed, color or employment. But now if you look at her scale, Mr. Frazier and others in his caucus have added their thumbs to tip the scales out of balance.

Mr. Frazier’s words tend to make it seem like he fully supports our police officers. Unfortunately he has been found lacking, for his deeds do not match his words. His deeds tell a different story entirely.

Unfortunately for all of us this is an old story, a story of a politician that says one thing and does another.

For example, Mr. Frazier has long touted his love for veterans, and has made many speeches to that effect. However, this past November, he announced his Veterans DMV Tax on Veterans Day – causing a hidden tax on any veterans that wish to be identified as such on their state issued Identification Cards. With Law Enforcement Appreciation Day being celebrated this month, I felt a need to highlight, to local law enforcement, what he has done for you while collecting your endorsement at the same time.

I would certainly like to be writing about my own positive change platform, instead of going after Mr. Frazier’s voting record from the last Session of the State Legislature. Highlighting the differences between Jim and myself, the voters of AD-11 need to be made aware of just how disingenuous their legislator is to the betterment of our community.

My goal is to change all that in November.

Dave Miller, Republican candidate for California State Assembly, 11th District

Editor:

As time marches inexorably forward and we approach the New Year, I find it a good time to pause and reflect on where we’ve been, and where we’re headed, at the Antioch Unified School District.

As 2015 came to an end, we saw change come in double step, with the retirement of our Superintendent and the resignation of a School Board Trustee.  Yet changes are nothing to moan over.  Change should be welcomed.

As the voters so decisively indicated in the last election, a course correction was desperately needed.  But, just as large ships at sea don’t turn easily, so it is with large bureaucracies; status quo driven inertia keeps them moving in old lanes, even when a change in direction is clearly called for.

Eventually, however, a ship will turn, and so it is with AUSD.  With the addition of new Trustee Fernando Navarro to our board, we are seeing less divisiveness and a renewed sense of purpose. The absence of friction allows us to address long-standing problems within the District.

Granted, positive behavior interventions, advanced placement class participation, overall high school graduation rates and career themed academy expansion are among the areas of district improvement. The fact is, though, that with all the initiatives that have been implemented over the last several years, we’ve seen little progress with our lowest performing students.

Our current Board does not find the achievement gap of English language learners, children of color, or low economic status acceptable; nor is it tolerable that 81% of our students fail to show proficiency in math.  We can’t have two tiers, haves and have-nots. We must do better by all the 18,500 students in AUSD. All, after all, means all.

We have now begun the search for a new Superintendent; a critical step, since the person selected will most likely be at the helm of AUSD for the next several years.  Bold leadership is clearly needed.  As a Board, we’re committed to a selection methodology that ensures the local community has input in the process, and that the individual we choose to lead our district has the courage to take the necessary steps to effect the changes needed.

I grew up in Great Neck, Long Island, New York.  As a child, I can remember people leaving notes by our front door encouraging us to call them if we ever decided to move.  Why did they do this?  Simple answer; because they wanted to buy into the area due to the quality of our school district.  The quality of the education available made living in our community that desirable.  That is my dream for Antioch…that it would become a city that people clamor to move to, because of the education their children can achieve.  Quality of schools is pivotal in civic promotion, so having kids or not, we all want a great school system.

The first necessary step in effecting change is to recognize that you have a problem.  As a board, we’ve done that and we are taking the steps needed to fix it. Our students, their parents, and our community deserve no less.

Walter Ruehlig

Vice President, Board of Trustees, Antioch Unified School District

Dear Editor:

Assemblyman Frazier’s AB-935…a wolf in sheep’s clothing?

In April, 2013, Assemblyman Jim Frazier (of Oakley) introduced AB-935, a bill which, among other things, allowed veterans to have a veteran designation on their drivers’ licenses.  After its passage in the August 2014 session, he held a press conference in every town in AD-11, touting how hard it was to pass this legislation, as well as talk about the speed bumps along the way in its passage.

I would agree with him that the veteran’s designation is a useful designation, to all California veterans, the affluent as well as the homeless, and something that has been a long time in the making, to help veterans attain the services they have earned by serving this great nation.

After a careful legislative analysis, the designation was deemed “non-mandatory” in its current state, but what Assemblyman Frazier failed to mention in his press conference is the $5.00 fee to receive the designation, with the agency (CA DMV) reserving the right to raise that fee to a figure as high as $15.00.  Meaning, if you want the designation, which you deserve, you’ll need to pay for it.

In my estimation, the introductory program amounts to a promo code time period in which the DMV will assess the success of the program. At that point, if successful, they will unleash Section 14901.1 of the Vehicle and Traffic Code to raise the veterans’ designation fee, to the fee they wanted to charge all along, which is $15.00 per veteran.

According to the United States Department of Veterans Affairs, there are 1,851,470 living veterans, from all branches of our nation’s service, residing in the State of California.  What Mr. Frazier is seeking, is that $15.00 “cover charge” from each California veteran, which translates into over $27 million over five years’ time, into most likely transportation/infrastructure  earmarks.

If I were to speak to every veteran from around this state, I would tell them to not get too excited about this very long, overdue veterans designation on their driver’s license.   I would tell them to wait until your current DMV License expires in a few years before committing to a new one, or wait until Republicans in the Legislature, can offer this at a price it deserves to be offered at, which is free of charge.

If Democrats are going to insist on charging for this, they should put it where it will do the most good, that being county veterans service agencies.   We’ve already seen the federal government whitewash how they handle things at the Veterans Administration, and the state is no better.   Now, when they finally come up with a great idea, to help veterans earn the benefits they deserve, they find ways of making money off your service to our nation.  I won’t even bore you with the statistics that Assembly Appropriations came up with when they drafted this bill, suffice it to say, that was their first and only consideration.

If elected to replace Mr. Frazier, in California’s vast 11^th Assembly District, I will introduce new legislation to amend this otherwise well-meaning law, striking the fees to veterans from it.  I agree with Mr. Frazier that we should always honor our veterans; what I vehemently do not agree on is imposing a tariff to receive the veteran designation. What I see is nothing more than a revenue generating bill, that Mr. Frazier and his colleagues are secretly imposing on our veterans…and it is utterly despicable.

Dave Miller, Conservative Republican Candidate for California State Assembly 11^th District

California’s 11th Assembly District includes Antioch, Brentwood, Knightsen, Bethel Island, Oakley, Discovery Bay, Vacaville, Fairfield, Suisun City, Rio Vista and a portion of Pittsburg.