Dear Editor:

Did you get asked by the AUSD on how you feel about another tax? I sure didn’t as well as many of my neighbors. AUSD have alternative ways of raising funds for school maintenance and pushing for a 36-year tax is not the answer especially when 3 of our school board members will not be impacted by this tax if passed.

County Counsel has stated that “Approval of the measure does not guarantee that the proposed project or projects in the District that are the subject of bonds under the measure will be funded beyond the local revenues generated by the measure.” In other words, there is no guarantee that projects that start will be completed or even get off the ground.

Please review the County Counsel’s Impartial Analysis of Measure T:

“The California Constitution provides that school districts may issue bonds for the construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation or replacement of school facilities, including the furnishing and equipping of school facilities or the acquisition or lease of real property for school facilities, with the approval of 55% of the voters voting at an election for that purpose.

By resolution, the Antioch Unified School District has proposed that bonds of the District be issued in an amount up to $105,000,000. This measure provides that proceeds from the sale of the bonds will generally be used to “provide up to date classrooms, renovate athletic fields and related facilities, replace underground water sewer and gas lies, and replace old and inefficient electrical, lighting, heating, plumbing and ventilation systems.” The specific projects are set forth in the bond project list attached to the resolution of the Board of Trustees. The measure provides that a citizens’ oversight committee will be established to ensure that bond proceeds are properly expended and that annual performance and financial audits will be conducted. The measure further provides that bond proceeds will only be used for the purposes specified in the measure, and not for any other purpose.

Approval of this measure authorizes the levy of ad valorem taxes upon taxable property to repay the bonded indebtedness, both principal and interest, in each year that bonds are outstanding. The Antioch Unified School District has prepared a Tax Rate Statement, which represents the District’s best estimates of the property tax rates required to service the bonds. The estimated highest annual tax rate required to be levied to fund the bonds is expected to be $60 per $100,000 of assessed valuation.

Approval of the measure does not guarantee that the proposed project or projects in the District that are the subject of bonds under the measure will be funded beyond the local revenues generated by the measure. The proposed project or projects may assume the receipt of matching state funds, which could be subject to appropriation by the Legislature or approval of a statewide bond measure.

A ‘yes’ vote authorizes the issuance of the bonds and the levy of taxes as estimated in the Tax Rate Statement to repay the bonded indebtedness. A ‘yes’ vote by 55% of the voters within the District voting on the measure is required for passage of this measure. A ‘no’ vote on this measure disapproves the issuance of the bonds and the levy of the taxes for the bonded indebtedness.”

Tell the AUSD bullies “That’s It” and vote “No” on Measure T!

Gil Murillo

South Antioch Resident

The East Bay Leadership Council is proud to endorse Measure J in Contra Costa County and wanted to share a few reasons why we believe it deserves a YES vote on March 3.

All the Money Raised Here Stays Here

That may sound simple, but recent transportation funding initiatives have pooled revenue among all nine Bay Area counties and then divvied it up based on a number of factors. In these situations, the East Bay has not always received an equitable share.

Measure J is a chance to raise $103 million per year for Contra Costa County that is guaranteed to go back into our community to ease bottlenecks, improve transit access, and make roads safer for cyclists and pedestrians.

Funding for Bus, Bike, and Pedestrian Improvements

If Contra Costa County is ever going to get off the “worst commutes in the nation” lists, then we must make it easier and more efficient for commuters to opt for alternative transportation options like express buses, protected bike lanes, and pedestrian over-crossings.

These investments will ease congestion on our roads and improve air quality. It is one of the reasons why the East Bay Regional Park District, Save the Bay, Bike East Bay, TransForm, and Save Mount Diablo all joined us in support of Measure J.

Did we mention free and reduced fares for students, seniors, and people with disabilities? That too!

Innovate 680

If you were a fly on our office wall, you would hear a lot about innovation opportunities on Interstate 680.

Measure J will prioritize this critical commute corridor by helping to get express buses running on the shoulder of the freeway that could connect BART stations to job centers in the Tri-Valley. Other 680 innovations include smart freeway signs and metering lights, express lane extensions, and self-driving shuttles.

There is so much we can do to make commutes on 680 more efficient and Measure J will help us get there.

The Economy

We cannot expect businesses to attract and retain employees while Contra Costa County makes headlines for long and inefficient commutes.

Investing in the transportation system is an investment in helping businesses start, stay, and grow in the region. That means more jobs close to home for Contra Costa residents.

Matching Funds Get Projects Done

Money raised at the local level will not be enough to pay for every transportation improvement that Contra Costa County needs. The good news is that there are state and federal funds available to help complete important projects.

The secret to winning that funding is that the state and federal government both prefer to contribute the last dollars for a project, not the first.

By raising funds locally first, Contra Costa County will be able to win more grant funding and make more efficient use of every dollar for decades to come.

To learn more about Measure J and its benefits visit www.friendsofcontracostatransportation.org. To learn more about the East Bay Leadership Council visit www.eastbayleadershipcouncil.com.

Dear Editor:

The chief selling point to Measure J on the March 3 ballot is to “reduce congestion”, a laughably empty promise. The 75 words on the ballot create a smokescreen for a 1/2% sales tax increase.

Measure J allots $148 million to BART, who has their own mega-budget and a long history of wastefulness. Only Contra Costa would shoulder the additional tax to be handed over to BART with no assurance that Contra Costa would benefit.

This measure contains hiring restrictions that will drive up costs of taxpayer-funded projects. It requires that all apprenticeship labor must come from certain politically favored sources, rather than the largest qualified pool of applicants. Construction labor short supply due to recent wildfire rebuilding efforts. As a result, projects everywhere are currently facing massive cost overruns. This is the wrong time to impose even further hiring restrictions.

Residents may see signs on the highway referencing Measure J for current projects. This refers to a Measure J generously passed by voters in 2004. The suspicious letter designation is confusing, but clearly this is not the same. This is an additional increase for 35 years.

We encourage a no vote on Measure J.

Susan L Pricco

President, Contra Costa Taxpayers Association

Dear Editor:

The shooting and death of the 16-year-old at Deer Valley High School puts a mark of fear and dismay in the hearts of all Antioch residents.  We are praying that our school board members along with school administrators will come together in one heart and mind to bring healing and hope to students, faculty, families and residents in a very dark hour in our city. Perhaps even local pastors of our many churches can rally together in promoting peace, love, forgiveness and reconciliation in our high schools.

During the President’s State of the Union Address he spoke of allowing prayers in schools – does this mean teachers and pastors can initiate prayers on behalf of students’ needs – it would certainly be beneficial to those students involved in last week’s shooting, and to any that have been traumatized by it.

Our community, as a whole needs to be united in bringing closure and resolution to this serious problem.

Nick Culcasi

Antioch

Dear Editor:

Political tribalism is a growing danger to our country. People select their Party/tribe and can then retreat into in a bubble where they believe that their Party is right about everything and the other Party is universally wrong. That mentality leads to elections where candidates often stop trying to win votes from around half the population to have a chance at victory. Those officials who legitimately try to represent everyone, and who work each day to improve the lives of all of their constituents regardless of Party are rare and valuable. Supervisor Diane Burgis is one of those precious public servants.

I’ve had the pleasure to be a constituent and a nearby neighbor of Supervisor Burgis for years, and I have found her accessible, accountable, and devoted to her community. She doesn’t pay lip service to the ideals of non-partisanship, hard work, and of legitimately wanting to serve her community: she lives those ideals. Supervisor Burgis puts the needs of her constituents over the desires of her Party. And most importantly, she is committed to serving every person in her district regardless of whether that person voted for her in the past or is likely to vote for her now; she will never sell us out in order to stay in office. Personally I know that if I make Supervisor Burgis aware that I need her help, she’ll be there for me, and I know that I have someone in my corner fighting for me, and not because I’m a Democrat, but because I’m her constituent, her neighbor, and a human being.

All of that is why I support electing Diane Burgis to another term as Supervisor of Contra Costa District 3, why I supported her in the past, and why I will continue to support her in the future.

Heath Lenoble
Oakley

Dear Editor:

2019 will be the year in which our African American community is once again, not recognized for their continued and positive contributions to the City of Antioch.

What I witnessed Wednesday night at the Antioch School Board meeting was incomprehensible to say the least. School Board Member Crystal Sawyer-White was recognized by her peer to be School Board President for calendar year 2020. This was encouraging to hear the nomination and I believe instrumental to many in our community seeing an African American woman taking the reins of one of the largest and highly challenged school districts in Contra Costa County.

But the nomination was quickly challenged, and the outcome was unbelievable. The excuse was that Board Member Sawyer-White needed to understand the actions of the president role by being the vice president for a year. It appeared that some members of the Board failed to recognize that Board Member Sawyer-White was vice president in 2018 and was overlooked for the president role in 2019.

What is clear is the AUSD School Board already had an agenda not to recognize Board Member Sawyer-White and I am reminded of other actions that have occurred in this city. If you recall Editorial posted by Susanne Larson on March 2, 2019, she reflected on the actions of the City Council referencing hiring an African American City Attorney and the mockery of that meeting.

I may not know all the School Board Members personally, but I do know this is not about color. This is about having those in charged having a “liked” policy thinking and only keeping to that. It is about the fear of change that a new president with a different mindset from others will bring to the table. It is ignoring “this is how it is done” and having a strategic view instead of a tactical one.

AUSD continues to struggle in providing every student the ability to achieve success. Test scores speak for themselves!

Board Member Sawyer-White’s credentials are far from those that are serving. Though she may not have the decades in representing the city as others, but what is important is having the education, skills and background to drive a vision forward. A vision that has been lacking on the school board for the decade I have resided here in Antioch.

We lost this opportunity to really see a new leadership model and I am hoping that you will remember this in November. It is time to ask ourselves, “Do we want a board that is exclusive or inclusive?”

We don’t need to have Board Members that are exclusive in thinking as this hindered our kids, teachers and community. What we need are inclusive, inspirational thinkers that are actively engaged with administration, teachers, kids and the community at large.

Thanking you for your time.

Gil Murillo

Antioch

By Greg Palast

OCTOBER 11, 2019

The PG&E Blackout Con is all about threatening the judge in the PG&E bankruptcy case. The victims have joined with the bondholders to eliminate the equity of the stockholders who deserve nothing. So in desperation, the power company pigs are turning off your lights. Hopefully, the judge will not be intimidated.

Leaving hospitals, schools and 1 million homes without power — and that means without water — in California is the endgame of deregulation mania.

Jerry Brown, Bill Clinton and other deregulation snake-oil salesmen, and the PG&E greedster bosses, should be imprisoned for the people already burned to death.

Where is the California utility commission?

I’ve written a book published by the United Nations called, Democracy and Regulation, about how to avoid such piggery. When I wrote the book, it was meant only for Third World nations — apparently, Northern California is the third world of electricity.

Public utilities must be publicly owned. Decades back, I investigated power company racketeering for the Justice Department.

As an expert, I can tell you, PG&E is a criminal enterprise parading as a power company. Shut them down — not us.

Palast, a Puffin Foundation fellow in investigative reporting, is the author of the New York Times bestseller, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy, now a feature documentary. www.GregPalast.com

Dear Publisher:

Hypocrisy is not limited to those who are agnostic or atheist. Many people of faith can be just as hypocritical whether they be Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist or of any other faith.

Look at those of faith who say it is okay to pull families apart and put children in cages at our border. Is that really a statement of faith?

Does that really apply the golden rule or is that hypocrisy?

Or, look at the man in the White House. A narcissistic serial liar; with five children from three baby mommas and innumerable mistresses on the side. A man who somehow holds solid support from the faith base of the South.

Those folks just look the other way. Does that really make one a person of applied faith or a hypocrite?

This is not a question of exercising faith. This is an issue of free speech. Free speech on both sides. So, on this point we can agree.

In our American we have free speech, but that right is not absolute. You cannot yell “fire” in a theater. At governmental meetings where the public can speak, everyone should have the right to make their statement within the bounds of acceptable decorum.

Does someone expressing their desire to have a flag flown have the right to silence others? No, is the simple answer.

Do those of faith have a right to express their view? Yes, is the simple answer.

The decisions of our representatives should be based on the law. What does the law state? How should it be applied? What are the rulings of courts that may apply? This is how decisions should be made by government, local, state or national.

Our Declaration of Independence and Constitution are documents written by men. All religious testaments are words written by men. Whether they are inspired by a higher power; well that is a question.

Your statement made “that there is no separation of church and State in the Constitution” is incorrect.

The United States Constitution is a living document with Amendments. The first ten of these is called the Bill of Rights.

Amendment 1 states, and I’ll paraphrase, Congress shall not establish a State Religion. By Supreme Court confirmation this means that no religion has a preference over another and has no sway over the government of the United States. That; in and of itself is separation.

The Pledge of Allegiance you reference containing “Under God” was not originally written with those words. You misspeak here.

Written in 1892 by Francis Bellamy it originally read: “I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic, for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.”

Not until 1954 in response to Communist threats of the time were the words you reference added.

You speak of “Divine Providence” in your Perspective. Divine for whom? Slaves? Native Indians? Indentured Servants? Women? Truth be told this country was formed because of a tax revolt and a lack of representation in Parliament by white, land owning men.

If all men are equal, then why would a higher power shine greater on North American than on the British Isles? Why not shine equally on all? The world rotates so why not shine all over the world? We’re not blessed by Divine Providence we’re blessed by our law. For whom no one is above.

I don’t have the answer to many of the questions written here. I’m not that smart, gifted, or enlightened. Humility rather than hypocrisy should be the consideration whenever an elected representative needs to make a decision for all of us.

Thank you for expressing your thoughts and for publishing this response should you choose to do so.

Mark Jordan

Antioch