By Devon Minnema

I’ve recently been in Nevada working for a Super PAC. While it was truly nice to be surrounded by coworkers who share my ideology (for the most part), it served as a reminder for why I believe what I believe. While moderates would probably like to label me a “libertarian,” I consider myself a conservative first and foremost. I have found, especially in speaking with voters during my time out of state, that few people truly understand what a conservative really is. Conservatives are not nationalists, nor are they budget busters, nor are they the so-called “moral majority.”

A conservative believes in Renaissance ideals; Freedom, equality, liberty, respect, and diplomacy. Unlike Donald Trump’s fallacious supposition that conservatism is about, “conserving our money, conserving our wealth,” it is in fact all about conserving order in the pursuit of those ideals. In America, this concept has been adapted to protect the Constitution, which is more than just a piece of paper, but rather the enshrinement of those ideals. Peaceful transition of power, restrictions on the influence of the federal government, and the protection of states’ ability to make their own laws and economic systems are key pieces in the Constitutional puzzle. This is why conservatives are so often constitutionalists as well.

Simply wanting smaller government or even good governance does not a conservative make. You must ask yourself why. Why do you want smaller government? Is it so you can enjoy freedom and liberty? Or is it simply because you don’t trust Democrats?

The Renaissance was much more than simply writers coming up with new political concepts. The Renaissance was a renewal in the Greek and Roman tradition of being at peace with our humanity. This also meant that you could be at peace with other’s humanity, whether you agreed with their interpretation of the world around them or not.

Our “Western Civilization” developed due to shared suffering under Roman Catholic rule after the fall of the Roman Empire. Rather than continue to live under the oppressive and corrupt ways of the Medieval Church and it’s approved monarchies, the Renaissance brought back the Greek and Roman interest in secular governance. Roman Catholicism preached that people needed to be ashamed of their humanity. Piousness and subservience to the church was the ideal. A life of comfort or success was seen as gluttony and greed, as any and all profit beyond what was needed for survival should be “given” to either the church or the church-approved ruler. The “Dark Ages” was a period of civilizational formation, where nomadic tribes fell into this shared experience in which tyrants and the occasional real leader would unite and/or subjugate them. It took approximately 1500 years for our civilization to realize that despots, with unlimited power over their subject’s lives, was not a very good idea.

The Renaissance was just as much a historical breaking point as it was an intellectual and scientific enlightenment. The educated members of this civilization were able to look back at the previous 1500 years and realize that not one kingdom had sustained prosperity for more than a few decades at a time. That was because rulers who had been easy on their people or stood up to the church in defense of their subjects were more often than not followed by a ruler who didn’t care about their living conditions or natural rights.

When our nation’s founders put together the Constitution, they knew that never before had a government been formed with the intention of protecting people’s rights rather than impeding upon them. The founders had already tried a straight representative democracy, but knew that it had been too chaotic and simply resulted in either the smaller states being trampled or the larger states being stifled.

Our country is special. It is not because our people are somehow inherently “better,” or that we have some secret “superior” values or even that there is any specific cultural difference, as many nations within Western Civilization share, to some degree, our values. Nor does it have anything to do with our soil. The area of the United States could just as easily be ruled by a despot as it could be a republic.

It is that our government was founded upon the idea of liberty and then that was anchored with the Constitution.

There is no threat nor technology that changes the importance of freedom.

ISIS is scary, and social networking makes it all the more apparent, but the anarchist movement of the 1800s was just as scary and that resulted in the assassination of a United States president. The Tripolitan Pirates declared war on us and actively captured and tortured American citizens but we didn’t give up our Constitution. The British invaded and burned Washington, D.C. and we still didn’t give up our Constitutional rights.

Despite our resolution to hold the Constitution sacred in the first half of our national history, we hail those presidents that amassed more power for themselves, or even broke the law. Democrats romanticize Franklin D. Roosevelt when he imprisoned American citizens and denied them due process, all in addition to abusing the Interstate Commerce Clause to the point of logical yoga. We hail Lyndon B. Johnson as a hero for the working class when his policies bastardized the 10th amendment and have kept the American south poor and uneducated for decades. We put Truman on a coin despite nationalizing an entire industry and shredding property rights as well as the aforementioned 10th amendment..

To invalidate even one piece of the Constitution is to invalidate the culmination of the sum experiences of Western Civilization and essentially say that “We know better.” Do you really have that much hubris that you would risk forcing posterity to live under tyranny. Invalidate the Constitution and you invalidate what made us great.

So go ahead, tell me that you have nothing to hide and that the FBI should force Apple to risk the cyber security and privacy of the entire country, but realize what you are saying by invalidating the fourth and first amendments. Go ahead and claim that presidents shouldn’t be required to get a declaration of war, as required by the Constitution, but realize the consequences of perpetual intervention overseas.

Conservatism isn’t about conserving wealth or conserving resources, it is about conserving freedom and liberty, the ideals that faux conservative politicians so quickly bastardize in the name of nationalism or national defense. If what you want is nationalism or military dominance, go ahead. Vote for the Hillary’s, and Trump’s, and Marco’s of this world. But true conservatives will be fighting to defend our rights, our Constitution, and not just the bits that are politically expedient.

Minnema is a 20-year-old college student and small business owner.

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

By Barbara Zivica

There’s a plethora of candidates for both Mary Piepho’s seat (District 3) and Supervisor Federal Glover’s seat (District 5) and probably more to come.  Mrs. Piepho is not running for reelection. However, Glover, who has been on the Board of Supervisors since 2000, is running for another term.

For starters, let’s define a County Supervisor’s duties and responsibilities:  Appoint most county dept. heads, except elected officials and provide for appointment of all other County employees, provide for compensation of all county officials and employees, create officers, board and commissions as needed, appoint members and fix terms of office, award all contracts except those that are within the authority delegated to the County Purchasing Agent, adopt an annual budget, sponsor an annual audit of all County accounts, books and records, supervise operations of all departments and exercise executive and administrative authority through the County government County Administrator, serve as appellate body for Planning and Zoning issues, and serve as County Board of Equalization (the Board has created an Assessment Appeals Board to perform this function) and on the Housing Authority which oversees the Section 8 program.

Now let’s look at the candidates, so far and what district they are running in:

Running for District 5 ( Glover’s seat) are:

Federal Glover – former Pittsburg City Council Member. Served as Mayor from 1998 to 1999 and has been on Board of Supervisors since 2000.  Has stated his commitment to reinforcing a sense of community by building bridges of trust, inclusion and cooperation among the diverse elements of District 5.  According to Glover’s campaign manager Mary Jo Rossi whose name has come up in regard to backroom deals concerning the Navy land plan,  he has worked on improvements to BART and Highway 4, defended the county’s Urban Limit Line and wants to find ways to keep kids out of  jail.

Conrad Dandridge – In 2006 he ran for the District 4 seat in unincorporated Martinez  (Susan Bonilla won that race.)  Nominated by then supervisor Sunne McPeak, served as member of the Pacheco Municipal Advisory Council (closest thing to a city council in that unincorporated area.)  Worked as a Census Bureau field operations supervisor for the county in 2000.  He’s concerned that unincorporated areas have a leadership shortage and haven’t received proper attention by Supervisor Glover.

Anamarie Avila Farias – Martinez resident who currently serves as Vice-Mayor on the City Council.   Serves on 3 different boards: 2nd VP of East Bay Division,  Housing Community and Economic Development Policy Committee Member and current Board Member for the Latino Caucus and Juvenile Hall Auxiliary of Contra Costa County.

Running for District 3 (Piepho’s seat) are:

Steve Barr – Brentwood City Council Member.  Endorsed by Brentwood Mayor  Bob Taylor and Brentwood Vice Mayor Joel Bryant and Council Member Erick Stonebarger.  A licensed contractor and community activist.  Elected to the Liberty High School District Board in 2005, served as Board President in 2008 and completed his term on the board in 2010.  Ran for Mayor against Taylor in 2012. He was appointed to the East Contra Costa Fire District Board in 2011 – 2014 and recently reappointed in 2016

Diane Burgis – Oakley Resident – elected as an East Bay Regional Parks District Trustee in 2014, and executive director of the Friends of March Creek Watershed, a grassroots organization.  She was elected to the Oakley City Council in 2012 and was recruited by Supervisor Mary Piepho who is not running for re-election.  Burgis wants to encourage economic growth in East County.

Wade Harper – Former Antioch Unified School District board member from 2008-2010, elected to the Antioch City Council in 2010 with the help of Federal Glover and a campaign that stated that with his 22 years in law enforcement he would focus on reducing crime.  Harper became Mayor in 2012 and was the principal officer for Antioch’s Measure C, a half cent sales tax, which was promoted by telling the public that it would enable the hiring of 22 more police officers.  As it turns out, Harper didn’t fulfill his campaign promises to city residents.

Douglas Hardcastle – was elected to the Oakley City Council in 2012 and just completed a term as Mayor and is endorsed by current Oakley Mayor Kevin Romick.  He first served as an elected member of the Ironhouse Sanitary District from 2000 to 2012 and served as President of the board in his final year. He owns Hardcastle’s RV sales and repair company in Oakley and is known as a “straight shooter”.

Odessa Lefrancois – Pittsburg resident. Retired Navy vet, respiratory therapist and 2nd VP of Local Union 1 and a civil rights activist as President of the NAACP East County Branch.  Concerned about vets rights issues, unfair labor practices and community related issues concerning seniors.  (I found her use of the County’s logo in her “Vote Odessa Lefrancois” campaign presumptuous).

Monica Wilson – Member of the Antioch Economic Development Commission from 2011 to 2012, and currently a member of the Antioch City Council.  She has stated that public safety is a top priority and wants to apply her experience in business development on a larger scale. Her standby council members in the event that she becomes completely unavailable, includes Lamar Thorpe and Patrice Guillory, Thorpe’s wife.  Recently a Notice of Intent to Circulate Petition seeking to limit card rooms within the city was filed by Lamar Thorpe, Patrice Guillary and LaTanya Harmon.  The initiative is a back door ploy, sponsored by the California Grand Casino, to eliminate competition.

Filing opens on February 16 and closes March 11 unless the incumbent isn’t seeking reelection, as is the case in District 3. Then the filing deadline is extended to March 16.

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

By Allen Payton

Lamar Thorpe, his wife and one other Antioch resident just put the City in a bind. The Council was forced to either adopt an unnecessary ordinance from an initiative for which they were the proponents and funded by an out of town casino, to limit the number of card rooms in Antioch from two to one, or spend between $132,771 and $177,028 on a special election.

While the Council chose to allow the initiative to go to the ballot, I hold Thorpe personally responsible for costing Antioch taxpayers that amount of money that could be used, instead to pay for at least one police officer for a year.

Here’s the crazy part. Thorpe is a member of the Antioch Economic Development Commission and was nominated by Mayor Wade Harper and appointed by the City Council. He’s supposed to be working to help grow the local economy. Instead, he’s chosen to be a shill for the California Grand Casino in Pacheco, to limit competition for them and creating a monopoly for the only current card room in Antioch, the 19th Hole.

Whether or not you agree with gambling, as I do not, the issue is what is the role of a member of the Antioch Economic Development Commission? Doing the bidding for out of town interests to limit competition in our city is not one of those.

Lamar Thorpe. Herald file photo.

A representative of the same people behind the initiative approached me, last fall. I told them flat out no way would I be a front person for them, even though I oppose gambling, as it violates my faith. I don’t want an out of town business dictating what we will or won’t do in our city.

Thorpe chose to go the opposite direction, thinking this might help him to advance himself politically, possibly in another run for City Council. He lost his race in 2012 after he wouldn’t admit to something he did in college, and continued to lie about it, blaming the student newspaper.

The worst thing is he didn’t even have the guts to get up from his seat in the audience and speak at the Council meeting, and identify himself as the leading proponent, when Mayor Harper asked for the proponents to get up and speak. Instead he let the California Grand Casino’s attorney speak.

For that reason alone he should have never been appointed to the commission, nor by Councilwoman Monica Wilson as one of her Stand By Council Members. She also appointed Thorpe’s wife as one. Wilson should also immediately rescind those appointments.

While there may not be a financial conflict of interest for Thorpe in what he did on the card room initiative, he has a serious conflict because he’s been working against his responsibilities as a commissioner, as well as the interests of both the commission and the City in general.

It’s time the Council voted to remove Thorpe from the commission, and send the message out to all commissioners and residents that this is not acceptable behavior for anyone who wants to serve the City in a leadership or representative position.

By Allen Payton, Publisher

Finally. Antioch has a gated, single-family home community being proposed for development. This is not just any gated community, but one by Blackhawk in partnership with the Nunns of Brentwood who built Apple Hill Estates and other projects in the city to our east.

While it’s not the same as Apple Hill or Blackhawk in the San Ramon Valley, at least it’s a gated community with some nice amenities and homes that are projected to sell in the $500,000 to $600,000 range, which will help improve home values throughout Antioch.

The project, known as the Vineyards at Sand Creek, two years in the planning stage, received a 5-1 vote by the Antioch Planning Commission recommending approval by the City Council.

It includes 641 homes on 4,200 to 5,160 square foot lots, which doesn’t fit within my previous stated desire for larger homes on larger lots in the Sand Creek Focus Area of the City’s General Plan, formerly known as Future Urban Area 1 or FUA-1. However, it makes sense, as that area is adjacent to what is proposed to be mixed use development, including high-density housing on the Brentwood side, and a BART  station.

It will replace the 640 homes lost when the land for the planned, gated Roddy Ranch community was allowed to be sold to the East Bay Regional Park District that would have helped pay for the roads and sewer lines in the Sand Creek Focus Area of the City’s General Plan.

While the lot sizes don’t fit within my previous stated desire for larger homes on larger lots in that part of Antioch, formerly known as Future Urban Area 1 or FUA-1. Plus, again, the homes will be in a gated community, which does fit within my previously stated desires for the area, along with upscale homes and senior communities.

Also, this project will provide the extension to the needed infrastructure to the entire focus area, specifically the sewer line and a section of Sand Creek Road. It is located across the street, of the planned extension of Hillcrest Avenue, from the previously approved Aviano Farms.

A little background for those concerned about all the new houses. When I was on the City Council from 1994-98 a total of 8,900 homes were planned for the area. Today that number is down to about 4,000 and possibly fewer, after learning in a recent discussion with representatives of Richland, which owns the land known as The Ranch, across Deer Valley Road from the Kaiser Medical Center, and was slated for 1,667 homes. They told me that number will be closer to 1,100 homes, instead. So, the total number of homes for the 2,700 acre Sand Creek Focus Area, inside the city limits and inside the Urban Limit Line, which cuts off 65% of land in the county from subdivision development (no more than one home per five acres), definitely fits within reason and the long-term plans for Antioch and East County.

Plus, an economic study has shown there is more than enough land in Antioch for commercial development and employment. Specifically, the proposed Resolution in the City Staff report states “in May 2015, the City hired EPS to prepare the ‘Implications for Economic Development of the Proposed General Plan Amendment for the Promenade/Vineyards at Sand Creek Project’ (the ‘Economic Study’). The Economic Study concluded that: (1) The City currently has workspace development capacity of approximately 23.3 million square feet; (2) On an aggregate basis, the City has substantial development capacity for job growth requiring office/commercial and business park/industrial space; (3) Comparison of available City employment areas indicates that there are areas that are better and will be more competitive in attracting economic development than the Sand Creek Focus Area; and (4) Overall, the proposed change in General Plan designation (from Business Park to Residential) will not negatively affect the City’s ability to attract new economic development.

The project will also be required to create an assessment district to pay for police, with each home paying an annual fee, as the Aviano Farms project was required to do.

Finally, the fact that Blackhawk wants to build in Antioch says a lot and sends a message to the greater Bay Area that our city is coming back and on the road to economic recovery and hopefully, a safer one, as well.

However, as I stated in my column, last month, this should be the last project proposed for the Sand Creek Focus Area, approved by the Planning Commission and City Council, until a final plan for the area is put in place, which isn’t expected to be completed until later this year.

While we still have a long way to go to improve our city, the homes, if approved won’t be under construction for another few years. By then things can and should not only be better for the new homebuyers, but for those of us who live here, now, as well.

The Antioch City Council meeting will be held at 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday, February 8 in the City Council Chambers at City Hall, between West 2^nd and 3^rd Streets at H Street.

In June, the Antioch City Council unanimously approved a plan for downtown that envisions a balance of housing (2,173 homes) and commercial construction (575,000 sq. ft. of new retail and office space).

Council however had butted heads with some residents who disagreed with the three options Council considered for the vacant lot, formerly known as the Beede Lumber yard, across from the old Antioch Lumber Company building, which now belongs to a realtor.  The city’s proposed options were:   1) housing – 18 units per acre instead of the 37 unit limit originally planned;  2) a combination of residential or commercial and/or a park;  3) turn the area into a park with space for an event center.

Option 3 runs counter to staff’s recommendation to convert Waldie Plaza into a venue for concerts, festivals and other gatherings.  Note: The city’s general plan designation for the “Yard” is “Rivertown/Urban Waterfront”, which encourages the maintenance of sufficient waterfront amenities in the original downtown (aka “Rivertown”) to attract visitor trade.

Council may already be aware, or shortly will learn about an initiative ordinance to turn the Beede Lumber Yard into a town square. (The parcel is located between E Street, West 2nd Street and West 3rd Street)

The  ORDINANCE OF THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ANTIOCH DESIGNATING THE OLD BEEDE LUMBERYARD SITE AS A TOWN SQUARE was submitted to the City Clerk on January 26th, the intent being that it go to the public for a vote at the next regularly scheduled election, once the necessary signatures are gathered, which would be this November.

As a former member of the Antioch Waterfront Commission, I know there were big plans for that area and I don’t mean high density housing.  Condos were voted down before.