By Barbara Zivica

As readers know, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on 3/7 in which I thought they would discuss issues and options for the 2007-2014 housing element implementation (ABAG mandates) which were presented to the Planning Commission in February. They did not. The only item under discussion was amending the existing Residential Development Allocation Ordinance sunset date to 2013.

I contacted Tina Wehrmeister, the city’s Community Development Director who advises me that currently ABAG is working on the Sustainable Communities Strategy (planning to 2040) and the Regional Housing Needs Allocation for the next housing element period of 2014-2022. Key dates and document releases coming soon.

On Friday, March 9th, the joint MTC/ABAG Planning Committee will release the preferred Sustainable Community Strategy scenario for public comment and on 3/15 the ABAG Executive Board will release the draft Regional Housing Needs Allocation for public comment. Both items will be brought before a future Council for discussion and direction to staff.

To all of you who showed up for the 3/7 council meeting to comment on ABAG’s mandates, my apologies. Know, however, you made an decided impact even though the Planning Commission did not discuss the staff report presented to them in February. City hall has been put on notice that residents are concerned about the quantity of low and very low income housing ABAG feels our city should accommodate.

The Planning Commission of the City of Antioch will hold a public hearing at City Hall at 6:30 P.M. March 7th on Issues and Options for Antioch’s next 7 Year Housing Element Plan required by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). An excellent staff report on the subject can be downloaded from the City’s web site.

Here’s a brief synopsis:

AGAG calculated Antioch’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) to be 2,282 units, including 516 very low-income and 330 low-income units.

ABAG also concluded that since the previous 7-year planning period (1996-2006) did not identify enough sites to accommodate the entire allocation of low and very low-income units, the City’s adjusted RHNA be increased to 3,310 units.

As the City was unable to find enough land to meet its share of the regional need for lower income units, it will probably need to amend its existing ordinance to allow some residential projects to be approved WITHOUT A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT OR DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL.

Projects that include lower income units to be entitled to a density bonus under State law and thus would be entitled to provide reduced parking. Parking requirements could also be reduced by providing shuttle or van service to shopping, social services and transit stations or limiting the areas where parking reductions apply to neighhoods or districts closer to transit or shopping. (Rivertown projects, for instance, could offer the option of paying an in-lieu fee to be used to construct a future parking structure.)

The City has hired Dyett & Bhatia as consultant to assist in adjusting our Housing Element program to become in full compliance with State law and make regulations consistent with the State density bonus requirements and establish new zoning districts and programs to accommodate new dwelling units.

Two options are suggested to help the city rezone sufficient land to accommodate its allocation for lower income units at the so called ”default density” (30 units per acre for Antioch and other suburban cities with more than 100,000 population).

One is to rezone 106.5 acres to establish a zone where multi development is permitted at 20 units per acre and rezone sufficient land at a minimum density of 30 units per acre. (Six sites with more than 50 acres in the Rivertown/Urban Waterfront Focus Area could be rezoned from PBC to allow residential development of a minimum density of 20 units per acre.)

The other option is to rezone 59.47 acres at a density of 30 units per acre and continue to require a conditional use permit or planned development approval for some or all units.

The zoning ordinance also needs amending to establish fixed standards and requirements in regard to development features. Some of the changes to be considered include: Reducing the existing 25-30 foot setback from collector streets and establish front yard build to or set back zones that would allow homes about 10-15 feet closer to the street, requiring parking to be located to the rear instead of instead of in front of buildings, etc.

Because Antioch does not have sufficient facilities to accommodate the need for emergency shelters, it must identify a zone or zones where at least one year round shelter can be established. It is proposed to amend our current ordinance to allow such a shelter on City owned land near Delta Fair and Century Blvd., including a site that the Bay Area Rescue Mission had considered for a transitional housing facility.

Based on an estimated density of 200 shelter beds per acre, the sites could accommodate both the 124 emergency shelter beds the City needs to meet the State requirement as well as 100 units of transitional housing and associated services.

Among other options is amending our zoning ordinance to define Single Room Occupancy (SRO) units as a form of multi-family housing and allow SROs in the Rivertown High Density Residential and Transit-Oriented Residential Districts subject to specific limitations.

I don’t know about you folks, but I’m tired of government intervention, e.g., being told what light bulb I can use or having to bring an reusable bag to the grocery store. We all need to protest the proliferation of proposed parcel taxes on future parcel ballot measures and the imposition of zoning mandates on local communities by MTC and ABAG, the latest scheme which is entitled ONE BAY AREA PLAN, one of the many mandates touted to reduce greenhouse gasses but which in reality are just meant to overturn local control of zoning.

Please attend this planning meeting because as Abraham Lincoln once said “To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men.”

By Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla
Executive Director, Restore the Delta

HR1837, a Federal bill sponsored by Congressman Devin Nunes (CA -21, Tulare County) , is a horrific bill for Delta communities. Tentatively, this pending piece of legislation will be considered for a floor vote in the U.S. House of Representatives on Wednesday, February 29, 2012.

In addition to relaxing water pumping restrictions for the Delta, which have been one of the last lines of defense for protecting water quality for Delta farming and urban users, this legislation proposes to strip away 150 years of water rights law and protections in California. Our State water rights laws would be replaced with a new Federal government water rights system, just for California. In other words, passage of HR 1837 would set the stage for big government intrusion into local and state water laws. Enactment of this bill would also undermine our rights as citizens under the California Constitution by stripping away public trust protections of our most valuable shared resource — water.

Even more disturbing, a provision currently exists in HR 1837 that would grant the Westlands Water District the right to receive 100% of their contract water allotment, every year, even in drought years. Remember, Westlands Water District is a junior water rights holder and is only legally entitled to surplus or extra water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta during wet periods.

Passage of HR 1837 would create a new system that would give Westlands farmers all the water they want at any time at the expense of Delta farmers, Delta urban communities, and Delta fisheries.

This is why we need you to take action today!

We need each and every one of you to send four letters out as soon as possible to show your opposition to HR 1837. A draft model has been provided at the end of this email, as well as mailing addresses.

The first two letters should be sent to Congressman Jeff Denham (CA-19, Modesto) and Congressman Tom McClintock (CA-4, Auburn). Both are strong supporters of this legislation to the detriment of their own constituents and to the greater good of California. Let them know why you oppose HR 1837 and ask them to explain why they are such ardent supporters of a handful of corporate farmers in the Westlands Water District rather than the citizens of California whom they serve.

The third letter should be sent to Speaker of the House of Representatives, John Boehner, and should point out that the bill does not merit a floor vote.

The fourth letter, which will require revision from the template, should be sent to Secretary John Laird, of the California Resources Agency. Restore the Delta has learned that Secretary Laird does not feel that opposition to HR 1837 is an important priority for his office.

Considering that his agency is in charge of crafting the plan for the peripheral canal with the Westlands Water District (via the BDCP), opposing this bill which would put Westlands first in the water rights system ahead of all other Californians is a must do task for his office.

This is difficult but vitally important action request. It’s time for us all to roll up our sleeves, to fire up our computers, and to take a stand for the Delta.

Addresses:
The Honorable John Boehner
Speaker of the House
United States House of Representatives
H-232 The Capitol
Washington, DC 20515

The Honorable Tom McClintock
428 Cannon HOB
Washington, DC 20515

The Honorable Jeff Denham
1605 Longworth HOB
Washington, DC 20515

Secretary
California Natural Resources Agency
1416 Ninth Street, Suite 1311
Sacramento, CA 95814

Template:
RE: OPPOSE H.R. 1837 (Nunes)

Dear Speaker Boehner:
On behalf of the undersigned organizations, we urge you to oppose the “San Joaquin Valley Water Reliability Act,” (H.R. 1837), which was introduced by Representative Nunes. Furthermore, we do not believe that this bill merits a vote by the U.S. House of Representatives.

H.R. 1837 overrides the public trust as defined in the California Constitution and state water laws. It reverses the long-standing Congressional principle that the federal government should follow state water law whenever possible.

H.R. 1837 would reduce water quality and water availability for Delta communities and Delta farmers. It seeks to ensure water flows to corporate agribusiness in the western and southern San Joaquin Valley at the expense of Delta family farmers. The recently-released Economic Sustainability Report authored by the Delta Protection Commission shows that Delta agriculture is worth $4.2 billion annually and provides tens of thousands of jobs. Delta agriculture and jobs should not be sacrificed to benefit water users in other parts of the state, some of whom do not even use that water for agriculture.

H.R. 1837 would hinder efforts to restore fish populations in the Delta. Science-based protections for salmon and other endangered species are required under both California state law and the Endangered Species Act. Since 2009, the State of California has consistently opposed legislation that would weaken the Endangered Species Act in the San Francisco Bay-Delta and Estuary. Title I of H.R. 1837 would substitute measures that were part of a short-term agreement in 1994, when the health of the Delta had not deteriorated so seriously and when recent scientific studies had not yet been done.

H.R. 1837 would reverse San Joaquin River restoration, thereby further impacting water quality and quantity for the south Delta. While the San Joaquin River restoration allows for a limited flow of additional water into the south Delta, breaking the promise of San Joaquin River restoration would signal to Delta communities the federal government’s sacrifice of the Delta for the preference of another region in California.

This deeply-flawed bill joins a long list of water strategies created behind closed doors without input from the Delta communities that rely on a healthy Delta for their livelihoods. It threatens the economic security of families, farmers, and small business owners in the Delta, as well as those in the Delta and Northern California who depend on recreational and commercial fisheries. It also threatens the urban economy surrounding the Delta – an area that is home to four million Californians and that is dependent on the Delta to meet its water user needs.

H.R. 1837 deserves your opposition.

On February 14th, staff recommended that the Antioch City Council adopt a resolution in support of the City filing an application under the State’s “Sustainable Communities Planning Grant and Incentive Program” in order to fund the preparation of a Specific Plan for the City’s Downtown Area.

The City is requesting a grant from the state in the amount of $500,000 in order to retain consultants to prepare the specific plan, as well as to offset staff costs to administer the Specific Plan effort, estimated to take approximately 18 months.

First a little background. As of 2005, the City’s Waterfront Development Plan had been stalled for more than a decade. Insufficient funds were supposedly the reason for the delay, which may have been true due to past councils making a number of unwise decisions.

These include lending developers millions of dollars, contributing over $1 million for the construction of Humphrey’s Restaurant, miscalculating and delaying state Department of Boating and Waterways loan repayments for the Marina, and allowing the infamous Roger Moore to misappropriate more than $3 million of the city’s money for the failed San Diego ferryboat project.

In 2005, however, the Council decided that in order to move ahead on the revitalization of downtown they would put the ball in the hands of one master developer and solicited interest from 10 major developers, later narrowing the field down to four: Arcadia G&M, D.R. Horton, Lennar Bay Area Urban Division, and Reynolds and Brown.

Firms were anxious to compete because Rivertown was in a redevelopment district, allowing the City to use eminent domain powers to underwrite affluent firms seeking to build major projects. But once again plans stalled.

In April of 2007 Guy Bjerke, the City’s Economic Development Director, Concord City councilmember and CEO of the Home Builders Association of Northern California, presented the City’s Economic Development Commission with an update on downtown revitalization efforts.

Discussed was the need to amend the city’s general plan and zoning ordinance in the Rivertown Focus Area to allow mixed-use development and conduct a baseline parking study to determine the existing amount of parking downtown, a study useful in planning for a ferry terminal and future revitalization projects.

If the City does get the grant money, will the plans come to fruition this time around? Will we really get ferry service, a cleaned up waterfront and businesses that will lure us to visit what was once a vital part of our city? Or will developers just build “stack and pack,” high-density, mixed-use projects like they plan to do around Antioch’s new eBART station?

By Walter Ruehlig

These are trying times for Antioch. Fact is, there’s trouble brewing in Dodge City and it’s spelled lawlessness.

This in no manner deters from the good work done by Police Chief Allan Cantando and his crew of dedicated men and women. Under Cantando’s watch homicides dropped from thirteen in 2010 to five in 2011. That’s no small potatoes. Overall, violent crimes dropped some 5%.

Other good city news is the high schools have seen lowered suspension rates and the graduation drop out rate fell from 27% to 18%.

Where Antioch got hit hard, though, was in burglaries, up over 25% in 2011. The epidemic of recent shootings also put this year off to a very shaky start in the violence realm. With a city staff payroll that is the same as Brentwood, which is half our size, even Houdini must run out of tricks.

Antioch has not been replacing officer retirees and is now paying the Piper. We are simply asking too much of a police force to be down some 30 sworn officers. We’ve got the size of the police force in the 1970’s when we were more a burg.

The pickle is both in size and in challenging demographics. Antioch has the highest rate of population under eighteen (38%) in the County; one of the highest rates of foreclosures in the state, hence causing transitory issues; an increase of 250% in foster home and 150% in group home population; a staggering influx of urban migrants that Sociology 101, unarguably, instructs takes time to absorb and acclimate.

I knew bad times were in gear when a friend called me from Key West, Florida asking me if the wild west had broken out in Antioch. He had seen news on Huffington Post of the six-person garage party shooting, knowing it before I did. It was carried nationwide through the Associated Press.

Then the home invasion happened. To think, these bummers just when we were recovering from the shocks of the Dugard decades-long kidnapping story and the god-awful Jasmine Davis locked-in-her room and brutalized tragedy.

Right or wrong, people can get numb about shootings in the Sycamore corridor because they may say to themselves, “Well, I avoid the area.” A home invasion, though, touches a different nerve. A home, after all, is meant to be our castle.

Given the upheavals, I suggest we need a three-pronged attack to take control and not let fear rule the day.

Firstly, more boots on the ground. The City Council is to be commended for saying that come hell or high water they will find the money for two or three more officers for immediate hire. Remember, response time was once closer to five minutes. It is now closer to eight. A great deal of havoc can occur in those lost three minutes.

Then there’s the issue of no response, as many calls are now simply off the priority radar screen. I know, because my alarm system would go off and there’d be no response.

Exhibit B: A neighbor down the street saw four youth knock down a front door in December and called the police to be told they had no available units because of a sprawling fracas somewhere. As the youths were leaving the home some ten minutes later the neighbor called again and now was told the police were free to come out. No doubt, we need more bodies out there.

Secondly, all citizenry need be proactive. We’re told that God helps those who help themselves. Simple things can make a difference in defending your life and property. Light sensors, outside cameras, locked side gates and front door grills; a reinforced garage side-door; a police lock; dog; alarm systems (we save the monthly fee by hooking up our own, which rings to our phone). Cold truth is, why would a thug hit your home when easier pickings are down the street?

Thirdly, unite. Strength is in numbers and Neighborhood Watch is a proven safeguard. I know it turned our neighborhood around.

Biggest success was driving out a house with 53 police calls. Neighbors all started calling the police when there were issues. We also wrote the landlord, who we threatened to individually bring to small claims court and sue for $5,000 for interfering with our right of enjoyment. The landlord finally got rid of the chronic offenders and neighborhood disruption has calmed immeasurably.

Watching out for each other while others are working or on vacation and being the eyes and ears of the police does wonders. I recommend neighbors exchange work or cell numbers and notify each other of suspicious activity like a truck in their driveway during a weekday. One scam out there is to have a truck with some phony carpet cleaning or other tag and pick a house clean while people on the street “mind their own business.”

Antioch has too many good people and too many gems to give up on; career-themed schools, the Delta, Black Diamond Mines, Contra Loma Reservoir, Lone Tree Golf Course and Event Center,, 28 city parks, the Water Park, Prewett Community Center, the El Campanil Theatre, Antioch Historical Society, unchopped hills and undulating streets, etc. I know that I’m not giving up. I hope you’re not.

It only takes a single lamp post to lighten a darkened street. A small core of committed individuals focused on the crime problem can turn this around. Against all predictions, Rudy Guliani did it in New York. Antioch’s not a city of eight million, so it’s not impossible.

Antioch is our home. It’s worth fighting for.

On Valentine’s Day, the Antioch City Council received Police Chief Allan Cantando’s annual report on crime in Antioch (2010 vs. 2011 stats).

The report showed declines in homicides (5 vs. 13), rape, robbery, aggravated assault, and total arrests. The bad news, however, was that burglary was up 22.8%, theft up 49.8%, auto theft up 0.7% and arson up 51.4%. To sum it up, although total violent crime declined 5.3%, total property crime went up 25.1% and total violent and property crime went up 18.5%.

Regrettably, there have been 6 shootings in the past few days, resulting in the death of one person. (Shades of the Valentine massacre). Fortunately, the resident who defended himself against an apparent home invader, wasn’t injured.

Residents would like to see the additional hiring of police officers, but due to the reluctance of the Public Employees Union Local 1 and the Antioch Police Officer’s Association, who inexplicably were granted 2 extra holidays per year during budget negotiations last year, to accept the same labor concessions as other city employees, the standoff may continue.

Politicians and their special interest supporters don’t see 2012 as the ideal time to seek ways to trim budgets and reform overgenerous public pension systems. Rather they see it as the moment to impose higher taxes and fees on taxpayers struggling in a down economy.

Some prime examples are:

1) Governor Jerry Brown’s proposed initiative to raise about $7 billion by increasing the state sales tax by a half cent (hurting those at the lower income levels) and raising income tax on those who make $250,000 or more a year.

2) The California Federation of Teachers tax initiative to raise about $6 billion for schools.

3) Activist lawyer Molly Munger and the California Teachers Association tax initiative to raise about $10 billion in taxes for schools.

4) The Contra Costa County Supervisors decision to send out ballots to property owners in regard to imposition of a “Clean Water” parcel tax. The election will cost approximately $526,500. Incidentally, we already pay a federal storm water tax on our properties, half of which stays within cities to clean storm drains and creeks and half of which goes to the County’s Clean Water Program.

Additionally, supervisors are expected to ask voters in November to approve a new parcel tax on behalf of the Contra Costa County Fire District, which has been affected by declining property tax revenues and retirement costs which continue to take a greater portion of the budget.

5) The Contra Costa Community College District is in the process of conducting a voter opinion poll seeking to gather voter support for a parcel tax on the November 2012 election ballot. Voters approved the first CCC College District local bond measure in March 2002. Measure A was for $120 million. Voters also approved a second bond measure in June 2006. That bond measure was for $286.5 million.

6) The Contra Costa Water District just approved an “adjustment” in rates and charges in order to increase revenues 3.6%. You may ask what does this mean to Antioch residents, but old timers like me know that when CCWD rates go up, the city decides to increase our rates also.

7) The Antioch Unified School District, which sought approval from property owners in the non-Mello Roos districts in 2008 for a $61,600,000 bond measure to renovate and modernize schools, is now planning to ask voters to approve an additional bond measure for further “improvements,” despite the fact that each year 3% of their budget is state mandated for maintenance.

NOTE: Property owners should be wary of casting votes for any new tax proposal. The California Franchise Tax Board intends to pursue taxpayers and tax preparers who have previously ignored a state law preventing property owners from deducting certain real estate taxes on their tax returns. The tax board is referring to charges that began appearing on tax bills after Prop. 13 limited general property tax increases.

Since then local governments and school districts have been raising revenues via voter-approved parcel taxes and other charges that will now be disallowed. The tax board will require property owners to show their parcel number and total property tax bill on their 2011 tax form in an effort to educate the public and generate voluntary compliance. Next year, however, the tax board will enforce compliance.

By Lou Davis

One of today’s popular sayings goes like this: “It is what it is.” But I say “it” is also what you make it. And it’s extremely critical today, moreso than ever before, that we make our contributions to help make a difference.

Nowadays, there are very few caring Americans who will disagree with the fact that, like never before in the history of our nation, casting your vote for leaders in this country has never been more important than in 2012. Too bad, but in our system of government we can only ‘throw the bums out’ of office by expressing our choices at the ballot box.

Most will agree that bums which deserve throwing out most are in Washington; from our Robin Hood style president to members of Congress who think the country can spend its way to prosperity and let future generations pay the difference in years to come.

Meanwhile, our governors and mayors appear to be cowered down by other bums called Occupy Wall Street protesters, who obviously do not believe in ballot style change-making, like Tea Party groups. Wall Street occupiers prefer to force their change on us. They obviously feel that the President is on their side, which he has stated several times, and that governors and mayors are afraid to take necessary steps to stop them.

In California, our first opportunity for helping make change comes during Primary Elections in June. If voters feel as I do, with a very strong opinion on who our next leaders should be, voting in the 2012 Primary is not an option. Particularly for the president and members of Congress, voting this year is a must-do proposition.

Although “it” may be what it is, it is up to us as responsible citizens to become more familiar with issues and candidates, and cast a positive ballot this year.