“Lamar Thorpe is clearly lashing out with disrespectful and racist verbiage to distract voters from pointed examples of his failed leadership” – recall supporter Alicia Taylor

Other elected officials listed as roasters or on the host committee refuse to denounce rhetoric

“I find it infuriating he’s calling us all Karens and furthering the racial divide in our city.” –recall proponent David Amezcua

By Allen Payton

In expectation of his recall qualifying for the ballot, Antioch Mayor Lamar Thorpe is planning to raise funds by hosting a roast of himself Friday night, Jan. 14. On the fundraiser’s Eventbrite site the description refers to the proponents and supporters as “a small group of #Karens”. In addition, the name of Thorpe’s campaign committee is, “Stop the #KAREN Recall of Mayor Lamar Thorpe”.

According to Dictionary.com, “Karen is a pejorative slang term for an obnoxious, angry, entitled, and often racist middle-aged white woman who uses her privilege to get her way or police other people’s behaviors. In 2020, Karen spread as a label used to call out white women who were captured in viral videos engaging in what are widely seen as racist acts.”

The invite posted in December reads: “As Mayor Thorpe’s first year draws to a close, a small group of #Karens–who didn’t support his bid for Mayor in the first place–are now trying to undo the will of the voters.

Are we surprised? Hardly. We sent Mayor Thorpe to City Hall in order to upset the status quo–and, boy, are they upset!

He’s made it crystal clear from day one–the days of a small group of special interests trying to manipulate City Hall were over the moment he was elected.

Together, we still have important work to do! We hope you’ll join us at Mayor Thorpe’s next fundraiser. This event promises to be a lot of laughs, and we look forward to seeing you there.”

According to the Eventbrite site, the list of those scheduled to roast Thorpe are State Treasurer Fiona Ma, Congressman Jerry McNerney, State Senator Steve Glazer, Antioch District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson and Contra Costa Community College Board District 4 Trustee Andy Li. In a promotion of the event on Thorpe’s official Facebook page, not his campaign page, he announced Congressman Mark DeSaulnier is part of the host committee. In another promotion of the event on Sunday, Thorpe announced Congressman John Garamendi, who is running for re-election to represent part of Antioch in the newly drawn 8th District, has joined the event’s host committee, as well.

“Unexpected call from former CA Lt. Governor and current Congressman John Garamendi earlier today,” the mayor wrote. “He recently learned about the #Karen recall effort in Antioch. He reached out to let me know that he’s standing with me to protect the progress Antioch has made in working to house our nieghbors [sic] without houses, police reform, building youth programs, launch our mental health crisis response team, and Chinese reconciliation efforts.”

“He’s now part of the host committee and will be in attendance Friday. Help me put this noise behind us by making a donation today,” Thorpe added.

Proponents Say Thorpe is Race-Baiting

The use of the racist term used by Thorpe in the name of his committee, as well as what he’s claiming are the reasons why they’re recalling him is what has some proponents and other Antioch residents supporting the effort upset at him and those supporting him as roasters and event hosts. The 20 proponents who signed Thorpe’s recall notice include women and men who are White, Hispanic and Black.

“It is despicable that Thorpe and his followers are calling those leading the recall ‘Karens’,” said Arne Simonsen, one of the recall organizers. “

Asked if he thinks Thorpe is race-baiting by using that term, Simonsen responded, “Yes, he is. And the overwhelming number of proponents for his recall are registered Democrats!”

When reached for comment and asked if she is Hispanic, recall organizer Kathy Cabrera responded, “My hubby (one of the recall proponents) is, which means my children are and I am highly offended by his calling us Karens. My family is a melting pot. I’m white, Husband Latino, Children Latino, Foster son I raised is black And I have a transgender child. I am sooooo not racist.

It’s my belief that Thorpe thinks this recall is being run by Republican “Karens” and I want to set the record straight – in fact the proponents are a group of Bi-Partisan individuals – some of which who even voted for Thorpe but have been disappointed in his actions this first year in office.

Regarding Garamendi’s participation, Cabrera wrote, “I wonder if he is aware that Thorpe is deeming this event as ‘The Stop the Karen’s recall’ event? Basically, that he is calling his constituents ‘Karen’s’ which is offensive. Because us ‘Karens ’ are also HIS constituents, and we will remember this when it comes time to vote.”

“One of the Thorpe Recall Proponents reached out to Mark DeSaulnier and stated that Mark DeSaulnier endorsed his original candidacy, he is not supporting this current climate nor is he aware that his picture or likeness is being utilized in this manner,” Cabrera continued. “Fiona Ma and Jerry McNerney are the same.”

“Many of us have been calling and emailing them all morning. Now, let’s see if these politicians still back him,” she added.

Another supporter of Thorpe’s recall, Julia Gonzalez, shared her thoughts writing, “I am also part of the Recall Thorpe group. I am also offended by the mayor calling us ‘KARENS’.”

“I am first-generation Hispanic, my ex-husband is from Mexico. My four children are first- and second- generation Hispanic and I’m also a proud mother and grandmother of a past and currently present U.S. Navy Servicemen,” she continued. “Lamar Thorpe is not Hispanic, just raised by a foster family that were. Anyone can learn the language. He’s a disrespectful Navy veteran that won’t even salute the flag at any event especially at the Veterans Memorial which there is a picture of this for proof.”

“When has it been tolerated to call citizens names like ‘Karens’ or heckling people in public?” Gonzalez asked. “He’s an embarrassment to our city, to our citizens and especially to all our servicemen, veterans and our country. I SUPPORT RECALL LAMAR THORPE 2022.”

Recall proponent, Velma Wilson wrote, “In response to the Mayor calling the proponents who signed the Recall against him ‘Karens’ I find it rather offensive and outright disrespectful. Myself and my husband are appalled by some of the behavior this mayor has displayed.”

“As African American residents we have raised our children to not only serve the community but to respect those in authority,” she continued. “It’s amazing as we prepare to celebrate the life and legacy of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. how his message of hope, peace, love and unity have been glossed over. Dr. King died trying to unify not divide. I say to Mayor Thorpe, you have failed the people of Antioch because of your lack of wisdom to support unifying the community.”

“I am not and never will be a ‘Karen’. I serve this community with my time and talent and yes, I am not afraid to speak on what is right,” Wilson shared. “Dr. King, once said, ‘The time is always right to do what is right.’ Lamar could start right now by doing a small part to treat people with dignity, courtesy and respect and stop spreading hatred and bigotry.”

“I am a first generation Mexican-American male that was born in Oakland and raised in Richmond and am one of the 20 proponents of the mayoral recall attempt,” David Amezcua wrote in response. “I find it infuriating he’s calling us all Karens and furthering the racial divide in our city.  It’s just a way to deflect from the real issues and try to discredit those of us that want him removed.”

Another resident, Alicia Taylor, shared her frustrations with the mayor and calling out his racism, and sharing photos of her African-American grandparents in a post on the Recall Lamar Thorpe Facebook page, writing, “I voted for the wrong man. I thought Lamar Thorpe understood our city and state. We are a melting pot of many ethnicities. We come in different shapes, sizes, and colors. I was wrong about him, and I feel like a victim of false advertising.”

“Lamar Thorpe is clearly lashing out with disrespectful and racist verbiage to distract voters from pointed examples of his failed leadership,” she continued. “Lamar Thorpe, you DO NOT know the constituents of Antioch. It is disappointing to see your disrespectful, self-serving agenda, and racist behavior produced by you, on social media. I hope everyone remembers your authentic smile displayed here when I’m out with the RECALL petitions.”

“Never assume, Lamar Thorpe,” Taylor wrote. “Effie Crenchaw Lee (only gma I knew) attended and worked for Dunbar High School in Little Rock, AR. She had to pay poll tax but couldn’t vote. She was a woman and a negro. Additionally, her cousin went on to represent a big part of black history.”

“Horace James Lee, (only gpa I knew) was one of twelve born on a farm in Edison, GA,” she continued. “On his way to fulfill his military orders from NY to Monterey, CA, he was denied rest / shelter because he was black, and with a white woman. Additionally, his aunt went on to represent black history, too.”

“You are attempting to divide MY FAMILY and MY NEIGHBORS with the old racist black and white show. DENIED. You can disagree with someone without being disrespectful. That’s a leadership quality you have forgotten sir. Do better,” Taylor added.

Questions for Thorpe, Host Committee Members, Roasters

Questions were sent via email Tuesday afternoon to Thorpe and each of the roasters and members of the host committee or their representatives asking if they are aware of the racist connotation of the term “Karen”. In addition, they were provided with a copy of Thorpe’s recall notice which lists the 20 proponents and reasons for his recall, asking, “are you claiming the proponents and other supporters of your recall are racists and trying to remove you from office because you’re Black? Are you not aware that the list of 20 proponents on your recall notice includes women and men who are White, Hispanic and Black, and some voted for you in 2020, some are Democrats who no doubt voted for some of those on the host committee and/or are roasters? Do you really believe all those Antioch community leaders and residents are racists and oppose you because of your ethnicity or skin color?” (See related article)

The reasons given for the recall, listed in the notice and on the petitions currently circulating for signature gathering, which mention nothing about Thorpe’s ethnicity nor skin color, are as follows:

“Disrespect for Council Members and the Public who disagree with you during City Council meetings. Blocking constituents and not allowing them to comment on your social media. You have failed to provide full support to the great men and women of the Antioch Police which is impeding their ability to keep our residents safe. As a result of your failed leadership it has led to the resignation of Police Chief Tammany Brooks who will be taking up a new post in Boise, Idaho; and the announced retirement of City Manager Ron Bernal. You put on the Council agenda to rescind the School Resource Officer Grant without any public input from the Antioch Unified School District (AUSD) Board or Administration after the Officers had been interviewed and selected. You misled the Public about when you were informed about the death of Angelo Quintos, when you had earlier received an email from Chief Brooks. You blamed business owners on Sycamore Drive for the crimes that are being committed by others that live nearby which does not reflect Antioch’s theme: ‘Opportunity Lives Here’.”

Finally, the other elected officials participating in the event were asked, “do you agree with Lamar calling the supporters of his recall racists, and think it’s appropriate or funny to support his fundraiser with that in the description?”

Garamendi Unaware of Use of “Karen” Term

Garamendi’s chief of staff, Bradley Bottoms responded, saying, “the congressman was asked to help Lamar which he agreed to do. But he wasn’t aware” of the use of the term “Karen” in Thorpe’s campaign committee name or promotion for the fundraiser. “It’s not his intention to offend anyone.”

Additional attempts to reach Garamendi or Bottoms, including a call and text on Thursday afternoon, for further comment were unsuccessful.

DeSaulnier Continues Support for Thorpe, Falsely Claim He Won by “Substantial Majority” in 2020

DeSaulnier responded with a statement that reads, “It’s clear to me that many recall campaigns are now being used as political weapons to undermine the will of the voters in free and fair elections. I support Mayor Lamar Thorpe, who was elected by a substantial majority in 2020 to represent the city and people of Antioch.  The recall effort against him in a non-election year is a total waste of taxpayer money.”

However, Thorpe received less than a majority of the vote with 44.44% in the November 2020 election according to the Contra Costa Elections Division of the county clerk’s office.

Pressed further, asking the congressman what he had to say about Thorpe’s use of the racist term “Karen” to describe his recall proponents and supporters, DeSaulnier did not respond.

Thorpe Doubles and Triples Down

Thorpe responded to the emailed questions writing, “The host committee is hosting the Roast of Mayor Lamar Thorpe. I’m characterizing the recall effort as a #karen recall because that’s exactly what it is.”

A follow up question was sent to the mayor, “So, just to clarify, you are calling the recall proponents and supporters racists and you believe they’re working to recall you because you’re Black?” But he did not respond.

Then on Tuesday, Jan. 11, Thorpe continued with his racist rhetoric by posting on his Instagram account a video of him laughing at a woman being called a “Karen”.

The event will be held at La Plazuela Restaurant in Antioch from 7:00-9:00 PM. Ticket prices are listed as $50 – #LOL, $100 – #bellylaugh, $250 – #one-liner and $400 – #heckler. As of Thursday evening the roast’s Eventbrite site shows it is sold out.

Please check back later for any updates to this report.

 

4-0-1 vote approves staff drawn map keeping boundaries significantly the same as current, politically drawn wards map from 2011; leaves portions of Antioch in same ward with most of the San Ramon Valley

By Allen Payton

The Contra Costa Community College board, on a 4-0-1 vote, approved a final redistricting, staff-drawn map that keeps the ward boundaries significantly gerrymandered, protecting each of the incumbents for re-election. Ward 5 Trustee Fernando Sandoval voted to abstain. During a public hearing on Ward Equalization Based on the 2020 Census at their regular meeting Wednesday night, the trustees reviewed three maps drawn by district staff, and only one member of the public, a former trustee, spoke. The new wards will go into effect for this year’s November elections, in which both Ward 3 Trustee Rebecca Barrett and Ward 4 Trustee Andy Li face re-election if they decide to run.

In addition, the board again discussed the “Public employee discipline/dismissal/release/complaint” of Chancellor Bryan Reece during a special meeting at 5:00 p.m. But no reportable action was taken during the closed session.

During the staff presentation on redistricting, Executive Vice Chancellor for Education and Technology Mojdeh Mehdizadeh said, “This is the fourth meeting we’ve held in order to achieve equalization” which was the main focus of the staff-drawn maps. Those include a Community Roundtable on Ward Redistricting on Jan. 6.

“You wanted to see more maps and interactive maps, you wanted to have the high school markers placed on the maps and more time for public input,” she continued. “We also asked the public for more input through an online survey…which went live on Dec. 17. We received a total of 12 responses.”

Three maps were offered to the public, two that are very similar to the current wards map, and one similar to the map that the county Board of Supervisors adopted, with a significantly gerrymandered Ward 2 which is very different than Supervisorial District 5. (See related article)

“Nearly 60% (7 people) indicated that Map 2 is the favored map. Map 3 was the least favored map. About 75% of respondents (8 or 9 people) said it was the least favorite,” Mehdizadeh stated. “We continue to offer Map 2 as the best map.”

That was the same map she and the district’s attorney recommended previously.

The three proposed maps show the locations of the high schools in the county except for Deer Valley High School in Antioch and misspelled the name of Dozier-Libbey Medical High School, also in Antioch.

Splits More Cities

While the new trustee ward map has a total population deviation of just 1.7% between wards – which is closer to the intent of the Constitution of ensuring one-person-one-vote – it keeps things pretty much the same as the 2011 map. It continues to split Antioch, Brentwood and Pittsburg in East County, Martinez, Concord, Walnut Creek and now, one of the county’s smallest cities, Clayton, in Central County, and in West County, instead of splitting Pinole, as the current map does, the new map splits Hercules.

Public Comments

Former board trustee Greg Enholm was the only person to speak during public comments saying, “as a Trustee for 2012 to 2020 I did not participate in the ward equalization process for the 2000 and 2010 Census data. But I was affected as a candidate for the subsequent 2006 and 2010 Ward 3 elections created from the 2000 Census Data and the 2012, 2016, and 2020 elections created from the 2010 Census Data.”

“I have been a candidate in five contested elections being elected in two,” he continued. “I have had many opportunities to interact as a candidate with the approximately 200,000 4CD constituents each in Wards 3 and 5 as well as eight years being accountable to all one million 4CD constituents. I believe that the voters must select their representatives not the reverse. I hope that all five trustees agree with that statement and will ask that staff prevent or at least reveal any inappropriate effort by any current or prior trustee to use ward equalization to primarily improve their opportunity to be re-elected or affect any current or prior trustee’s opportunities to be a successful candidate using the 2000, 2010, and/or 2020 ward equalization process.”

Enholm provided each of the trustees with a copy of his comments on the three maps proposed by staff.

“Please read my comment below on all three proposed maps and ask staff if they have assured that the 2000 and 2010 ward maps were created in full compliance with all applicable laws, rules, and regulations in effect when they were adopted,” he said.

Trustee Comments

Ward 3 Trustee Fernando Sandoval was the only member of the board to speak, asking, “Can you tell me the implications for adopting each map? Can we respond to Mr. Enholm’s question…if the maps were created fairly.”

All three maps comply with population balance, Mehdizadeh pointed out.

“Map number 1 is a slight variation of the first one we presented you,” she said. “As it pertains to the second map, we attempted to keep as many cities as tight knit.”

However, both proposed Maps 1 and 2 split more cities than the current ward map.

“The third map was a request that came from the December meeting…that the Board of Supervisors had adopted their map…that was a consideration, as well,” Mehdizadeh stated.

In response to Sandoval she said, “Your question about the 2000 and 2010 process, I personally was not involved in the 2000 process.”

Mehdizadeh again spoke of population balance.

“In 2010 I can tell you I was directly involved,” she stated. “We worked closely with our legal counsel…we spent quality time with our governing board to get public input.”

“Our county Office of Education chose to adopt the same map,” Mehdizadeh added. “That showed a reduction in costs” for printing and mailing ballots during elections.

“I do know they have a meeting on the 19th,” Sandoval said referring to the county Board of Education. “But this year they hired their own demographer. I don’t know why. Is there a reason we wouldn’t wait for them to come back? We want to make sure the alignment is consistent. Would it be prudent to wait until they vote on a final recommendation?”

“That could be our challenge,” Mehdizadeh responded. “Our maps have to be approved by the end of February. It really is who ultimately who votes and makes a determination of their maps. They have been working closely with us, as staff. They are very well apprised of the timelines. It really is up to the board.”

With no other comments by the trustees Board President and District 2 Trustee Judy Walters closed the public hearing.

Board Adopts Map 2

Then later during the meeting, under NonConsent Agenda – Action Items – Miscellaneous, on a motion by Trustee Li and seconded by Ward 1 Trustee John Marquez, the board voted 4-0-1 to adopt Map 2. Sandoval voted to abstain. Student Trustee Austin Green also voted for the motion, but the vote is advisory, only.

However, the resolution signed by both Walters and Marquez, who is the Board Secretary, incorrectly shows Sandoval voted for the map and Marquez voted to abstain. 4CD adopted Ward Equalization Resolution 0122-20B-MI – incorrect

When reached for comment about the mistake Sandoval said “that’s wrong. I’ll call John Marquez.”

When informed of the mistake, Marquez said, “I’ll call the staff member who handles that, Pat (Kaya) and get it corrected, right away.”

Torres-Walker stands for Pledge of Allegiance; mayor welcomes Con Johnson as interim city manager, finally refers to him as “retired San Francisco Police Lieutenant”

By Allen Payton

During a public hearing at the beginning of Tuesday night’s meeting, the Antioch City Council reviewed new maps submitted by members of the public, as well as the eight maps previously reviewed, including three drawn by the consultant and five submitted by members of the public. In a surprise to some residents watching, District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker stood for the Pledge of Allegiance, for the first time since the council returned to holding in-person meetings.

“Since the last meeting we have had four new submissions,” said Karin Mac Donald, owner and Senior Researcher of Q2 Data and Research. “Two of the public submissions don’t meet the Fair Maps Act” due to “contiguity”. She was referring to Maps 39 and 49 reviewed by the council at a previous meeting.

See all maps on the City’s Redistricting webpage under Draft Maps and Public Map Submissions.

“You have one more mapping meeting on Jan. 25th,” she added. “It would be good to whittle down the number of maps” for consideration.

A fourth new map, #503, was submitted last night. (See related article)

During public comments, resident Harry Thurston, one of only two residents to speak, again advocated for Map B, as he had at a previous meeting.

Resident Sharon Johnson asked, “what is the reason for redistricting when you just did it two years ago? My neighbors and I are wondering.”

“If you’re going to do it…” she continued, then said she also supported Map B “because it keeps current neighborhoods together.”

“This process is required every 10 years. What we did last time was not redistricting but districting due to a lawsuit…based on the Census,” Mayor Lamar Thorpe explained

The current districts are based on the 2010 Census. The new districts will be based on the 2020 Census which includes a population increase of 15,000 residents.

During that process in which the council adopted the current districts in May 2018, Thorpe asked Consultant Mac Donald about the current process. “Will we see drastic changes in where the lines will be?”

She responded by saying, “I think that depends on what you wanted to do. There is no law…that says you must start with the districts drawn in the last process.”

Thorpe then stated, “So, we can start with a completely new…or go with what we have and try to adjust the lines accordingly.” (See related articles here and here)

Council Reviews New Maps Submitted by the Public

“I would like to see the new maps that were submitted,” said District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock.

Jane Hood of Q2 then reviewed the four new submitted maps 91, 95, 99 and 503.

She pointed out that the new map, #503 was incomplete, as it is does not include a small portion on the west side of District 2. “It should be included with District 2,” Hood stated.

Ogorchock asked to see Map 91, again, which Hood put up on the screen.

About Map 95 Hood then said, “You’ll see this changes things, a bit.”

She then presented Map 99 and provided the population deviation percentages and described the boundaries.

“The last submission we have was received last night, which is #503,” Hood said, then reviewed the district boundaries and population percentages.

“This process continues until February so there’s time to submit maps,” Thorpe said.

“Do you want me to include all those maps in the staff report?” asked City Attorney Thomas L. Smith.

“Yes, please,” Thorpe replied. He then asked to review the City’s current districts map and the last two maps that the council considered in 2018.

“This map was created through public engagement and by the elected officials,” he said about a map that the council did not approve, known as Quadrants C. As reported previously, that map used major thoroughfares on the south side of Highway 4 as the dividing lines, such as Putnam Drive, Lone Tree Way and Deer Valley Road, as well as the Delta DeAnza Trail on the west side of the city.

Thorpe then spoke about the current districts map.

“This map wasn’t created by any public officials or by any member of the public,” he said. “This map was created by the consultant. No lines were changed…it was literally the exact map created by the consultant. I point this out because there’s been some implications that lines were moved to accommodate one individual council member. That’s a bold-faced lie.”

“That map passed on a 3-2 vote,” Thorpe continued. “There was some interest particularly by Latino residents up north that they haven’t had representation. This process was fair…of the highest regard. This map is fair.”

However, the consultant drew the map after extensive input from both members of the public and city council during several meetings and special workshops, during the 2018 process. Also, at that time, Thorpe said he supported having two council members represent the north side of the freeway stating, “North Antioch deserves two council people.” But in an Op-Ed by him published the day before, he advocated for one district north of the freeway. Plus, Thorpe was one of the three council members, along with Wilson and then-Councilman Tony Tiscareno to approve the current map with just one council member representing that area of the city.

In addition, during the 2018 process for creating the current map, then-Mayor Sean Wright said, “When you gerrymander you draw crazy lines to make sure you have the people in your district. When drawing the lines, I went down the major thoroughfares. I didn’t look at which family is where. I’m in favor of Quadrants C going forward and Working Draft 1.” (See related article)

 

Barbanica then asked to see Map 58 and for the Q2 staff to “go over the boundaries?”

Hood then described the district boundaries and population deviation percentages from average.

“It’s just an easy map to follow,” Barbanica said.

Thorpe Introduces Interim City Manager Johnson as Retired Police Lieutenant

The mayor then closed the public hearing and began the introductions of new city staff members.

“It is my duty to introduce our new city manager. Con Johnson is here, today. He took the helm, officially by himself, last week,” Thorpe said. “He’s a retired San Francisco Police Lieutenant. Con, we welcome you.”

“I would just like to thank the mayor and entire council members for this opportunity to work for this wonderful city,” Johnson said.

By Allen Payton

Three maps drawn and submitted by the public for the Antioch City Council’s redistricting process in December, since their last meeting on the 14th, are not included with the public hearing agenda item for Tuesday night’s meeting. Copies of two of the maps and statistics obtained by the Herald were sent Friday afternoon, to all five council members, city staff and staff of Q2 Data and Research, the consultant hired to assist in the process.

In addition, they were asked if they had received the maps, if there were any other maps submitted since the last council meeting on Dec. 14. They were also asked, if there were additional maps submitted, why they aren’t included for tomorrow night’s discussion, why they aren’t on the City’s redistricting webpage, and what is the process for a map created by a member of the public to be included in the council’s public hearings and on posted on the webpage.

It’s not clear when the maps were submitted by the public. Because the map labeled #58, was created and submitted by this reporter in November, but it’s dated Dec. 13 and map #87 is dated Dec. 17 but it w.as one of the five publicly submitted maps included in the discussion during the public hearing on Dec 14. (See Draft Maps)

This is the second time maps submitted by the public – long before the council agenda was issued – were not included in the meeting agenda packet. The five maps submitted by the public before the Dec. 14 meeting weren’t included for the public hearing that night. However, by that afternoon, Q2 staff had included the publicly submitted maps on the City’s redistricting webpage and Mayor Lamar Thorpe included them in the discussion during the public hearing, that night. (See related articles here and here)

Attempts on Monday to reach Jane Hood of Q2 asking her the same questions sent on Friday, were unsuccessful prior to publication time. 4:40 P.M. UPDATE: “All maps are posted on the website – the new ones are 91, 95 and 99,” Hood shared. However, they’re located under Public Map Submissions.

User Comments on Three New Publicly Submitted Maps

For Map 91 the online mapping tool’s user didn’t offer any comments. It is just slightly different than map 87. For Map 95, the one on the left at the top of this article, the User Comments are: “It results in three council members representing the waterfront instead of just one. It also serves to more unify the city between older parts and newer parts instead of dividing it like the current districts do with just one district north of Highway 4. It also combines the Mira Vista Hills area south of James Donlon Blvd. with the older areas north of James Donlon Blvd. and the newer area west of Somersville Road which is more of a Community of Interest.” For Map 99, the User Comments are: “This map gives each council member a portion of both sides of Highway 4
and a share of the waterfront using major city streets as boundary lines.”

Ogorchock Responds to Questions

District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock was the only council member to respond to the Herald’s questions. She wrote, “I’ve not seen these maps until now. I’m not sure as to why there not part of the presentation. Good question. I can tell you I’m not for either one of them. Thank you for sharing.”

Attend or View Council Meeting

The redistricting public hearing is item 1 on Tuesday night’s council meeting agenda, which begins at 7:05 p.m.

The meeting will be held in-person in the Council Chambers at 200 H Street and are televised live on Comcast channel 24, AT&T U-verse channel 99, or live stream at www.antiochca.gov/government/city-council-meetings.

Public Comments

Members of the public wishing to provide public comment may do so one of the following ways (#2 pertains to the Zoom Webinar):

1. Fill out an online speaker card by 3:00 p.m. the day of the Council Meeting located at:  https://www.antiochca.gov/speaker_card.
2. Provide oral public comments during the meeting by clicking the following link to register in advance to access the meeting via Zoom Webinar: https://www.antiochca.gov/speakers

– You will be asked to enter an email address and a name. Your email address will not be disclosed to the public. After registering, you will receive an email with instructions on how to connect to the meeting.

– When the mayor announces public comments, click the “raise hand” feature in Zoom. For instructions on using the “raise hand” feature in Zoom, visit: https://www.antiochca.gov/raise_hand. When calling into the meeting using the Zoom Webinar telephone number, press *9 on your telephone keypad to “raise your hand”. Please ensure your Zoom client is updated so staff can enable your microphone when it is your turn to speak.

1. Email comments to cityclerk@ci.antioch.ca.us by 3:00 p.m. the day of the Council Meeting. The comment will be read into the record at the meeting (350 words maximum, up to 3 minutes, at the discretion of the mayor). IMPORTANT: Identify the agenda item in the subject line of your email if the comment is for Announcement of Community Events, Public Comment, or a specific agenda item number. No one may speak more than once on an agenda item or during “Public Comments”.

All emails received by 3:00 p.m. the day of the Council Meeting will be entered into the record or the meeting. Speakers will be notified shortly before they are called to speak.

Pledges to continue work in Congress for Contra Costa; if re-elected will continue to represent portions of Antioch; lists his endorsements

CONTRA COSTA, CA – The DeSaulnier for Congress Campaign announced the launch of the congressman’s re-election effort for California’s newly drawn 10th Congressional district, as approved by the California Citizens’ Redistricting Commission (CCRC) on Monday, Dec. 20th. Mark DeSaulnier has represented Concord and Contra Costa County in Congress since 2015 and vows to continue to work hard for his constituents, fighting for working families.

Th 10th District encompasses most of Contra Costa County, including Lamorinda, the San Ramon Valley, Concord, Clayton, Clyde, Pacheco, Pleasant Hill, Walnut Creek, and portions of Martinez in Central County, and in East County, Brentwood, Oakley, Bethel Island, Knightsen and portions of Antioch, plus portions of Dublin in Alameda County. DeSaulnier currently represents portions of Antioch and will continue to do so if re-elected to the U.S. House of Representatives.

“Throughout my time in Congress, my guiding principle has always been this: I work for you,” said Congressman DeSaulnier. “It’s been my honor to represent this area for nearly three decades, on the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors, in the California State Legislature, and for the past six years as a Member of Congress. My priority has always been serving the people of Contra Costa and making our voices heard during the tough fights, when it matters most.”

DeSaulnier lives in Concord where he raised his two sons, Tristan and Tucker, and opened and operated a small business, TR’s restaurant.

He’s also spent three decades as a public servant: representing his community on the Concord City Council, as Mayor of Concord, as a three-term Contra Costa County Supervisor, in the California State Legislature, and currently as a Member of Congress.

As Supervisor, he served on the California Air Resources Board, the Association of Bay Area Governments, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. He was elected to the State Assembly in 2006 where he served one term and received the distinction of being the first freshman in history to chair the Assembly Transportation Committee. DeSaulnier was elected to two terms in the California State Senate in 2008 and 2012 where he served as Chair of the California State Senate Transportation and Housing Committee. During his time in Congress, DeSaulnier has been honored to represent California’s 11th Congressional District including Richmond, El Cerrito, Kensington, and Pittsburg, now in the new 8th District, and looks forward to continuing to serve them in 2022.

Congressman DeSaulnier is running for re-election to fight against the reckless Republican agenda and move our nation forward by:

• Ensuring every American has access to quality, affordable health insurance and care;
• Confronting racial injustice;
• Creating national common sense gun violence reforms;
• Helping America’s students receive a quality education without being shackled by debt;
• Protecting Medicare and Social Security;
• Safeguarding the environment;
• Overseeing the largest investment in our nation’s infrastructure in modern history, and
• Ensuring government is accountable to the public.

The campaign is proud to announce the following endorsements:

• Alex Padilla, United States Senator for California
• Karen Bass, United States Representative (CA)
• Jared Huffman, United States Representative (CA)
• Barbara Lee, United States Representative (CA)
• Doris Matsui, United States Representative (CA)
• Eric Swalwell, United States Representative (CA)
• Mike Thompson, United States Representative (CA)
• George Miller, Former United States Representative (CA)
• Rosa DeLauro, United States Representative (CT)
• Betty T. Yee, California State Controller
• Ricardo Lara, California Insurance Commissioner
• Rob Bonta, Attorney General of California
• Tony Thurmond, California State Superintendent of Public Instruction
• Tom Torlakson, Former California State Superintendent of Public Instruction
• Steve Glazer, California State Senator
• Rebecca Bauer-Kahan, California State Assemblymember
• Tim Grayson, California State Assemblymember
• Diane Burgis, Supervisor, Contra Costa County
• Federal Glover, Supervisor, Contra Costa County
• John Gioia, Supervisor, Contra Costa County
• Karen Mitchoff, Supervisor, Contra Costa County
• Diana Becton, District Attorney, Contra Costa County
• Lynn Mackey, Superintendent of Schools, Contra Costa County
• Holly Tillman, Vice Mayor, City of Clayton
• Julie Pierce, Former Mayor, City of Clayton
• Dominic Aliano, Mayor, City of Concord
• Carlyn Obringer, Council Member, City of Concord
• Edi E. Birsan, Council Member, City of Concord
• Tim McGallian, Council Member, City of Concord
• Newell Arnerich, Mayor, Town of Danville
• Teresa Gerringer, Mayor, City of Lafayette
• Susan Candell, Council Member, City of Lafayette
• Cameron Burks, Former Council Member, City of Lafayette
• Rob Shroder, Mayor of the City of Martinez
• Lara DeLaney, Council Member, City of Martinez
• Mark Ross, Council Member, City of Martinez
• Dennis Fay, Mayor, City of Orinda
• Amy R. Worth, Council Member, City of Orinda
• Inga Miller, Council Member, City of Orinda
• Kevin Wilk, Council Member, City of Walnut Creek
• Cindy Darling, Council Member, City of Walnut Creek
• Michael Harris, Mayor, City of Pleasant Hill
• Sue Noack, Council Member, City of Pleasant Hill
• Matthew Rinn, Council Member, City of Pleasant Hill
• Ken Carlson, Councilmember, City of Pleasant Hill
• Merl Craft, Council Member, City of Pittsburg
• Tom Butt, Mayor, City of Richmond
• Gabriel Quinto, Mayor, City of El Cerrito
• Lisa Motoyama, Mayor Pro Tem, City of El Cerrito
• Janet Abelson, Council Member, City of El Cerrito
• Paul Fadelli, Council Member, City of El Cerrito
• Rita Xavier, Mayor, City of San Pablo
• Abel Pineda, Council Member, City of San Pablo
• Linda Mayo, Trustee, Mt. Diablo Unified School District
• Mae Torlakson, Vice Chair, Ambrose Recreation and Park District in Bay Point
• Judy Walters, Ph.D., President, Contra Costa Community College District Governing Board
• Fernando Sandoval, Vice President, Contra Costa Community College District Governing Board
• Rebecca Barrett, Board Trustee, Contra Costa Community College District Governing Board
• Andy Li, Board Trustee, Contra Costa Community College District Governing Board
• John E. Marquez, Board Trustee, Contra Costa Community College District Governing Board

 

Have you ever considered running for office? Then consider checking out one of Contra Costa Elections Division’s Candidate Workshops.

This engaging workshop is designed to remove the mystery from running for office. Experts will cover what’s involved in running for office, including how to file and appear on the ballot, campaign finance disclosure requirements, strategies for spreading your message (including social media), and what happens when you’re in the public eye.

The first of three workshops will be held on January 18th at the Lafayette Library from 6 pm until 9 pm. Please reserve a free ticket here: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/221010988817

The second of three workshops will be held on January 29th at the Richmond Civic Auditorium from 9 am until 12 pm. Please reserve a free ticket here: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/219543840537

The last of three workshops will be held on February 2nd at the Antioch Community Center at Prewett Park from 6 pm until 9 pm. Please reserve a free ticket here: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/221022543377

If you have any questions, please contact Karen Tedford at 925-335-7863 or by email at ktedford@cr.cccounty.us.

 

Both offer a citizen-driven, transparent process; Martinez council has no say, Brentwood council will only make final choice; Antioch and Richmond get honorable mentions for offering online mapping tools

By Allen Payton

Comparing the redistricting process used by the county supervisors, cities, education boards and special districts in Contra Costa County whose members are elected by district, ward or area, it’s clear that just like the slogan they’ve been using for the past few years, it really is better in Brentwood – than most. But Martinez offers the best process in the county. Both have independent redistricting commissions and offer the same, easy-to-use online mapping tool for the public to draw and submit their own maps. While Brentwood’s process ends with the council only choosing from already completed maps, the Martinez council has no say and takes what their commission gives them.

At least Brentwood’s doing it right, this time. That’s because when the initial districts were drawn and approved in 2019 for the 2020 election and based on the 2010 Census, the Brentwood city council map for Districts 2 and 4 was obviously gerrymandered to benefit one if not more incumbents. Just look at the section of District 2 on the southwest side of the BNSF railroad tracks and you’ll see, that’s surrounded on three sides by District 4. But it really had no effect since those two seats aren’t up for election until next November.

Besides Martinez and Brentwood, the following cities and school districts elect their members by district and are undergoing a redistricting process:

Antioch City Council – District Elections – City of Antioch, California (antiochca.gov) – Antioch online mapping tool

Antioch School Board – Post Census Redistricting / 2020 Census Redistricting (antiochschools.net) – No online mapping tool.

Concord City Council – Redistricting | Concord, CA (cityofconcord.org) – No online mapping tool, yet. Process started Nov. 2.

Richmond City Council – Redistricting 2020 Census | Richmond, CA – Official Website – For online mapping tools click on “Draw Map”.

San Ramon City Council – Redistricting 2022 – City of San Ramon (ca.gov)  – No online mapping tool.  The council will consider final redistricting maps on Tuesday, March 22, 2022.

Contra Costa Water District – No redistricting page nor online mapping tool. The board was given a redistricting presentation during their Oct. 15 meeting. The next meeting will be held on Jan. 5 with expected completion by March 16.

Contra Costa Community College District – www.4cd.edu/gb/redistricting – No online mapping tool. See below for process information.

In 2010, both the college board and the Contra Costa County Board of Education adopted the same exact map. But their website doesn’t offer a very detailed map for the public to see in which district they live and which trustee is their representative.

Oakley Council Converts to District Elections

The Oakley City Council just completed the process of converting to district elections and adopted a five-member map during their meeting on Nov. 9.

Most Gerrymandered Current District Map

So far, the current map in the county with the worst, gerrymandered districts I’ve seen is for the Contra Costa Community College District, and as a result of the above, the county Board of Education, too. It combines Lamorinda with Hercules, Rodeo and Crockett in one ward and all of the San Ramon Valley, sans Alamo, in the same ward as Byron and Discovery Bay. Plus, it splits six cities, as well.  Those trustee ward lines were clearly drawn in 2011 to protect the incumbents, at that time.

This year, the college district staff tried to present their board with only one map to consider – drawn by staff and an attorney, with minor changes to the current map, continuing to protect incumbents. Where the current council or board members live is not a required consideration for redistricting. However, it’s understandable why that it would happen since staff members have a conflict of interest and inherent bias in wanting to please their bosses, instead of drawing maps to serve we the people.  (See related article)

Fortunately, the college board wisely directed staff to open up the process for more public input and offer two more proposed maps and an online survey about those choices, although they aren’t offering an online mapping tool.

Different Deadlines

While school boards have a deadline of March 1, 2022, to complete the process and submit an approved map, city councils have until April 17. The supervisors had to complete their process sooner, because filing for the June Primary election for Districts 1 and 4 opens mid-February and closes mid-March.

While some cities, like Antioch were trying to complete their process by the end of January – which the council just extended by a month – Brentwood’s process, which began Oct. 14 won’t be completed until March 3 and possibly not until March 10.

While congressional redistricting is the most difficult because it requires no more than a one person difference between districts, all other districts can have a maximum of a five percent population deviation from average, referred to as ideal, to be legally acceptable.

Process in Martinez Started First, Includes Independent Commission

Martinez, which began their redistricting process way back in January, has a seven-member independent redistricting commission, not chosen by the council. In August four commissioners were randomly drawn by the Deputy City Clerk from different quadrants in the city. Then those commissioners selected three additional commissioners from a designated pool of applicants. Finally, another random draw was undertaken to determine the two alternates from the remaining pool of qualified applicants.

The commissioners are responsible for drawing council districts in Martinez and held their first meeting on Sept. 22. So, the council has no say. They get what the people give them.

Martinez offers residents an online mapping tool to draw and submit alternative maps, just like the county supervisors’ did, and Brentwood and Antioch offer. While the supervisors’ online tool was easy to use, the tool offered by Martinez and Brentwood is easier. Each of the proposed maps and even the draft maps drawn by members of the public are on the site and can be viewed by anyone.

Redistricting in Brentwood Better Than Most

Brentwood’s redistricting process also offers residents an online mapping tool. Like Martinez, each of the proposed maps and even the draft maps drawn by members of the public are included on the City’s redistricting website for all to see and review to maximize public input.

The Brentwood city council established an independent, citizens redistricting commission, whose five members and four alternates volunteered and were selected by retired Judge Thelton Henderson – not the mayor and council members – following an application process. All but the last step of the redistricting process was transferred to them. The commission is leading the redistricting process by holding public hearings, reviewing all maps submitted by the public and gathering “community input to ensure everyone’s voice is heard”.

When the commission’s part of the process is complete, it will submit two or more potential boundary maps to the City Council and – here’s the best part – the Council must then select one of the submitted maps – wait for it – without modifying!

Interestingly enough, many of the publicly submitted maps in Brentwood look similar in how best to create new, common-sense districts – drawn based on the principals of compactness, Communities of Interest, using natural and man-made barriers for boundary lines and one-person-one-vote, with the smallest population percentage deviation from average as possible. Unfortunately, some of the maps submitted for the Brentwood City Council process don’t follow the aforementioned principles and can’t be considered because they don’t comply with the maximum population deviation percent requirement.

Honorable Mentions

Both Antioch and Richmond also offer online mapping tools and while Antioch’s has had glitches, it appears those have been worked out. Richmond was using the same tool as Martinez and Brentwood, known as DistrictR. But it has been replaced with Dave’s Redistricting App (DRA) because DistrictR uses population estimates while Dave’s Redistricting App uses the official population. Dave’s is difficult to use.

Richmond also offers Maptitude, which is the same software app used by the consultant to the state Citizens Redistricting Commission. But both require someone to sign up in order to use them. People can use Antioch’s online mapping tool as a guest, which requires the map be drawn all in one setting because it can’t be saved without signing up and logging in.

Other Councils and Boards Should Follow Example of Martinez and Brentwood

I can often be pretty tough on candidates and elected officials in my media role and responsibility of holding them accountable. But I also believe it’s good to praise those who are doing it right.

Neither the council members in Martinez nor Brentwood can make any changes to the final maps, thus, they won’t have any ability to gerrymander their districts to benefit themselves. They’ve empowered the people to have control over choosing who they will have represent them instead of the other way around. Representative government in our republic. Hey, what a concept!

Why don’t all the other boards of government agencies in our county do the same? Martinez and Brentwood are the example for the Board of Supervisors, other city councils, school and college boards to follow for the best way to handle the redistricting process.

The Brentwood City Council should be congratulated for doing it right and the best, when it comes to redistricting, this year.

Hopefully, all the other cities and districts, and the supervisors in Contra Costa will duplicate what Brentwood is doing, 10 years from now, the next time they will redistrict. Actually, they don’t have to wait. Once the current process is completed for the 2022 elections, the other councils and districts will have plenty of time for a redo by the 2024 elections.

Unless that happens, then remember, folks, the district lines approved this time will be in place for the next 10 years. So, while the redistricting process may be technical and dry, the decisions made now can and will affect who we have representing us during that time, and making decisions affecting our lives, homes, schools, businesses, and communities. So, stay informed, engaged and give your input on redistricting.

 

Petition approved by deputy city clerk on Monday; second recall Householder faces including possible removal as school board trustee, third in city with Thorpe also facing possible removal as mayor

By Allen Payton

Ellie Householder made local history, last year by becoming the first person to be elected as both an Antioch School Board trustee and a City of Antioch official, when she was elected city clerk. This year, she’s made history, again – as the first person in Antioch to face recall from both positions. On Monday, Deputy City Clerk Christina Garcia, a Certified Municipal Clerk, informed recall proponent, and former Antioch School Board Trustee Diane Gibson-Gray that the petition submitted 10 days ago was approved – on the last legal day required, because Garcia was on vacation, last week. Householder City Clerk Recall Petition Certification Letter -122721 – redacted

The organizers can now begin gathering the necessary 9,521 valid signatures of registered voters in the city to place Householder’s second recall on the ballot. They have 160 days collect them, which gives them until June 6, 2022. However, if enough signatures are gathered sooner, the recall election could be placed on the June Primary Election ballot.

This is the third recall being faced by an Antioch elected official, with signatures already being gathered to remove and replace Mayor Lamar Thorpe, who is Householder’s political ally. The organizers for his recall must have the same 9,521 signatures to place his name on the ballot.

In their message to Householder, the recall proponents included their reasons for the recall on the petition. SUBMITTED-PETITION FOR HOUSEHOLDER CITY CLERK RECALL

It reads, “The grounds for the recall are as follows: You violated the California Public Records Act (Government Code 6253) by failing to provide a copy of a public document to the records department at Antioch City Hall and thus hindered a constituent from their right to inspect a public record. You rejected the first drafted petition to recall the Antioch mayor without including a statement of what alterations to the petition were necessary (Elections Code 11042(c)). You then rejected a second petition citing election code 107(b), which is not applicable to the recall effort. You ignored the proponents request to send your findings via email, instead choosing to send them via certified mail at a cost to the city and cited elections code 11224 as your reason to not email them. Election code 11224 refers to the certification process of approved petitions that have already been signed by registered voters and was erroneously cited. You omitted emails from a Public Records Request, once again violating the California Public Records Act. This misuse and misapplication of Election Codes and continued violations of Government Code 6253 illustrates your inability to do the job in which you were elected and warrants your removal.”

In addition, the recall supporters provided a timeline of the process for obtaining approval for Thorpe’s recall petition. It took Householder almost two months, from October 11 until Dec. 2nd to approve the petition, on the organizer’s fourth attempt. (See related article).

Householder was served with the notice to recall her on Nov. 30 while awaiting Thorpe to arrive for one of his press conferences. She had the opportunity, within 10 days, to provide a written answer in response to the allegations against her on the petition, but like the mayor, she chose not to. (See related article)

Some supporters of the mayor’s recall have speculated that the California Secretary of State’s Office communicated with and directed Householder, in response to the third submittal of the petition by the organizers of the mayor’s recall, to provide more details of what the city clerk’s office was requiring them to do in order to comply.

Householder and Garcia were asked via email Monday night, if that is true and, if so, to provide a copy of the communication between the Secretary of State’s Office and their office. Householder was specifically asked, if not, why did she finally decide to provide those details that she didn’t provide in her first two response letters.

In addition, Householder was asked via email and phone message, Monday night, “now that the petition for your recall as City Clerk has been approved for signature gathering, since you didn’t provide a written ‘Answer’ in response to the recall notice that would have been printed on the petition, as you were allowed, would you like to respond now? What do you want to say to the voters about the multiple allegations against you, written in the petition?”

As of Tuesday morning, at 10:50 a.m., neither of them had responded. An additional attempt to reach Garcia Tuesday morning was also unsuccessful.

A Public Records Act request was made by the Herald to Deputy City Clerk Garcia, for copies of any and all communication between Householder and the California Secretary of State’s Office regarding the recall of Mayor Lamar Thorpe. Garcia has 10 days to provide any document(s) or a reason why they can’t be provided.

Organizers have set up a Facebook page to support their efforts to recall Householder as city clerk.

Please check back later for any updates to this report.