Awaits Gov. Newsom’s signature; will cost county $547,700 even if he vetoes bill; would raise an estimated $81 million per year.

By Allen Payton

On Monday, Aug. 31, the last day of the legislative session, the California State Senate passed SB1349 authored by Senator Steve Glazer (D-7, Orinda), to allow Contra Costa County Supervisors to place a half-cent sales tax increase on the November ballot on a vote of 29-10-1. According to the state’s Legislative Information website, the bill was presented to Governor Newsom at 6:30 p.m., that night. He has until Sept. 30 to either sign or veto the bill and if he chooses to take no action it automatically becomes law.

During a special meeting held on Friday, Aug. 21, the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors voted 4-1 to approve an urgency ordinance placing the measure on the November ballot if the State Senate passed the bill by Aug. 31 and it was signed by the governor. Board Chair Candace Andersen, who opposes asking the voters for a tax increase during the COVID-19 pandemic, was the lone no vote.

As of Friday, the governor still hadn’t signed or vetoed the bill, according to Steven Harmon, Glazer’s spokesman, who wrote, “Checking. Though, as of yesterday I don’t think he had.”

While Newsom has until the end of September to sign or veto legislation, Harmon added, “I think a premium has been made to get a quick signature,” because any delay holds up the printing of the ballots in Contra Costa County.

The measure is estimated to cost the county $547,700 to place it on the ballot, according to County Clerk-Recorder Deborah Cooper.

The supervisors were asked to consider whether to adopt Ordinance No. 2020-23, an urgency ordinance amending the effective date of the ordinance establishing a general Countywide 0.5% sales tax and acknowledge that if Senate Bill 1349 is not approved by the Legislature by August 31, 2020, Ordinance 2020-22 (as amended) will still be printed on the November 3, 2020 ballot, even though the ordinance will not be effective.

So, labeled Measure X, the ballot language is already on the County Elections Division website, just in case the governor signs the bill and if passed will not go into effect if the governor vetoes the bill.

It asks voters, “To keep Contra Costa’s regional hospital open and staffed; fund community health centers; provide timely fire and emergency response; support crucial safety-net services; invest in early childhood services; protect vulnerable populations; and for other essential county services, shall the Contra Costa County measure levying a ½ cent sales tax, exempting food sales, providing an estimated $81,000,000 annually for 20 years that the State cannot take, requiring fiscal accountability, with funds benefitting County residents, be adopted?”

Assistant Registrar of Voters for the county, Scott Konopasek, was asked what is the drop deadline date for sending the ballots to print in time to get them to the voters and avoid the additional cost. He responded, “The ballots are at the printer already. The bill becomes law without a signature as long as he doesn’t veto. In the event of a veto, we will not count or report any results.”

In California, the legislative process works just the opposite of the pocket veto for the president and federal legislation. According to Congressional Quarterly, the “Governor must veto legislation within 12 days of ‘transmittal’ or they automatically become law. However, for bills adopted during the last 12 days of a legislative session and still on the governor’s desk the day the legislature adjourns, usually Aug. 31, the governor has until Sept. 30 to veto before they automatically become law. Governor has a ‘reduction’ veto that provides the ability to reduce – but not increase – proposed appropriations in a particular line item within any spending bill. Legislators can override a veto with a 2/3rd vote of both chambers, but only the governor can call a special session to do so.”

In addition, Supervisor Andersen was asked for any new information her office might have regarding the governor’s action on the bill. She responded, “At our August 21, 2020 Special Meeting the Board of Supervisors authorized putting it on the ballot. It will be on the November ballot, but just would have no effect if the governor chooses to veto the bill. Karen agreed to support it because the elections cost were going to be lower than initially thought since we’re not including the text of the full measure, and the language of the bill was tweaked to better reflect what the governor has signed/agreed to in the past.”

As a result, Measure X will be on the November ballot in Contra Costa County. But if the governor vetoes SB1349, and the measure passes it will not go into effect, which means the sales tax in the county will not increase by a half percent.

Only includes panelists who support it, doesn’t include rep from Contra Costa Taxpayers Association or other opponents; continues false “loophole” claim

By Allen Payton

Proposition 15, the Schools and Communities First initiative, on the California November ballot will increase taxes by as much as $12 billion on commercial and industrial properties in California.  On Wednesday, September 16 from 7:00- 8:30 p.m., three panelists will explain how it will affect you and your community in an online discussion.

The panel will only include three who support the measure and no one opposing, it such as a representative from the Contra Costa Taxpayers Association (CoCoTax) which opposes the measure. (See their positions on the issues, here). Nor does the panel include a representative from the coalition members of the campaign to defeat Prop. 15. The reason for that is the League has endorsed Prop. 15 and supports its passage.

According to Suzan Requa, President of the League of Women Voters of Diablo Valley (LWVDV), “The League is a non -partisan organization in that we do not support or oppose candidates or parties; we do though take positions on issues after extensive study by our members, and both the state League as well as our local League have taken a support position on Prop. 15.”

We are hosting the panel to provide information and commentary on the positive impacts we believe will occur throughout the state as a result of the passage of Prop 15.  Arguments for and against Prop 15 and the other statewide ballot measures will be on our impartial electronic voter tool www.Votersedge.org.”

When informed of the event, Susan Pricco, President of CoCoTax responded, “I wouldn’t consider this much of a ‘forum’. I expect it will be more of a sales pitch.”

No “Loophole” in Prop. 13

The League’s announcement for the online discussion makes the claim, “Proposition 15 will close the corporate property tax loophole in Proposition 13.” However, there was no “loophole” for commercial and industrial properties in the 1978 measure passed overwhelmingly by voters. The property tax protection language in the ballot measure covered all properties in the state, including residential, commercial and industrial.

In a 2018 commentary co-authored by Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, named for the anti-tax advocate who led the fight to pass Prop. 13, he wrote, “For decades, California progressives have complained about a ‘loophole’ in Proposition 13 that unfairly benefits the owners of commercial real estate to the detriment of homeowners. This characterization has been widely accepted by the mainstream media with little critical analysis. There is no loophole in Prop. 13.”

The League’s Event Announcement

The LWVDV has invited three panelists to discuss why they are supporting Prop. 15:

• Contra Costa County Supervisor John Gioia
• Contra Costa County Superintendent of Schools Lynn Mackey
• League of Women Voters of California President Carol Moon Goldberg

Proposition 15 will close the corporate property tax loophole in Proposition 13.  It will continue to protect residential and agricultural properties and will not change their taxes.  It also includes protections for small businesses. If passed, it will bring $348 million annually back to Contra Costa County.

Register in advance for this meeting.  Space is limited to 100 guests.

https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZcvdeyhqzsoG9yhPqXYS-koJKN3mf-oh7v4

After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the meeting.

Questions for panelists should be submitted in advance to prop15@lwvdv.org.

For more information, contact info@LWVDV.org

Opposition to Prop. 15

According to the website for the campaign to defeat Prop. 15 explaining the reason for the 1978 Prop. 13, “In the 1970s, families, seniors, farmers and businessowners were being forced from their homes, farms, and properties because they couldn’t afford to pay 50-100% increases in their property taxes every year. Property tax bills skyrocketed, often beyond the owners’ ability to pay.

It was nearly impossible to predict the next property tax bill, leaving many families and small businesses unable to plan for the future. In some cases, small businesses were left with no choice but to lay off employees or raise prices on their customers.

This led to bipartisan support for property tax reform.

On June 6, 1978, nearly two-thirds of California voters passed Prop 13 to cap property tax increases for residential and business properties and provide certainty so that they will be able to afford their property tax bills in the future.

Specifically, Prop 13:

1. Calculates general property taxes for residential and business properties based on one percent of their purchase price
2. Caps annual increases in property taxes at two percent per year, which prevents sharp increases in property taxes, especially when property values rise quickly

Most small businesses rent the property on which they operate, and their lease agreements require they pay the property tax. Without Prop 13’s protections, small businesses will face soaring rents at a time when federal and state government is trying to provide small businesses with relief to keep their doors open.

Unless defeated by voters, Prop 15’s higher property taxes will ultimately get passed on to consumers with higher costs on just about everything we buy and use, like groceries, fuel, utilities, day care and health care.”

Attorney General’s Title & Analysis of Prop. 15

According to the California Secretary of State’s website, the title and of the measure by state Attorney General Xavier Becerra reads, “INCREASES FUNDING FOR PUBLIC SCHOOLS, COMMUNITY COLLEGES, AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT SERVICES BY CHANGING TAX ASSESSMENT OF COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.” (Emphasis in original). His analysis states Prop. 15 “Increases funding for K-12 public schools, community colleges, and local governments by requiring that commercial and industrial real property be taxed based on current market value. Exempts from this change: residential properties; agricultural properties; and owners of commercial and industrial properties with combined value of $3 million or less. Increased education funding will supplement existing school funding guarantees. Exempts small businesses from personal property tax; for other businesses, exempts $500,000 worth of personal property. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local governments: Net increase in annual property tax revenues of $7.5 billion to $12 billion in most years, depending on the strength of real estate markets. After backfilling state income tax losses related to the measure and paying for county administrative costs, the remaining $6.5 billion to $11.5 billion would be allocated to schools (40 percent) and other local governments (60 percent).” (Emphasis on original).

Lawsuits Filed Against Attorney General Becerra for Biased Title and Analysis

The measure is referred to as a split roll, as it would treat residential properties different than commercial and industrial properties on the tax rolls.

According to a report on CalMatters.org, “Becerra has been sued by both business groups and anti-tax advocates over his description of the measure, which emphasizes that it “increases funding sources for public schools’ without specifically including the phrase ‘tax increase.’

On July 29 the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association sued California Attorney General Xavier Becerra “for his abject failure to produce impartial ballot material related to Proposition 15, the ‘split roll’ attack that seeks the partial repeal of Proposition 13.”

Past criticism of Becerra’s bias has been vocal but has now reached a crescendo…editorial boards and columnists have lambasted Becerra. In fact, the specific deficiencies of Prop 15’s ballot label as well as the title and summary are well identified in the media reports themselves.”
The tax fighting organization listed many examples of Becerra’s impartiality, including, “The ballot title on Prop. 15 begins by stating that it ‘increases funding sources for public schools, community colleges and local government services.’ It would do so, it states, by ‘changing tax assessment’—not raising taxes—on commercial and industrial property.” (John Diaz, California attorney general loads language on 2 November measures, The S.F. Chronicle, July 26, 2020, https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/diaz/article/California-attorney-general-loads-language-on-2-15434094.php, emphasis in original.)”; and

“The title and summary of Proposition 15 are not only tilted toward one side, they are less than fully accurate. Property in California is not taxed on ‘purchase price.’ It’s taxed on fair market value at the time of purchase, adjusted annually, for inflation with increases capped at 2 percent per year…”

“This blatant manipulation of the ballot label as well as the title and summary is in direct contravention of the Attorney General’s fiduciary duty to prepare impartial ballot material,” said Coupal.

However, also according to CalMatters.org, “In response to the petition from Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, which opposes Prop. 15, (Sacramento County Superior Court Judge Laurie) Earl wrote that while one portion of the title ‘may be somewhat misleading, the Court is not convinced the sentence is so misleading that it justifies judicial intervention.’” Earl extensively cited an appellate court ruling in a previous case, “that ballot descriptions ‘prepared by the Attorney General must be upheld because all legitimate presumptions should be indulged in favor of the propriety of the attorney-general’s actions.’”

So, the ballot title and description for Prop. 15 by Becerra remains unchanged.

Big Backing by Zuckerbergs

According to Ballotpedia, the measure is backed by Chan Zuckerberg Advocacy, formed by Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and his wife Priscilla Chan, who according to the California Globe, contributed $1.9 million to the effort, through their Chan Zuckerberg Initiative. They believe it’s unfair for Disneyland to pay a lower property tax rate than their company is paying on its property.

The election is on November 3.

Dear Antioch Voters:

As an Antioch resident of nearly 10 years, I am running for Antioch City Council District 4 to implement real results and to put a stop to the empty promises from our current council.  If the City of Antioch is going to reach greater heights, we will need real leadership in City Hall; someone who will prioritize our needs and do right by its citizens. I am that someone.

As a professional businesswoman with 20 years of Human Resources, I have experience in supporting organizations to meet their business objectives.  I will bring those skills to:

• Support smart growth.
• Improve and enhance community safety.
• Aid and support local businesses development, and infrastructure improvements.
• Ensure we continue to live in a community that emulates the high standards and values our citizens aspire to restore.
• Create well-paying jobs for Antioch residents, while working to support economic development.

Public Safety:  As the current Chair of Antioch Crime Prevention Commission, I have built partnerships and will continue to work to provide the resources that our police and firefighters need to keep our neighborhoods safe. I will fight to increase our code enforcement team, reduce homelessness, and prevent gang violence.

In addition to experience in the corporate environment, I have a bachelor’s degree in Psychology and Master of Associate degree in Counseling Psychology. As your councilwoman I will leverage my business acumen, background and my hands-on mental health experience that will bring value on my first day in office.

Visit www.sandrawhiteforcitycouncil.com or visit my campaign Facebook page, email me at SandraWhiteCityCouncil@gmail.com, or call me with any questions or ideas you might have at 925-437-9361.

Sandra White

Candidate, Antioch City Council District 4

Dear Antioch voter:

It has been an honor to serve you these past eight years as your Antioch City Clerk and I ask for your vote to continue to serve the residents of Antioch.

Understanding the responsibilities of a City Clerk, I graduated from Technical Training for Clerks alongside appointed & elected City Clerks; and in August 2017 the International Institute of Municipal Clerks designated me a Certified Municipal Clerk (CMC).

I continued alongside City Clerks from throughout California attending the annual New Law & Elections Seminars, the City Clerks Association of California Annual Conferences and graduated from the Master Municipal Clerk & Clerk of the Board Academy in February 2020.

In April 2020 the IIMC designated me a Master Municipal Clerk (MMC), becoming the first Antioch City Clerk to obtain that designation and become only one of some 1,300 Master Municipal Clerks worldwide!

Antioch is the 54th largest city in California and the 259th largest city in the United States. With the increase in population, the workload has increased significantly; but the staffing of the City Clerk’s Office has not. The elected City Clerk needs to be returned to the full-time salaried status that it was from 1872 to 2010 to properly serve you, our residents, in a prompt and timely manner.

The City Clerk is also the City Elections Official and Records Manager. As such, I have instituted electronic filing of Campaign Finance Reports and Public Record requests to better serve you.

I respectfully ask for your vote on November 3rd.

Arne Simonsen, MMC

Antioch City Clerk

Dear Antioch voters:

As your Councilwoman, my biggest strengths are that I’m big hearted and solution-minded. I have a big heart and genuinely care about people; and once I set my mind to doing something, I won’t give up. Your trust in me has enabled us to accomplish many things together.

• COVID-19 Assistance for Seniors – Whether it’s delivering meals, providing resource information, or leading a team of volunteers to clean/repair seniors’ homes … We must continue to help/protect Antioch’s elderly citizens.
• More Police, not Less – Since being elected, we’ve hired 20 additional police officers. Crime is down. Chokeholds are banned, but we need to do better. I support body cams for every officer, NOT “defunding the police.” I’m proud to be supported by our Antioch Police Officers.
• Helping Victims of Domestic Abuse – Together we celebrated the opening of Antioch’s Family Justice Center, where victims of domestic violence, elderly abuse and human trafficking can get hands-on help/support.
• First to Stand Up – I marched with Black Lives Matter, organized Antioch’s first women’s march for equality, and brought the first Veterans’ Memorial Banners to Antioch to honor our fallen servicemembers.
• Protecting Our Open Spaces and Hillsides – I support the Urban Limit Line and preserving our beautiful open spaces from development.

We are living in challenging times. We can get through this together by remaining compassionate toward others and staying focused on creating meaningful solutions. I am here to serve you and am honored to be working on your behalf.

Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock

Ogorchock@comcast.net

Cell (925) 628-7764

Dear Antioch,

I wanted to take this opportunity to introduce myself and share some of my thoughts on how I can serve Antioch.

My family moved to Antioch in 1988 where they purchased our first family home. I attended Antioch schools starting with Sutter Elementary, Park Middle School and eventually Antioch High School where I played softball for four years. My love for softball started on our Antioch Little League fields which sparked a love for the game that would eventually lead to lifelong friendships, the foundation for my work ethic and the love for my community.

Over the last 10-years I have worked in nonprofit finance administration working for various organizations in Northern California.

Growing up in a family that owned a small business and I experienced and observed the challenges that family businesses face. Small businesses play a key role in our local economy. As we continue to deal with COVID-19, we need to start thinking about a post-COVID-19 future. Developing solutions that will help our businesses here in Antioch remain open and to keep their employees employed. I support expanding our current small business grant program, developing tax incentives for small businesses to hire employees from Antioch, and building engagement with the city to help our local businesses prosper.

In addition to the importance of small business growth I am a firm believer in taxpayer accountability. The residents of Antioch have the right to have access to easily digestible financials, for transparency, accountability and to promote a more informed community. The taxpayers of Antioch want to see a return on investment for their tax dollars.

The recently approved ballot measures (C and W) called for: cleaner streets, a restoration of police officers patrolling streets, job opportunities, and a plan to attract small businesses. Our tax dollars should be spent responsibly, transparently, and with cost consciousness to improve the livability in Antioch for all its residents.

I am a firm believer that building engagement between our residents and the police department improves trust and strengthens our community. We have an opportunity to be the model for how policing is done in communities like ours by reviewing our existing policing practices and looking for ways to evolve as necessary. Continuing to evolve our policing will empower our police department and protect our residents. I do not support defunding police. The voters in Antioch voted to support Measure C and W to increase police services.

Blight is another issue that plagues our community. I plan to attack blight by developing blight initiatives such as the one passed by the Brentwood City Council that fines neglectful owners that don’t maintain their vacant properties. We need to provide our code enforcement the tools that they need to enforce our codes on illegal dumping and littering. And developing codes that will punish the illegal dumpers further than they are today.

Sadly, homelessness is plaguing our community as well as California and the nation as a whole.

We should approach the unhoused individuals and families with a compassionate lens that provides resources for those seeking help. At the same time, we need to continue to support our businesses and neighborhoods, by preventing homeless encampments near their storefronts and within neighborhood side streets.  Antioch is not equipped financially to solve homelessness alone.

Reducing homelessness will need to be a regional effort. We need to collaborate with our neighboring Delta cities on how to resolve an issue that impacts all our communities. Taking a regional approach will prevent Antioch from having to absorb the financial burden alone and allows more collaboration and opportunity to develop an impactful strategy for those seeking assistance.

I care deeply about our community. This is my home. I grew up playing in our parks, playing ball on our diamonds, swimming at the water park, hiking in our hills, going to the Big Little Game (Go Panthers), and boating in our Delta. I am a parishioner & parent of a child at Holy Rosary Church, volunteer in Antioch Little League and Chair of the Parks & Recreation Commission. This is where I chose to raise my daughters and build my community.

My campaign team is made up of friends and family that grew up here in Antioch. These friends have donated their talent and time because they care about Antioch as much as I do. These are unprecedented times and it is more important now than ever to shut down the divisiveness and come together as a community to promote forward thinking, new solutions and to do the right thing. I personally understand the hardships that some families are experiencing at this time. I want to be your candidate. I want to help.

If you want to know more about me, please visit www.mariearce.com or ‘like’ my campaign Facebook page to get the latest news and information from our campaign. Reach out if you would like to connect and be part of the change Antioch needs and deserves.

I am Marie Arce and I am fighting for a better Antioch for our families and for our future. I look forward to connecting with you online or around town.

I hope to earn your trust and your vote.

Marie Arce

Candidate for Antioch City Council District 3

www.mariearce.com

 

 

 

Moved back to Antioch two months ago, but has lived in the city for over half her life.

By Allen Payton

Questions have arisen about the possible conflict of interest of the candidate for Antioch City Treasurer, Lauren Posada, who is challenging appointed incumbent Jim Davis in the November election, because she works in the City of Antioch Finance Department. But City Attorney Thomas Smith says there isn’t a conflict of interest and she can run.

When asked to verify that, she responded, “yes, I work for the finance department in (the) City of Antioch. I’ll been there five years next month and have received all approvals to run for treasurer, including the City Attorney. I got the green light last Friday (July 31).”

Questions were sent to City Attorney Smith and City Finance Director Dawn Merchant asking for confirmation of what Posada shared and the relationship the City Treasurer has with the department.

In response Smith wrote, “The City Treasurer is an elected office, and under the law, any resident of Antioch who is registered to vote in the city may run for that office, including an employee of the City.  The duties of the City Treasurer are set forth in the California Government Code and include ensuring that city funds are properly deposited and invested, sign warrants and submit monthly reports.  On the other hand, the duties of the City Finance Department are much broader in range, including preparation of the City budget, utility billing and collection of fees, issuance of business licenses, and general fiscal operations, etc.  If Ms. Posada is elected City Treasurer, the City Council may consider whether the compensation and/or benefits for the City Treasurer position should be adjusted.”

Davis shared that he as City Treasurer, is the custodian of the field checks each month and “those checks come back through Lauren’s accounts payable to pay them, including bills for the various departments.”

An email was then sent to Merchant asking about Posada’s duties and if there would be any overlap with the responsibilities of the City Treasurer.

The following questions were asked: “How much and in what ways do you and your department work with the City Treasurer?” and “is Mrs. Posada a full-time employee?”

Merchant responded with, “Ms. Posada is a full-time employee.  Ms. Posada does not pay the Field Checks.  Field Checks are manual/hand checks written by various authorized City employees to pay vendors for goods or services under $200.00.  A carbon copy of those checks are returned by employees to our accounting department for review of account accuracy and adequate documentation.  Ms. Posada then enters the field check data into the City’s General Ledger after accountant review so that they are properly recorded and accounted for.  As far as the various bills of the City, all invoices are first reviewed by whatever department purchased the good or service.  They are then approved by the authorized supervisor, manager or department head.  Ms. Posada then enters those approved payments into the accounts payable system for processing.  Her batches are then reviewed by the accountants before final payment can be made.”

Davis also broached the subject about Posada’s residency, claiming she’s only lived in Antioch for two months. When asked if that was true, if she moved away and recently moved back and how long she lived outside of Antioch, Posada responded, “yes, that’s correct. I’ve lived in Antioch for roughly 16 years throughout the course of my life, which is over half. My parents occasionally moved away but we always came back to Antioch.”

She then also shared, “I was born in Antioch (literally at Walnut Creek Kaiser), until I was around two-years-old, moved back from 2nd-10th grade, moved back in 2013 and my husband and I sold our home in 2015. Moved back in 2020. So, it’s been five years.”

On her campaign Facebook page earlier this week, Posada wrote, “Hello Residents of Antioch! This is just the beginning of my page and I look forward to sharing my heart with you concerning Antioch and why I made the decision to run for Treasurer.” She is married to Will and they have two children.

Davis was appointed City Treasurer by the city council in 2018 filling the vacancy left by former City Treasurer Donna Conley, and this is his first time running for election to the position. He is a former Antioch Mayor and Councilman. This would be Posada’s first time in elected office should she win. The election is on November 3.