Defendants allegedly opened fire on unsuspecting officers guarding courthouse at federal building as public demonstrations continued only blocks away; one also killed Santa Cruz County Sheriff’s Sergeant during arrest attempt.
OAKLAND – At a press conference held Tuesday morning, June 16, 2020, at the Ronald V. Dellums Federal Building and United States Courthouse in Oakland, the Department of Justice announced that murder and attempted murder charges have been filed against Steven Carrillo, the alleged gunman in the May 29, 2020, drive-by shooting that resulted in the death of 53-year-old Protective Security Officer David Patrick Underwood of Pinole, CA and injuries to a second security officer. The Department of Justice also announced aiding and abetting charges against Robert Alvin Justus, Jr., the driver of the vehicle from which Carrillo is alleged to have attacked the guards.
“Pat Underwood was murdered because he wore a uniform,” said U.S. Attorney David Anderson, “but he was much more than just the uniform he wore. Pat Underwood was a brother, a father, and a son. Many, many people will miss hearing the sound of his voice and laughter. Pat Underwood wore his uniform because it signified his authority to protect the courthouse where we are gathered here today. This courthouse exists to administer justice, to uphold the rule of law, and to protect the freedoms that we all cherish. In announcing today’s charges, we are reaffirming our determination to protect those who protect us.”
“Liberty flourishes in the rule of law,” said Assistant Attorney General for National Security John C. Demers. “Indiscriminate targeting of law enforcement officers by those motivated by violent extremism of any stripe is contrary to our nation’s values and undermines the powerful message of peaceful protestors. The Department of Justice stands in support of all Americans exercising their First Amendment rights to peaceable assembly and speech, but we stand firmly against anyone who seeks to hijack the protests with acts of violence and destruction.”
“I applaud the agents and officers who investigated and captured those responsible for the attack on Federal Protective Service officers resulting in the death of Officer Underwood and serious injury of his partner,” said Department of Homeland Security Acting Secretary Chad Wolf. “As the nation’s largest law enforcement organization, the Department’s top priority is protecting the American people and our workforce, and we are not going to rest until these criminals are brought to justice. The assassination and injury of federal officers who swore an oath to protect the American public will not be tolerated. The Department of Homeland Security will continue its mission to end violent extremism in any form.”
“These arrests are an important step for our community, the families of those who were killed in the line of duty, and our law enforcement partners, so that we may begin the healing process,” said FBI San Francisco Special Agent in Charge John F. Bennett. “While we cannot bring Officer Pat Underwood and Sergeant Damon Gutzwiller back, we can hold those responsible for taking them from us accountable.”
The charges against 32-year-old Carrillo and 30-year-old Justus were brought in two criminal complaints, one filed against each defendant. According to the complaints, at approximately 9:27 p.m., on May 29, 2020, a white Ford Econoline-style van parked directly across the street from the federal building in Oakland on Jefferson Street. The van was parked facing the guard post where Officer Underwood and his partner that evening stood guard to protect the building. The van was on the southeast corner in the spot closest to the intersection with an unobstructed view of the guard post. Shortly after the van parked, a man emerged from the driver’s seat and walked around the area conducting reconnaissance for approximately ten minutes. Then, at approximately 9:43 p.m., the exterior lights of the van turned on and the van moved north on Jefferson Street toward the guard post. The passenger-side sliding door opened, and Carrillo allegedly fired multiple rounds from a firearm toward the guard post, killing Officer Underwood and injuring his partner.
The incident set off an eight-day manhunt that came to a crescendo after a witness reported an abandoned white Ford van in Ben Lomond, Calif. The van reportedly contained what appeared to be ammunition, firearms, and bomb-making equipment and an effort apparently was made to alter the van’s appearance with spray paint and a wheel covering to disguise a missing hubcap. Nevertheless, evidence from the van led deputies from the Santa Cruz County Sheriff’s Office to Carrillo’s residence in Ben Lomond. There, Carrillo allegedly opened fire on the deputies when they arrived at his property, killing one deputy, 38-year-old Santa Cruz sheriff’s Sgt. Damon Gutzwiller (whose funeral was held, today, Wed., June 17, 2020), and injuring a second. During the attack there was also an explosion on the property.
The complaints describe a subsequent odyssey during which Carrillo was shot and fled the scene initially on foot, and then by carjacking a vehicle on a nearby highway. The chase came to an end when, bleeding from his hip, Carrillo was taken into custody.
Additional items were recovered at Carrillo’s Ben Lomond residence included an AR-15-style short-barreled rifle fitted with a binary trigger that fired one round of 9mm ammunition at the pull of the trigger and another round at the release of the trigger. The rifle was fitted with a silencer that suppressed the sound of gunfire from the rifle. In addition, Carrillo appears to have used his own blood to write various phrases on the hood of the car that he carjacked. The phrases relate to an extremist ideology that promotes inciting a violent uprising through use of militias.
Cell phone records from Carrillo’s phone identified Justus as a person with whom Carrillo may have been communicating in the days leading up to the drive-by shooting attack in Oakland. On June 11, while the FBI had Justus under surveillance, travelled to the Federal Building in San Francisco, met with the FBI, and was thereafter arrested for his involvement in the shooting, including his role as the driver of the vehicle.
According to an ABC7 News report, Carillo was an active duty Air Force police officer at Travis Air Force Base in Fairfield at the time of the shooting.
According to a KPIX5 news report, “Carrillo is also a suspect in the June 6 murder of Santa Cruz sheriff’s Sgt. Damon Gutzwiller, authorities said. At the time of the attacks Carrillo was an active-duty staff sergeant stationed at Travis Air Force Base. The FBI believes both men are associated with the Boogaloo movement, which federal officials say is not a defined group, but rather the ideology of heavily armed extremists who want to fight back against perceived government tyranny.”
The charges contained in the criminal complaints are allegations only. Carrillo and Justus are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
“ATF immediately responded to these shooting incidents to make available our personnel to support our partners with the investigations into these crimes,” said Special Agent in Charge Patrick Gorman, San Francisco Field Division, ATF. “ATF provided investigative and forensic support throughout the investigation into these crimes. This included local special agents, as well as, laboratory and firearms enforcement officer resources from the greater Washington, DC area. ATF personnel examined firearm evidence and utilized our National Integrated Ballistic Information Network or NIBIN. The complaints describe the work ATF personnel performed to uncover the purported similarities between the recovered fired cartridge cases found at the Oakland and Ben Lomond homicides. These senseless crimes, which resulted in the tragic loss of Patrick and Damon and caused serious injuries to others, should not have occurred. ATF will continue to make available our resources and support to our partners throughout this investigation.”
Carrillo is charged with one count of murder of a person assisting an officer or employee of the United States Government, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1114(1) and 1114(3) and one count of attempted murder under the same statutes. If convicted of the murder charge, the maximum statutory penalty for this charge is death. If convicted of the attempted murder charge, Carrillo faces a maximum statutory penalty of 20 years in prison, three years of supervised release, a $250,000 fine, and restitution. Justus is charged with aiding and abetting the murder and attempted murder and faces the same maximum statutory penalties. However, any sentence following conviction would be imposed by the court only after consideration of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and the federal statute governing imposition of a sentence, 18 U.S.C. § 3553.
Justus made his initial appearance Monday, June 15, 2020, before U.S. Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler, and was detained for further proceedings. His next appearance is scheduled for Friday, 10:30 am, before Magistrate Judge Kandis A. Westmore for identification of counsel and additional proceedings. An initial federal court appearance has not yet been scheduled for Carrillo.
The case is being prosecuted by United States Attorney for the Northern District of California David Anderson and the Oakland Branch of the Office of the United States Attorney with assistance from George Kraehe of the National Security Division’s Counterterrorism Section. The case is being investigated by the FBI, the ATF, the FPS, and the U.S. Marshal Service with assistance from the Oakland Police Department and the Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office.
See Justus complaint. See Carillo complaint.
Allen Payton contributed to this report.
Read MoreOK spending $10,000 on sales tax poll
By Daniel Borsuk
The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors got an earful of complaints on Tuesday from citizens upset over a proposal to award Sheriff David O. Livingston’s department a $2.8 million pay raise up and a department request to buy a $275,000 LDV Custom Specialty Vehicle at a time library hours are being slashed and librarians are getting pink slips.
At the last minute, a proposal to layoff up 16 Department of Child Support Services workers was scuttled from the agenda when county officials learned that the Governor’s Office has proposed state funding that could keep the child support services positions on the payroll. County officials were unaware of the new state funding source before Tuesday’s meeting and details were not provided at Tuesday’s meeting.
In the Black Lives Matter era, supervisors listened via teleconference how speakers objected to the county’s proposal to give Sheriff Livingston, who has been the target of numerous complaints from citizens about how his deputies abuse the rights of male and female prisoners of color, should not receive a $2.8 million increase for fiscal year 2020/2021 when many other county services like libraries are taking funding cuts.
County Administrator David Twa said because of the uncertainty of the state’s fiscal situation due to COVID-19, the supervisors will not get around to passing a 2020-2021 budget until August, not June.
Speakers also opposed Sheriff Livingston’s request to use a $275,000 2017-2018 State Homeland Security Grant Program to buy a 2019 or 2020 Ford F550 Logistics Support Vehicle.
“Now is not the time to increase the Sheriff’s budget,” protested Harry Baker of Pleasant Hill, who had demonstrated a day earlier in front of Sheriff Livingston’s Danville home. Speaking to supervisors’ telephone, Baker said. “Keep the libraries open. Police brutality is on the rise. Don’t increase the sheriff’s budget.”
“You should not increase the sheriff’s budget when you’re making cuts in the library and child support services,” complained Francisco Torrez of Pittsburg. “Libraries are part of our democratic process. Hospitals are needed in West county Talk about militarization. We don’t have any faith in our Sheriff.”
“I oppose increasing the Sheriff’s budget,” protested Rachel Cohen of Danville. “He has proven to be a racist. Juvenile Hall should be closed. Fund social programs, public housing, libraries. Look at Minneapolis, San Francisco, Portland, Oregon, at what police should look like.”
Several speakers like Raymond Hutchins called on supervisors Diane Burgis of Brentwood, Karen Mitchoff of Pleasant Hill and Federal Glover of Pittsburg for accepting collectively $22,500 in campaign funds from the Contra Costa County Sheriff’s Association.
None of the three supervisors addressed the charge about accepting sheriff’s association campaign funds, especially Glover who faces a runoff election this November against county assessor Gus Kramer.
Neither the sheriff nor a spokesman was available to comment about the protestor’s statements at Tuesday’s meeting.
Concerning the sheriff’s request for a $275,000 LDV Custom Specialty Vehicle, speakers questioned why the Sheriff’s Office needs an armored vehicle for search and rescue purposes and other speakers thought the vehicle will be improperly used by deputies to patrol peaceful BLM demonstrations.
“This truck will used to respond to wildfires,” said Supervisor Mitchoff. “This is an armored vehicle. Its main use is for support.”
Supervisors unanimously approved the state grant for the sheriff to buy the CSV.
Libraries Reduce Hours, Cut Staff
County librarian Melinda Cervantes relayed the bad news to supervisors that because of the dwindling revenues, several cities have to cutback operating hours to the county’s mandatory 35 hours per week schedule. As a result of the reduced operating hours, the library is laying off 32 librarians, mostly library assistant -journey level employees.
The Brentwood library will cut hours per week from 56 to 35, Clayton from 56 to 35 hours, Concord from 52 to 48 hours, Danville from 60 to 56 hours, El Cerrito from 50 to 46 hours, Hercules from 43 to 39 hours, Lafayette from 58 to 54 hours, Moraga from 39 hours to 35 hours, Orinda from 60 per week to 56, San Pablo will reduce hours from 47 to 35, and San Ramon from 58 hours to 54 hours.
County Administrator Twa said the librarians will be offered positions elsewhere in the county, most likely clerical positions.
Supervisors voted 5-0 in approving the reduction in library operations and staffing.
Agree to Spend $10,000 on Sales Tax Poll
In the county’s quest to draw additional funds to support public services, the supervisors agreed on a 4-1 vote to spend $10,000 for a polling firm to test prospective voters whether a tax increase could muster voter approval this November.
Board chair Candace Andersen of Danville cast the lone dissenting vote on the proposal suggested by District 1 Supervisor John Gioia of Richmond. Some $21,000 has already been raised to conduct a poll from labor unions and other organizations.
Certain features of the 75-word poll would test the public’s opinion about the pandemic, willingness to pay more in taxes in the areas of hospitals, sheriff services, abuse, senior services, mental health, youth services, and criticism in the community.
Hair Salons, Barber Shops Allowed to Open
Supervisors were informed from Deputy Public Health Officer Dr. Tom Warren that the county is taking another step toward alignment with the state’s guidance on opening businesses and activities, while recommending that residents stay home as much as possible and take steps to protect themselves and each other when leaving the house.
Dr. Warren told supervisors the county’s health order now allows hair salons and barber shops to reopen for business beginning Wednesday morning. They must follow state health guidance to reduce the risk of spreading COVID-19.
The new order also increases the number of swimmers who may share a pool to 1 person per 75 square feet, as allowed by the state. The social distancing order also allows as many as 100 persons to attend a funeral or other religious service at an indoor place of worship, in line with the state health guidance.
Planning Review to Begin on Walnut Creek Area Senior Development
The Contra Costa County Conservation & Development Department got the green light to begin general plan amendment study of Spieker Senior Development Partner’s congregate care/senior housing development (CCSHD) in unincorporated Walnut Creek, at the end of Seven Hills Ranch Road.
The project is regulated by the State of California Department of Social Services to provide lifetime occupancy and support services, instead of ownership interests.
The development consists of two independent living units providing about 351 total units and a health care center with 100 total units – 50 units for skilled nursing, 20 units for memory care and 30 units for assisted living.
The proposed development would provide a clubhouse, recreation building, parking, and maintenance buildings.
Read MoreNon-profit will also assist local response to COVID-19 in city’s homeless encampments
Today, Tuesday, June 16, 2020 the Martinez Homelessness Task Force, led by City Councilmember Noralea Gipner and a coalition of community and faith leaders, announced the next phase of its work with the launch of the independent Homeless Action Coalition (HAC), a 501(c)(3) nonprofit community benefit organization.
“Most of us take the basics for granted. But many of our neighbors don’t have that luxury,” said Gipner, President and CEO of the HAC. “Imagine not being able to wash your hands, have a warm dinner or fall asleep feeling safe each night. That stress takes a toll and can make it a challenge to heal trauma and enter the workforce. Our coalition is going to ensure all of Martinez’s unhoused residents can land on their feet and transition into housing.”
With more than 150 unhoused residents living in encampments, embankments and parking lots, Martinez has one of the highest per capita homelessness rates in Contra Costa County. With such great need, Martinez leaders were compelled to act.
Over the past year, community groups and the Martinez Homelessness Task Force have partnered to address urgent needs, most recently operating a weekly homeless service center at the Martinez Waterfront Park. There, the Bay Church and other faith partners offered showers, laundry service and toiletries. The Martinez Police Department and Contra Costa C.O.R.E. connected people to shelters and other public resources, while Contra Costa Health Services provided a free mobile clinic. Community volunteers offered haircuts and organized a clothing exchange program. Prior to COVID-19, 30-40 individuals participated in these services every week.
Moving forward, the Homeless Action Coalition will serve as a hub for these resources, coordinating strategy and funding within Martinez and its adjacent communities.
Since officially incorporating as the successor organization to the Martinez Chamber Development Corporation this past Winter, the HAC has built an internal infrastructure with a Board of Directors, a Faith Community Advisory Committee and an effective fundraising apparatus, raising nearly $30,000 from individual donors, faith organizations and labor groups prior to its formal launch today.
In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the HAC has already deployed four sanitation stations throughout the city to provide residents with safe and reliable access to bathrooms. It has also organized essential services for the city’s waterfront encampment, providing food, clothing, tents and other supplies to residents who agree to abide by county health rules and self-govern the area to ensure resident safety.
Once the pandemic subsides, weekly group services will return and the HAC will embark on a series of innovative projects to help unhoused residents start new careers, access affordable housing and connect with mental health services.
“By listening to the people we serve, staying nimble and recruiting our neighbors to help out, we believe we’ll be able to have a real impact,” said Jonathan Bash, Chair of the HAC board of directors. “Our region’s housing crisis is complicated, as are the structural roots of poverty. We can’t do this alone. We need people to get involved in the way that works best for them: donate, volunteer or advocate for those who need a voice.”
Residents, business owners and community leaders who wish to get involved can learn more by visiting www.homelessactioncoalition.org.
Read MoreIssued on: June 16, 2020
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:
Section 1. Purpose. As Americans, we believe that all persons are created equal and endowed with the inalienable rights to life and liberty. A fundamental purpose of government is to secure these inalienable rights. Federal, State, local, tribal, and territorial law enforcement officers place their lives at risk every day to ensure that these rights are preserved.
Law enforcement officers provide the essential protection that all Americans require to raise their families and lead productive lives. The relationship between our fellow citizens and law enforcement officers is an important element in their ability to provide that protection. By working directly with their communities, law enforcement officers can help foster a safe environment where we all can prosper.
Unfortunately, there have been instances in which some officers have misused their authority, challenging the trust of the American people, with tragic consequences for individual victims, their communities, and our Nation. All Americans are entitled to live with the confidence that the law enforcement officers and agencies in their communities will live up to our Nation’s founding ideals and will protect the rights of all persons. Particularly in African-American communities, we must redouble our efforts as a Nation to swiftly address instances of misconduct.
The Constitution declares in its preamble that one of its primary purposes was to establish Justice. Generations of Americans have marched, fought, bled, and died to safeguard the promise of our founding document and protect our shared inalienable rights. Federal, State, local, tribal, and territorial leaders must act in furtherance of that legacy.
Sec. 2. Certification and Credentialing. (a) State and local law enforcement agencies must constantly assess and improve their practices and policies to ensure transparent, safe, and accountable delivery of law enforcement services to their communities. Independent credentialing bodies can accelerate these assessments, enhance citizen confidence in law enforcement practices, and allow for the identification and correction of internal deficiencies before those deficiencies result in injury to the public or to law enforcement officers.
(b) The Attorney General shall, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, allocate Department of Justice discretionary grant funding only to those State and local law enforcement agencies that have sought or are in the process of seeking appropriate credentials from a reputable independent credentialing body certified by the Attorney General.
(c) The Attorney General shall certify independent credentialing bodies that meet standards to be set by the Attorney General. Reputable, independent credentialing bodies, eligible for certification by the Attorney General, should address certain topics in their reviews, such as policies and training regarding use–of-force and de-escalation techniques; performance management tools, such as early warning systems that help to identify officers who may require intervention; and best practices regarding community engagement. The Attorney General’s standards for certification shall require independent credentialing bodies to, at a minimum, confirm that:
(i) the State or local law enforcement agency’s use-of-force policies adhere to all applicable Federal, State, and local laws; and
(ii) the State or local law enforcement agency’s use-of-force policies prohibit the use of chokeholds — a physical maneuver that restricts an individual’s ability to breathe for the purposes of incapacitation — except in those situations where the use of deadly force is allowed by law.
(d) The Attorney General shall engage with existing and prospective independent credentialing bodies to encourage them to offer a cost-effective, targeted credentialing process regarding appropriate use-of-force policies that law enforcement agencies of all sizes in urban and rural jurisdictions may access.
Sec. 3. Information Sharing. (a) The Attorney General shall create a database to coordinate the sharing of information between and among Federal, State, local, tribal, and territorial law enforcement agencies concerning instances of excessive use of force related to law enforcement matters, accounting for applicable privacy and due process rights.
(b) The database described in subsection (a) of this section shall include a mechanism to track, as permissible, terminations or de-certifications of law enforcement officers, criminal convictions of law enforcement officers for on-duty conduct, and civil judgments against law enforcement officers for improper use of force. The database described in subsection (a) of this section shall account for instances where a law enforcement officer resigns or retires while under active investigation related to the use of force. The Attorney General shall take appropriate steps to ensure that the information in the database consists only of instances in which law enforcement officers were afforded fair process.
(c) The Attorney General shall regularly and periodically make available to the public aggregated and anonymized data from the database described in subsection (a) of this section, as consistent with applicable law.
(d) The Attorney General shall, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, allocate Department of Justice discretionary grant funding only to those law enforcement agencies that submit the information described in subsection (b) of this section.
Sec. 4. Mental Health, Homelessness, and Addiction. (a) Since the mid-twentieth century, America has witnessed a reduction in targeted mental health treatment. Ineffective policies have left more individuals with mental health needs on our Nation’s streets, which has expanded the responsibilities of law enforcement officers. As a society, we must take steps to safely and humanely care for those who suffer from mental illness and substance abuse in a manner that addresses such individuals’ needs and the needs of their communities. It is the policy of the United States to promote the use of appropriate social services as the primary response to individuals who suffer from impaired mental health, homelessness, and addiction, recognizing that, because law enforcement officers often encounter such individuals suffering from these conditions in the course of their duties, all officers should be properly trained for such encounters.
(b) The Attorney General shall, in consultation with the Secretary of Health and Human Services as appropriate, identify and develop opportunities to train law enforcement officers with respect to encounters with individuals suffering from impaired mental health, homelessness, and addiction; to increase the capacity of social workers working directly with law enforcement agencies; and to provide guidance regarding the development and implementation of co-responder programs, which involve social workers or other mental health professionals working alongside law enforcement officers so that they arrive and address situations together. The Attorney General and the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall prioritize resources, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, to support such opportunities.
(c) The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall survey community-support models addressing mental health, homelessness, and addiction. Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall summarize the results of this survey in a report to the President, through the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, which shall include specific recommendations regarding how appropriated funds can be reallocated to support widespread adoption of successful models and recommendations for additional funding, if needed.
(d) The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall, in coordination with the Attorney General and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, prioritize resources, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, to implement community-support models as recommended in the report described in subsection (c) of this section.
Sec. 5. Legislation and Grant Programs. (a) The Attorney General, in consultation with the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, shall develop and propose new legislation to the Congress that could be enacted to enhance the tools and resources available to improve law enforcement practices and build community engagement.
(b) The legislation described in subsection (a) of this section shall include recommendations to enhance current grant programs to improve law enforcement practices and build community engagement, including through:
(i) assisting State and local law enforcement agencies with implementing the credentialing process described in section 2 of this order, the reporting described in section 3 of this order, and the co responder and community-support models described in section 4 of this order;
(ii) training and technical assistance required to adopt and implement improved use–of-force policies and procedures, including scenario-driven de-escalation techniques;
(iii) retention of high-performing law enforcement officers and recruitment of law enforcement officers who are likely to be high-performing;
(iv) confidential access to mental health services for law enforcement officers; and
(v) programs aimed at developing or improving relationships between law enforcement and the communities they serve, including through community outreach and listening sessions, and supporting non profit organizations that focus on improving stressed relationships between law enforcement officers and the communities they serve.
Sec. 6. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or
(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
DONALD J. TRUMP
THE WHITE HOUSE,
June 16, 2020.
Read More
Plea entered today, Tuesday, June 16, 2020 in Butte County Superior Court
SAN FRANCISCO—PG&E today entered its plea in Butte County Superior Court related to its role in the 2018 Camp Fire. In accordance with the agreement PG&E reached in March 2020 with the Butte County District Attorney, the company pleaded guilty to 84 counts of involuntary manslaughter and one count of unlawfully starting a fire.
The following statement was delivered today in court by PG&E Corporation CEO and President Bill Johnson.
“I am here today on behalf of the 23,000 men and women of PG&E, to accept responsibility for the fire here that took so many lives and changed these communities forever.
I have heard the pain and the anguish of victims as they’ve described the loss they continue to endure, and the wounds that can’t be healed. No words from me could ever reduce the magnitude of such devastation or do anything to repair the damage. But I hope that the actions we are taking here today will help bring some measure of peace.
Our equipment started the fire that destroyed the towns of Paradise and Concow and severely burned Magalia and other parts of Butte County. That fire took the lives of 85 people. Thousands lost their homes and businesses, and many others were forced to evacuate under horrific circumstances.
I wish there were some way to take back what happened or take away the pain of those who’ve suffered. But I know there’s not.
What I can say is this: First, PG&E will never forget the Camp Fire and all that it took from this region. We remain deeply, deeply sorry for the terrible devastation we have caused.
Second, since the Camp Fire, we have worked side-by-side with Butte County residents and public officials to help the Paradise region recover and rebuild. That work continues today, and we are doing everything we can to make things right.
Third, we are working hard to get the victims compensated. With our Plan of Reorganization on track to be approved by June 30, their wait may finally be nearing an end. In fact, the Bankruptcy Court has concluded confirmation hearings regarding our Plan. This should be one of the final steps toward paying the $25.5 billion in settlements we’ve reached with wildfire victims, Butte County agencies and others.
Finally, I want to reiterate to the Court and all of the people of the Paradise region that the lessons PG&E learned from the Camp Fire are being taken to heart and are driving comprehensive changes currently underway at PG&E.
We are intently focused on reducing the risk of wildfire in our communities. We have improved our inspection and operational protocols. We are hardening our energy system and making it more resilient. We have incorporated advanced technology to better predict and detect extreme weather conditions. All of this, and more, is being done to help make sure the tragedy that occurred here never happens again, in any of the communities we serve.
In closing, I want to reiterate that on behalf of PG&E, I apologize for the pain we have caused. We know we cannot replace all that the fire destroyed. We do hope that by pleading guilty and accepting accountability, by compensating victims and supporting rebuilding efforts, and by making significant, lasting changes in the way we operate, we can honor those who were lost and help this community move forward.
Your Honor, we make this plea with sadness and regret—and with eyes open to what happened, and to what we must do to make things right.”
About PG&E Corporation
PG&E Corporation is a holding company headquartered in San Francisco. It is the parent company of Pacific Gas and Electric Company (the “Utility”), an energy company that serves 16 million Californians across a 70,000-square-mile service area in Northern and Central California. Each of PG&E Corporation and the Utility is a separate entity, with distinct creditors and claimants, and is subject to separate laws, rules and regulations. For more information, visit http://www.pgecorp.com. In this news release, they are together referred to as “PG&E.”
Read MoreIncludes hair salons, barber shops, and 100 people at indoor church services and funerals
Contra Costa Health Services is taking another step toward alignment with the State of California’s guidance on opening businesses and activities at a pace that protects public health and safety. At the same time, CCHS continues to recommend that residents stay home as much as possible and take steps to protect themselves and each other when leaving the house.
The Contra Costa Health Officer has amended the county’s health order to allow hair salons and barbers to reopen for business beginning Wednesday morning. They must follow state health guidance to reduce the risk of spreading COVID-19.
The new order also increases the number of swimmers who may share a pool to 1 person per 75 square feet, as allowed by the state.
The social distancing order also allows as many as 100 people to attend a funeral or other religious service at an indoor place of worship, in line with the state’s health guidance.
Some of Contra Costa’s key indicators for measuring how well the community is slowing the spread of COVID-19 did increase in the first half of June, an expected outcome as more people come into more contact with each other as the county gradually reopens businesses and activities.
CCHS is carefully monitoring that data and could adjust the reopening timeline to protect the public health.
CCHS encourages everyone to take simple steps to protect themselves from COVID-19: Follow the shelter-in-place order, and wear a face covering when you go out or are near other people. Wash your hands thoroughly and frequently, and always stay home from work or school if you are not feeling well.
Visit www.coronavirus.cchealth.org/health-orders to read the new health order and its appendices, and for local information about Contra Costa’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Read More
Beginning Monday, June 15, the Library will offer Front Door Service at 23 community libraries. The service will allow patrons to pick-up books, DVDs and audiobooks placed on hold through the Library’s website at ccclib.org.
Those patrons with holds on the shelf from early March, before the Health Order began, will have the opportunity to make appointments first. This is necessary to clear the thousands of holds currently on library shelves and make room for new holds. Those patrons will be contacted with instructions explaining how to make an appointment to pick up their materials. Appointments are encouraged, but not required. Those coming to the library without appointments may experience a wait.
New holds can be placed beginning on Thursday, June 18, and appointments will be open to any patron who wishes to pick up available holds. Patrons will be notified when their holds are ready. They will make an appointment at the appropriate location and schedule a pick-up time. Once at the library location, the patron will call or text the number on the sign at the front of the building. Staff will confirm the library card number and collect the items. Materials will be placed in a bag with the patron’s name on it and put on a table at the front door. It is a safe, contactless process.
“We are eager to reconnect with library users and take this important step toward reopening,” said County Librarian Melinda Cervantes. “Staff are taking every precaution to provide visitors with a safe, library experience.”
Front Door Service is available during regularly scheduled hours at 23 locations. See the full list of locations and hours here. All libraries will be closed on Sundays. Front Door Service will not be available at the Pinole, Pleasant Hill or Prewett locations until further notice.
For the safety of our patrons and staff, Library items will be quarantined for a minimum of 72 hours in between each use. Staff will wash their hands frequently, wear masks and observe social distancing protocols. Patrons approaching the front door should also wear a mask and observe social distancing guidelines. All returns should be placed in the book drop.
Stay tuned to ccclib.org for more information about how to use Front Door Service.
For questions about library services, contact staff via Chat, Monday – Friday from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. or text questions to (925) 290-7627.
Read MoreFrom Contra Costa Health Services
The State of California this week granted Contra Costa County a variance that allows more local control over when some activities restricted by the COVID-19 pandemic may resume.
The variance allows Contra Costa to move ahead with its road map for reopening at a pace that is appropriate for local conditions, which includes hair salons, indoor dining, gyms and schools in coming weeks.
“We are able to reopen more businesses and activities because the people of Contra Costa have diligently followed the health orders restricting our activities for many months,” said Candace Andersen, chair of the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors. “We remain committed to a safe and careful reopening for our county.”
In an attestation filed to the state this week, Contra Costa Health Services (CCHS) outlined the progress at managing the spread of COVID-19 locally and how the local healthcare system is preparing in the event of a new surge in cases.
If safe to do so, hair salons and barber shops can reopen for business on June 17, according to a timeline released by CCHS. Indoor dining, bars, gyms and fitness centers, hotels and some indoor entertainment venues may follow July 1.
The county’s timeline could change if community health indicators worsen, such as an increase in the number of new cases or patients hospitalized with COVID-19.
Contra Costa is the first of six counties in the lower Bay Area to seek or receive a variance from the state COVID-19 health order, joining the North Bay counties of Napa, Solano and Sonoma.
Visit cchealth.org/coronavirus for more information about Contra Costa’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Read More
By Jimmy Lee, Director of Public Affairs, Contra Costa County Office of the Sheriff
On Wednesday, June 10, 2020, at about 4:05 pm, Contra Costa County Deputy Sheriffs from Bay Station were dispatched to a suspicious circumstance at an apartment building on the 4800 block of Appian Way in El Sobrante.
Deputies arrived at the location and discovered a body that was decomposed. The Homicide Unit of the Investigation Division responded along with the Crime Lab.
The autopsy of the body took place this morning. The person is identified as 64-year-old John Birdseye Sussdorff of El Sobrante. The cause of death is listed as blunt force chest injury and sharp force head injury.
Detectives identified a suspect in the case. 48-year-old Anthony Mark Rodriguez of El Sobrante was arrested and later booked into the Martinez Detention Facility for murder. He is being held in lieu of $1 million bail. Detectives say the two knew each other and had lived in the same residence.
Anyone with any information on this case is asked to contact the Investigation Division at (925) 313-2600. For any tips, email: tips@so.cccounty.us or call (866) 846-3592 to leave an anonymous voice message.
Read MoreClaims “Restricting Religious Gatherings to 12 Participants Unconstitutionally Violates Right to Equal Protection”
“…the County’s Order violates federal and state law while unashamedly discriminating against houses of worship.”
On Wednesday, June 10, 2020 a formal legal letter was by attorney Harmeet Dhillon, founder of the Center for American Liberty, to members of the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors, to ensure county health services staff follows through with their commitment to change the requirement to a recommendation that places of worship gather names and contact information of those who attend services and provide it to the county upon request. (See related articles, here, here and here). In addition, the letter points out that the county’s health order limiting indoor services to 12 people also violates the Constitution. – 2020.06.10_HDhillon CAL Letter to Contra Costa County
June 10, 2020
Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
651 Pine Street
Martinez, CA 94553
Re: Unconstitutional Contra Costa Health Services Order No. HO-COVID19-17, Specifically Regarding “Additional Businesses” (section 3 of Appendix C-1, Updated June 5, 2020)
Dear Board of Supervisors:
We write today, on behalf of clients in Contra Costa County, to demand the immediate rescission of Contra Costa Health Services Order NO. HO-COVID19-17 (the “Order”). The Order is concerning for two reasons: (1) Its requirement that houses of worship—and only houses of worship—keep and upon request disclose “a record of attendance” to Contra Costa Health Services violates both state and federally protected rights of associational privacy; (2) Restricting religious gatherings to no more than 12 participants violates First and Fourteenth Amendment protection. And while we appreciate the County’s recent announcement that it plans to revise its requirement that houses of worship keep and disclose attendance lists, until such plans manifest, we reiterate our objection over its current text.
- Restricting Religious Gatherings to 12 Participants Unconstitutionally Violates First Amendment Rights
The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prohibits government actors from enforcing any “law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” U. S. Const. amend. I; see also Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296, 303 (1940) (applying the First Amendment to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment). Under strict scrutiny, the government cannot burden religious activity unless it first establishes (1) a compelling interest for imposing such burdens, and (2) that the burdens are the “least restrictive means” necessary to further that compelling interest. Federal courts routinely enjoin the enforcement of laws and policies under this standard. See e.g., Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. City of Hialeah 508 U.S. 520, 524 (1993).
The County’s Order severely burdens religious expression. The Order’s restriction on indoor religious services—limiting the number of participants to 12 persons or 25% of the building’s capacity, whichever is less—does not survive exacting scrutiny in that it is not the least restrictive means to accomplish the County’s interest in public health. Simply put, there are better ways for the County to accomplish its interest in public health that do not burden religious expression as much. For example, restricting participation on a percentage basis only—with respect to facility seating capacity—is a better solution. Twelve people in a sanctuary that holds one thousand looks very different from twelve people in a sanctuary that holds one hundred people.
In other words, percentage-based restrictions accommodate larger houses of worship while satisfying the County’s interest in public health and social distancing.
- Restricting Religious Gatherings to 12 Participants Unconstitutionally Violates Right to Equal Protection
The Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution provides that “[n]o State shall . . . deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 1.
Equal protection requires the state to govern impartially—not draw arbitrary distinctions between
individuals based solely on differences that are irrelevant to a legitimate governmental objection. City of Cleburne, Tex. v. Cleburne Living Ctr., 473 U.S. 432, 446 (1985).
Here, the County’s 12-person limit on religious gatherings is nothing if not arbitrary. This is more restrictive than statewide health guidelines, according to the California Department of Health for places of worship, which currently limits attendance to 25% of building capacity or a maximum of 100 attendees, whichever is less; it is unclear where Contra Costa County’s “12 person” idea originates.
Additionally, no other establishment in Contra Costa County is subject to these more restrictive and draconian requirements. Costco, laundromats, marijuana dispensaries, and countless other purely secular entities are not burdened by this arbitrary, 12-person limitation.
On April 14, 2020, the United States Attorney General, William Barr, issued a statement addressing the disparate treatment being afforded to houses of worship.
As we explain in the Statement of Interest, where a state has not acted evenhandedly, it must have a compelling reason to impose restrictions on places of worship and must ensure that those restrictions are narrowly tailored to advance its compelling interest. While we believe that during this period there is a sufficient basis for the social distancing rules that have been put in place, the scope and justification of restrictions beyond that will have to be assessed based on the circumstances as they evolve.
Religion and religious worship continue to be central to the lives of millions of Americans. This is true more so than ever during this difficult time. The pandemic has changed the ways Americans live their lives. Religious communities have rallied to the critical need to protect the community from the spread of this disease by making services available online and in ways that otherwise comply with social distancing guidelines.
The County may not treat houses of worship as second class entities; at a minimum, it must treat them equitably with respect to secular counterpart. Contra Costa Health Services Order NO. HO-COVID19-17 does the opposite—it targets houses of worship with more burdensome restrictions.
III. The Order Infringes Upon Constitutionally Protected Right to Privacy Under State Law
The right to privacy is an inalienable right under California law.3 This privacy interest irrefutably extends to participation in religious gatherings.
In Church of Hakeem, Inc. v. Superior Court, Alameda County, 110 Cal. App. 3d 384 (Ct. App. 1980), the court expressly declined to mandate disclosure of member names and addresses, even after allegations of criminal activity or wrongdoing by the church. In City of Carmel-by-the-Sea v. Young, 2 Cal. 3d 259 (Ct. App. 1970), the court affirmed a list of freedoms afforded constitutional protections, such as the freedom of association and privacy in one’s associations, encompassing privacy of the membership lists of a constitutionally valid organization. In Pacific Union Club v. Superior Court, 232 Cal. App 3d 60 (Ct. App. 1991), the court provided a robust analysis of associational rights and ultimately upheld a private club’s right not to disclose member lists.
Applied here, Contra Costa County’s Order requiring houses of worship to create and preserve the names and contact information of those in attendance at a worship service or ceremony, and then disclose such information “immediately upon request” unconstitutionally violates privacy rights while chilling religious expression. Whether gathering for political, social, or religious reasons, the right of association is sacrosanct. Unfortunately, the County’s Order deprives Californians their right to pray, worship, repent, and seek spiritual guidance privately. Rather, the Order subjects their most intimate religious activities to potential publication.
3 “All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.” Cal. Const. Art. 1 § 1
- The Order Violates Right to Privacy Protected by Federal Law
The “Court has recognized the vital relationship between freedom to associate and privacy in one’s associations.” Nat’l Ass’n for Advancement of Colored People v. State of Ala. Ex rel. Patterson, 357 U.S. 449, 462 (1958). Citing American Communications Ass’n, C.I.O., v Douds, 339 U.S. 382, 402 (1950), the Court explained,
‘A requirement that adherents of particular religious faiths or political parties wear identifying arm-bands, for example, is obviously of this nature.’ Compelled disclosure of membership in an organization engaged in advocacy of particular beliefs is of the same order. Inviolability of privacy in group association may in many circumstances be indispensable to preservation of freedom of association, particular where a group espouses dissident beliefs.
Here, Contra Costa County’s Order tramples Californians’ right to privacy and in doing so, violates the Due Process Clause. Similar to the state of Alabama in NAACP v. Alabama, Contra County is requiring houses of worship to disclose the identities of congregants gathering to worship. And similar to the state of Alabama, this mandatory disclosure of religious expression “curtails the freedom to associate,” “denying “the ‘liberty’ assured by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment,” and is “subject to the closest scrutiny.” Id. at 460-61.
- Attendance Recordation Requirement Violates Equal Protection Protected by Federal Law.
By the Order’s express terms, the Order discriminates against places of worship by requiring places of worship to create and maintain attendee lists, yet the Order places no other such burdens on any other non-religious establishment whatsoever. As the United States Supreme Court has noted, “a law burdening religious practice that is not neutral or not of general application must undergo the most rigorous of scrutiny.” Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. Hialeah, 508 U.S. 520, 546 (1993). Further, “A law is not generally applicable if its prohibitions substantially under include non-religiously motivated conduct that might endanger the same governmental interest that the law is designed to protect.” Stormans, Inc. v. Wiesman, 794 F.3d 1064, 1079 (9th Cir. 2015) (citing Lukumi, 508 U.S. at 542–46). So, “In other words, if a law pursues the government’s interest ‘only against conduct motivated by religious belief,’ but fails to include in its prohibitions substantial, comparable secular conduct that would similarly threaten the government’s interest, then the law is not generally applicable.” Id.
The County fails this standard. Houses of worship are uniquely burdened by this public disclosure requirement. And again, no other entity appears to be subjected to this standard.
In conclusion, we believe the County’s Order violates federal and state law while unashamedly discriminating against houses of worship. For these reasons, the Center for American Liberty respectfully requests that Contra Costa Health Services Order NO. HO-COVID19-17, requiring houses of worship to record and disclosure attendance at religious services, be either rescinded or amended to cure its constitutional defects. We look forward to hearing your response.
Regards,
Harmeet K. Dhillon
cc: John Gioia, Candace Anderson, Diane Burgis, Karen Mitchoff, Federal D. Glover
Read More