Contra Costa Herald

News Of By and For The People of Contra Costa County, California

Contra Costa DA Becton meets with Public Defender, others on Antioch cops’ racist texts, will work to ID compromised cases

By 1 Comment

By Allen D. Payton

In response to the letter from the Contra Costa Public Defender Ellen McDonnell to DA Diana Becton on Friday, requesting all cases brought by the Antioch Police Department be dropped and all inmates be released, due to the racist text scandal, a meeting was held Monday afternoon to discuss the matter. (See related articles here, here and here)

DA’s Office PIO Ted Asregadoo sent the following statement “about the meeting that happened at 1 pm today at the DA’s Office”:

“Today, District Attorney Diana Becton, Public Defender Ellen McDonnell, Betty Barker from the Alternate Defender Office, and the Director of the Contra Costa Conflict Program, Oksana Tsykova met to discuss the creation of a process to address cases affected by the disclosure of cruel, racially insulting, and hostile text messages written or received by members of the Antioch Police Department.

The Contra Costa District Attorney’s Office is working to identify cases that are potentially compromised by the text messages. Once we’ve identified those cases – and any overlapping conflicts — we will initiate a detailed review process for potential dismissal, resentencing, or the preservation of convictions.

The DA’s Office is working to ensure that public safety and serving the interest of justice are priorities in this process.”

The scandal involves as many as 45 Antioch cops, focusing on 14 and one in particular, with many of them on paid leave during the police department’s own investigation.

McDonnell was asked if she had any comments about the meeting but did not respond prior to publication time.

Please check back later for any updates to this report.

Contra Costa Public Defender wants DA to drop all cases, release suspects of Antioch Police Department

By 5 Comments

Claims “At least 45 APD officers were on the text chains”

“I request you immediately dismiss all pending Public Defender cases involving APD, agree to release our incarcerated clients, and cease filing any APD related cases.” – Public Defender Ellen McDonnell

“Text messages… reveal a deeply entrenched, department-wide culture of racism, homophobia, targeted violence against Black people, selective enforcement of laws against Black people, fabrication of evidence, and utter disregard of civil and human rights.”

By Allen D. Payton In response to the reports of Antioch Police Officers’ racist texts released this past week, Contra Costa Public Defender Ellen McDonnell sent a letter to DA Diana Becton on Friday, April 14, 2023, requests she “dismiss all pending Public Defender cases involving APD, agree to release our incarcerated clients, and cease filing any APD related cases.” (See related articles here and here) McDonnell had previously asked Becton to pause all criminal filings and prosecutions of the Antioch officers involved in the text scandal and investigation. Now, based on the additional information that more officers including department leaders were included in the text messages exchanged, she’s requesting much more. Public Defender Letter to DA Becton_4-14-22 McDonnell’s letter reads as follows:

April 14, 2023

Diana Becton

Office of the District Attorney

900 Ward Street Martinez, CA 94553

Dear Diana,

I am in receipt of redacted versions of Contra Costa County District Attorney Senior Inspector Larry Wallace’s investigative reports.1 The Antioch Police Department (APD) text messages discussed in the reports reveal a deeply entrenched, department-wide culture of racism, homophobia, targeted violence against Black people, selective enforcement of laws against Black people, fabrication of evidence, and utter disregard of civil and human rights. At least forty-five APD officers2 were on the text chains disclosed thus far. The officers run the gamut from patrol officers to lieutenants. Of the twelve non-CSO senior officers3 in APD’s investigations bureau4, eleven were recipients or active participants in the text chains. The president of the Antioch Police Officers Association, an APD sergeant, was actively involved. Even the internal affairs sergeant participated in the group sending these vile text messages.

At least sixteen of the forty-five officers are in leadership roles at APD as detectives, sergeants, and lieutenants showing they endorsed and shared in these views.

The public simply cannot have trust or confidence in any criminal prosecution involving APD. No one should be charged with a crime based on the report of a police department so thoroughly riddled with corruption. I request you immediately dismiss all pending Public Defender cases involving APD, agree to release our incarcerated clients, and cease filing any APD related cases.

Following up on my March 30, 2023 letter, incorporated by reference, I request you identify all law enforcement officers involved in the text messages (whether as active participants or recipients), as well as all Public Defender and Alternate Defender pending and closed cases where the officers were involved in the investigation. I also request that you provide unredacted copies of Inspector Wallace’s reports and further disclose all of the text messages themselves.

The vile text messages were apparently discovered while investigating other acts of moral turpitude by members of APD and the Pittsburg Police Department (PPD). News reports have characterized the acts being investigated as “using cocaine and steroids, cheating on tests or misrepresenting their own training, and assaulting people, among other offenses”5 and “trying to fraudulently obtain college degrees in order to collect pay bumps.”6 At least one PPD officer has been charged with selling AR-15 firearms. {People v. Armando Montalvo, Contra Costa Superior Court docket no. 01-22-02142.)

News reports indicated a grand jury was convened and indictments were expected in or around December 2022.7 It has now been over a year since the news first broke of your office’s joint investigation with the Federal Bureau of Investigations of criminal conduct by APD and PPD police officers. I request information regarding the status of this investigation and its estimated end date.

Following up on my March 28, 2022, letter, incorporated by reference, I request you identify all APD and PPD officers that were or are being investigated for crimes of moral turpitude, as well as all Public Defender and Alternate Defender pending and closed cases where the officers were involved in the investigation. I further request you provide police reports and other investigative materials without insisting on a protective order. The extent of the hatred and lawlessness that has recently been revealed within APD is unfathomable. Continuing to prosecute the victims of APD’s targeted, violent, racist policing while simultaneously shielding the officers’ identities and the full extent of their misconduct and criminal activities is manifestly unjust. I request immediate full discovery and complete transparency. Please see the attachment for a specific list of items requested.

Thank you in advance for your assistance and cooperation with this matter. If you have any questions about this request, please let me know. I look forward to discussing this matter with you on Monday, April 17 at 1:00 p.m.

Sincerely,

Ellen McDonnell

Public Defender Contra Costa County

1 Nos. 01-1046493/21-001905, dated March 28, 2023, and 013-1046493, dated March 27, 2023.

2 As of March 14, 2019, APD’s roster contained 115 staff. Assuming the current roster is similarly sized and consists entirely of sworn officers, approximately 40% of APD officers are party to the text message chains.

3 Nine are detectives, two are sergeants and one is a lieutenant. 

4 https://www.antiochca.gov/police/contact-information/

5 https://www.mercurynews.eom/2022/09/10/exclusive-fbi-criminal-investigation-of-antioch-pittsburg-cops-grows-grand- jury-convening/

6 https://www.ktvu.com/news/antioch-pittsburg-police-under-investigation-for-ffaudulent-college-degrees-report

7 Id.

Attachment to April 13,2023 Letter to Diana Becton – Discovery Request

This discovery request is made pursuant to the United States Constitution, Amendments V, VI, and XrV; Brady v. Maryland (1963) 373 U.S. 83 and its progeny; California Penal Code section 1054,1; and California case law. The requested material does not constitute personnel records protected by Pitchess, as it was not generated in coimection with appraisal or discipline, was generated independently of internal investigation, and arose in the context of a criminal investigation. {Pasadena Police Officers Association v. Superior Court (2015) 240 Cal.App.4th 268, 287-288, 292; City of Eureka v. Superior Court (2016) 1 Cal.App.5th 755.) Please provide the following materials:

  1. A list of all Antioch Police Department (APD) and Pittsburg Police Department (PPD) officers being investigated by Contra Costa District Attorney’s Office and/or the Federal Bureau of Investigations for acts of moral turpitude;
  2. Investigative reports, recordings, videos, phone records, and/or any other materials gathered during the course of the investigation, in complete and unredacted form, without any limiting protective order;
  3. A list of all law enforcement officers involved in the text chains that were discovered by your office during the investigation of acts of moral turpitude, and the agency each officer is employed by;
  4. Unredacted copies of any reports regarding the text messages, including but not limited to Contra Costa County District Attorney Senior Inspector Larry Wallace’s reports;
  5. Copies of all the text messages discovered to date, including any that may have also been sent or received by PPD officers or officers in any other law enforcement agencies;
  6. Any other investigative reports, recordings, videos, phone records, and/or any other materials gathered during the course of investigating the text messages, in complete and unredacted form, without any limiting protective order;
  7. A complete list of all pending and closed Public Defender and Alternate Defender cases in which the officers engaged in the text messages, whether as recipients or active participants, and/or under investigation for crimes of moral turpitude, were involved;

Please consider this request as ongoing. As your office obtains new material, please continue to provide complete, unredacted discovery and provide an updated list of affected cases.”

Questions for DA Becton, Antioch Police Chief Ford

Becton and Antioch Police Chief Steve Ford were asked via email Saturday afternoon if they had responses to McDonnell’s request.

4/17/23 UPDATE: DA’s Office PIO Ted Asregadoo responded Monday morning, “DA Becton and PD McDonnell are scheduled to meet this afternoon at 1 pm at the DA’s Office on Ward Street in Martinez.”

Please check back later for any additional other updates to this report.

 

Second DA report leaked, posted on social media shows texts by Antioch Police officers about two suspects in murder case

By 5 Comments

Focuses on Officer Eric Rombough, involves seven others including sergeant, detective, plus, U.S. Postal Inspector

“Nice babe, another one for the mantle.” – from an unidentified person in response to Rombough bragging about beating and shooting one of the suspects with a non-lethal weapon

WARNING: Contains offensive language

By Allen D. Payton

Another report by Larry J. Wallace, Senior Inspector with the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office was leaked and posted on social media on Saturday, April 15, 2023 about the two suspects and the eight Antioch Police Officers involved in a murder case, plus, a U.S. Postal Inspector, and their racist and other offensive texts. Some of the texts were included in the previously released 21-page report dated March 27, 2023. (See related article)

The 14-page report, dated March 28, 2023, focuses on the “text messages derived from the personal cellular telephone belonging to Antioch Police Department (APD) Officer Eric Rombough” and include “conversations between APD Officer Rombough and the following APD Officers regarding an investigation into Teryon Deshon Pugh and Trent Allen in March of 2021: APD Sergeant (Sgt) Josh Evans, Detective Robert Gerber, Johnathan Adams, Scott Duggar, Timothy Manly Willams, Tom Smith, and Brock Marcote.” The report also shows offensive texts between Rombough and U.S. Postal Inspector Francisco Garcia. Many of the texts reveal mistreatment of the two suspects. Redacted APD Officer texts investigation report 32823

Examples of Text Messages

On March 20, 2021, the report shows text message exchange between Rombough and Gerber:

At 9:16 p.m., APD Officer Rombough responded, “Bro I can’t wait to forty all of them (“forty” or “40” are references to the deployment of the 40mm less-lethal launcher)”

At 9:16 p.m., APD Detective Gerber text, “Hell yeah.”

The report shows more racist texts sent on March 25, 2021:

At 7:36 p.m., APD Officer Rombough texted, “Well we knew they wouldn’t be by the pool.”

At 7:39 p.m., APD Officer Rombough text, “Look at all the Infiniti’s.”

At 7:40 p.m., APD Officer Rombough text, “And cuz they’re dark black.” APD Officer Adams responded with “(laughing emoji).”

At 7:41 p.m., APD Officer Rombough text, “Gotta get them to smile.”

At 8:02 p.m., APD Officer Rombough continued, “Definitely can’t see them.”

The report reads: On 3/30/202 at 8:22 p.m., APD Officer Rombough text APD Detective Gerber, “This looks like dudes car from his ig.” – a reference to Instagram.

At 8:23 p.m., APD Officer Rombough text, “And he’s chilling at ruth Chris steakhouse”. I hate all of them.”

At 8:24 p.m., APD Detective Gerber text, “Turds… all turds”, a comment that APD Officer Rombough “liked”.

The texts on the final day of the report’s time period included exchanges with an unidentified person who praised Rombough for mistreating suspects and claim by Marcotte that a nurse laughed about a suspect being in pain:

On 03/31/2021, at 8:29 a[sic].m., APD Officer Rombough text “Yeah 40 deployment” and “F-g–t got his ass whooped.”

At 9:09 a.m., (An unidentified person) text, “Nice babe, another one for the mantle.”

At 9:1 0a.m., APD Officer Rombough texted, “Murder suspect. In custody and that a–hole made me run.” (An unidentified person) text, “Good thing you fast honey.”

At 9:12 a.m., APD Officer Rombough text, “We managed to setup a perimeter and he ‘got his ass whooped in the back yard and I field goal kicked his head. (An unidentified person) responded, “I thought that was a no no.”

At 9:13 a.m., APD Officer Rombough text, “No we can do that just no chokes” and “I tried to knock him unconscious. And he got muzzle thumped 6 times before he gave us his hands.”

At 9:12 a.m., APD Officer Marcotte responded, “The nurse saw me smiling when he was ‘making noises in pain and she started laughing (laughing emoji).”

At 9:13 a.m., APD Officer Rombough text, “Lmao.”

At 9:15 a.m., APD Officer Rombough added, “What a b–ch.”

At 9:24 a.m., (An unidentified person) texted, “Glad you’re havin fun babe.”

At 9:25 a.m., APD Officer Rombough text, “It was nice after a very boring swat op.”

During this same time, APD Officer Rombough also group text his co-workers, APD Officers Brock Marcos, Timothy Manly Williams, (An unidentified person) and Scott Duggar, (An unidentified person)

At 8:45 a.m., APD Officer Rombough texted the group, “Lol I 40d him right next to his throat.”

At 8:46 a.m., APD Officer Marcotte responded, “Oh f–k” and “Cuz he ducked so fast.”

Later that day the report reads, At 4:43 p.m., APD Officer Rombough replied, “Yup and another f–g-ot in the butt” and “2 for the day.”

At 4:49 p.m. (An unidentified person) responded, “Nice babe.”

Only One Reference to Officers Being Corrected by Department Leader

During an exchange with Rombough on March 31, 2021 the report reads, At 3:11 p.m., APD Officer Adams texted, and “…I forgot that Koch wanted us to stop sending dumb sh-t. Oops.” He was referring to Sgt. Matthew Koch. This is the only text in the report that references any department leader correcting officers for their offensive texts.

Text Exchange Between Rombough & Postal Inspector Garcia

The text message exchange with Postal Inspector Garcia in the report reads: On 03/31/2021, a 3:10 p.m. APD Officer Rombough text United States Postal Inspector Francisco Garcia, “I 40d and field goal kicked one that fled from us on foot today.”

At 3:11 p.m., United States Postal Inspector Garcia responded, “(laughing emoji)”.

At 3:12 p.m., APD Officer Rombough text, “Bro but my foot f—ing hurts.”

At 3:16 p.m., APD Officer Rombough sent the following GIF:

At 5:13 p.m., United States Postal Inspector Garcia asked, “Did you find any guns on any of them?”

At 5:21 p.m., APD Officer Rombough replied, “Sorry we were taking down a second ‘murder suspect and he got 40d too.”

At 5:58 p.m., United States Postal Inspector Garcia texted, “(laughing emoji)….That 40 flag is coming along!! Murica!!”

Questions for DA’s Office

Questions were sent to DA’s Office PIO Ted Asregadoo Saturday afternoon asking to whom the report was sent, why it was prepared separately from the 21-page report, why it wasn’t sent to the media and was it intended to be shared with the media. He was also asked how the East Bay Times obtained it earlier this week, was it leaked by someone in the DA’s Office and if so, who. Finally, Asregadoo was asked if there is an investigation in the DA’s Office to determine who leaked the 21-page report and this other, 14-page report.

4/17/23 UPDATE: Asregadoo responded Monday morning, “Our inspectors have investigated the matter and determined someone outside of our organization disclosed the reports to the public and press.”

He was then asked again, to whom were the redacted reports sent from the DA’s Office and who in the DA’s Office sent them out. Asregadoo later sent out a press release about the matter with a further redacted copy of the 14-page report.

 

 

Contra Costa Supervisors select long time Deputy Attorney, current Chief Assistant as new County Counsel

By Leave a Comment

Thomas L. Geiger was selected the new Contra Costa County Counsel. Source: CCC Office of Communications & Media

County Counsel is the legal advisor for the County, including the Board of Supervisors and County officers, departments, boards and commissions, and certain special districts. Mr. Geiger has been an attorney in the County Counsel’s Office since 2001 and has served as Chief Assistant County Counsel since August 2022. He has significant legal experience in the areas of land use, code enforcement, real estate, public works, elections, emergency medical services, and Delta and water issues. Among his many accomplishments, he advised the Board of Supervisors, County Health Officer, and other County departments on legal issues arising from the COVID-19 pandemic response.

“It’s a privilege to serve Contra Costa County in this role and to lead such an incredible team in the County Counsel’s Office,” Geiger said. “I am deeply honored to be selected as County Counsel and for the opportunity to help the Board of Supervisors carry out its vision of delivering quality public services that make a difference in the lives of people throughout our County.”

Geiger succeeds Mary Ann Mason, who retired as County Counsel in November 2022. As County Counsel, he will lead a legal team of 55 attorneys and staff who advise the County on civil legal matters and defend the County in litigation filed against it.

“Tom has a long history of public service in Contra Costa and has skillfully guided our County through complicated legal issues involving disaster response, land use and other significant community matters,” said Board Chair John Gioia, who represents District I. “We are grateful for his strong leadership, commitment to equity and transparency, and his ability to implement the Board’s priorities on the public’s behalf.”

Mr. Geiger holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in history from Stanford University and a Juris Doctorate from the University of California, Davis, School of Law.

Glazer, coalition oppose legal challenge to his bill limiting special interest contributions to candidates

By Leave a Comment

State Senator Steve Glazer speaks on the legal challenge to SB1349 during a virtual media briefing on Monday, March 6, 2023. Video screenshot

Joined by Common Cause, Consumer Watchdog for media briefing on “what’s at stake if big money wins lawsuit to terminate anti-corruption law”

On Monday, March 6, 2023, a coalition of policy experts, including representatives from Common Cause and Consumer Watchdog, joined State Senator Steve Glazer (SD7, D-Contra Costa) held a briefing on the special interest lawsuit to terminate SB 1439, what they refer to as “a common sense anti-corruption law that would help end the cycle of scandals caused by special interests’ massive campaign contributions to the local officials they have business before.”

Authored by Contra Costa State Senator Steve Glazer and signed into last year, SB1439 prohibits a local elected official from voting on a matter if they have received a contribution from the party to the matter or their agent of more than $250 during the 12 months prior to the date a final decision is made on the matter. It also prohibits local officials from receiving a contribution of more than $250 in the 12 months after the proceeding from party to the matter or the party’s agent. But the bill also allows an official to return a contribution to avoid violating the new law and still vote on the matter.

According to Common Cause which proposed the bill, California law prohibited anyone seeking a contract, permit, or license from the government from making a campaign contribution of more than $250 to the officials responsible for decisions about that contract, permit, or license. The limitation applied while the contract, permit, or license was pending and for three months after. But local elected officials were exempted from the law. The bill extended the prohibitions from three to 12 months and included local elected officials.

The panel of policy and democracy experts warned the public of the high-stakes consequences of the special interest lawsuit, by eight trade associations and two Sacramento area local elected officials, to terminate SB 1439 at a virtual press conference. The legislation, signed into law last year, is a common-sense, anti-corruption law that would help end the cycle of scandals caused by special interests’ massive campaign contributions to local officials they have business before.

The panel discussed the urgent need to uphold the lawful, long-overdue legislation that holds local leaders accountable to the people they serve, not to special interests. Local stakeholders illustrated how special interests meddling in local politics hinders democracy and harms our communities.

“We have become numb to the legal corruption that has enveloped our democracy. Pay-to-play is antithetical to an honest and ethical government, and it should be rooted out and killed like a cancer that has affected the body politic,” said Glazer.

Regarding the importance of expanding our anti-corruption laws: 

“California’s local governments have been plagued by scandals in which special interest entities pump campaign cash to the local government officials who determine their fate on licenses, permits, and contracts. The examples are endless – SB 1439 is a common sense, narrowly tailored solution to an acute and documented problem to protect our communities,” said Jonathan Mehta Stein, Executive Director of California Common Cause. “It has been tried in other states and in a long list of California cities, and it has never been knocked down because of legal challenges. We trust SB 1439 will succeed in the courts.” 

Regarding how SB 1439 expands the Political Reform Act: 

“SB 1439 is one of the most significant pieces of legislation in the last 10 years. It gets right to the heart of the corruption problem – people think that elected officials are acting in the best interest of their contributors, not in the public interest. This law expands the purposes of the Political Reform Act and is a major effort to correct this problem and public perception, thus the law should be upheld by the courts,” said Bob Stern, policy expert and principal co-author of the Political Reform Act of 1974.

Regarding how big money in our local politics hurts our communities: 

“Supporting SB 1439 as a bill was an easy choice for us – we see and feel regularly the impact of corporate money in the Inland Empire. Increasingly, it’s felt that regardless of how loudly residents and voters push back against certain kinds of local projects, developer money will always drown out our voice,” said Sky Allen, Executive Director of Inland Empire United. “Over the past 20 years, the Inland Empire has become the largest logistics hub in the world – so instead of green space and local businesses, we’re surrounded by massive warehouses and, as a result, we breathe some of the worst air and are offered fewer quality jobs. Laws like AB 1439 give us hope that moving forward, the scales will be more balanced.” 

Regarding how big money in our local politics hurts consumers: 

“Local politicians have tremendous influence and direct impact on the policies that impact consumers the most, like zoning laws, environmental regulations, and business licensing. When corporations and wealthy individuals use their financial resources to influence local elections and create favor with local elected officials, they successfully steer public policy in ways that are sympathetic to their own interests at the expense of consumers as a whole,” said Ben Powell, Staff Attorney for Consumer Watchdog. “Laws like SB 1439 address this by ensuring that local politicians are working in favor of the public interest, not bids for re-election or trading favors with wealthy donors.”

“It’s imperative that we ensure local elections stay equitable for everyone. When big money comes into play, socioeconomic barriers are strengthened and the community is ultimately the one who loses,” said Emmanuel Estrada, Mayor of Baldwin Park. “In Baldwin Park, we enacted a local ordinance barring city contractors from directly donating to candidates and adding stricter contribution limits. When we sent it to the voters to reinforce the ordinance, over 80 percent were in favor, illustrating the massive desire to remove the influence of big money from our local politics.”

California Fair Political Practices Commission Chair, Richard C. Miadich, who was unable to attend the briefing said, “We’re disappointed to learn a lawsuit has been filed regarding SB 1439 after the Commission voted unanimously to support it and months after it unanimously passed the legislature and was signed by the Governor.”

“It also comes months after we’ve begun issuing guidance, gathering public input and crafting regulations to implement the law. We’ll continue doing just that and will continue to enforce the law unless and until a court ruling says otherwise,” he added.

To watch the full briefing, click here. 

Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.

 

 

Contra Costa seeks volunteers for oversight of Martinez refinery release investigation

By Leave a Comment

Source: Martinez Refining Company

Contra Costa County seeks community volunteers for a committee to oversee an independent investigation and risk assessment of the Nov. 24-25 release of heavy metals into the surrounding community by Martinez Refining Company (MRC). (See related article)

The oversight committee will advise the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors and Contra Costa Health’s (CCH) Hazardous Materials Program on the hiring of contractors to probe the cause of the release, and separately the impact that it had on community health and the environment. The committee will review and direct the work as it proceeds and is ultimately reported to the Board and the public.

The Ad Hoc Committee for the Industrial Safety Ordinance and Community Warning System, a subcommittee of the Board of Supervisors, directed CCH at its Jan. 12 meeting to lead the community-involved investigation and risk assessment, parallel to the investigation MRC is legally required to conduct.

The nine-member oversight committee will be chaired by a Hazardous Materials Program staff member and include representatives from the City of Martinez, MRC, the labor organizations representing MRC workers, and five at-large members from Martinez, Pacheco, or other communities near the refinery.

From about 9:30 p.m. Nov. 24, 2022, to the early hours of Nov. 25, MRC inadvertently showered surrounding neighborhoods with more than 20 tons of spent catalyst, a dust-like substance that CCH later determined to contain elevated levels of aluminum, barium, chromium, nickel, vanadium and zinc.

MRC did not report the release via the county Community Warning System or directly to CCH as required by the county’s notification policy, preventing an immediate regulatory response or prompt safety messaging to affected neighbors. CCH has referred that matter to the Contra Costa District Attorney’s Office for consideration of legal action.

To apply for an at-large seat on the committee, fill out the online form at cchealth.org/hazmat or send an email to hazmat.arpteam@cchealth.org including your name, address, and a brief statement about why you wish to participate, or phone 925-655-3200 for assistance.

Community members who are 18 or older and who live near Martinez, Pacheco, and surrounding unincorporated areas will be considered. Committee members will be selected by Supervisor Federal Glover’s office. The deadline to apply is Friday, Jan. 27.

 

Seeno’s attorneys request new trial following Save Mount Diablo legal victory against Faria project in Pittsburg hills

By 2 Comments

The Pittsburg hills where the Faria project has been approved for construction, as seen from the San Marco neighborhood in Pittsburg. Photo: Scott Hein

607-acre, 1,650-home development next to planned Thurgood Marshall Regional Park

SMD leader says motion for new trial “should be denied”

By Allen D. Payton

Last Friday, Feb. 25, 2022, attorneys representing Discovery Builders and their Faria new home development requested a new trial for the lawsuit by Save Mount Diablo, following a judge’s decision in favor of the environmental group to stop the project. As previously reported, on March 30, 2021, Save Mount Diablo filed a lawsuit challenging the City of Pittsburg’s approval of the 1,650-unit Faria project, on the ridgeline between Pittsburg and Concord. According to the agenda item documents, the master plan overlay district encompasses approximately 607 acres of land. (See related article)

The motion for a new trial was filed “on the basis that the Court’s decision is not supported by the evidence and controlling legal authorities. Specifically…that there were several portions of this Court’s February 10, 2022, Statement of Decision that may not have fully considered evidence in the administrative record.” In addition, the motion asks that the “Court vacate its Statement of Decision and enter a new decision denying SMD’s motion” and “conduct a new hearing”. Faria project Motion for New Trial Parsons Dec. ISO Mot for New Trial      Raskin Dec. ISO Mot for New Trial    Faria project new trial Proof of Service

A hearing date on the motion for a new trial has been set for April 14, 2022.

The now named Thurgood Marshall Regional Park is directly adjacent to the Pittsburg City Council approved Faria project. Herald file graphic. Credit: Save Mount Diablo/Google Earth.

On the day of the decision, Save Mount Diablo issued the following press release about their legal victory:

“On February 10, 2022, the Contra Costa County Superior Court handed Save Mount Diablo a major victory in its legal challenge to the City of Pittsburg’s approval of the 1,650-unit Faria/Southwest Hills Project.

According to the ruling, the city’s environmental review was inadequate in numerous ways. Faria was proposed by Seeno companies/Discovery Builders, Inc./Faria Investors LLC on the spectacular and highly visible major ridgeline between Pittsburg and Concord and could include grading and houses visible across the ridge.

As a result, the City of Pittsburg is required to overturn approvals for the project and correct environmental review. The city and Seeno/Discovery Builders will also be required to pay Save Mount Diablo’s legal fees.

It remains to be seen whether the developers, Discovery Builders, Inc. and Faria Land Investors, LLC, or the City of Pittsburg will appeal the decision.

The Pittsburg City Council—then-Mayor Merl Craft; then–Vice Mayor Holland Barrett White; and Councilmembers Shanelle Scales-Preston, Juan Antonio Banales, and Jelani Killings—all voted to approve the proposal in February 2021. (The mayor and vice-mayor designations rotate among the councilmembers.) They ignored hundreds of letters and public comments that opposed the project. Save Mount Diablo filed a lawsuit challenging the project’s approval in March 2021.

If the project had moved forward, it would have meant the development of a major, new residential subdivision on 606 acres of ridgeline and hillside grazing land in what is currently unincorporated Contra Costa County, immediately south of the City of Pittsburg.

The biologically rich site supports sensitive wildlife species and rare plants and is in one of the most visible and most environmentally constrained areas of the county. The Faria project would have fragmented open space and damaged wildlife corridors.

The proposed housing development would have changed the beautiful green hills forever by annexing the property to the City of Pittsburg and locating 1,650 new residences far from jobs, transit, and services.

The Faria project would have also impacted the new East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD) Thurgood Marshall Regional Park – Home of the Port Chicago 50 at the Faria site’s southwestern edge, formerly part of the Concord Naval Weapons Station. Save Mount Diablo and its partners advocated for the creation of this new park over many years. The Faria project would have been located directly above the new park on a ridgeline, degrading views from surrounding areas.

The Contra Costa Superior Court ruled that the City of Pittsburg’s environmental review of the project was inadequate in four major ways:

  1. It failed to analyze any impacts that would results from the 150 accessory dwelling units that were added by the City of Pittsburg at the last minute. This is important because the number of units affects every part of environmental review from traffic to water supply to schools, etc. and will make correcting the environmental review complicated;
  2. It failed to include a baseline description of biological resources that could be impacted by the project, specifically special-status plant species;
  3. It failed to consider the water supply impacts of adding 1,650 new housing units in the area, which is especially important given years of drought and increasing fire danger; and
  4. It failed to adequately disclose or mitigate the project’s air quality impacts, including greenhouse gas impacts, without which development will continue to make the climate crisis much worse.

“The court’s decision says to developers: ‘You don’t get to kick the can down the road. You have to do a thorough analysis of your project’s impacts before you lock in project approvals,’” said Winter King, Save Mount Diablo’s attorney from Shute, Mihaly & Weinberger. “The court got it right.”

The court’s ruling means that the City of Pittsburg’s approval of the project is null and void.

The court also noted that additional impacts—such as geologic hazard impacts resulting from grading and filling, and impacts on streams and agricultural lands—would need to be addressed in more detail.

Save Mount Diablo Executive Director Ted Clement said, “Throughout the East Bay, residents have worked hard to protect our ridges and views, flora and fauna, and to defend our parks. In this case that was just decided in our favor, Save Mount Diablo had to stand up against some very powerful interests to help further the work of protecting these treasured resources, which add so much to our collective quality of life.”

“Although I’ve worked for Save Mount Diablo on this issue, I’m also a Concord resident,” said Juan Pablo Galván Martínez, Save Mount Diablo’s Senior Land Use Manager. “This project infuriated me as an open-space lover, a wildlife enthusiast, and someone who is deeply worried and taking action to stop catastrophic climate change. Since this affects both cities, I want both city councils to work together to protect the hills and ridgeline.”

“This is a major victory for Pittsburg’s hills,” stated Save Mount Diablo Land Conservation Director Seth Adams. “Open space, habitat for wildlife, and the community’s scenic views have won the day, and poorly planned development will not go forward, for now. We are very happy with the court’s decision.”

“On the other hand,” said Adams, “while our victory is costly for the city and Seeno/Discovery Builders in time and money, it does not stop the project forever. After correcting environmental documents, the Pittsburg City Council can approve Seeno’s huge project again if they choose. But now they have a second chance to make it better by protecting the ridgeline and neighboring regional park. We don’t have to argue about protecting ridgelines in other cities. The Pittsburg City Council should do the right thing.”

Save Mount Diablo Says Motion for New Trial “Should Be Denied”

Asked about the motion for a new trial, Save Mount Diablo Executive Director, Ted Clement responded, “Regarding the Seeno companies/Pittsburg request for a new trial, the Court has already rejected their arguments for reasons fully set forth in its decision. Their Motion for New Trial does not question the adequacy of the administrative record on which the Court properly based its decision (and which the City itself prepared) or suggest there was any other irregularity or unfairness in the hearing. Instead, they seek a second bite of the apple.”

“Their Motion reargues issues that were fully briefed and addressed in the Court’s Decision,” he continued. “They also seek to introduce irrelevant and improper extra-record evidence, violating black letter law that CEQA actions must be decided on the record that was before the agency when it made its decision.”

“Because their Motion provides no basis for this Court to order a new trial solely on the issues decided adverse to them, it should be denied,” Clement concluded.

Ninth Circuit agrees to rehear lawsuit ruling Newsom unconstitutionally closed private schools during pandemic

By 1 Comment

Vacates court’s three judge panel ruling, will hear en banc

San Francisco — The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, at the request of Governor Gavin Newsom, agreed, on Wednesday, to vacate the court’s three judge panel ruling, earlier this year, in favor of the parents represented by the Center for American Liberty’s lawsuit Brach v. Newsom (#OpenCASchools), that Newsom’s COVID order barring private schools from in-person teaching, violated parents’ Due Process rights, and have the entire case reheard by the full Ninth Circuit Panel.

Click here to view and download the court’s order.

Click here to view and download the Ninth’s Circuit’s prior ruling

In the prior ruling for parents, the three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit reasoned: “…the Supreme Court has long held that ‘the right of parents to make decisions concerning the care, custody, and control of their children is a fundamental liberty interested protected by the Due Process Clause,’ and that right includes ‘the right of parents to be free from state interference with their choice of the educational forum itself.’”

“It’s sad to see Governor Newsom so vigorously continue his assault on children’s education,” said Harmeet K. Dhillon, CEO of the Center for American Liberty. “The prior opinion from the Ninth Circuit was a clear victory for parents and students when the court correctly ruled that under the Constitution, parents – and not Gavin Newsom or faceless bureaucrats — have the right to decide how best to educate their children. I’m confident that the en banc panel will reaffirm that Governor Newsom’s anti-parent power grab was unconstitutional.”

“Although we believe that the original panel correctly held that Governor Newsom violated the Constitution when he closed private schools across the state, we look forward to making our case again to the en banc panel,” said Partner at Eimer Stahl LLP, Robert Dunn. “The school closure orders the Governor kept in place for nearly a year had a devastating impact on students throughout the state and plainly interfered with parents’ ability to control the education of their children. We are confident that the en banc panel will vindicate our clients’ fundamental rights and prevent the Governor from reinstituting such an order.”

 

Superior Court upholds City of Lafayette’s approval of 315-unit Terraces apartment project

By 1 Comment

The planned Terraces of Lafayette apartment project that will overlook Highway 24. Source: O’Brien Land Company

By Suzanne Iarla, Communications Analyst, City of Lafayette

Terraces of Lafayette rendering. Source: O’Brien Land Company

On Friday, November 12, 2021, the Contra Costa Superior Court upheld the City of Lafayette’s approval of the Terraces of Lafayette project of the O’Brien Land Company. The project would build 315 apartments, including 63 affordable housing units, on a 22-acre parcel at the southwest corner of Deer Hill Road and Pleasant Hill Road. In its ruling, the Court rejected claims by Save Lafayette, a citizens group, and found that the City’s environmental review complied with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and that the Terraces project was consistent with the City’s General Plan.

The Terraces project has been in process for over ten years — the developer’s application dates back to March 2011.  Since then, the City has worked to address community and regional concerns, including by considering a proposed alternative 44 single-family home project with a community park. The City approved the alternative project in 2015. Save Lafayette initiated the referendum process to overturn that approval in 2018.

After the alternative project was rejected by the voters, the City resumed processing the original Terraces project application. In compliance with the strict requirements of State law, including the Housing Accountability Act, the City approved the Terraces project in August 2020.

Save Lafayette sued in September 2020 to overturn the approval, in an effort to stop the Terraces project on environmental and General Plan consistency issues.  After over a year of litigation, the Superior Court rejected Save Lafayette’s claims and affirmed that the City’s CEQA review and approval of the Project complied with the law. The Court’s ruling will become final unless Save Lafayette appeals within 60 days following the notice of entry of judgment.

Terraces of Lafayette Site Plan updated 2-11-20. Source: O’Brien Land Company.

Developer Calls Court Decision “Major Victory”

The developer issued their own press release announcing last Friday court’s decision:

In a major victory for housing rights, the Contra Costa Superior Court on Friday, Nov. 12 issued a ruling rejecting in full Save Lafayette’s lawsuit challenging the Terraces of Lafayette, a 315-unit apartment community by O’Brien Land Company.  After nearly 10 years of processing and 120 public hearings, the Lafayette City Council approved the project by a 4-1 vote in August 2020.

“We have had many local people reach out to us to ask when they can rent an apartment at the Terraces,” said Dennis O’Brien of O’Brien Land Company. “The need for this type of housing is apparent, and we look forward to no further delays so we can provide homes for those individuals and families.”

Terraces of Lafayette vicinity map. Source: O’Brien Land Company.

The project site is adjacent to Highway 24 and located one mile from the Lafayette BART station.  The Terraces is considered an affordable housing project under state housing law and will set aside 20%, or 63, of its dwelling units for lower income households.  This will substantially assist Lafayette in meeting its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for the lower income categories assigned to it by long-standing state law.

Despite the project’s robust legal protections under controlling state law, Save Lafayette has been opposing the project for years. The anti-development group also opposed a 44 single-family home compromise project by filing litigation and a ballot referendum that overturned the smaller project.  Once the voters rejected the smaller project, O’Brien and the City of Lafayette resumed processing the apartments.

Terraces of Lafayette clubhouse and pool area rendering.  Source: O’Brien Land Company.

Although the affordable housing development included a full Environmental Impact Report, Save Lafayette’s lawsuit claimed the City’s approval of the project violated the California Environmental Quality Act, a law frequently employed by anti-development groups to challenge new housing.  The lawsuit also claimed the project was not entitled to the protection of the Housing Accountability Act, which shields housing developments from changes in local land use laws after an application is deemed complete.  The Superior Court rejected Save Lafayette’s arguments and agreed that the City complied with the law.

“When people ask why we have a housing crisis in California, they should look no further than this project for answers,” Bay Area Council Senior Vice President Matt Regan emphasized. “Over 10 years of foot dragging, goalpost moving, ballot measures and lawsuits, finally the construction of these much- needed homes can now begin.  This saga highlights the need for more reforms to state law so that good housing projects no longer have to run this sort of gauntlet and can be approved swiftly and fairly.”

For more information on the project, visit www.lovelafayette.org/Terraces.

Allen Payton contributed to this report.

Contra Costa Coroner’s inquest jury determines 2019 in-custody death of Clayton man was an accident

By Leave a Comment

By Jimmy Lee, Director of Public Affairs, Contra Costa County Office of the Sheriff

Sheriff-Coroner David O. Livingston announces that a Coroner’s Jury has reached a finding in the August 18, 2019 death of 35-year-old Benito Stefano Carrasco of Clayton. The finding of the jury is that the death is an accident. (See related article)

Carrasco was arrested by the Clayton Police Department and booked into the Martinez Detention Facility (MDF) on August 15, 2019. He was being held on charges that include burglary, grand theft, possession of stolen goods, possession of burglary tools, shoplifting, and possession of drug paraphernalia. He was being held in lieu of $40,000 bail.

On Sunday, August 18, 2019, at about 11:20 PM, a Deputy Sheriff escorted a nurse to Carrasco’s cell. They discovered him unresponsive on his bed.

Medical aid was immediately rendered. Additional medical staff at the jail responded and continued life saving measures until the fire department arrived. Carrasco was later pronounced deceased at the scene and the in-custody death protocol was invoked.

The Coroner’s Jury reached the 10-0 verdict after hearing the testimony of witnesses called by the hearing officer, Matthew Guichard.

A Coroner’s Inquest, which Sheriff-Coroner Livingston convenes in all fatal incidents involving peace officers, is a public hearing during which a jury rules on the manner of a person’s death. Jury members can choose from the following four options when making their finding: Accident, Suicide, Natural Causes or At the hands of another person, other than by accident.