Opinion | Contra Costa Herald

The Herald recommends Martinek for Congress in District 9

February 19, 2020 By Publisher 4 Comments

William Martinek

There are two candidates challenging six-term incumbent Congressman Jerry McNerney, retired U.S. Marshal and L.A. police officer Antonio “Tony” Amador who is running for his third time and newcomer, financial advisor and decorated combat Army veteran William Martinek. I’ve compared the two to decide who to support and vote for. Both are good men and have already served our nation. Both want to serve our country, again as a member of Congress. Both offer a serious contrast to McNerney.

Martinek is from Brentwood and jumped into the race early, showing a sincere interest in serving the people of our district. Amador, from Lodi in the San Joaquin County part of the district, only entered the race after he met Martinek and thinks he would be the better Republican candidate. They have similar views on the issues: national security and defense, transportation, jobs and economic development, and working to solve the problems of illegal immigration and homelessness. So, the main differences are age and life experience, but also commitment to run a serious campaign.

Amador is in his 70’s, married, a father, grandfather and great grandfather, and has a long history of public service, which is great, and I applaud him for that. Martinek is a much younger, married father who served tours in Iraq and Afghanistan defending our national interests, which I also applaud. He wants to take his energy to Washington, D.C. to work for us.

They both believe they can do better for our district than McNerney who is now in his 12th year in the House of Representatives.

But, the final, major difference I had to look at is which of the two Republicans will run a more serious campaign to replace the incumbent. In his first run for Congress, in 2014, Amador only raised and spent about $60,000, yet came within 5 percent of McNerney. Had he run a more aggressive campaign and raised more money to get his message out to the voters, Amador might have won. But, then in 2016, again waiting until the last minute, while the San Joaquin County Republican Party Chairman, he jumped in the race against Kathryn Nance, who had been campaigning for several months. Amador came in second in the primary, beating Nance by 2.6% of the vote, and making it into the general election. But, this time – during the presidential election year – he lost to McNerney by almost 15%.

If the Republicans hope to take the most winnable Congressional district in the entire nine-county Bay Area, plus San Joaquin County, it’s going to take a candidate who will be aggressive and raise the necessary funds, like Ricky Gill did in 2012, who raised and spent almost $3 million. But the candidate needs more life experience than Gill had, having just graduated from law school.

Martinek is that candidate. He’s serious about serving our nation and has already done so in the Army, and he wants to make things better for his family and ours, in both Contra Costa and San Joaquin Counties. And he’s willing to do put in the hard work to campaign aggressively and raise the needed funds to get his message to the voters so they can become familiar with him by the November election.

Please join me in voting for Republican William Martinek for Congress in the 9th Congressional District. For more information read the Herald article, here and visit www.williammartinekforcongress.com.

Allen Payton, Publisher & Editor

East Bay Leadership Council offers five reasons to vote yes on Measure J

February 12, 2020 By Publisher Leave a Comment

The East Bay Leadership Council is proud to endorse Measure J in Contra Costa County and wanted to share a few reasons why we believe it deserves a YES vote on March 3.

1. All the Money Raised Here Stays Here

That may sound simple, but recent transportation funding initiatives have pooled revenue among all nine Bay Area counties and then divvied it up based on a number of factors. In these situations, the East Bay has not always received an equitable share.

Measure J is a chance to raise $103 million per year for Contra Costa County that is guaranteed to go back into our community to ease bottlenecks, improve transit access, and make roads safer for cyclists and pedestrians.

2. Funding for Bus, Bike, and Pedestrian Improvements

If Contra Costa County is ever going to get off the “worst commutes in the nation” lists, then we must make it easier and more efficient for commuters to opt for alternative transportation options like express buses, protected bike lanes, and pedestrian over-crossings.

These investments will ease congestion on our roads and improve air quality. It is one of the reasons why the East Bay Regional Park District, Save the Bay, Bike East Bay, TransForm, and Save Mount Diablo all joined us in support of Measure J.

Did we mention free and reduced fares for students, seniors, and people with disabilities? That too!

3. Innovate 680

If you were a fly on our office wall, you would hear a lot about innovation opportunities on Interstate 680.

Measure J will prioritize this critical commute corridor by helping to get express buses running on the shoulder of the freeway that could connect BART stations to job centers in the Tri-Valley. Other 680 innovations include smart freeway signs and metering lights, express lane extensions, and self-driving shuttles.

There is so much we can do to make commutes on 680 more efficient and Measure J will help us get there.

4. The Economy

We cannot expect businesses to attract and retain employees while Contra Costa County makes headlines for long and inefficient commutes.

Investing in the transportation system is an investment in helping businesses start, stay, and grow in the region. That means more jobs close to home for Contra Costa residents.

5. Matching Funds Get Projects Done

Money raised at the local level will not be enough to pay for every transportation improvement that Contra Costa County needs. The good news is that there are state and federal funds available to help complete important projects.

The secret to winning that funding is that the state and federal government both prefer to contribute the last dollars for a project, not the first.

By raising funds locally first, Contra Costa County will be able to win more grant funding and make more efficient use of every dollar for decades to come.

To learn more about Measure J and its benefits visit www.friendsofcontracostatransportation.org. To learn more about the East Bay Leadership Council visit www.eastbayleadershipcouncil.com.

Contra Costa Taxpayers Association: vote no on Measure J transportation sales tax increase

February 8, 2020 By Publisher Leave a Comment

Dear Editor:

The chief selling point to Measure J on the March 3 ballot is to “reduce congestion”, a laughably empty promise. The 75 words on the ballot create a smokescreen for a 1/2% sales tax increase.

Measure J allots $148 million to BART, who has their own mega-budget and a long history of wastefulness. Only Contra Costa would shoulder the additional tax to be handed over to BART with no assurance that Contra Costa would benefit.

This measure contains hiring restrictions that will drive up costs of taxpayer-funded projects. It requires that all apprenticeship labor must come from certain politically favored sources, rather than the largest qualified pool of applicants. Construction labor short supply due to recent wildfire rebuilding efforts. As a result, projects everywhere are currently facing massive cost overruns. This is the wrong time to impose even further hiring restrictions.

Residents may see signs on the highway referencing Measure J for current projects. This refers to a Measure J generously passed by voters in 2004. The suspicious letter designation is confusing, but clearly this is not the same. This is an additional increase for 35 years.

We encourage a no vote on Measure J.

Susan L Pricco

President, Contra Costa Taxpayers Association

Writer shares reasons to re-elect Diane Burgis supervisor

February 3, 2020 By Publisher Leave a Comment

OP/ED: PG&E blackout is blackmail

October 12, 2019 By Publisher Leave a Comment

By Greg Palast

OCTOBER 11, 2019

The PG&E Blackout Con is all about threatening the judge in the PG&E bankruptcy case. The victims have joined with the bondholders to eliminate the equity of the stockholders who deserve nothing. So in desperation, the power company pigs are turning off your lights. Hopefully, the judge will not be intimidated.

Leaving hospitals, schools and 1 million homes without power — and that means without water — in California is the endgame of deregulation mania.

Jerry Brown, Bill Clinton and other deregulation snake-oil salesmen, and the PG&E greedster bosses, should be imprisoned for the people already burned to death.

Where is the California utility commission?

I’ve written a book published by the United Nations called, Democracy and Regulation, about how to avoid such piggery. When I wrote the book, it was meant only for Third World nations — apparently, Northern California is the third world of electricity.

Public utilities must be publicly owned. Decades back, I investigated power company racketeering for the Justice Department.

As an expert, I can tell you, PG&E is a criminal enterprise parading as a power company. Shut them down — not us.

Palast, a Puffin Foundation fellow in investigative reporting, is the author of the New York Times bestseller, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy, now a feature documentary. www.GregPalast.com

Payton Perspective: If Brentwood voters don’t approve Measure L Antioch should annex the land and approve the homes

October 8, 2019 By Publisher 16 Comments

Area map showing the land for the planned development highlighted in gold that the passage of Measure L would annex to Brentwood. From the planning documents for the proposed Vineyards at Deer Creek development.

In November, Brentwood voters will have the opportunity to do what Antioch voters did in 2005 and that was to approve a new housing development and undo what the five members of the Board of Supervisors did to a few landowners and the plans by Antioch and Brentwood. On the ballot is Measure L, which will annex about 800 acres and approve 2,400 new, upscale homes, 80% of which will be for seniors.

The land in the Measure L plan has been inside both the City of Antioch’s and City of Brentwood’s planning areas for decades. However, it’s not been in either city’s sphere of influence or city limits. It was also inside the voter-approved Urban Limit Line, until the County Supervisors played political games and moved it out, in 2003. That included the land that was planned for the Roddy Ranch housing development surrounding the former Roddy Ranch golf course, as well as all the land north of the ridge line that runs on the south side of the former golf course and continues into Brentwood behind Heritage High School and Adams Middle School. So, it makes sense the land is moved back inside the Urban Limit Line and the homes built.

1998 was my final of four years serving on the Antioch City Council, the Contra Costa Transportation Authority, and the State Route 4 Bypass Authority. That year, while serving as chairman of the Bypass Authority, we bought the right-of-way for the extension to Highway 4 from Lone Tree Way to Balfour Road for four lanes of traffic and two lines of transit, down the center.

The plans and funding for the Highway 4 widening and bypass/extension, as well as the major roadways in Antioch, included those homes. In fact, a total of 12,000 homes were included in the planning for the regional roads in East County. Now, the plans in Antioch include only 4,000 homes, and the 700 homes at Roddy will never be built because that land was sold to the East Bay Regional Park District and is permanent open space.

The homes in Measure L will not create urban sprawl as some opponents are claiming. I laugh when I hear that about growth in Contra Costa County. I grew up in Southern California and was a chauffeur while attending college in Riverside, driving clients into Orange County and Los Angeles where I saw the results of urban sprawl. But, in our county, the Urban Limit Line protects about 65% of the land in the county from subdivision development. This land is inside the 35% of the land that the voters said could be built on. That’s why the land was purchased by developers years ago – before the Supervisors arbitrarily moved the line in.

It’s time either Brentwood or Antioch voters corrected their action.

If Brentwood doesn’t want them, those are the kind of homes Antioch wants and needs for our housing mix, especially now that Roddy Ranch is permanent open space and the homes planned for the western Sand Creek area might never be built.

OPINION: Contra Costa College president, interim VP’s being placed on administrative leave in May called “racist public lynching” by staff

August 17, 2019 By Publisher 1 Comment

Dr. Katrina-VanderWoude in her new Contra Costa College office in August, 2018. Photo by Denis Perez The Advocate

By the African American Staff Association (AASA) of Contra Costa College

District Chancellor Fred E. Wood has spearheaded a brazen “racist public lynching” of Dr. Katrina VanderWoude. On May 28, 2019, Chancellor Wood placed Dr. VanderWoude, president of Contra Costa College (CCC), and two interim vice presidents, Susan Kincade and Carsbia Anderson, on administrative leave pending investigations concerning a suspicious complaint.

Chancellor Wood and his Contra Costa Community College District (4CD) office advisors violated district and state policies in pursuit of their campaign to remove the last two Black upper level managers at CCC. The chancellor has sought to make a public example of President VanderWoude for not going along with the continued racial gentrification of the college, which began a new phase in 2017. He assumed that VanderWoude, who is African American, would simply be window dressing to placate the AASA, which had raised concerns about the complete omission of new Black hires, among other issues.

Contra Costa College interim Vice President of Academic Affairs Susan Kincade and interim Vice President of Student Services Carsbia Anderson.

Here is a timeline of events:

During the 2017-2018 academic year, the AASA began documenting and reporting on the systematic actions to reduce Black faculty and shrink the class offerings in their departments, particularly the social sciences and ethnic studies departments. AASA also raised issues about the new alarming direction of racial gentrification, with the CCC administration hiring 28 people, none of whom were Black.

On Jan. 30, 2018, the AASA and Black community leaders met with then President Mojdeh Medizadeh to address “Six Areas of Concerns” facing Black people at CCC. Instead of addressing these issues, Chancellor Wood removed Mehdizadeh in the middle of the semester and appointed an interim president. Wood’s reckless decision spun the campus into turmoil, while the nationwide search for a new president was underway.

On April 11, 2018, the AASA presented the six concerns directly to Chancellor Wood and identified managers who openly talked about introducing a “culture change” at CCC and were responsible for new gentrification policies, specifically detrimental to Black employees and students. Wood made promises but did very little to address these concerns.

On May 31, 2018, Chancellor Wood said in a press release that new President “Dr. VanderWoude’s … dedication to diversity, inclusion and equity prepare her very well for this important leadership role.”

In Fall 2018, President VanderWoude began her tenure with bringing back shared governance, instituting a more reasonable student-focused enrollment management plan, addressing the low campus morale issue and promoting racial equity in hiring. CCC was moving in the right direction.

In October-November 2018, the racist public flogging of Dr. VanderWoude began when it was learned that four of the five finalists for the vice president of student services (VPSS) position were African American. The credibility of two of the candidates was attacked by campus employees who used Google searches to find unvetted internet materials, dating back to 1997, to condemn these Black men without a trial.

These employees criticized VanderWoude for the hiring controversy, although she was barely two months on the job and was following district hiring procedures. Meanwhile, Wood remained silent and never explained that the district Human Resources Department (HR), headed by Diogenes Shipp, approved this entire hiring process. The misplacement of blame gave this small employee group an angle to criticize VanderWoude’s leadership of the college.

In March 2019, a trumped-up employee complaint was filed, charging VanderWoude with reverse racism, age discrimination and retaliation. There was no effort by Wood to address these allegations and resolve the concerns, as required by California Code of Regulations, Title 5.

On May 2, 2019, Chancellor Wood emailed an evaluation survey to various constituency groups as per the Management Manual (Section 6.2), and this two-week survey was to close on May 16th. However, there was a tiny group of VanderWoude’s opponents who complained about not being included in the survey, and therefore Wood obliged them.

On May 14, 2019, Chancellor Wood publicly joined the campaign to attack VanderWoude by emailing a second evaluation survey campus-wide to manufacture the written evidence to justify firing her. This was an open violation of 4CD HR Procedure 2030.13 and was a rogue action to allow the protest group to attack VanderWoude with the final written assault.

Wood’s deviation from the evaluation procedures is inherently biased and unjustified. The two overlapping active surveys is a completely unique process and has not been done for any other 4CD college president.

On May 28, 2019, Chancellor Wood executed the public political lynching of President VanderWoude by putting her and the two interim vice presidents on administrative leave without any prior effort to resolve the alleged issues in the March complaint. The interim vice president for student services removed by Wood is an African American man, and in Wood’s administration “diversity, inclusion and equity” evidently do not include top management positions for African Americans at CCC.

Wood’s goal is to fire VanderWoude, but there is now an unexpected public standoff with her supporters.

On July 17, 2019, amid the racial turmoil at CCC, Chancellor Wood made the sudden announcement that he will retire in March 2020. In reality, Wood is being pushed out because of, as he stated, “my belief that the district is ready for new leadership.”

A failed administrator

It is well documented that Chancellor Fred Wood is a failed administrator, who was a central member of the administrative team responsible for the infamous pepper spraying of students incident at UC Davis on Nov. 18, 2011, when he was the vice chancellor of student affairs. He then wrote an article, “Weary of Blame,” in the college newspaper California Aggie (Nov. 29, 2011) to deflect from his justly earned criticism for the shocking violation of these students. In May 2019, he has again earned well-deserved blame for the reckless removal of CCC administrators, with disastrous affects that are unmatched in the college’s history.

Finally, the public silence of Chancellor Wood in the midst of multiple incidences of racist hate graffiti at our sister campus, Diablo Valley College (DVC), in Spring 2019 gives some insight into how he and his district office cohorts view Black lives.

On March 6, 2019, in the men’s bathroom of the Engineering Technology Building, someone scrawled on the wall a racist threat of a noose with a hanging stick figure, along with the words, “No niggers working in trades.” When AASA President Manu Ampim called on Wood to be consistent and issue a district office statement to show a commitment to support Black students, as was done with other students, his response was simply, “If I say something I get criticized, and if I don’t say anything I get criticized.” This type of weak leadership is unacceptable and demonstrates Wood’s inability to lead a racially diverse college district.

Resolutions presented to the Contra Costa Community College District in July:

Reverse the premature administrative leave action on May 28, 2019, which has crippled the college, and restore President VanderWoude and the two interim vice presidents to their positions.
Immediately reassign to another campus the senior dean who has been in the center of conflict since she was hired in 2017 and began implementing a toxic “culture change” based on gentrification.

When reached for comment, Michele Jackson of the AASA said, “There’s no diversity at Contra Costa College in a very diverse community” and that “Wood and all of the district leadership need to go. They have no ties to the community.”

When reminded that Wood has announced he will retire next year, she responded, “We were instrumental in that.”

The African American Staff Association (AASA) of Contra Costa College, 2600 Mission Bell Drive, San Pablo, CA 94806, can be reached at AAStaffAssociation@gmail.com or 510-688-8806.

Allen Payton contributed to this report.

Please tell CCTA: East County needs freeway from Brentwood to Tracy for long term economic growth

August 5, 2019 By Publisher 2 Comments

The Contra Costa Transportation Authority is holding Telephone Town Hall Meetings to inform the public of the Initial Draft 2020 Transportation Expenditure Plan (TEP) and get their input before finalizing the plan and placing another tax measure on the March 2020 ballot to fund it. The meeting for East County will be held on Wednesday, Aug. 8 (see previous post on this website, below)

The plan (www.ccta.net/theplan) currently has a total price tag of $3.061 billion and the tax is in addition to the county’s current half-cent sales tax for transportation from Measure J, which voters approved in 2004 and expires in 2034. The new tax would last until 2050. The CCTA attempted to pass a similar additional half-cent sales tax in 2016, known as Measure X, but it failed. The only new section of roadway in the entire county in that plan was the $117 million “limited access” connector between Vasco Road and the Byron Highway, next to the Byron Airport. Voters overwhelmingly voted against the measure and it failed.

Fortunately, that project was included in the Regional Measure 3 expenditure plan which did pass. But, RM3 didn’t include the long-planned Route 239, the proposed four-lane freeway between Brentwood and Tracy, which will connect East County to Interstate 5, the economic lifeblood artery of the state.

That road has been on the books for over 60 years. But, planning for it only began in 2013 as part of what was known as the TriLink Project, as it crossed the three counties of Contra Costa, San Joaquin and a sliver of Alameda, and was to also include two lines of transit down the middle, connecting the end of the BART line in East County to Tracy.

However, the TriLink Project website is no longer active and neither the four-lane freeway nor the transit lines are included in Contra Costa County’s plans for the next 30 years.

Yet, it’s Route 239 that will ensure East County’s long-term economic viability, allowing current businesses, including agriculture, to get their products to market quicker. Plus, it will open up our area for greater local job creation, and complete what I refer to as the beltway around Mt. Diablo, eliminating the cul-de-sac effect with the three two-lane roads connecting us to the east and south.

Antioch and East County have the freight rail connecting us to the east and west, plus the river connecting us to the world, to move goods. But we only have Highway 4 and BART connecting us to the west for moving people and goods.

Central County folks oppose Route 239 saying it will “induce growth in East County.” But they’ve been saying that for almost 50 years about every new road improvement, including the Hwy 4 Bypass/extension, which we had to fight for over four years from 1994-98 to just get approvals, not any money. In fact, it was that same mindset that prevented Hwy 24 from being extended to East County back in the 1970’s and the result is a surface road with the three names of Ygnacio Valley Road, Kirker Pass and Railroad Avenue, today.

I grew up in Walnut Creek and moved to Antioch because it was more affordable. In fact out of all us who attended the 35th reunion of the Northgate High School Class of ’81 in 2016, only four classmates still lived in Walnut Creek. Where did many move to? East County. So, as I said to my fellow elected officials when I was on a panel during a transportation conference back in the late 1990’s when I was serving on the Antioch City Council and Contra Costa Transportation Authority, don’t blame us for the growth. They had kids and we needed somewhere to live that we could afford. That was when East County was pushing for funding and approvals for Highway 4 widening and the Highway 4 bypass/extension. We received it and those projects are now completed.

It’s time we completed the transportation infrastructure in East County and Route 239 is a key part of it.

Besides, that road won’t induce residential growth. We have the Urban Limit Line to control that. But it will induce economic growth with more local jobs, which is what East County needs.

We need both Route 239 and the transit link between Antioch and Tracy. But, for now, let’s push for funds for the freeway to be included in the county’s new plan. Estimates are it will cost an additional $1 billion. I say add it to the total and let the voters decide.

We need bold leadership from our local elected officials and the voice of “we the people” to make it happen.

OP/ED: State must keep financial assistance for low-income California dialysis patients

July 9, 2019 By Publisher Leave a Comment

Joel Levin

By Joel Levin

I am a local public schoolteacher working with special education students from elementary age through young adults, and I am a dialysis patient who has suffered kidney disease for decades.

I’ve dedicated my career to helping those less fortunate in need. That’s why I’m disappointed that insurance companies are behind legislation that would cut off the charitable financial assistance I need to pay for the dialysis that keeps me alive.

Legislators will soon be voting on Assembly Bill 290, which would eliminate financial assistance that the non-profit American Kidney Fund provides charitably to more than 3,700 qualifying California dialysis patients like me.

AB 290 requires AKF to disclose confidential patient information in violation of the federal regulations governing the program. Because of these unreasonable requirements, AB 290 would force AKF to stop helping California patients altogether.

The losers are patients like me who depend on the financial assistance AKF provides to pay for the dialysis that we need to stay alive. The winners are insurance companies whose profits would go up if it passes.

Even as a kidney patient who must undergo the rigorous dialysis treatment process to stay alive, I feel like one of the fortunate ones. Most people on dialysis can’t work because of the exhausting process of dialysis. Thankfully I can continue working as a teacher while still receiving this time-consuming treatment three times a week for three to four hours at a time, after my workday.

It is not easy, of course. And for dialysis patients who require between 9-12 hours a week of dialysis treatments, our health care coverage is expensive. Although I’m on Medicare, it only covers 80 percent of my health care costs and Medicare also requires monthly insurance premiums. I also have copays for doctor visits and copays for my numerous medications because of my kidney disease.

On top of that, I must get an additional insurance policy, with additional monthly premiums, to cover the 20 percent “gap” that isn’t paid for by Medicare.

As a public schoolteacher, I’m certainly not rich. I have a finite amount of funds. Without the AKF’s assistance program, I’m not sure how I’d be able to afford these payments.

Only a small number of Californians on dialysis, about 5 percent, use financial assistance from a third-party, non-profit charitable organization like the American Kidney Fund to help pay their health insurance premiums. AKF has made premium assistance available for more than 20 years.

I’m extremely thankful they’re in existence and grateful for the help they provide me. For me, the program offers peace of mind that I can pay my expenses and receive the healthcare that I need. I can’t even imagine what would happen to dialysis patients who can’t work. How will they survive?

At its core, AB 290 is about increasing insurance company profits.

Lawmakers who are aligning with insurance companies and supporting the measure are not seeing how it would impact the patients in the long run.

I urge legislators to reject this insurance company scheme and vote no on AB 290.

Joel Levin is a dialysis patient and resident of Danville.

Letter writer: Democrats in Congress need to forget impeachment, focus on important issues

May 20, 2019 By Publisher Leave a Comment

Dear Editor:

Even liberal Bill Maher says, “Enough already. Either move to impeach Trump or shut up about it”. He’s right on, it’s time the Democrats stop wasting their time and the president’s, too trying to take the president down.

It’s time for them to concentrate on things they were elected to do, important issues confronting the country, like the southern invasion of illegal aliens, China trade issues, Iran, etc. Instead they keep calling for silly investigations.

Calling for Trump’s financial and tax returns has nothing to do with running the country. Most people don’t give a whit about them either.

Pelosi is a weak leader. The real leaders in the House today are a Jew hating woman and a Congresswoman from New York whose IQ is less than her age.

The country is split, and the Democrats are fueling it. Instead they should calm down and help bring the nation together.

Ken Hambrick

Walnut Creek