Contra Costa Herald

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

Miller criticizes Frazier for giving Chief of Staff $18,000 annual raise

By Leave a Comment

Editor:

My State Assembly campaign has discovered another breach of the public’s trust, as it relates to Jim Frazier’s stewardship of the 11th Assembly District. Last month, it was discovered that Mr. Frazier’s Chief of Staff, Jay Day, according to State Assembly publicly compiled State Employee salary records, received a $102,000 per year salary. In 2016, his salary went up to $120,000 per year, surpassing the base salary of his elected supervisor, Mr. Frazier.

Members of Assembly can appropriate Salary dollars any way they see fit, within their staff. Assembly Chief of Staff salary range, anywhere from $68,000 in Bakersfield, to $135,000 for Members of Assembly with leadership positions in the Chamber. A standard cost of living adjustment (COLA) for an employee earning a $102,000 wage would be about 3-4% or in Mr. Day’s case, around $3,500. This $18,000 raise Mr. Day received, that Mr. Frazier approved, is what some people in this district are lucky enough to earn working their fingers to the bone in a year’s time, thanks in large part to regulations placed on small businesses by Democrats.

This salary announcement comes conveniently two weeks after Mr. Frazier proposed the single largest per gallon fuel tax in the history of the Golden State. Mr. Frazier drew the criticism of voters from San Diego to Shasta with his proposed 17 cents per gallon fuel tax increase, which is 30 cents per gallon for diesel and also adds an additional $38 per year DMV Registration Fee. The criticism of his fuel tax has been loudest in AD-11, where voters not only drive literally hundreds of miles a day, to get to work, but also enjoy evening and weekend boating on the various waterways surrounding the San Francisco Bay Estuary.

I can’t answer as to what Jim was thinking when he approved this bump in salary. I can tell you that as your Assemblyman, I will fight to give my per diem back to the State Treasury, as Assemblywoman Baker, has done. I’m told per diems are optional to Members of the Assembly, and as such, I will get on the highways, and come home to my family just like many of you who work in Sacramento do every evening.

As someone who has worked in Government for nearly 30 years, and plans to once again, I will be available to take your call, respond to your emails, invite you to meetings on issues that are important to you, help refer you to the proper government agency to help solve your problems, inform you of my vote in the chamber, using social media almost instantly, hand out my personal cell number to those who ask for it.

Twenty-eight years of government service does that to a person. And I can assure you as I sit here, My Chief of Staff will not make more than I do. As a taxpayer, I’d like to know what I’m getting for my money right now. You should also.

Dave Miller

Candidate for Assembly, 11th District, California

 

Writer likes Davis column about police, hate crime and America’s real enemy

By Leave a Comment

Editor:

I wanted to start off with saying that I believe his (Lou Davis’) article in this past herald about the treatment of Police Officers was great and to the point. My wife and I think it was very well put, no B.S. and with knowledge of the situation. We feel that this article should be offered out to all local Bay Area newspapers so they to can publish it and get it out to thousands more so they can read it as well. I would love to see it on the internet as well.

I hope that this can happen because we feel this should get out to many more readers.

Thank you,

Mike de Luna

Antioch

On police officers, protests, hate crime and America’s real enemy

By 1 Comment

the-way-i-see-it-lou-logoFor as many years as I can remember, I’ve always been a strong advocate of giving praise to groups of special people, and individuals in our society who help to keep us safe, and enable us to live in freedom..

Unlike too many people nowadays, who claim that police officers are searching for black men to kill, I see this as a two-sided dilemma. If fewer crimes are committed, fewer police officers would be needed to go into the hood to check out complaints. Also, if more parents, school teachers and college instructors  are available to teach younger people how to stay out of trouble, and how to respect authorities there will not be as many arrests and shootings.

And why does Kaepernick and other multimillion dollar NFL players show outward disrespect for the Flag and National Anthem that our military forces have fought and died to preserve?   Now this unhealthy movement is even taking hold in our high schools.  You have to wonder if NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell is proud of the fact that he’s allowing Colin Kaepernick to dictate policy for the League he should be running?

As for myself, I proudly served this country for 20 years, including wartime service in Vietnam, along with millions of other veterans.  Now, we must stand by and personally be insulted by these young, wayward football-playing millionaires.  They obviously did not learn enough in school, nor in college to understand like real adults, what national pride is all about.

These ill-advised protesters should also realize that every time they take to the streets  and occupy public places to air their grievances, they also broaden the potential of a worsening race and class warfare in our country.

The enemy from outside our country; ISIS and other terrorists take advantage of a breaking down of forces inside America to launch more effective attacks on all of us.  It should be enough that our so-called “leaders” in Washington are willfully diminishing our fighting forces, and inviting even more potential terrorists to unlawfully enter our country.  And, Hillary Clinton is planning to invite 500 percent more “refugees” into the country than President Obama has done already.

I’m happy to congratulate law enforcement people in Antioch and other parts of Contra Costa County who, working together arrested two hate criminals who recently tried to burn down the home of a nonwhite family.  These criminals could have been planning to commit this arson for a number of sick reasons, or they could have been incited to take revenge on people of another color, as part of their own undeclared race-hate war.

Whatever the reason, I say, to law enforcement who arrested those responsible people, and all other  brave crime fighters – Thanks for your service!

In November, there are three dates which we should all be aware of:  On November 8th, be sure to vote, for someone, who will help transform this country into one we can continue to be very proud of. On November 11th, lets remember to say thanks to our veterans for helping to keep our country free.

And, on Thanksgiving Day, whether you eat turkey or not, take time to thank God that we live in the greatest country in the world, and let’s ask our Creator to help us do all we can to keep it that way.

Letter writer: Sandoval challenging Enholm for college board to make Brentwood Center a reality, instead of campus in Antioch or Oakley

By Leave a Comment

The existing Brentwood Center is costing $68,000 a month and its location is not suitable as it sits in a high density retail establishment.

The new center is planned to be completed and open approximately Sep 2020 to support student needs in a 17 acre environment in the Trilogy/Marsh Creek Road Location.

I support the Governing Board’s decision to go ahead with the center as part of phased plan for enrollment with the first phase planned to support forecasted enrollment with a future phase to increase capacity as enrollment increases.

The initial facilities that are being constructed will provide what is required for the existing student population and is not expected to reach capacity for many years, at which point the 2nd phase of the project will be reviewed for additional construction. This is a smart approach as it ensures that the costs are aligned with the needs of students when it opens and for future students.

Mr. Enholms position’s has resulted in numerous delays. Delaying the construction of the center would not serve the needs of the district or its students and would ultimately result in higher costs with no benefits to the district, its students and its taxpayers.

Delays also impact the jobs of workers who would contribute to its construction.

Mr. Enholm who was an instructor at DeVry and Heald, the two failed for-profit institutions, four years ago ran on the platform opposing the 17-acre campus and advocated for a 110-acre campus.

He voted for the Brentwood Center as part of the Governing Board recommendation and helped in its bond passage, but continues to pursue a bigger campus even though no location is available and a bigger campus is not approved by the Community College Board.

If a bigger campus were to be built it would mean a tax increase for working families. The need for a larger campus is not practical or a wise use of taxpayer dollars. The LMC campus has unused capacity and forecasted enrollment trends shows that an extension Center will meet the needs of future students as enrollment starts to creep up. The trend of on-line classes also continues to grow reducing the need for increased facilities.

There were discussions early on to move from the planned Trilogy and Marsh Creek Road location, however a feasibility study concluded there is no reasonable alternative to the original site, and the governing board voted 4-1 not to move the site, which it had already purchased. BART had urged possibly moving the site to Highway4 and Mokelume Trail, however, the BART Board had made no official decision to pursue property for a future eBART station near the intersection of Highway 4 and the Mokelumne Trail.

We have no secured land for a site near an eBART.

It would take an additional three or four years and cost an additional $750,000 or more in site-selection processing expenses alone. The move would also need to be approved by the California Community Colleges Board of Governors or the district could risk losing lose $1.1 million per year in current revenue. Pursing a new larger campus could result in a 10 year delay at a minimum and impacting the services that are required for students.

The existing construction at planned facility at the 17 Acre center is estimated at this time to be $43.6 Million dollars. The costs to move to a 110 Acre campus would be astronomical in comparison with the taxpayers footing the bill for this increase, with no current basis for its usage based on enrollment needs and trends compared to the approved 17 acre campus.

Mr. Enholm’s delaying tactics in stalling the construction has already cost the district thousands of dollars.  Mr. Enholm continues to advocate for a larger campus for Antioch, Oakley and Brentwood. However, unless those communities are willing to pay an increase in taxes, as the entire District taxpayers would not support it based on past tax increase elections. A key reason Measure E passed was because there was something for every taxpayer.

Mr. Enholm continues to advocate for a campus in Antioch and Oakley and stated in part that the reason he won his first election was that he went before those communities and told them he would help build a larger campus. However, these communities were informed that Mr. Enholm did not have the authority of Board approval for such a statement.

Mr. Enholm’s desire to move the campus may be more in self-interest as these new campuses would be in Ward 5, which he presently represents. The planned Brentwood Center is located outside of his ward.  Self-interest is never a reason to lobby for change that is not beneficial to the larger community, especially our students.

We need fresh eyes, new ideas, and a leader who can bring people together in order to solve problems with practical ideas and future thinking.

Fernando is listening. Fernando has the education, experience, and commitment to bring needed change.

Vote wisely November 8th.

Valerie Romero-Lopez

Resident of Ward 5

Pittsburg

Editorial: Congress must stop international takeover of the Internet

By Leave a Comment

“if you cherish free expression, and free speech rights generally, you should be worried”

By Allen Payton, Editor & Publisher

I rarely write about national issues on the Herald websites or newspaper, but this one is too important not to as what could happen in the next few days could affect not only my business but any and all internet-related media and any business and individual who uses the Internet.

The Obama Administration supports allowing the international takeover of the Internet, which was developed here in America, first by our military, and is currently controlled by American interests.

If that happens, some unelected body made up mostly of representatives of foreign governments, which in general oppose and work against American interests and the freedoms we enjoy in our country, will be in control of the most powerful information and commerce tool ever created.

The UN could ultimately take control and it is not favorable to America and hasn’t been for years. Back in 1985 while working as an intern for then-U.S. Senator Pete Wilson in Washington, D.C., I had the opportunity to travel to New York over Thanksgiving weekend to visit a college buddy. He had to work the day after the holiday, so I spent it being a tourist in Manhattan.

One of my last stops was the United Nations building. While in the gift shop I met and struck up a conversation with a delegate from the U.S. State Department and asked him what his thoughts were on the institution. His response was rather eye-opening.

“This place is a joke,” he said. “It’s the U.S. and Israel against the world and once in awhile our old friend Great Britain will abstain.”

Well, things haven’t changed much in the 31 years since then, and actually they’ve become worse. While I believe it’s always better to talk things out than to fight them out, as the delegates to the UN spend much of their time doing in that deliberative body, the decisions they can make once they have control of the Internet could prove disastrous.

Let’s remember who some of the nation states that are members and their policies toward the Internet in their own countries. China, Cuba, Saudi Arabia, just to name a few. Do we want their views, which are anathema to our God-given, constitutionally-protected freedoms of religion, speech, and the press be the ones governing or influencing how the Internet operates in our country? What about even England, Scotland or France, where certain comments that we consider disagreements and debate, can get you arrested for “hate speech”?

In a television interview on Wednesday, Ajit Pai, a senior member of the Federal Communications Commission, said “This proposal is to essentially give up the US oversight role that it’s had for the last 20 years, basically for the entire commercial lifespan of the Internet to a company called ICANN, which is an international organization, which includes a number of foreign countries.”

Pai further stated, “[I]f you cherish free expression, and free speech rights generally, you should be worried, I think, when there’s — this oversight role’s going to be ceded to potentially, foreign governments who might not share our values.”

This needs to be stopped, and now.

Congress is debating the issue today and our representatives need to hear from us, now. Please join me in contacting them and urging them to vote to stop the Obama Administration from allowing the international takeover of the internet scheduled for Saturday, October 1st.

Rep. Jerry McNerney

Washington, D.C. Office (202) 225-1947

Antioch Office (925) 754-0716

Stockton Office (209) 476-8552

Rep. Mark DeSaulnier

Washington, D.C. Office (202) 225-2095

Walnut Creek Office (925) 933-2660

Richmond Office (510) 620-1000

Rep. Mike Thompson (represents Martinez, Hercules and Crockett)

Washington, D.C. Office (202) 225-3311

Vallejo Office (707) 645-1888

Rep. Eric Swalwell (represents San Ramon)

Washington, D.C. Office (202) 225-5065

Pleasanton Office (925) 460-5100

Senator Diane Feinstein

Washington, D.C. Office (202) 224-3841

San Francisco Office (415) 393-0707

Senator Barbara Boxer

Washington, D.C. Office (202) 224-3553

Oakland Office (510) 286-8537

Guest Column: Assembly candidate Grayson addresses flaws in UC System

By Leave a Comment

By Tim Grayson, Councilman, City of Concord

This year, it seems Californians cannot turn on the news without hearing about another scandal at the University of California.

In August it was the shameful resignation of Chancellor Linda Katehi at UC Davis after she spent $175,000 on “consultants” to eliminate bad press and troubling videos of an incident when campus police pepper sprayed student protesters.

Then her counterpart at UC Berkeley, Nicholas Dirks also resigned after it was discovered that he spent $700,000 of taxpayer dollars on a fence around his official residence.

Months ago, state auditors reported that many qualified students from California were denied entry, while University admissions favored out-of-state students because they pay higher tuition.

Enough is enough. Who is standing up for the taxpayers who are paying for the University system year after year?

Californians are sick and tired of hearing about the excess and greed demonstrated by University of California officials. We are tired of hearing stories about our neighbor’s daughter, the honors student and champion athlete who was denied admission to the Berkeley campus.

We are tired of hearing more about the troubling admissions policies that favor out-of-state students who pay top dollar over exceptional California resident students paying in-state tuition. And we are tired of reports of waste and impropriety from University officials. It has to stop.

The University system has changed over the years.

Many of my neighbors and friends recall a time in our state when the University system made California the great land of opportunity it is today. Hard work at one of our best UC institutions provided access to a job at one of the best companies in the world or acceptance into a competitive medical school. Qualified California students were admitted when they demonstrated their ability to compete and this resulted in prosperity for generations of families across the state who benefited from our exceptional institutions.

Today, things have changed. UC leaders have become greedy. From reports of salaries over $400,000 for executives to blatant preferences for out-of-state or foreign students paying higher tuition rates, the focus on making money has to stop.

Our state leadership needs to help the University reset its compass and focus on goals that will continue to serve generations of Californians to come.

The resignations of two UC Chancellors should begin a fresh start, a time when our state refocused our priorities and set forth a higher standard of conduct for University officials.

State leaders need to set strict policies that ensure University officials are held accountable to admissions standards that honor their obligation to California taxpayers.

In the Assembly, I will stand up for legislation to ensure qualified California students have an opportunity to succeed in one of our top institutions and I will work set policies in place to ensure the University is fully accountable to the public so that taxpayer dollars are spent to benefit students, not University administrators.

Grayson has been a Concord resident since 2001 and was elected to serve on the Concord City Council in November 2010. He served as Redevelopment Agency Chair in 2011 and Vice Mayor in 2013. Grayson was Mayor of Concord from 2013 – 2015.

Guest Commentary: Supervisor Glover offers memories of September 11

By Leave a Comment

By Supervisor Federal Glover

FIFTEEN YEARS AGO, the United States suffered the terrorist attacks on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon. 9/11 has become a date that will live in infamy. It is our generation’s equivalent to December 7, 1941. Who can ever forget the jetliners crashing into the New York skyscrapers, bursting into flames, people jumping from the upper stories, the last calls of those trapped inside.

Who can forget the office workers fleeing the burning floors above them and the firemen  dragging their hoses with them, going up the stairs towards the flames.

Who can forget the towers toppling down on workers and the heroic first responders? The mayhem, the dust-covered office workers?

Who can forget other firefighters, policemen and other rescue workers going through the debris to find survivors?

Who can forget the people from all across the nation, including some from Contra Costa County, who dropped what they were doing and rushed to New York to help in the rescue efforts?

Who can forget Flight 93’s heroic passengers, including residents of the Bay Area, who fought the terrorists to prevent the jetliner crashing into the White House or Congress even though it meant their certain death?

The deaths of those 3000 people on 9/11 are seared into our collective memories. We will always remember what we were doing and where we were on that fateful morning.

But there is another memory I’ll always keep with me. I’ll remember the American people rallying around the towers, around New York, around the Pentagon and Flight 93 – that was perhaps among the finest hours of America. We didn’t think about the race of the victims or their rescuers. We didn’t ask if they were Democrat, Republican, liberal or conservative, rich or poor. For those few hours, those few weeks, after the horrible acts of terror; we were united as a country, we were all Americans.

That is what I’ll remember.

Glover represents District 5 on the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors.

Letter writer supports Frazier transportation bill

By Leave a Comment

Editor:

Thank you to the Herald for its recent coverage of the Frazier-Beall transportation plan, a smart, sensible bill that addresses our state’s transportation issues and provides a fair approach to funding provisions that will fix our roads and strengthen California’s economy. It is inarguable that our transportation infrastructure is rapidly deteriorating under the pressure of population growth that puts more vehicles on the road than the system was designed to manage safely.

The transportation funding plan put forth by Assemblyman Jim Frazier and Sen. Jim Beall offers a practical solution. It calls for an equitable distribution of funding responsibility among multiple sources, including gas and diesel tax increases and an annual fee for zero-emission vehicles. The bill encourages the use of public transit and other transportation alternatives. Frazier and Beall exhibit a commendable vision by balancing modes, understanding their net positive impact on relieving congestion and carbon emissions while off setting their impact on a corresponding net loss of gas tax receipts under the current program.

California’s transportation network serves as the lifeline for our personal mobility as well as an economic engine that makes the state the preferred originating point to move goods throughout the U.S.  We must fund consistent, long-term maintenance and expansion now to keep our lifeline open and ensure a safe, reliable transportation system that we can count on.

Art Hadnett

President, West Division at HNTB Corporation

San Francisco

Letter writer upset about Frazier’s proposed state gas tax increase

By Leave a Comment

Editor:

Assembly Member Jim Frazier wants to add a 17 cent per gallon tax on gas in addition to our already outrageous cost of living. He wants this tax increase to cover transportation costs. This tax would generate $7.4 billion.

Illegal aliens cost California taxpayers more than $25 billion per year. Here is a novel idea, stop supporting these illegals (in some cases they receive far more than U.S. citizens), and many problems would be solved at the same time, by the same action. Most illegals would return to their country of origin or go elsewhere. This would relieve the strain on the state budget, the strain on the water supply, the strain on the judicial system, education, jail systems to name a few.

All of these positives and more could be achieved by actually enforcing current, existing laws. By doing so, we would not need a 17 cent per gallon gas tax increase and would still have more than $17.6 billion left from the $25 billion that illegals cost California taxpayers annually.

In an honest system, we could even receive a tax cut, but I just do not see this happening. By myself, I have supported more families than I have actual family members. I, for one, am growing extremely weary of it.

We are no longer citizens or constituents, only taxpayers or dollar signs.

Steven Payne

Writer: Shooting death by Richmond police was unnecessary, DA report is wrong

By Leave a Comment

Editor:

The shooting death of Richard “Pedie” Perez by the Richmond Police Officer was unnecessary.  The Officer-absolving findings by the RPD and D.A.’s Office also was wrong.  I know because I personally investigated the matters for the victim’s family attorney.

I have about 75,000 hours of law enforcement related investigations employment, experiences, training, education, and a lot of expertise in death investigations.  For 33 plus of those years, out of 50 years total, I was a full time sworn Officer, Police Supervisor, Investigations Units’ Supervisor, and State P.O.S.T. certified Police Supervisor and Homicide Investigator.

I personally examined and photographed Perez’s deceased body, finding that he had more gunshot bullet entries than the three the police claimed.  Perez, in my opinion and experiences, was not a violator of Penal Code Section 647f – Public Intoxication (as corroborated by the surveillance video tapes).  Perez was also not “swaying from side to side” as police claim.  The agencies’ use of DUI levels regarding Perez was also disingenuous and misleading! Perez was not driving!  I also interviewed eye witnesses, reviewed the store’s recorded video tapes of the events, and Perez’s and the responsible officer’s actions.  I overall determined that the Officer didn’t have to use deadly force when he instead had readily available non-lethal alternatives at hand.

As in the Oscar Grant shooting death case, which I also personally investigated, the actions by the officers in these, and other similar, cases further increasingly endanger other uninvolved officers’ lives, performances, and community support (as evidenced, unfortunately, by the on-going attacks and deaths nationwide of even uninvolved officers).  I’ve been alerting and warning law enforcement agencies over the years now about such possibilities and predicted repercussions.  It seems to have fallen on deaf ears, with more uninvolved officers suffering the consequences.

It’s time that they finally admit that they’ve responded wrongly, have been close-minded, and should now move forward by honestly and fully addressing how to positively try to correct this dangerous and deadly environment they’ve contributed to.  Intimidating and verbally attacking incidents’ news reporters by police defenders and POAs is reprehensible.  They can continue to hide from it but I again warn that it could cost more citizens’ and officers’ lives, and their families, while they remain in their self-protecting denials with their heads buried in the ground.   Don’t they get it, or even care?

Ralph A. Hernandez, Antioch