Brentwood Press - Index

Brentwood Press - AntiochPress_05.16.08 - Index

MAY 16, 2008 COMMUNITY THEPRESS.NET | 21A
Tenants from page 1A
ing authority about the problem in an effort
to get an eviction from the residence and removal
from the Section 8 program.
City Council members declined to
comment on the lawsuits due to the possible
litigation. But in a phone interview
Tuesday, City Manager Jim Jakel called the
allegations of racism “untrue,” and defended
the CAT Team’s activities.
“It’s the police department’s duty to
respond to community concerns and calls,”
he said. “And that’s where they focus their
efforts to make Antioch a better place. They
are not proactive – they are responding to
community complaints.”
The following is what the lawsuits state
happened to each of the women:
• In June of 2007, offi cers came to Coleman’s
home saying they had authority to search it
because her husband, Thomas Coleman, is
on parole. Against her objections, the offi -
cers searched the home, damaged the front
door, took photographs, told her she would
lose her Section 8 benefi ts and went to her
husband’s place of employment asking to
see his employment records.
• In January of 2007, offi cers visited Payne’s
home at her request to stop the threats of
violence from a man, a request she had
made a number of times in the previous
two years. The police then informed the
housing authority about the constant need
for police at the residence, the nuisance to
neighbors, and claimed that Payne, her children
and the man threatening her all have
criminal records.
The police also sent a letter to her landlord,
repeating those claims, stating that
they had responded to her previous residence
29 times and warning that the landlord
could be held responsible for criminal
or nuisance-related activity.
The landlord declined to renew her
lease, telling her she must move. The housing
authority sent a letter notifying her of
its intent to terminate her Section 8 voucher,
but backed off after she sought the help
of Bay Area Legal Aid.
• Scott was pregnant and home with her 1year-old
daughter in January of 2007 when
offi cers came to her home to search it, based
on an arrest warrant for a man who was visiting
her home. Despite her objections, they
searched the home, refusing to show her a
copy of the search warrant.
The CAT Team sent a letter to her
landlord stating that the police had arrested
a man living in the home who was most
likely not on the lease and warning that
the landlord could be held responsible for
criminal or nuisance-related activity. The
housing authority terminated her voucher,
but it was reinstated after she appealed the
decision.
• The CAT Team wrote a letter to the housing
authority dated March 15, 2007, stating
that “two authorized juveniles” were living
with Tuggles, and that the juveniles had
been involved in “recent and multiple violent
assaults” in Antioch.
The housing authority sent Tuggles a
30-day notice of termination of her Section
8 voucher and alerted her property manager.
The property manager notifi ed her that
beginning in May she would be liable for
the full amount of rent: $1,850 per month.
At a hearing to determine if her benefi
ts were lawfully terminated, two police
offi cers disclosed information from juvenile
police reports, in violation of a confi dentiality
provision in state law, according to the
suit. On June 26, Tuggles’ Section 8 voucher
was reinstated due to a failure to provide
specifi c reasons for the termination on her
termination notice.
• In January of 2007, police visited Williams’
residence in response to a call from
her oldest son for assistance to stop a threat
of domestic violence against her. In the pre-
Photo by Dave Roberts
Mary Scott was one of nine African-American women receiving Section 8
housing subsidies who complained of harassment by the police Community
Action Team. Five women have recently fi led lawsuits against the city.
vious two years, fi ve complaints had been
made to police concerning her pit bulls.
After learning that she was receiving
a Section 8 subsidy, the police sent a letter
to her landlord, stating that an adult male
who is most likely not on the lease has been
causing problems in the house and her pit
bulls have been causing a nuisance to the
neighborhood.
After being contacted by the CAT
Team, the Housing Authority sent a notice
of proposed termination to Williams. But
after a hearing in which a police offi cer testifi
ed against her, she was allowed to keep
her Section 8 voucher.
The lawsuit alleges that what happened
to these fi ve women is part of a practice in
the Antioch Police Department to discriminate
against African-American Section 8
recipients.
Although less than 5 percent of Antioch
households consist of Section 8 recipients,
two-thirds of CAT Team investigations
involve these recipients. As a result,
the brunt of CAT Team investigations falls
disproportionately on African-Americans,
who comprise 56 percent of Section 8
households, according to the suit.
In 2007, the CAT Team was unsuccessful
in 60 percent of the cases in getting the
housing authority to terminate the Section
8 voucher, according to the suit. Seventytwo
percent of the CAT Team’s unsuccessful
termination referrals involved African-
Americans, and only 18 percent involved
whites.
“The city and Antioch Police Department
authorize and/or ratify the unlawful
and discriminatory conduct and behavior
of police offi cers, especially when such
unlawful and discriminatory conduct and
behavior is directed at African-American
citizens,” the suit states.
The women are seeking two jury trials
– one for Tuggles and the other for the other
four women. They are seeking compensatory
and punitive damages for violating the
women’s rights under the First, Fourth and
14th amendments to the Constitution.
Jakel said the CAT Team’s actions
were justifi ed by the behavior of the affected
residents and/or the conditions at the
properties.
“The problems that are associated with
the properties are properties that have high
numbers of (police) calls for service and suspected
criminal activity, perhaps unsanitary
facilities, sometimes vacant homes or buildings
or a lack of property maintenance,” he
said. “The CAT Team does excellent work
on behalf of the community as a whole.”
This dispute has been brewing for the
past year. At the Sept. 25 City Council
meeting, nine African-American women
told their stories of CAT Team harassment.
In December, Bay Area Legal Aid and Public
Advocates released a report charging the
CAT Team with racist harassment of the
women.
A meeting between the advocacy organizations
and city offi cials was held in
March, but nothing was resolved and city
offi cials declined to meet again, according
to David Levin of Bay Area Legal Aid.
“The most important thing for us is:
this case is really about one of the most precious
rights we have as Americans – to be
safe in our homes,” said Levin. “In this case,
the Antioch police, with offi cial approval,
repeatedly entered the homes of our clients,
who didn’t commit any crime and weren’t
charged with any crime.
“For us to be involved in this type of
lawsuit is a very rare occurrence. Our clients
decided they had no alternative for protecting
their civil rights than to seek a hearing in
civil court. Their goal is to choose to live in
Antioch without facing police harassment
and the threat of losing their homes.”
To comment on this story, visit www.
thepress.net.
LEGAL NOTICES LEGAL NOTICES LEGAL NOTICES LEGAL NOTICES LEGAL NOTICES LEGAL NOTICES
LEGAL NOTICES
NOTICE OF PROPOSED
ORDINANCE SUMMARY OF
ORDINANCE NO. 859
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
BRENTWOOD APPROVing A
REZONE (RZ 07-020) ADDING
CHAPTER 17.740, RESIDENTIAL
CONDOMINIUM CONVER-
SIONS, TO THE BRENTWOOD
MUNICIPAL CODE establishing
criteria for condominium conversions
of all multi-family residential
projects over FOUR units within the
City limits.
THE FOREGOING ORDINANCE
was introduced with the fi rst reading
waived at a regular meeting
of the Brentwood City Council on
the 13th day of May 2008, by the
following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers
Becnel, Brockman, Richey, Stonebarger,
Taylor
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
ATTEST:
/s/_______________________
Margaret Wimberly, CMC
City Clerk
A certifi ed copy of the full text of
the proposed ordinance is posted
and may be read in full in the City
Clerk’s Offi ce at 708 Third Street,
Brentwood, California, or a copy
may be obtained from that offi ce
based on the City’s actual cost for
duplicating.
Proposed date of adoption by City
Council: May 27, 2008
Brentwood Press No. 02-1273
Publish Date: May 16, 2008
RIGHT TO FARM
DISCLOSURE
The City of Brentwood has
declared its policy to protect and
encourage agricultural operations
in its General Plan and has adopted
a “Right to Farm Ordinance”.
If your property is located in the
City, near an agricultural operation,
you may at times be subject to inconvenience
or discomfort arising
from those operations, including
noise, odors, fumes, dust, smoke,
insects, the operation of machinery
(including aircraft) during any time
of day or night, the storage and
disposal of manure, and the ground
or aerial application of fertilizers,
soil amendments, seed, herbicides,
and pesticides. These and other
similar inconveniences will not
be considered a public nuisance
if they are conducted according
to proper and accepted customs
and standards. The Right to Farm
Ordinance establishes a grievance
procedure to help resolve any
disputes between agricultural
operators and their neighbors.
This is only a summary of the Right
to Farm Ordinance. If you wish
further information about the meaning
or effect of the ordinance or the
grievance procedure set forth in
it, please contact the City’s Community
Development Department
at 104 Oak Street Brentwood, CA
94513 or call (925) 516-5405.
Brentwood Press No. 02-1273
Publish Date: May 16, 2008
NOTICE OF PUBLIC
HEARING AND
AVAILABILITY OF A
MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION
Notice is hereby given that the
Planning Commission of the City
of Brentwood will, at 7:00 p.m. or
as soon thereafter as the normal
course of business permits on June
17, 2008, hold a public hearing to
consider the following:
An application to construct the
Brentwood Civic Center project,
which includes demolition of the
existing Brentwood Library, Council
Chamber, Community Center, and
City Hall, construction of a new City
Hall, Council Chamber, Community
Center, and parking structure,
and reconfi guration of the existing
City Park. The project site is ap-
proximately 5.5 acres in size, and
is bounded by Second Street, Oak
Street, and Liberty High School
(APN 013-041-008, APN 013-041-
009, and APN 013-042-001). The
following entitlements are being
requested as part of the project:
• A General Plan amendment
(GPA 07-02) to change the land
use designation on a portion of the
project site from Park to Downtown
(Mixed Use).
• A Specifi c Plan amendment (GPA
07-02) to:
1. Add a new district (Brentwood
Civic Center) to Section 2.2.1
(District Zones) of the Downtown
Specifi c Plan, and create site
development standards and permitted
uses for this district, as well
as other related amendments.
2. Redesignate City Park, the
adjacent Maple Street and Third
Street surrounding the park, and
two City-owned parcels to the new
Brentwood Civic Center district on
the Downtown District Zones Map.
• A design review (DR 07-16) for
a 55,000-square-foot building
that includes a Council Chamber
with seating for 150 people and
a three-story City Hall, a 32,000square-foot
building that includes
a two-story Community Center and
additional City offi ces, a four-level
parking structure with 280 spaces,
a 2.5-acre park, and all related site
improvements.
A mitigated negative declaration
has been prepared for this project
pursuant to the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), to
assess potentially adverse environmental
impacts. A draft mitigated
negative declaration will be available
beginning May 16, 2008 for
public review and comment in the
Community Development Department
for a period of 30 days. The
deadline for submission of written
comments on this environmental
document ends on June 16, 2008
at 5:00 pm.
Applicant: The City of Brentwood
Said hearing will be held at the
City Council Chambers, 734 Third
Street, Brentwood, California.
Further information may be
obtained from Principal Planner
Erik Nolthenius [(925) 516-5137 or
enolthenius@ci.brentwood.ca.us]
in the Community Development
Department of the City of Brentwood,
104 Oak Street, Brentwood,
California 94513.
Before any court challenge of Planning
Commission decisions, you
are required to appeal the decision
to the City Council no later than
the time period provided under the
City’s Municipal Code. In addition
you may be limited to raising only
those issues you or someone else
raised at the public hearing described
in this notice, or in written
correspondence delivered to the
Brentwood Planning Commission
at, or prior to, the public hearing.
Brentwood Press No. 02-1273
Publish Date: May 16, 2008