Brentwood Press - Index

Brentwood Press - AntiochPress_08.15.08 - Index

16A | THEPRESS.NET AUGUST 15, 2008
“ Race has nothing to do with it. It is how you
act as an individual, a family, a neighbor and a
responsible member of the community.
Louis Renner ”
Winning Newspapers
Award
EDITORIALS, LETTERS & COMMENTARY
OPINION
National
Screamers don’t speak for community
Bravo to Mr. John Fritz for his bold commentary on
the current waste of our tax dollars and resources regarding
attempts by a select few to paralyze the Community
Services District (CSD).
While some citizens of Discovery Bay have recognized
that these individuals have used
GUEST
COMMENT
by Bob Mankin
Discovery Bay
the Letters to the Editor section
as their weapon of choice, many
others may be unaware that one
individual, Bill Richardson, is
also using correspondence and the Public Records Act in
an attempt to overwhelm the district’s staff.
This is his right as a citizen, but what he has failed
to recognize is that due to his multiple attempts to litigate
against our CSD, his letters must all be reviewed by
Actions speak louder than race
Editor:
I read the recent article (July 25) entitled
“Expanded lawsuit charges racism”
with skepticism.
Let me start by stating that I am one
of the citizens in Antioch who has had
to call the Community Action Team on
numerous occasions. I am amazed and
frankly appalled that those in the article
believe they can infract the law and then
are entitled to some sort of special treatment.
Let’s be clear: if you infract the law,
the police will arrive at your house and
the consequences of your infraction will
be dealt with appropriately.
I am tired of everything being
reduced to race. Race has nothing to do
with it. It is how you act as an individual,
a family, a neighbor and a responsible
member of the community.
Loud parties to all hours of the
night, the vulgar, sexually explicit music
played so loud you can hear it inside the
house with the television on, the disrespect
for others in the neighborhood,
with yelling and cussing, the loitering – no
wonder the police are called routinely.
How can anyone think or believe this type
of behavior is normal? How can anyone
think their neighbors would not call and
complain?
Recently, I approached two juveniles
who were playing vulgar, sexually explicit
music Sunday morning so loud that I
could hear the music inside my car inside
my garage with the garage door closed.
As the music was so loud, it required
me to raise my voice to ask them to
please turn down the music down. I was
promptly threatened for my trouble.
So to those who are fi ling the lawsuit,
I want you to know the police offi cers of
the Community Action Team are follow-
the legal staff, who are charged with defending against
Richardson’s litigation. If this were limited to only a few
letters it might not have been an issue; however, this is not
the case. His letters (correspondence) are often written
daily, numbering close to 100, and several are dozens of
pages long.
I have been a regular attendee at CSD meetings for
2 1 /2 years now, only missing a handful in that time. I’ve followed
this personal vendetta, researched the issues, know
the players and where they stand. For reasons unknown
to me, I have been regularly copied by Bill Richardson in
his correspondence to the board for close to a year now.
Recently, there has been an increase in volume and venomous
language within these letters; it has become quite
disturbing.
I believe the letters and records requests are averaging
four to six a week. This week’s batch included a 27- and a
46-pager (including attachments). Bill Richardson is cur-
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
ing up on the concerns of the citizens in
the area. These offi cers have demonstrated
nothing but professionalism, courtesy and
respect. They have repeatedly responded
to my issues and have taken the time to
explain the law and how it applies.
You should be thanking these offi cers
for taking an active part in making the
city of Antioch a better place to live. You
should understand that if you infract the
law, there are consequences. I fail to see
what is so diffi cult to understand about
this basic concept of living in society.
In my opinion, I believe the board
made a mistake in reversing the decision
allowing you to remain a Section 8 recipient.
Those in Antioch should contact
Federal Glover and have those on the
housing board who overturned this Section
8 termination immediately removed
from their positions.
Louis Renner
Antioch
Don’t write off the readers
Editor:
The hallowed institution of public
libraries has had its obituary prematurely
read from the public square. Truth
be told, the CCC library system broke
an unprecedented 5 million circulation
mark in 2006-07. Yet another barrier was
broken for the 2007-08 fi scal year, with
circulation hitting 6,132,207, a whopping
13-percent increase.
The county library’s signs of vigor
coincide with national trends. A 2006
study shows more than two-thirds of
Americans surveyed owned library cards.
Over half had frequented a library within
the last year and 66 percent reported
usage by visit, phone or Internet; 70
percent reported signifi cant satisfaction
with libraries, up 10 points from 2002.
Book borrowing increased 14 percent; 83
percent believed libraries and librarians
play a vital role in our democracy.
The rub, then, is that the Internet
has not, as some argue, diminished the
role of libraries. A study by Pew Internet
and American Life Project and the University
of Illinois showed the contrary.
Internet users are more than twice as
likely to patronize libraries as non-Internet
users. In fact, two-thirds of all library
users availed themselves of computers
while in the building for topics as diverse
as job, tax, health care and education
searches.
Death never looked so robust.
Walter Ruehlig
Antioch Representative
CCC Library Commission
Funding guarantees should be fair
Editor:
Regrettably, I must express a
disagreement with Contra Costa Sheriff
Warren Rupf, who notes he supports
Proposition 6, which guarantees funding
for law enforcement programs.
I too would like to fund the many
programs Sheriff Rupf considers critical.
However, if law enforcement secures
a guarantee of funds from the California
budget, that only means some
other equally valuable programs will be
shorted in order to meet the law enforcement
guarantee. For instance, education
funding that is without a guarantee may
well have to be curtailed in order to meet
the law enforcement guarantee.
I admit that I do not have an indepth
knowledge of Prop. 6, but I would
suggest that giving certain programs a
clear preference by providing a funding
guarantee does not sound equitable.
Education, infrastructure, and other
programs should be equally able to
rently suing the CSD (that’s effectively you and me), and
it is prudent that all of his correspondence be sent to legal
staff for review and follow-up advisement.
For Mr. Richardson to object to a better understanding
of the cost behind his actions by stating that he is being
“singled out” is ridiculous. He ignores the obvious fact that
as the litigant against the community, he has effectively
done the “singling out” by his own actions.
I (and others) had become so bothered by the degrading
tone delivered by a small handful of community
members that I was willing to put my name to a letter
mailed community-wide asking if residents would join me
in appealing for more civility and constructive dialogue. I
did not author the letter nor was I involved in the mailing,
but I did feel strongly enough about the sentiment to
support it.
see Speak page 18A
demand a guarantee, given their importance.
However, when funds are limited,
there must be equity in how those limited
funds are dispersed.
Sheriff Rupf seems to be operating
on the basis that his particular concerns
surpass all other needs within the state.
That seems a rather narrow and shortsighted
view.
Keith K. Wheeler
Brentwood
Objections to CSD are justified
Editor:
It seems some in this community
seek to stifl e/limit those who desire to
challenge our local politicians in the
form of letters, document requests and
public comments.
Last week this paper published a letter
from Mike Welch saying there should
be “limitations” on how much someone
can disagree with and correspond with
the DBCSD. A letter printed in this
paper written by an individual who
continually rails on the DBPOA said I
should leave town if I don’t like the CSD.
While I respect these folks’ right to say
these things, it is hard not to taste the un-
American fl avor of their rhetoric.
Two recent examples of why I am
challenged by our CSD’s behavior and
why I have chosen to speak out are:
Much of the ridiculous debate over
how much it costs the CSD to deal with
citizen correspondence relates to the
Richardson v. CSD lawsuit and issues
surrounding the reasons for the litigation.
This whole situation could easily be
put to rest if the CSD would engage in
meaningful settlement talks. Richardson
is only asking the CSD to agree to follow
the law. He is not seeking damages or
see Letters page 17A