City Council Recap: June 18, 2024

Monkeys and footballs

In a rare absence by Kasey Reynolds, the council proceeded with the six remaining members.

Consent Agenda: TAXES

These are not usually very newsworthy items, but it was this time for a couple of reasons.  One was because it brought out a familiar character in city politics, Karl Ory who spoke on the 1% tax measure.  He was riding one of those scooters because his lower leg was in a soft cast. When I asked him what happened, he replied “Snowboarding accident.”  Right….

You may not have realized, but in a defensive move to a voter initiative put forward by the Howard Jarvis organization, the city of Chico has to resubmit the 1% sales tax to the voters, because if the initiative passes, it makes measures like Chico’s illegal if it doesn’t contain a “sunset” provision.  The November ballot measure will add that provision to our tax ordinance.

But as Karl pointed out, Chico’s measure will appear on the ballot among other pleas for taxpayer money, including a 1% tax by the County, and yet another school bond measure (looked at your property tax bill lately? There are several on there already!) I’m sure the state will not let November go by without asking for more of your money.  If it all passes, your tax bills will substantially increase, making Chico’s sales tax 9.25%.  That puts us in the top 1/3 of all California cities for the highest tax rate.  We were the lowest just a year ago.

My take is this: The reason our local tax base suffers is that the great banana republic of California sucks enormous tax dollars from our local economy, combined with all the other issues, not the least of which is a flagging economy with unheard-of inflationary prices, most especially for housing, fuel, and food, all essential for any form of civilized life.  It is not right to punish our local government for the sins of the father (California mega tyranny/super-majorities) but working families are not a bottomless well.

Firey “I TOLD YOU SO!”

“Mrs. Right” (not her real name) has been a familiar voice at council meetings in the past but last night she made a reappearance during public comments to scold the City Council for going along with the Covid mandates, despite Mrs. Right’s prior warnings that masks don’t work, vaccines don’t work, and lockdowns hurt everyone.  At one point she singled out Mayor Coolidge for refusing to look at her.  In the catchphrase of the month, she summarized her criticisms this way:
“Fauci lied, you complied, and people died.”

Rent Stabilization/Rent Control: Tomeɪto/Tomɔtoː (IYKYK)

The room was packed for this item.  We were treated to a master’s thesis from a consultant on rent control. At one point both Coolidge and Morgan hinted to the speaker that she was taking too long and going into too much detail. Not only did she read her slides verbatim but elaborated on them. It was good data, but well beyond what was needed or desired by the council.

I don’t know if Addison’s grandma was in the audience, but it was Addison’s crowd, and he made sure to charm them before the meeting.  He would have kissed some babies if any were under 80.

We heard from both tenants and landlords, and both were right. Senior mobile home residents are screwed and trapped by the arrangement.  Because they can’t move out and can’t afford to stay, they see their final dignity living out their final years in their bottom-rung housing slipping away.  They can’t move their mobile homes to another park, can’t afford housing outside a MHP, (the reason they probably moved to a mobile home in the first place) and the rent on the land they don’t own continues to squeeze their budgets beyond reason.

On the other hand, park owners have rights too, and the difference can’t be made up simply by freezing them out of business.  While most MHPs were once on marginal land on the edge of town, now they are sitting on prime real estate, and their costs continue to rise like everyone else’s. 

I lived in San Francisco for 10 years in a rent-controlled flat.  Trust me when I say there is a major downside to rent control too.  People get locked in place, even if they want to move. In my case, moving would have meant tripling my rent.  Two people can pay vastly different rents for the same apartment in the same building.  Squeezing landlord margins means cutting costs and the first thing to go is maintenance.  It is truly a lose/lose situation.

My parents lived their last years in a mobile home park, and the issues of residents are all too familiar.  If it went to a voter initiative, what would happen?  It would pass because more people are tenants than there are landlords. This is exactly why direct democracy is a total disaster.  The tyranny of the majority does not care for the rights of the minority.  Rent control is a good example of this moral hazard.

Wisely, the city council failed to weigh in with a decision and defeated a motion by Tandon seconded by Winslow to bring an ordinance back and move forward. The vote was 2-4 against.

As an aside, most of the people in the audience are old, like me. Several times, the audience openly complained that they could not hear the speakers from the podium. In response, Coolidge said a couple of weird things. First, he responded, “The speaker is addressing us (on the dais).”  I think he quickly realized how wrong that sounded so he quickly added, “Just do the best you can. We haven’t had this issue come up before.” 

Really? How long has the public complained that speakers can’t be heard from the audience?  Every meeting???  Yes, every meeting. The solution is mechanical and straightforward but seems beyond their capacity to solve.

Budget Adoption

At the last meeting, much time was spent debating revisions to the “final” budget. Addison wanted more money for the homeless industry, but that failed to get support.  Coolidge’s pet project, getting air service to Chico, managed to get $250,000 as a guarantee the airline doesn’t lose money, even if Chico does.  Another $300,000 for terminal improvements was rejected.  Tom Van Overbeek voted against it on principle.

Before voting “no” he said if the market supported airline service, it wouldn’t need a subsidy.  The city should not use its money to “pick” winners and losers.  That is a solid conservative value.

Last night, however, Tom had a change of heart, and his conservative principles took a sabbatical. He said he voted against Coolidge’s proposal last time, but after talking to people from the university he realized he was wrong.

Apparently airline service is important to the professors at Chico State. This is understandable because they fly all over the world to study this and that, and to opine on what we should do if we were as smart as them, all at taxpayer’s expense. 

But one must wonder, why doesn’t the California State University Chico put their own budget where their mouth is?  Why should the people of Chico subsidize a service demanded by such well-paid and unaccountable state employees? Don’t we do enough for Chico State? Shouldn’t they do something for themselves and us for a change?

In the end, the council voted to amend the budget one last time, allocating the full $500,000 to the airline fund, and another $300,000 for terminal improvements should this tactic succeed in attracting an airline to service Chico. That’s nearly a million dollars in subsidies to private enterprise, with no tangible argument for ROI. Sooner or later, as the saying goes, you run out of other people’s money.

Is this what you wanted with your 1% tax increase?  Tandon also got $100,000 to keep the public library open 1 more day/week for 6 months.  That is a County expense, not the city, and it will be the first target to be cut further if you don’t approve the county’s 1% tax increase. 

Are you beginning to see a pattern?  They squeeze hardest on those things you value the most. Have I become too cynical, just another old grouch yelling at kids to stay off my lawn?  Maybe.

AD HOC Committee to look at future growth and housing for Chico

At the last meeting, Sean Morgan asked the council to approve a discussion on forming an ad hoc committee to discuss the aftermath of the Valley’s Edge referendum in the context of the General Plan, growth, and planning.  In this last meeting, they decided how to proceed.

In a curious moment at the outset, Coolidge recognized Morgan to speak about his item. But not surprising to some, and notably not surprising to either Morgan or Van Overbeek, Sean punted to Tom saying that while it was his item, Tom had been running with it and taken it over. Tom denied “taking it over” and then proceeded to take it over. I can’t say how, but I’m told that this was not an ambush by Sean but an “understanding” that existed before the meeting. Whatever.

So, Tom is taking the lead, and ala Henry Kissinger, he has been meeting with all sides of the issue on his own.  In the end, all that happened was an ad hoc committee was formed and the council left it up to the council representatives to determine what would happen next. In the end, whatever the committee does or doesn’t do, “findings” will be returned to the City Council. What the council will do with the report was not made clear.

There was one more curious thing about this I want to mention.  There was an exchange regarding who would be on the committee from the council.  Tom indicated that it would be him and Addison.  At this point, Debbie Presson mentioned that Kasey Reynolds, who was absent, also expressed an interest in serving on the committee.

At this point, Coolidge asked the city attorney how many council members they had to have.  Both Lam and Presson said the limit was three. That is a Brown Act requirement.

This is where it gets interesting. Coolidge then asks, “But, we can have only two?”  “Yes.” “Then under his breath, Coolidge says “Let’s go with two then.”

First, this triggered my PTSD over how Coolidge and Tom treated Kasey during the appointment of the  Mayor after the last election. As you may recall, Coolidge was appointed for a second term, and Tom unsuccessfully made a bid for Vice Mayor. Second, since when does the Mayor have the power to make decisions for the entire council? This was especially poignant given Kasey’s absence.

From a practical view, an even number of votes is impractical.  Even though Tom referred to Addison as “his friend,” on the subject of land use planning I would imagine, they must be as far to opposite sides as possible.  How are deadlocks over ideology, policy, and recommendations going to be resolved?  Maybe they won’t and maybe that’s not a bad thing.  Whatever action is taken, the full council will decide.

On the topic of the overall conduct of the meeting, someone there asked me if I had ever seen monkeys having carnal knowledge of a football. I replied that the monkeys seemed more competent.  But again, maybe I’m just turning into a grouchy old man.