Sean Morgan Interview—June 22, 2022—KPAY

Sean's critique of the Protect Chico's Quality of Life Act, and my commentary in response.

Sean Morgan recently appeared on KPAY, as he often does, to talk about the proposal put forward by Vice Mayor Kasey Reynolds to place an initiative on the November Ballot, designed to protect and enhance Chico’s quality of life. There is little dispute that it has been declining, and that citizens are unhappy about it.

The interview begins with an attempt at humorous sarcasm by Sean.  Perhaps this was “breaking the ice.”

“You know you called me and said we have all these things to talk about, and I thought, OMG, what am I missing? Everything seems perfect right now.”

Scott Michaels directed him to the ongoing cleanups, the plea for patience from city staff, and the increasing sheltering flowing out of the enforcement efforts.  Then Scott says this:

“Last night you heard from a group of citizens, and I quote: ‘We the people of Chico….”

At this point, Sean can be heard laughing in the background. As Scott was finishing the Chico mission statement, Sean chimed in at the end and parroted Scott as he said the words, “And a premier place to live.”  My impression is that Sean was saying this was nothing more than a platitude.  Ho-hum.

Sean explained: “You know, ten years ago, someone ran for council, and that was their ah, all they did was repeat that over and over and over?  If this is the city’s mission statement, why aren’t we doing anything about it? And I got slack for it, ‘cause I said it over and over and over. Scott Gruendl [former city council member] said, ‘All Morgan is, is a broken record. He repeats that all the time.” Well no one is focusing on it.  So, it’s funny to see it regurgitated as if it’s new.” (scoff scoff).

“Regurgitate” brings vomit to mind.  Also, some things that are old, like say the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence, are worthy of repeating from time to time.  We usually do it because we want someone to pay attention to it, not because we’re claiming it’s new, that no one has ever said it before. That is the entire point of repeating it.  It is a call back to our ideals, principles, and purpose, something that rarely gets talked about these days. It’s certainly not a joke, or to be simply dismissed as “been there, done that.”

I can think of no better occasion to remind this city of its mission than when this voter initiative was introduced.  The motives and purpose are grounded in the people’s desire to have a city that truly reflects this mission statement.  Here it is, in case you don’t know:

“A safe place to raise a family, an ideal location for business, and a premier place to live.”

Scott says “Well let’s talk about it a little bit. Safety, cleanliness, beauty, and economic vitality. I think everyone can agree on that!”  Bocca gives an Amen : “Yea!”

Here is Sean’s chance to say something positive, uplifting, and teambuilding, perhaps give some credit to his colleague, Vice Mayor Kasey Reynolds, for bringing this forward.  But no, Sean runs back to sarcasm.

“I just thought you were explaining the City Council members.”  Sean cracks himself up. I heard what I thought was nervous laughter from the radio hosts, but I can’t be sure.

Scott pressed: “I mean what legally can be done?” Sean is saying something unintelligible and yucking it up. Scott to his credit, calls Sean back to the interview.  “Sean?  Pay attention. Don’t look at the squirrels.”  

Sean: “Ha ha ha…Sorry”

Scott: “Legally, what more can the city council do? Let’s put it to you that way.” 

Sean: “That’s a great question. So, here is what happened.”  

Scott didn’t ask what happened. 

“A citizen group got together, and you gotta respect what they’re doing because they’re frustrated.  Their businesses are being vandalized, people are frightened to go downtown, not so much anymore, but we heard from some people, some guy came is roughing up people in my apartment, and the police didn’t do anything about it. And so what is happening is that the citizens want the city to do more.”

I used to believe I knew what “respect” meant, but so far this doesn’t feel respectful.  But I think there is some truth here. Citizens expect more from their city government and don’t believe they’re getting it.

“That’s really what it comes down to, they want us to enforce our laws, they’re saying ‘Do this, do this, do this.’ And it’s fine.  I don’t have a problem with it, but we have to do what’s legal.”

Yes, that is the question Scott asked.  Is there more the city can legally do?

“One of the conditions in this….whatever you call it [it’s a voter initiative, Sean] that they gave us, is you know, somebody sees a homeless site that’s not supposed to be there, and they report it to the city manager, the city manager hasn’t got rid of it in twenty-three minutes, then the city has to pay this guy $5,000, and I’m like whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. We’re going to have, every citizen is gonna become a Barney Fife, and they’re just gonna like go down the bike path and say, ‘there’s a camp, there’s a camp,  there’s a camp, there’s a camp.  Clean it all up, Mr. City Manager or I want $25,000. And that sounds like an exaggeration, but that’s how it reads.”

Well, it is a gross exaggeration. That’s why it sounds like one.

 If you buy this, you believe that Barney Fife is going to use this voter initiative to blackmail the city over something that is impossible to do and has no limits or any guardrails against abuse.  That is not how it reads.  I read it.

Here is a picture of Barney Fife in case you don’t know who he’s referring to.  This is what Sean says the citizens will turn into if they are not already: a bumbling idiot who is foolishly given the power to extort thousands out of the helpless city. 

“But that’s OK. What we did is give it to our City Attorney, and said listen, are there things in there that could work, that we could enforce?  Now, people think the city’s not enforcing their laws.”

I wonder how anyone could have gotten that idea?

“And they’re thinking the police department is not doing all it can.  We are overrun with homeless people. “Oh, the settlement agreement is not going to work,” and it is working. It’s getting better, but what’s happening is the homeless people are moving out into other places. We only have so many resources. Public works are doing all it can, the PD is doing all it can. We’ll continue to fight the battle, but a paper document that says ‘You’re gonna do it the way I want versus the way the police chief and public works executives think, I don’t know that carries a lot of weight.”

We began being “overrun” with homeless people in April of 2020 when the Brown New Deal made everything worse.  We had three months of enforcement between January and March of 2021.  Ever since then, the citizens have had to stand by helplessly and in the dark, while our leaders dictated our future, which they did almost entirely in secret.

The result of that, after more than a year of non-enforcement of the growing abuse of our quality of life as measured by safety, cleanliness, beauty, or economic vitality, was the settlement agreement, the pallet shelter, and a mere 2 months of enforcement effort. 

Sean continues to defend it and our city attorney with the argument that had they not done what they did, things would be worse.  He doesn’t explain just how they could be worse. Sean implies he has inside information that we don’t have and aren’t entitled to know.  We are supposed to believe that because Sean said so, and he heard it from Vince, the two most responsible people still here for the content of the Settlement Agreement and the entire manner this case was handled?

I think Sean is counting on the fact that the things that were done and said in closed session will never see the light of day.  Don’t be so sure.  No one who has followed the Warren case believes that the city, through the city attorney, and with Sean’s full-throated endorsement at every step of the way, fought as hard as they could to protect our city, and certainly, there are many risks to overcome, because of the way the settlement was designed and approved.  Much is yet to come.

Enforcement has been permitted for less than two months, from very late April until today, late June. The enforcement effort before the lawsuit lasted longer than this, so it’s a bit early to declare victory and start high-fiving your buddies over whisky and cigars. 

The Pallet is nearly full, and there are plenty more encampments to go.  We will be hanging our hat on the Torres shelter to continue enforcement, and if those Torres beds somehow vanish, anyone can camp anywhere they want.  Read our anti-camping ordinance and see what it says. Vince did that and the council approved it.  You can find it here:  https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/chico/latest/chico_ca/0-0-0-30044 (See section 9.20.060)

Sean calls this initiative a “paper document”, implying that it has no importance, in the way some people say a marriage license is “just a piece of paper.”  The Constitution is just a piece of paper, right? Laws are written on paper, and so are ballots.  All carry with them the force of law.  A paper that carries the force of law is no trivial thing.

But this line, “You’re gonna do it the way I want versus the way the police chief and public works executives think, I don’t know that carries a lot of weight.” That is revealing.

Time for a story.  Early on, some years ago when I was just meeting people, I had a phone conversation with Sean.  It would have been in about 2017.  I forget exactly what it was about, but no doubt I was sharing my objectives and some things I thought would help.  To my surprise, Sean came back at me, with what I considered “both barrels blazing.”  What he said is, if I remember accurately, “I don’t need you to tell me how to do my job.”  I said “Whoa, whoa whoa!  You are misunderstanding me.  I’m sharing my ideas, not trying to be your boss.”  That conversation stuck with me because it was a valuable insight into the way Sean thinks. Certain themes come back again and again.  As you can see, it comes up here, where Sean objects to Barney Fife telling him and his people what to do, just because it says so on a piece of paper.  Anyone that knows Sean very well knows he is not exactly unwilling to take his counsel, period. The perceived threat of someone, anyone assuming they have the power to tell him what to do never fails to get a rise from Sean. That is a funny attitude for someone elected to represent them. “Represent” does not mean the same as “overlord.”  Perhaps that distinction is too subtle?

“But what we want, and something maybe we can go back to the judge say, ‘Well listen, we need to do these things.  But at the end of the day, the federal Magistrate trumps any ordinance we come up with.  So, what we asked the City Attorney, can you look at this framework the citizens have given us, and is there something workable here that will give us a little bit more strength in our argument for protecting our city because we have all the ordinances we need.”

First, it is embarrassing how terrified Sean is of this Magistrate, especially given the very, very narrow scope of his powers.  That cannot change, by the way, without a whole new lawsuit, and if that happens, neither Judge England nor Magistrate Newman is likely to be assigned the case or accept it.

The only way to get in front of Magistrate Newman is through the settlement agreement, specifically section 16 of the settlement, which begins with this: 

16. Dispute Resolution. Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman (“Judge Newman”) will retain jurisdiction over the Action until five years from the Effective Date for purposes of overseeing implementation, enforcement and/or modification of this Agreement through the dispute resolution process described below.

That is the full extent of his power.

Second, Vince is not someone who has earned much trust from me, and Sean’s continued deference to Vince just makes me scratch my head.  But I am certainly not comfortable leaving the language of the proposed initiative solely in the hands of Vince Ewing.  Good for Kasey (who Sean has yet to mention) to force Vince to return a final “ballot-ready” initiative for the July meeting. At that meeting, specific battles will be fought over whether the language he returns meets the spirit and intent of the proposal, or if it has been watered down to the extent that it will have little practical impact.  We are getting a huge hint as to how we should expect those deliberations to go.

Third, do we have all the ordinances we need?  Are we using all we have?  No rational person can say we are or we do.  We have not reached perfection, and until we do, there is always more to do, learn, and explore.  Sean seems confident that he already knows everything we need, and we already have it.  We must learn to live with it. But he then admits that we did not use everything we could have, and he explains why. It was that terror again, trying to put Vince in the “best light” with the Magistrate.

“But when the settlement agreement was being negotiated, we pulled back on some things, because we were trying to be in the best light of the judge. Now everybody knows, well not everybody knows, people think that didn’t work. We can argue about that forever.

“Pulled back on some things?” That’s an understatement.  How did that “best light” work out for you or us?  We probably would argue about that if anyone was willing to engage in such an argument.  What would have been even more helpful would have been to engage in those arguments BEFORE the judge signed the settlement order.  But then, that may have been violating the rule about never presuming to tell Sean, Vince, or other “executives” what to do.  I’ve only been in the corporate world for a few decades, but one thing I’ve learned, everyone has a boss.  Everyone.

You know, we gave up the airport site, that didn’t work, we did some things, we didn’t get a lot of the things we wanted.  If we pushed too hard, it would actually be worse.

How many times have we heard this?  And what evidence do we have for this claim? Sean says so. And he only knows what he does because his buddy Vince Ewing said so.  We, the Barney Fifes of Chico, can’t verify any of that.  How convenient.

And the funny thing, Sean was not in negotiations, ever.  He did his learning and deliberating and deciding in closed sessions, 100% dependent on the unchallenged advice of Vince Ewing and Mark Orme.  Surprisingly, Mark Orme was the only person to be present in every negotiation. Even Vince was not there every time.  So, Sean is depending on “his executives” to explain reality, and now Sean is explaining it to us. 

Some of us might have a question or two, but since January, not a single council member has faced the public with a willingness to entertain our concerns, and neither have Vince Ewing or Mark Orme.  Someone I know tried to intervene in this case, trying to raise questions and challenge what Vince was doing while there was still time to do something about it, and the city opposed it, just like Sean is apparently opposing this initiative. Why? Because no one is about to tell him how to do his job. That is about the size of it.

Another story. I think the last time I sat down with Sean was a breakfast meeting at Sea of Cortez.  My goal was to give him some feedback about some policy decisions that were pending, I think. In that conversation, which wasn’t going well, I described Sean’s attitude as arrogant.  I said it as a friend, but Sean didn’t see it that way.  He advised me to “stay away from that word if I was you.”  Sorry, but it is arrogance to believe that you always know what’s best, despite growing evidence to the contrary.  A little humility would be helpful, but I don’t see it. Right behind humility is gratitude. It would be nice to hear a little gratitude from Sean once in a while.  But no, what we hear is the complaint that “the people” might want to go another way than he’s leading. As long as he is on the council, he doesn’t have to listen to anyone.  That is arrogance and resentment, not humility and gratitude.

Sean keeps digging.

But I say this: Let’s take a step back and go, are things getting better, or not?  Things are absolutely getting better.  Are they getting better as fast as anybody wants them? No.  But, but does that ever happen? No. Soooo, I don’t know what else we can do.”

Well, you can listen.  You can learn.  Only someone who does neither can say with a straight face that we are out of options, that we should stop while we’re behind, that there is nothing else to be done.  Where is the hope in that?  Where is the promise to make things better? Where is the acknowledgment that intelligence does exist beyond the dais?

That was an 8-minute uninterrupted speech by Sean. He revealed quite a bit.  Let’s pick up the action.  Mike Boca takes the floor.

To paraphrase, he said when he read the initiative, he thought they were very nice themes, wonderful 30-second talking points, but it was very short on specificity.  Terms like “quality of life” or “beauty” or “cleanliness” are abstract, but he didn’t see how they could be enforced.

Apparently, he didn’t read it very carefully, but then he was waiting for a poker table in Vegas at the time.  Beats the library.

These terms, “Quality of Life,” defined as “safety,” “cleanliness,” “beauty,” and “economic vitality,” are what are called “aspirational goals”.  There is nothing in there that says “beauty” is a standard for enforcement.  But it is ludicrous to imply that such words have no meaning. Merely use the opposites, “dangerous,” “dirty,” “ugly,” and “poor”, and the meaning snaps right into focus.  We want the former and not the latter.

Enforcement is about “public nuisance” which is a legal term of art specified in the California Civil Code.  The initiative gives citizens an administrative path to register a complaint about a specific public nuisance and requires the city to respond to this complaint at an administrative level, within some specific time frame.  It does not require the city to abate all nuisances immediately.  But it does not allow the city to ignore such complaints either. 

To be clear, citizens already have a right to bring a lawsuit to force a city to abate a public nuisance.  Many legal schemes, like the Brown Act to pick one example, or CEQA is another, set up an administrative process that must proceed legal action. That is what this initiative does.  In this respect, it protects the City from lawsuits filed before the City has had a chance to deal with it at a less formal level.

The point of enforcement is not to extract fines from the city.  It is to allow the City to abate a public nuisance without involving any more judges, federal or otherwise. The initiative would require that an administrative procedure be set up to establish the way this would work.  If Mike Bocca made it to the end of the document before his poker table came up, he would have noticed that the initiative even gives the city council the power to make revisions, with a super-majority vote, provided these changes are designed to further the intention of the initiative.

Mike’s comment also demonstrates the power of narrative.  He completely buys into the idea that the Magistrate is running our city.  He paints the picture that Sean has worked hard to create; that we should go hat-in-hand to the Magistrate and ask his permission to do what we want, like a perverse game of “Simon Says.”

We are not stupid, us Barney Fifes.  We can read the settlement, and we can see what ordinances are covered by the agreement.  Suffice to say that the entire city government function is not subject to judicial control by a magistrate.  Democratic representative government by the people has not been suspended.  To suggest otherwise is not only ignorant, but it feeds the narrative that “we are already doing everything we can,” and “We are under the thumb of the all-powerful judge.”  Wrong on both counts.  We still control the instrument of government, and we have barely begun to do what we can.  Where is that spirit in our city officials?

Sean piles on. He says that Mike Boca is “exactly right.”  Surprise, surprise, since Mike is simply feeding back Sean’s narrative to him.

“Let’s not make the mistake of thinking that this current council isn’t completely aligned with what these citizens want. It’s the exact same thing. We’ve got what they want. We were elected to represent them. We’re doing all we can. But then we’ve got this settlement agreement and a federal magistrate on the other side saying here’s what you can and can’t do.

Could the narrative be any clearer?  Could it be any more wrong?

“We’ve got the pallet shelter that’s being run really well. They’re doing an incredibly good job. Were there some problems in the beginning? Yes. Those are starting to decline.  There’s less calls for service, so now it’s a matter of where do we deploy resources.

Do we go to Comanche Creek, do we go to the bike path, Lindo Channel, well the obvious answer is do it all at one time. Well, you can’t.  So how do we do that and what does it look like? Those are operational decisions, and frankly, the citizens don’t make those decisions,  The best council members don’t make those decisions.”

That begs the question, who are the best council members?

“We sit back and we did this in closed session last night. We listened to the police chief, we listened to the public works director, and we listened to the interim City Manager.  How do we think strategically?

We continue to move towards this beautiful, clean, safe city that we all remember, a lot of us growing up in, without totally blowing this with the plaintiffs and the judge.  And it is a fine, fine dance, believe me.”

If the council was fully aligned with what the citizens wanted, we would not have had a Brown New Deal, we would not have had THIS settlement agreement, and we would not have adopted the legal strategy that was pursued without question or challenge, while the formal challenges that were offered were actively and aggressively undermined. 

Sean never misses an opportunity to promote the narrative that the Magistrate is in charge of him, our attorney, and the future of Chico. This is a false narrative.  The voluntary settlement sets the parameters of what the city can and cannot do within the scope of the agreement, which is narrowly construed. The Magistrate’s rule is strictly limited to calling balls and strikes on the meaning of what is already in the settlement.  Don’t take my word for it.  Use your own experience.

What was the one thing that the Magistrate has done?  He refereed a dispute brought under section 16 regarding 5 issues that were not sufficiently spelled out in the settlement. That reflects a failure of negotiation, not handcuffs placed on us by a judge. 

A good agreement is one where there is no room for a referee because the things that might happen are contemplated and spelled out in the four corners of the agreement.  That is the job of a good negotiator.  I know. I spend nearly 30 years negotiating complex, international agreements before I became a contracts lawyer, negotiating complex agreements for a bank and other entities.  I cannot give this settlement high marks.

Second, there is an entire universe that exists beyond the four corners of this settlement. This initiative is an opportunity to mandate that this universe be explored and exploited, all in the service of abating public nuisances which negatively impact the quality of life, measured by safety, cleanliness, beauty, and economic vitality.  We are not so stupid that we can’t understand that if we simply give it a try.

Scott, to his credit, tries to get at this narrative of “blaming the Magistrate”.

“Any other things that can be done with the judge to kind of push him down the same road like these citizens and the city want, instead of just kowtowing to what both he and the advocates have demanded?

Boca shares a surprising revelation:

“Be careful. Be careful. I know him.”  He meant the magistrate judge.

 Sean: “Well, I’ve already been in trouble with the Magistrate judge, like what’s he going to do now? I’m not tempting him.”

This doesn’t sound like someone Sean is terrified of, does it?  He continues with a rare moment of candor.

“But he’s not doing what you’re saying.” Sean continues. “The judge now is not saying ‘you need to do this, you need to do this.’  He worked us through the settlement with the plaintiffs, the settlement is what it is, and the judge isn’t demanding anything more. And the judge wasn’t demanding anything before, it was the plaintiffs demanding all these things, and us doing our demands, and the judge trying to figure out what made sense according to the law.  So, we don’t necessarily like the way the settlement, some of us don’t like the way the settlement agreement came out, but I will tell you, it’s workable. It’s workable given our resources.”

Well, this is something. The last time Sean mentioned the judge he said he was running our city. Now he says he didn’t have much of a role, except perhaps to clarify to the parties what the law required.  That doesn’t sound terrifying.  It sounds like what I expect and what I’ve been saying all along: The settlement is a voluntary agreement between the parties, and no one held any guns to anyone’s head.  Yes, it is what it is, and we all can read.  Who owns it?  More than any other single council member, Sean owns it.  That is clear by now even to a casual observer.

Sean went on to talk about limited resources, which is a fact, and how Amber told him she doesn’t need anything else. He then comes back to a familiar theme.

“PD and Public works, they can only do so much at a time, so even if we got the OK from the judge to say, ‘You know what?  You can go clean up all the camps, all at one time, in one big fell swoop,’ and let’s be honest, that’s what everybody wants, even if he said we could do that, we don’t have the resources to do it anyway.”

So now we’re back to asking the judge for permission?  Anyway, this is a defense against an argument that no one I know is making.  No one is asking for a magic wand that is never limited by resources. That would be irrational.  It seems like Sean is implying that supporters of this initiative are irrational.

Boca calls him back to reality. “Sean, I don’t want to say that you’re saying these advocates are extreme….

Sean: “I didn’t say that. Some of these people are friends of mine.  At least they were yesterday.”

Boca persists: “I know, but it sounds like they’re saying there are issues out there, and then you talk with the Pallet shelter and  ‘No, those aren’t issues but some of the more extreme elements on that side may be saying ‘Yes, that there are issues.’  How do you reconcile both?  Calm those people  down that are friends of yours?”

Kudos to Baca, that is exactly what Sean is doing, trying his hardest to make proponents of this initiative seem ridiculous, irrational, and wannabe Barney Fifes.

Sean: “Well, probably there is no calming them down.”

Right. Irrational Barney Fifes should be humored and/or ignored.

Scott Michaels rides to Sean’s rescue:  “There’s no calming them down because they’ve been around for 30 years in this town, doing what they do.”

Boca: “On both sides.”

Sean: “I’ve been to a couple of meetings and taken a lot of arrows, and all I can do is let the vent at me. But I think they know, kinda what my intent is, where my heart is and what we’re trying to do.”

I happen to know what Sean is referring to. It was on January 17th, 4 days after the settlement first became public. It was held at the Commons on Meyers, right next to Comanche Creek. A number of the same people who are supporting this initiative were there to ask Sean questions.  Why Sean and not any other council member?  Deepika was there, but she was not there to answer questions, Sean volunteered for that. The presumption is that he was a member of the “inner circle” that had been working most closely with Vince Ewing and Mark Orme.

For Sean to characterize this meeting as him “taking arrows” is funny. I know most of the people in the room and had talked to them many times before this evening. Believe me when I say they were extremely restrained and polite.  But they asked sensible and reasonable questions. 

To say that all that was happening was “venting” is not only wrong, but disparaging to those citizens and business leaders who came with fair, legitimate questions at nearly the only opportunity, either before or since to ask questions about just how that settlement was supposed to work.  Many of those questions persist. 

But information has a way of coming out, and slowly we are learning much more about what has happened. Looking back, Sean has been consistent in his narrative, yet his view and this emerging information seem to be diverging more and more.

FYI, there have been exactly two opportunities for the public to speak about this case to their elected representatives, this meeting on the 17th, where we learned little other than Sean’s faith that all would soon be well, and a second press conference on the next day where Mayor Andrew Coolidge faced the press and answered some questions from me and others, or at least responded to some questions with little information or insight.  That was captured on video and published here:

If either council member thought that the public would not have questions, it turns out they were wrong. The council, as elected representatives, should be prepared and willing to address these questions in a public forum.  They tried it once, then ran for the hills, never to face the public again or since.  They were not about to repeat that mistake.

Sean continues: “But the other thing, we talked about this last night, I’m trying to leave people’s names out, but you know, people’s businesses are vandalized, and people threatening all these things, that is not a just a condition of the homeless problem, that is a condition of the state law in California. Nothing is a crime in this state.”

“We’ve got child molesters wandering around, we’ve got people stealing stuff wandering around when they get arrested, they come right back out. Someone living at the pallet shelter did some vandalism to a business very close to there and got arrested. I GUARANTEE, they were back out before the police officer finished writing his report. Chico cannot fix that. There is not an ordinance that anybody can write, Vince, Rob, anyone, that will stop the problem that is the state of California that has decided to let everyone do whatever they want, whenever they want.”

If I understand Sean correctly, the situation is hopeless.  There is nothing the city, Vince, Rob (me?), Sean, or anyone else can do to stem the wave of lawlessness unleashed by the State of California.  Unless there is some better news than this, let me slash my wrists right now.  Fortunately, Sean saves me from certain demise with a shift to the good news.

“The good news is, we’re starting to see the tide change a little bit. When the liberal hell-hole of San Francisco gets rid of the anti-justice DA? People are starting to say ‘This is enough!’ This should be the greatest state in the nation, and instead, it’s the worst one. Why? It’s all policy.

All Chico is trying to do is, we’re treading water. There are waves coming over our heads, and we’re trying to maintain the beautiful, safe city we grew up as, in light of all this crazy policy.

So, they’re not extremists, your friends my friends, they think the way they’ve always thought. But they’re seeing the state go right down the toilet, and they’re like, ‘Wait a minute! We gotta stop this, we gotta stop this.’  These are all Type A, successful people that when things go wrong, they step up and they say, ‘Hey. We’ll fight back.’ That’s what they are doing. I totally get it. I have the same personality.

The challenge is, the things they are asking for I can’t do because I got a federal judge and state laws saying “Nope.  That’s not legal, that’s not legal, that’s not legal. So to bring it all the way back to the beginning, what is this whole thing about? Trying to find are there ways we can push and protect in light of everything that’s going on. It’s not just the settlement. It’s AB109, it’s prop. 47 and all that stuff. And until the people of California screw their heads on straight, it’s just going to get worse and worse and worse.”

Sorry, but that didn’t sound like good news. It sounded like because we live in California, cities like Chico are doomed, helpless, victims of forces we can’t control, and therefore, Sean can’t control.  So, until the universe realigns, we just better resign ourselves to more and more misery. Is that the good news?

The radio hosts aren’t buying it.

Boca; “Don’t hold your breath.  Till the people of California get their heads on straight! 

Sean: “It’s not like this in Texas.  It’s not like this in Florida.

Boca: “But those people aren’t going to live here though.  California, though. I don’t see that changing.”

Scott calls the conversation home. “Let’s get back to some of the homeless issues.” Good call. The conversation shifts to discussing the alternative camping sites. Old news.

My conclusion thus far is that Sean is reaching for any reason outside of himself to blame for what motivated citizens to try something new, to assert some control over their future, despite all the challenges that Sean enumerates. In so doing, he misses the essential point.

He has supported Vince, Mark, and the Settlement from day one. Because of the secrecy, we don’t know for sure when day one was.  What I do know, despite the many challenges beginning with April of 2020 and the Brown New Deal, but it goes back further than that, no one who is in a position to fight for the citizens’ rights to a decent quality of life has stepped up and strapped on their iron, not Mark Orme, not Vince Ewing, and sadly, not Sean Morgan.  I could add some names to the list, but this is about Sean’s interview.

Even now, what we are hearing is despair, hopelessness, paralysis, “this is as good as we can do” and other deflections away from any personal responsibility for failure. And sorry, there is no way we can describe the events of the past year or two as a success.

Sean argues, and it is the best argument he has, that enforcement is working, just like he said it would. There is some truth in that claim. Certain areas are being cleared, slowly and expensively. On the one hand, we spent millions and waited months, all the while suffering the humiliation of watching our city being destroyed by those who have no regard for the quality of life of anyone but themselves, where destruction is the norm, and on the other, we depended upon helpless and feckless city leaders who expect citizens to lie quietly and follow the hollow excuses of the self-appointed leaders of the free world.

But as an analogy, imagine flying at 30,000 feet with a hole in the gas tank.  It is true, at the moment we are flying straight and level, but we also see the gas gauge moving towards E.  A crystal ball is not necessary to predict the future, which includes a splat, even if we can blame someone else for the leak. If I want to land this plane safely, the time for action is at hand now, not after the plane sputters and dives to the ground.  As the successful type-A personalities might counsel, “Fix the problem, not the blame.” Plenty of time for that later.

The problems are many, but they all orbit around the declining quality of life. Rather than join the team that wants to do something specific about it, some would rather quiver in their frozen state, blaming everyone and everything else for their paralysis.

Here is Sean’s closing:

“At the end of the day, and we said this in an editorial that Tom Van Overbeek and I wrote, as long as the homeless advocates are advocating for free will, free spirit, do anything you want, come to Chico and we’ll just give you endless amounts of stuff, we are going to battle this and battle this and battle this.  And, coming after the City Attorney and saying you’re not doing enough, you’re going to wear yourself out, because we’re doing everything we can with whatever resource we can. Mike drop.”

“Mike drop?”  I don’t buy it.  And although neither Sean nor Vince could give two hoots what I think or say, I do know a thing or two about Martin v. Boise, Warren v. Chico, and a range of things that can be done to restore and protect our quality of life now and into the future. 

It is time to give the microphone to others, and refuse to continue to allow Sean, working with Vince, to control the narrative.  Not only is it false, but it is also devoid of hope, action, or purpose. 

Clearing the parks once and for all is a noble goal, and one I hope to see in my lifetime, but even if that succeeds, the job is not done.  We can always enhance our safety, improve the appearance and pride in our city, and pursue beauty in all its diverse forms, all done in concert with, and not at the expense of economic health and vitality. These things are possible.

Here is one way to think of this initiative.  If the homeless problems did not exist, if we finally did succeed in ending homelessness, if that particular form of suffering was ended forever, along with the terrible impacts that population has had on the rest of the community, would we be finished? 

That is ridiculous. There is a world beyond homelessness, beyond Warren, the Settlement, and even the power of Sacramento.  It is up to us to create that world. We cannot expect anyone to ride in from the sunrise and deliver these things to us.  We must create them, nurture them, defend them, and develop them. We must do that.  It is not going to happen for us.

As the saying goes, “When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.”

One way to stop digging is to start with the idea of abating a public nuisance. That is a declaration that we intend to stop digging.  Our quality of life has suffered enough, and it’s time that we changed the path, changed the narrative, and changed the results.

There is another saying: “Lead, follow, or get out of the way.”  It is time for our current power brokers to get out of the way.  We’ve got work to do.  We don’t need a lecture on what we cannot do or how worn out we might get trying. 

I love Chico and the people in it.