Recalling Redding City Council Members Won’t Solve Shasta County’s Crime Problem

Shasta County Jail. Photos by Doni Chamberlain.

In encouraging news, several local citizens involved in the effort to recall two Redding City Council members took their concerns about deteriorating public safety to the Shasta County Board of Supervisors in late August, calling the supervisors out on the county’s repeated failure to provide enough jail space to contain the rising tide of drug-and-alcohol-addicted petty offenders terrorizing the community.

To their credit, county officials responded promptly, in a Record Searchlight article one week later, saying an expansion of existing jail capacity was back on the table. Sheriff Tom Bosenko already has a tentative plan in the works; supervisors Leonard Moty and Les Baugh said they might even propose some sort of local tax increase to fund it.

I find this development encouraging because the recall movement, or at least some of its members, are finally on the right track. If they continue down this road, they’ll discover that the local crime problem has absolutely nothing to do with Redding City Council members Francie Sullivan and Kristen Schreder, whom they seek to recall, and much more to do with the historical criminal justice reforms that have swept across California during the past decade.

The most sweeping of these changes has been prison realignment, sometimes referred to as AB 109, legislation passed in 2011 in response to a federal court ruling that declared California’s overcrowded prisons were in violation of the 8th amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.

Prison realignment unfolded just as California’s criminal justice pendulum was swinging away from punitive measures like the Three Strikes Law enacted in the 1990s and toward more lenient penalties and rehabilitation, especially for non-violent, non-sexual, non-serious offenders. Under prison realignment, the hardest criminals remained in state prison system but the responsibility for incarcerating and rehabilitating lower risk criminals was transferred to county jails and probation departments—along with approximately $1 billion in total annual state funding to cover each counties’ increased costs.

The money is administered by the Board of State and Community Corrections. According to BSCC communications director Tracie Cone, Shasta County receives about $10 million annually, plus any additional grants its qualifies for, and is given local autonomy on how the funding is spent.

“The governor has been adamant that each county’s approach to realignment should be unique to the local populations served,” Cone informed me via email. “What works in Siskiyou might not work in LA, and the challenges and availability of services in each county are different.”

Locally, the spending decisions and grant proposals are made by the Community Corrections Partnership Executive Committee, which presently consists of Chief Probation Officer and chairwoman Tracie Neal, Sheriff Bosenko, District Attorney Stephanie Bridgett, HHSA Director Donnell Ewert, Superior Court Executive Officer Melissa Fowler-Bradley, Public Defender Jeff Goder, and interim Redding Police Chief Peter Hansen.

Shasta County, despite the fact it was still recovering from recession, seemed well-poised to take on realignment’s added responsibilities in 2011, with a $33 million, 232-bed medium security facility, to be funded by AB 900 grant money and local revenue, already in the planning stage. The new facility would finally address the jail’s longstanding overcapacity issues. And then, just like that, the deal fell through.

“The decision was based solely [on] the county’s inability to secure the annual financial resources necessary to staff and operate the new facility,” Shasta County Chief Executive Officer Lawrence Lees informed the state Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation in Aug. 2012. The $33 million grant was reverted to the state to be redistributed elsewhere.

In what must have seemed like recurring episodes of Groundhog Day to Sheriff Bosenko, his proposed $20 million, 128-bed Adult Rehabilitation Center, tailored to the realities of criminal justice reform, was first whittled down to 64 beds in 2015 and then scuttled entirely last year, both times due to lack of local revenue to match state grant funding.

According to the ballpark figure presented by county officials, we’re anywhere from $2.5 million to $5 million short of the annual revenue needed to staff and operate an expanded facility.

Adding to the complications posed by realignment, the state’s voters passed Prop. 47 in 2014, which among other things raised the threshold for felony theft from $400 to $950 and reduced a number of other non-violent, non-sexual, non-serious crimes to misdemeanors, including hard drug offenses.

Prop. 47 achieved the laudable result of finally reducing the state’s prison population to the level mandated by the federal panel. But in certain locales across the state where jail space is limited, including Shasta County, it has morphed into what some describe as a catch-and-release program, where low level offenders, particularly drug addicts who commit misdemeanor thefts to feed their habits, are cited and then set free, because there’s no space in the jail, which is now reserved for hardcore felons who would have formerly been sentenced to prison or are awaiting sentencing.

The problem is fairly obvious: How do you force a low-level junkie thief into recovery without the threat of a jail sentence or at least probation? Fortunately in the overall scheme of California’s criminal justice reform movement, there are other options besides jail. This year, Shasta County seemed once again poised to take advantage of the reforms, and was in the running for a crucial $6 million Prop. 47 grant from the BSCC.

But in June, at the start of what has turned out to be a long, hot, angry summer, the BSCC informed informed Shasta County it wouldn’t be getting the grant, after all. Only 23 of the 54 counties applying for grants received awards.

Having followed the emotionally-charged debate revolving around street crime and homeless transients since I moved to Shasta County three years ago, I understood this was yet another serious setback, which like the county’s previous failed efforts to expand jail space, had virtually nothing to do with the Redding City Council.

It’s always tempting to point fingers during fierce debate, and when I contacted Cone at the BSCC, I had one of two culprits in mind: the state or the county. Cone quickly disabused me of the notion, held by many local law enforcement officials as well as myself, that Shasta County’s current crime problems are the result of of state prison realignment.

“That is a local communication problem,” Cone said. “Realignment is not contributing to an increase in statewide crime.”

I checked with the Public Policy Institute of California (as Cone suggested) and the PPIC has indeed revised its assessment on statewide violent and property crime rates since I last visited the issue. Formerly the PPIC had noted an increase in property crime statewide during the first two years of prison realignment and suggested a correlation; Shasta County saw a similar increase at the same time. Since then, the statewide property crime rate has come down. Shasta County’s property crime rate has also come down, although there is some debate as to how much crime is going unreported here.

My efforts to pin the blame on the county met with similar results.

I asked Cone if it was unusual for counties to revert multi-million dollar grants for jail expansions, as Shasta County had done on several occasions since prison realignment began.

“It is not unusual to revert jail construction awards from counties back to the BSCC,” she said. “Local conditions often change during the time it takes from application-to-award-to-establishment of projects. Sometimes it’s financial, sometimes counties decide that more and bigger jails are not the future.”

In Shasta County’s case, the reasons have been financial. But Cone pointed out that San Francisco recently reverted an $80 million grant because city officials believes jailing drug addicts and the mentally ill is no longer a viable solution.

“Most people in criminal justice reform believe that jail is the wrong place for both of these groups, and that they do better in treatment facilities that address their underlying issues,” Cone said. “This is one of the reasons why last year San Francisco returned $80 million in jail construction funding that it had received from us. It is far less expensive to treat someone out of a jail or prison than it is inside.’

It’s worth noting that both of Bosneko’s previous jail expansion proposals had a heavy emphasis on rehabilitation and treatment services. Cone said the fact that Shasta County continues to be awarded grants is an indication that its proposals are sound—if lacking the local funding to get off the ground.

“Jail beds are only a small part of the rehabilitative equation,” she said. “Even when counties have received jail funding awards it’s not to increase the number of beds, but to build more modern and efficient facilities that include space for rehabilitative programs.”

Despite recently losing out on the $6 million Prop. 47 grant, Cone pointed out that Shasta County’s Community Corrections Partnership has been quite successful at securing millions in grant funding for evidence-based programs like the Probation Department’s Day Reporting Center, the STEP UP program with Shasta College, as well as funding for mentally ill offenders and first-time parents.

While the BSCC doesn’t rate or compare compare the performance of counties, Cone said, “[I]t seems to me that Shasta County officials are aggressive and successful in applying for public safety grants. They seem to be doing a tremendous job in this area.”

All of this should be encouraging news. By airing its grievances at the county level, the recall movement has actually done a great service to the community. Increased jail space is back on the table, and so are the taxes to support it. It’s not going to be an easy sell in conservative Shasta County. Perhaps the recall campaign will consider abandoning its attempt to oust two city council members who have nothing to do with this issue and focus its efforts on supporting a tax proposal that might actually solve the problem.

It’s just a suggestion. According to the PPIC, from inception it takes anywhere from 5 to 7 years to get a brand new facility built. Might as well get started now.

R.V. Scheide
R.V. Scheide has been a northern California journalist for more than 20 years. He appreciates your comments and story ideas.
Comment Policy: We welcome your comments, with some caveats: Please keep your comments positive and civilized. If your comment is critical, please make it constructive. If your comment is rude, we will delete it. If you are constantly negative or a general pest, troll, or hater, we will ban you from the site forever. The definition of terms is left solely up to us. Comments are disabled on articles older than 90 days. Thank you. Carry on.

75 Responses

  1. conservative says:

    Gov. Brown and many democrats believe in “subsidiarity”. Use the search engine of your choice for articles on it. It means that the lowest level of government possible should deal with problems. The State has to deal with global warming, build and operate the high speed train and build the tunnels to carry Sacramento river water to San Joaquin Valley agriculture. Confinement of prisoners, welfare, the courts etc. can be shifted to counties. Alameda county and others have a 9.75% sales tax rate and it is thriving.

    AB 109 was a first round of prisoner releases and there are more to come. At Avenal and Pleasant Valley prisons in the SJ valley prisoners are dying of Valley fever. Those prisons and some obsolete prisons with asbestos insulation should be closed. Counties should build new jails and house and rehabilitate.

    One week ago, the CA Supreme Court ruled that sales tax increases by initiative can be passed with a simple majority, a crucial piece needed for “subsidiarity”. The local Gannet newspaper, as well as most of California’s major newspapers, ran an article about the decision which could be revolutionary.

    • R.V. Scheide Jr. says:

      The California Supreme Court ruling will be revolutionary … depending on how it is interpreted. If Shasta County can pass a tax for the jail with a simple majority, we just might get it done. But I see Howard Jarvis & Co already have their hackles raised and seek to stop any change. Thanks for pointing this out, I missed it last week.

      • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

        I’m hoping a test of the court’s ruling will be initiated within six months. It should only take a few years to resolve that case. Then—if there’s anything left to save—it’ll be time for another local ballot measure!

  2. Tim says:

    Why doesn’t Redding have a jail of its own? Chico does…

    Maybe if we kick out leaders who lavish raises on people who waste taxpayer dollars botching attempts at an Olympic Pool in the Aquatic center and tearing down 10 year-old city parks, the city might soon have the trust of the electorate that it’ll spend new tax revenue on a jail instead of yet another bike path.

    • trek says:

      I like your way of thinking. Although the bike paths that follow the river may seem like a waste of money to the citizens who do not use them they are truly one of Redding’s hidden jems to the outside world. With more outside exposure the paved paths would probably pay for themselves with tourist dollars spent in the community.

      • Marie says:

        Trek, You are on the right path (pun?). Improving and beautifying public areas entice more people to visit and it increases pride in the city. That is reflected in people being better citizens.
        More jail space seems like a band aid for making the city better.

    • R.V. Scheide Jr. says:

      It will be interesting to see if the County/City can come up with a proposal the voters will trust. Trust in local government isn’t exactly in high supply around here, and it really doesn’t have anything to do with how good or bad the local government is, it’s more long-held political values. Can we change that? I hope so.

  3. Karen C says:

    “Botched attempts at an Olympic Pool”? While I do not know all that much about the pool, it does seem to be busy all the time with events. I have friends who have promising swimmers and I often hear about major swim meets held there. I recall an event in which a guest team had issues with being harassed by the homeless in the park. Perhaps you can fill me in a little on the issues you speak of? I had always thought the pool was a successful venue for the events held there. Thank you.

  4. Julie Winter says:

    Thankyou for such a well researched article. On average, RPD arrests 60 people per day and there are typically about 5 beds available. We have lost the stick to get people to take the carrot of getting drug treatment. Cheap heroin is driving much of the crime today. We’ve got to figure out a way to break the cycle.

    • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

      I used to do work with a guy who thought it was insightful to describe a problem that was obvious to everyone, and then follow up with: “We gotta figure out a way to (solve the problem du jour).” And then he was done. He had stated the problem, and said we needed to do something about it. That was usually the totality of his contribution.

      It almost never occurred to him that, as top dog, it was his job to figure out what needed to be done, and his job to take the lead on implementing his plan. It was enough to vaguely state that something had to be done, by someone.

      So Julie, it seems like potential solutions are DOA due to lack of funding. What’s the plan?

      • R.V. Scheide Jr. says:

        Steve, this could be interesting. Will conservative supervisors support–and promote!–a small tax increase to get this project rolling? It seems like it would be decidedly out of character for them to do so. I was surprised they were so upfront about it in the RS article. Naturally, I pounced.

      • Julie Winter says:

        Steve,I believe we need a multi-pronged attack. There are some things only the County can do – courts, jail space, probation, mental health. Although we can ask (and we’ve done so) the DA to prosecute, sentence, and jail people we arrest, the county has said they do not have the funding to adequately do so. In CA the primary responsibility of the courts and jails is given by the state to the county. Cities (with county permission) can temporarily hold people in a detention center, but there is no funding stream for Redding to either build or operate such a facility. The current regulatory environment of our state (ADA Access, providing health care, mental health, legal services, etc to prisoners) makes this unattainable.

        What the city can do is reach out to the county and our state reps to come together and hammer out a plan to get changes at the state level. I am committed to working on that process.

        The bigger role for the city is working to create a positive environment for culture and business to thrive. Increasing employment, wages, and opportunities for our citizens to prosper will not only reduce crime, but provide revenue for more officers and jail space.

        Last night I voted to approve Solid Waste’s plan to take on an increased role in illegal camp cleanups, hiring an additional CSO, and increased vegetation management. We voted last night to keep REU rates from being increased. We also approved a letter of intent from a company to purchase Lot 10 at Stillwater Business Park. Very good news indeed.

        I have asked our city manager to look at a project in Albuquerque that employs homeless to see if we could do something similar here. We are looking at the feasibility of that now.

        Behind the scene, as a private citizen I am working on a homeless project as well as another project that would train up tech workers.

        I supported D&E and I would support a tax measure. Many other cities, Anderson included, have improved public safety with this revenue stream. The recent court decision may make this process easier if initiated by the citizens. Perhaps you’d be interested in taking that on?

        • Common Sense says:

          Hey Julie Winter…how about allowing a couple hundred Jobs to be provided AND Millions in Tax Revenues per year….not to mention buildings tripling in value so Higher Taxes for the County……I think you have seen it on here in the past….but in case you missed it…..Say Yes to Prop 64!….We do have an EMPTY Stillwater Business Park? Yes?….any ideas to create hundreds of Jobs And Millions per year in Tax Revenues other than that??

  5. Richard Christoph says:

    Thanks for the excellent synopsis, R.V. Your Monday morning E-pistles are consistently thoughtful, well-researched, substantive, and informative.

  6. conservative says:

    The 2016 election was a landslide in California. The results indicate popular support for AB 109.

    • R.V. Scheide Jr. says:

      Well, the voters did pass Prop. 57 last year, which will allow more low level convicts to apply for parole, so statewide, yes, voters support prison realignment and the various criminal justice reforms associated with it. However, I believe Shasta County as a whole voted against both Prop. 47 and 57. So it’s not clear if voter here support it.

  7. Karen C says:

    Thanks for the response Tim. It is interesting to me that Kim Neimer is being held responsible for much of the failures. As a retired city employee whose work involved many city departments, numerous projects, public events, and special programs, I was fortunate to have the backing of my peers at the Redding Police Department. Once given the go ahead for projects, I was backed and assisted by everyone from my immediate supervisor, all the way up to Chief Blankenship. Everyone took a part to make sure everything went smooth, on budget and was a success. Their doors were always open to me for questions, concerns and any assistance I needed.
    So, I wonder, does it not work that way on the City Hall side of business projects? Is one simply handed over the project and told to run with it, with no guidance, or checks in place to see it through successfully? Usually something I had not thought about, was thought about by someone else and I was alerted to it. If I had an issue with insurance coverage, or where to go for information I needed, someone was always there to give me an answer. I would never take on programs alone, such as the ones Kim Neimer was given. For her to be blamed for the failures of those massive projects seems unfair.

    • Tim says:

      Even if you think the criticism is unfair, you must admit the optics were terrible: Tell your constituents you lack money for public safety while increasing the total compensation, from $190,000 to $200,000/year, of a manager with a dubious track record who just so happened to be a campaign supporter of the 3 approving her raise…

  8. Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

    R.V. sez: “Perhaps the recall campaign will consider abandoning its attempt to oust two city council members who have nothing to do with this issue and focus its efforts on supporting a tax proposal that might actually solve the problem.”

    This is an excellent proposal, and I would hope that the recall proponents would take this advice and run with it. The recall amounts to an expensive and pointless exercise in tilting at windmills—a revolving cast of characters in the City Council would do nothing to address the area’s public safety problems.

    The likelihood of the recall proponents taking R.V.’s sound advice: When pigs fly over the frozen landscape of Hell. Power-tripping is a powerful drug.

  9. Tim says:

    It costs ~ $100/day to house an inmate. 404 people are responsible for 37% of RPD’s arrests (each of those 404 was arrested at least 5 times per year).
    So we need 404×$100/day×365days ~= $15 million to send these incorrigibles on a one year time-out (which may not be the best answer, but it sure beats nothing).

    There are 108,800 assessed parcels in Shasta County, paying an average of $1,500/year in property taxes. $15m is an average of ~$140/year.

    As a property owner, would you be willing to pay $140 to take a criminal off the street for the year? I sure would. Heck, make it 6 months for $70 — who can argue with that?

    • R.V. Scheide Jr. says:

      Your math says its doable, and the most interesting thing is, with the advent of evidence-based rehabilitation programs, which the county must use in order to get state funding, we may just start helping the criminals who can be helped, and lower the crime rate, as well as our costs.

      • Tim says:

        Hey look, somebody saying they want one thing (more jail space) and then suddenly wanting something else (helping criminals get better) once the prospect of a large sum of money is at hand! I think you would fit right at home on the city council…

        Two things are very clear to me: 1) we absolutely need more jail space 2) we absolutely cannot trust city staff to spend money in pursuit of #1.

        Liberal la-ta-de criminal coddling has gotten us into this mess and I for one wouldn’t pay another red cent towards these pseudo evidence-based programs until I can live, work, and play without reasonable fear of being made an actual victim by a poor widdle “victim of drug addiction and circumstance.” Maybe their life really sucked up until the point they hit the needle and maybe they were genetically predisposed. But the same could be said for John Wayne Gacy and I don’t lose sleep over him either.

        • R.V. Scheide Jr. says:

          Did you read the story? Even Bosenko’s 128 bed facility had 64 beds reserved for drug rehab/mental illness. This is the way the state is going. The problem isn’t just about locking people up–although a new facility will provided us with room for that too. Think Big Tim.

    • K. Beck says:

      Where, exactly, would these inmates be incarcerated? You seem to have missed a major point. The CA jails are full. The Feds stepped in and we got AB409. Now the “low level criminals” are scattered all over the state. Shasta Co. jails are FULL.

      Whatever are you talking about?

      Seems to me the major problem is those folks who keep saying, “Lock them all up.” That is what we have been doing and it does NOT work! We have proof positive of that. Look around you!

      Let’s have a look at putting money in up front, pre-school and good education thereafter. That way perhaps we “grow” useful citizens.

      • Tim says:

        Normally, it would be nice to construct a prison in the community using members of the community. But given our council’s propensity for graft and overspending, I’d just skip that and ship off anyone with >1 year sentence to CoreCivic or Geo group. Both are for-profit prisons, cost less than ~$50/day for minimum security and have plenty of capacity.

    • Pam says:

      Why should it be dumped on the property owners all the time? I am already paying for 3 school bond measures. I would have been happy to vote yes on the safety tax and pay my fair share but I didn’t get the guarantee from city council that it would be spent only for safety. I don’t trust them as this point.

      • Tim says:

        Because due to prop13, Californians drastically underpay property taxes. Unlike sales taxes, property taxes are progressive and help achieve a more equitable distribution of wealth (the rich can’t just hoard large tracts of property without eventually running out of money to pay for it — society is better served when land owners must make the best use of their land).

  10. Frank Treadway says:

    Not only are the TBR folks on the wrong political track; because of lack of signatures, they’re now reported to resorting to bring in outside paid signature gatherer’s. The last time I was asked to sign a petition the paid person was accused of harassment and removed from the premises. They’re willing to pay street folks $6-10. per signature and then complain about costs within the City. Who’s funding this fiasco ? They need to get over 100 signatures p/day…good luck !

    • R.V. Scheide Jr. says:

      They kicked me off their Facebook page, the big meanies!

      • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

        You have to petition to join their FB page and wait for the administrators to vet you. I suppose you got kicked off for being some sort of contrarian, right? I tried to join, and I’m still waiting for approval. Not gonna hold my breath.

        These people seem weirdly secretive, thin-skinned, and paranoid. If any of them are reading this they’re probably thinking, “It’s not paranoia if they’re all out to get you.”

        Some people only feel comfortable inside of echo chambers, I suppose. It certainly reduces your need to defend your weaksauce position if all you’re hearing is, “Ooh, me too! Me too! That’s what I think, too!”

        • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

          Waddaya know—I got accepted into the fold of their FB page! I quickly tried to post the following:

          Quick question: Why is this a closed group?

          Follow-up question: Am I going to get kicked out of the group for asking the above question?

          That’s how I learned that group members’ comments don’t post until the page’s administrators approve the comments—it’s more of an enforced echo chamber than I’d even imagined.

          They did repost some crank’s anti-recall post to another FB group’s page, so as to create the following illusion:

          (1) While we’re not afraid of debate, (2) the other side’s opinions are all cranks talking bat-shit, like this post from another FB group.

          So dishonest. So cowardly. So weak.

          FB deserves every ounce of criticism it gets for enabling this sort of insularity, which in turn promotes further polarization.

          • Anje Watson says:

            I’m not sure where posted but your information is inaccurate, we do not see your information before it is posted. There is healthy debate on a regular basis and we all learn from different ideas.
            The page is closed for many reasons, as a lot of pages are. The page was made to focus on solutions and to work together with community members that are interested in doing the same…this can be programs for the youth, working towards jail beds and mental health, holding group events, etc. It wasn’t meant to be an open group where people are subject to being insulted or bashed, etc but where the community comes together to work towards solutions. Amazing things have came from the group and the people that work countless hours behind the scenes. Funny how you are not talking about any of that.

          • R.V. Scheide Jr. says:

            They say they booted me off because I was a “lurking journalist” i.e. I announced I was a journalist in my posts.

            The real reason is, one of their inner circle tried to feed me that fake Two Bikers Down story, and they didn’t expect me to actually report the story out. That’s when I was booted, after the first story came out. I am protecting my source because it was off the record. I actually did them a favor.

          • Eric says:

            Why would you join a page that’s in support of a recall when you don’t support it ? Sounds as though you’re being a coward by posting about a page you joined on another venue instead of there. Might want to go put on your safety pin and go to your safe spot

          • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

            I got in about 6-8 comments on their closed group Facebook page. I was mostly asking why they were so secretive, allergic to dissenting opinions, and seemingly paranoid. (The only counter-point I could find on the page was re-posted from another page—it was some crank who was supposed to represent the opposition. I pointed out that it was a form of straw-man argument.)

            I also predicted that I’d be cast out shortly. I was assured that wouldn’t happen—that they weren’t afraid of healthy debate.

            I did get accused of personally attacking someone. In response, I pointed out that I very clearly was speaking to a particular statement, not to the character of the person who had posted it. I tried to explain that bad ideas don’t get immunity from being critiqued—sometimes harshly—by hiding behind “ad hominem.”

            Anyway, as of this morning I’ve been kicked out of the group, so I’m not going to avoid ad hominem snark any longer: These recall people are secretive, thin-skinned, paranoid, schoolmarmish (except when it comes to insults of their own—see Eric’s comment), afraid of debate, and overall shady.

          • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

            Eric — I joined the FB group to see if the group’s leaders were any more forthcoming there about their agenda than they are in public. Regarding especially (1) why two particular city council members were targeted for recall instead of three or four, (2) who they were supporting to replace those council members, (3) what in particular they were proposing to do to address Redding’s heroin and crime issues.

            Turns out they’re vague about their plans in private, too. The plan seems too be this: Let’s burn things to the ground and see what happens. As for content and overall substance on the FB group page, let’s just say THERE ARE A LOT OF ALL CAPS AND EXCLAMATION POINTS AND TIPOS IN PLAY!!! Whatever they’re thinking—and it’s hard to say what exactly that is because they don’t articulate it much—it seems to come from their bellies.

            I’m not cowering anywhere. There, as here, I used my full name. I only summarized here what I posted in full there. There, unlike here, the business that I own is coupled with my Facebook identity. I take note that I’m being labeled a coward by a scaredy-cat who identifies himself only as “Eric,” which I’m going to go ahead and assume is a fake name, as that fits with the rest of your chicken-$#!+ modus.

            Nice try, snowflake. Thanks for playing.

    • Dale says:

      Frank, bad enough you run your mouth about me personaly now you just make up complete lies. First the only way some one asked you to sign would be if you walked up to a table. 2nd. The recall commitee has no paid petetion gathers all volunteers. 3rd. The going rate is $2.50 per signature for future reference. 4th we were never asked to leave any spot, but kristens guy holding a KKK sign was asked to remove it at farmers market… when you cant argue a topic on its merits you resort to lies and personal attacts..

    • Eric says:

      I’d like to know who reported that because from what I’ve heard they haven’t raised any funds. There has been no radio, tv or print ads which would be an idicator there’s a lack of funding

    • Dale says:

      Frank, you are playing the well-practiced game of “Intellectual Dishonesty” which goes like this: (1) make an accusation, (2) pretend that your party has never participated in such a practice.

      Here’s the truth. No one has being paid for petition signatures unless you count the shopper who gave cold water to volunteers outside of our local retail chains in the sweltering heat. Your outright lies only further discredit you and the causes you advocate for. Shameful Frank. I wouldn’t want you within 10 miles of any political cause I cared for and supported.

      Here’s something you should read.

      http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-signature-gatherers-ballot-initiatives-california-20160627-snap-htmlstory.html

  11. cheyenne says:

    The Arizona Republic has an article on elected officials pay. State education head Diane Douglas is paid the lowest state edu salary of $85,000 to oversee 1.1 million students. The highest paid, to oversee 500,000 students, is Mississippi at $300,000.
    Governor Ducey is paid $95,000, only two other states pay lower governor salaries, Colorado-$90,000 and Maine-$70,000.

  12. pmarshall says:

    Prop 47 has certainly brought about more problems than can be solved by the two ladies who are on the list for recall. WE ALL KNOW WHAT THE PROBLEM IS, NOT THOSE TWO. yES, WE NEED TO KEEP A LOT OF THOSE “HOMELESS” PEOPLE “under wraps”. Redding has never had this much crime. But who will hire those people who have been released from jail? Is this really solveable?

  13. John says:

    Not impressed with any if it” Live with the wave of crime & danger as I do & every neighborhood except high end gated community’s & then come back with your defense for lack of police protection & fear of being prosecuted for defending your family & property as we are !

  14. B Miller says:

    Absolute rubbish. What you neglect to mention is the 60+ individuals on Redding city payroll receiving more than 200,000$ annual pay. For those of you that can’t do math, that’s 12,000,000 a year. The cost of living in this part of the state is miniscule compared to nearly any other area. Public officials that are approving pay increases to a bloated city management are to be held accountable. Perhaps we should consider proposing a local agenda (initiative) that would limit the pay of city officials to no more than 150% of the common household median income. That would still allow said city staff to make nearly 95,000 a year, which would be a secure enough breadbasket to live lavishly in these parts. More than that I approximate that this would provide close to 7 million a year in savings that we could dedicate to fixing our detention shortcomings. Look, the BOS is certain to be recalled next. For now let’s hold responsible the folks that authorize pay increases to the already wealthy public servants. Please don’t skirt the problem. To say that crime is the only reason for a recall is naive. There are dozens.

    • R.V. Scheide Jr. says:

      B Miller, crank this into your equation. The county I believe as a 25 million budget, the largest portion of which is spent on public safety. Lees has estimated we need 10 percent more, 2.5 million, to operate Bosenko’s 64-bed expansion. The larger facility would be twice as much. This could be done fairly easily–I believe Measure D would have taken in 11 million annually for 10 years?

      • Tim says:

        $25 milliom budget? LOL the county takes in $161 million in property taxes alone.

      • Tim says:

        Proposed 2017-18 county budget: $448mm

        public safety: $67mm (15%)
        public assistance: $113mm (25%)
        mental health: $50mm (11%)
        child support: $8mm (2%)
        public health: $22mm (5%)
        opportunity center: $5mm (1%)
        resource management: $7mm (2%)

        http://www.co.shasta.ca.us/docs/libraries/cao-docs/17-18-recommended-budget.pdf?sfvrsn=4

        • R.V. Scheide Jr. says:

          You’re right Tim, I was quoting figures from the Community Corrections Partnership budget, I was in posting in a hurry, and didn’t clarify that. It’s included in that public safety $65 million budget figure above. I believe the figure is $25 million. That’s where the 10 percent came from in the 2016 RS story about why the jail grant failed. $2.5 million for salaries and operating expenses. I’m more careful with my stories than my comments.

          • Tim says:

            You’re a compelling writer, but it is very frustrating when folks claim there is a shortage of funds when it really comes down to where funds are being spent; there will never be enough to make everybody happy so in some folks’ eyes, there will always be a shortage and a reason to raise taxes.

            Furthermore, there is an amazing lack of understanding among the public (and even the press) about how money is allocated. Most assume that the largest portion of the budget is spent on public safety (or the military), an illusion some in the government encourage, but the reality is the majority of the budget is spent on social programs and services.

            Redding:
            $300mm total budget, $29mm for Police (< 10%)
            $24.5mm of that Police figure goes to salary & benefits, which with ~100 officers and ~40 staff, works out to an average of ~$175,000 per person. And the pension is STILL underfunded!

            Federal:
            $3.8T total, $600B military, 16% of total.

            And what really makes my blood boil? We would have "plenty" of money if we weren't paying off yesterday's largesse. Redding is spending $28mm — nearly equal to the entire police budget — servicing debt!
            The federal government spends $230B — 6% — just on interest. That's more than transportation and education, combined!

      • Common Sense says:

        So a Cannabis Tax would take in enough to fund the Sheriff’s 64 bed expansion alone….mmm…but we must have open minds to want the millions in tax money and the hundreds of jobs created ( by saying Yes to Prop 64) ….Then factor in the Property Taxes Tripling on the Commercial/Industrial buildings once they started turning over…theres an addition add to the County’s Tax Coffers….

        No thing changes….if no one’s opinion changes…Change can only happen when we start saying Yes and not No…..there will be NO state Grants by Saying NO to prop 64! None…..Zero….Zilch…

  15. conservative says:

    In light of the CA Supreme Court decision last Monday, I think this would pass:

    1. An initiative drawn up by conservatives and liberals (including Gary Cadd who made the arguments against measure D on talk radio).

    2. .25% sales tax increase county wide specifically for jail expansion. All citizens in the county benefit from the county jail and all should pay. There are small stores in places like Burney and Shingletown which sell taxable goods.

    After that initiative passes, a series of initiatives should be tried which give discretion to the City of Redding and Shasta County. Only with broad bipartisan support will initiatives pass.

    I think Shasta County will need a series of sales tax increases, taking the rate up to 9.75 % in Alameda County. Brick and mortar retail in Shasta county is losing to shopping online. When Kmart, Sears, Dicks Sporting Goods (stock loss 51% in last 365 days), Macy’s, JC Penney, etc close, many smaller retailers move out of the malls when anchor stores close. You can look up how much their stocks have last in the last year. The sales tax hike to replace the loss from retail will pass if it is a crisis.

    Another large sales tax hike may be necessary when unfunded pensions reach a crisis.

  16. Beverly Stafford says:

    Friends just returned from Russia and the Baltic Countries. Their findings were that Denmark pays 45% income taxes plus VAT on purchases, and by all accounts, they have no poor people. All the countries with the exception of Russia were clean and prospering. I’m sure holes can be shot into these findings, but it does sound idyllic.

  17. Ron Hernandez says:

    AB 109 Leads to Death of Sacramento County Deputy Robert French

    by ALADS Board of Directors
    On August 30, 2017, Sacramento County Sheriff’s Deputy Robert French was killed by a felon; on February 20, 2017, Whittier Officer Keith Boyer was killed by a felon. In both cases, their killers were free to roam the streets thanks to AB 109.

    Our condolences go out to the family and friends of Deputy French, and we are praying for the two wounded CHP officers. While Deputy French’s family and colleagues prepare for his services and honor him for his sacrifice to the community, it is natural to look for answers and ask could this tragedy have been avoided? Did the justice system fail Officer Boyer and Deputy French?

    One of the central features of AB 109 was the attempt to eliminate the recidivism rate for state parolees – by essentially eliminating parole. State parole agent positions were eliminated, and instead, supervision of newly released prison inmates was given to already overburdened county probation officers in a program known as Post Release Community Supervision (PRCS). Violations of parole were to be handled not by a return to state prison for up to one year following a Parole Board hearing. Instead, impositions of 10-day “flash incarcerations” were invented, and if a revocation of PRCS was sought, it required a hearing before a local judge with a custody sentence limited to six months in county jail.

    Thomas Daniel Littlecloud, the deceased suspect in the murder of Deputy French was also accused of attempting to murder two CHP officers. Despite having a violent past, Littlecloud was free from custody because of AB 109 parole changes. He had served three prior state prison sentences: a one-year term for grand theft; a 16-month term for vehicle theft; and then a six-year prison term for assault with a semi-automatic weapon. In all cases, he was placed on state parole, with supervision by state parole agents, upon release from prison.

    However, following a three-year 2013 prison term for evading a police officer and possession of a gun, the suspect was placed on PRCS in Alameda County, where he promptly violated the conditions of release. A bench warrant from Alameda County was out for his arrest on December 15, 2016, when he led police officers in Sonoma County on a foot chase after they discovered the warrant. After being apprehended, a loaded handgun was found in his jacket, as well as a knife he admitted to officers he had planned to use to attack a police K-9. The car he fled from contained a loaded handgun, meth, heroin, prescription pills, fraudulent ids and fraudulent bank cards.

    That arrest apparently led to a federal indictment in June 2016, as well as charges in Sonoma County. However, he was released from custody on bail from the federal case in August 2016 and never showed up to court for arraignment in Sonoma County.
    Prior to AB 109, a no bail warrant for a violation of parole would have been issued for Littlecloud and served upon him following his December 2016 arrest. He would have remained in custody while awaiting both resolution of his new criminal cases and a parole revocation hearing that, based on his continued criminality, would have resulted in a one-year return to state prison. Most importantly, he would not have been on the streets in August, 2017 and able to murder Deputy French.

    The attempt by the state legislature to game recidivism statistics doesn’t change the reality of parolee behavior and law violations after release from prison. For example, the Los Angeles County Probation Department’s “Most Wanted” list is filled with dangerous felons the department pointedly notes they were assigned to supervise because of AB 109 and have failed to report after release from prison.

    As we prepare to lay Deputy French to rest, it is time to come together as a state and admit that there is a major problem with the current system. AB 109 is a bad experiment with public safety in California and has already cost the lives of two law enforcement officers this year.

    The Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs (ALADS) is the collective bargaining agent representing more than 7,900 deputy sheriffs and district attorney investigators working in Los Angeles County. Like our Facebook page http://www.facebook.com/aladsonline

    • Marie says:

      Very sad. Condolences to the friends and families of those killed. The respected Stanford University found that less than 1% of those convicted of murder and later released ever commit another crime of any kind. Far lower than the rate for the general population of the U.S. The number of times they harm someone is even more rare. Of course, human nature and the media being what it is, when it does happen headlines scream making it seem as if it is a common occurrence.

  18. Pragmatic Solutions says:

    Yes, the county is responsible for the jail and bed space. However RV, you overlook one very important point. Measure D failed not for it’s laudable intentions, but due to the lack of trust in city leadership. Schreder and Sullivan confirmed the reasons for that distrust with their last vote for pay raises with Missy McArthur. Their track record contributed to a culture of distrust and ultimately the demise of Measure D which would have provided city funding to transfer to the county for jail beds.

    You should keep that in mind.

  19. Shannon says:

    DON’T BUY THE LIE that the city has no influence over jail beds. FACT: Measure D would have had the city of Redding transfer funds to the county for additional jail beds. A recent editorial in A News Cafe conveniently overlooks this fact. FACT: A lack of trust in city leadership lead to 62.49% of voters resounding rejecting the measure that would have funded jail beds and other public safety and mental health programs. Yes, the county should have planned better and seen the coming tsunami of criminals due to AB109 and Prop 47, but the city was offering to subsidize jail beds being the county’s biggest ‘customer’.

    Here’s an excerpt from Measure D:
    “If the voters of the City of Redding approve a one-half of one percent limited term general sales tax (Transactions and Use Tax) increase, should the additional revenue be used to augment police protection, JAIL SPACE (emphasis added), mental health services, fire protection, and related public safety services?”

  20. Paul says:

    The fact is that repeat offenders are that way because most don’t have the ability to make the kind of change to their life that would end their trouble past/way of life. Having been a little bit of a trouble maker when I was young and being around these type of what appears to hopeless cases of re-offending troubled people, some need to get more than your typical treatment facilities “soft” approach. Most need a good kick in the a$$ and everyday hammering. My answer?..Boot camp type treatment. A place where they can go for a minimum of six months, that #1. Gets them off any problem drug use cold turkey. #2. Their days are a combination of good nutritious food, mental rehab, education, job training, hard work and physical exercise. They’ll be so tired/physically beat by nighttime they sleep like a rock , and are up early the next mornin to do it all over again. Have it be choice for them. Typical jail time ( which in a lotta cases it appears to do zero to change them and, in some cases even appears to make them worse) or the boot camp. Sitting in a jail cell usually does nothing to rehabilitate people, that’s been proven over and over again. Yes it is time to change. Time to try something new.

  21. Dan says:

    Eric, I was surprised and disappointed to read your comments. As someone with a degree in the sciences, I am certain you will agree it is important to do research before making broad sweeping accusations.

    Quote: “You have to petition to join their FB page and wait for the administrators to vet you. I suppose you got kicked off for being some sort of contrarian, right? I tried to join, and I’m still waiting for approval. Not gonna hold my breath.”
    “These people seem weirdly secretive, thin-skinned, and paranoid. If any of them are reading this they’re probably thinking, “It’s not paranoia if they’re all out to get you.”
    “Waddaya know—I got accepted into the fold of their FB page! I quickly tried to post the following:”
    “Quick question: Why is this a closed group?”
    “Follow-up question: Am I going to get kicked out of the group for asking the above question?”
    “That’s how I learned that group members’ comments don’t post until the page’s administrators approve the comments—it’s more of an enforced echo chamber than I’d even imagined.”
    “So dishonest. So cowardly. So weak”.
    “I joined the FB group to see if the group’s leaders were any more forthcoming there about their agenda than they are in public. Regarding especially (1) why two particular city council members were targeted for recall instead of three or four, (2) who they were supporting to replace those council members, (3) what in particular they were proposing to do to address Redding’s heroin and crime issues.” End quote.

    Eric, As one of the four administrators and first 100 members of this group from a few years ago, let me address a few of your questions during my lunch.

    “Take back Redding” is a loose affiliation of Shasta County Residents who are looking to reduce crime and improve the local economy. The group now has 8,000 Shasta County residents discussing and organizing on the Facebook page. That is 4xs the number of people the Convention center holds.

    Most of the local press (including Donni) are on the page. A number of Law Enforcement officers and local politicians also are members. As you can imagine with 8k people all kinds of things get thrown out for discussion (and we do not “Pre-approve” comments or ideas). A few times a day one of the administrators checks the page for “hate speech” “trolls” and defamation of private individuals. We do get some folks that need to be removed for breaking the rules. I have personally removed a number of Neo Nazis, Sharia law advocates, vigilantes, trolls, and seemingly intoxicated ranters/commenters over the last two years.

    It is a closed group because most people want to post without a quote getting published in the press and indexed on google to haunt them forever.

    These are the two questions everyone is now asked by an autoresponder when requesting to join:
    • Do you live in Shasta County?
    Yes/no
    • Will you abide by group rules? (Listed on top left) “Not a place for rants and raves, but a place to participate in legal changes to reduce crime and improve the local economy?”
    Yes/no

    Why only Two recall targets? It only takes three votes from thoughtful intelligent council members for a majority.

    Proposals for reducing the crime and heroin problems? As a Scientists, you could have simply read shared research news stories from National News Sources and research papers on the page from Harvard, Stanford, and Yale of proven ideas that have worked successfully in other communities to reduce crime to National per capita averages. Had you taken the time to politely review the past discussions, attend group meetings and City Council meetings all your questions would be answered.

    • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

      Dan — I’m a little confused as whether you’re addressing Eric or me, but I’ll guess it’s me.

      The group that I joined apparently wasn’t TBR—it was a FB page dedicated narrowly to the recall effort. I just now visited TBR’s Facebook page and saw that the membership includes many thousands of people, including a sizable number of friends and acquaintances. The closed group that I was on has to my recollection 700+ members, with only a couple of names that I recognize.

      I don’t recall if the group that I joined had an anti-rant rule, but pretty much everything posted at the site is a rant. The only thing that was obviously discouraged was dissenting opinions—not rants. Some words by other posters used to describe me: Libtard, liar, troll. And that was just my wife.

      As for proposals for reducing Redding’s crime and heroin problems: My point wasn’t that I’m unable to research those topics on my own. My point was that a group whose mission is to recall two council members for failing to address those problems (among other alleged sins) ought to be putting up in lights their proposed solutions. When asked directly what those solutions are, they ought to at least be able to respond with bullet points, rather than evasiveness or caginess.

      Not one of my questions were answered directly except for this one: Am I going to get kicked out of this group?

      The answer late in the day was “no.”

      The next morning, having posted nothing more, I’d been 86’d from the group.

  22. Dan says:

    The above post is in reply to Steve Towers post.

  23. R.V. Scheide Jr. says:

    I would like to point out that I made a mistake in the comments in regard to the jail budget that Tim H. caught me out one in the above comments. However, there are no errors in the story. That is the difference between a story and comments. A story, I check everything out, to make sure it’s right. The comments–well who knows, I might say something that just flew like a bat out of hell from nowhere.

    One of the recall group’s members is now entertaining a Q&A interview with me. I hope this happens.

  24. Marie says:

    Mass incarceration is a failure. Drug incarceration is the second leading cause of mass incarceration that lowers funding for education, infrastructure, public safety, and so on. I don’t know how to get to the root of the drug/alcohol problem or to break the school-to-prison pipeline, but adding more jail space seems to be a tiny band-aid on the huge problem. Maybe more treatment requirements, early education access, more jobs….I feel like we are wringing our hands without a real solution.

    Unreasonably harsh, long mandatory sentences are the leading cause of mass incarceration and for-profit prison corporations are the third leading cause.

  25. Russell K. Hunt says:

    The Board of Supervisors completely failed us and are now running for re-election (Baugh and Kehoe) The County should of accepted the loans from the state and got the projects going (ARC and jail expansion). I proposed to these people that the motel tax (TOT) be raised by the cities and counties to 16%, the same as L.A. and Florida. AND IT WOULD PASS .This represents $3.12 million a year and if the motels under construction are counted, even more. And the TOT needs to include houseboats. This is enough to pay back the loans and operate the new facilities.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *