On December 4, Supervisors dealt a blow to the eastern portion of Shasta County, turning down a request from county staff for additional funds for a design and feasibility study for a new library in Burney.
The proposal on Tuesday needed the support of four of the five supervisors. This “super-majority” was required by the California Government Code for increases to the county budget after the budget has been adopted. The proposal received the votes of only three supervisors.
Supervisor David Kehoe, who represents the most urban district on the Board, had voted against the proposal to provide $40,000 for the library study last March. He voted against adding $30,000 to the budget, which county staff believes would be required to complete such a study. His primary stated reason was a belief that the Supervisors’ priority should be public safety. Supervisor Les Baugh, who voted for the initial funding in March, surprised everyone by voting no on the augmentation this last Tuesday. He said he supports the public safety priority articulated by Supervisor Kehoe. In addition, he doubts that the county’s public and private resources could afford a new library in any case.
Priorities and ultimate cost estimates aside, the decision this Tuesday feeds rural perceptions that the county does not serve its eastern communities well. Funding for the study, and for at least a part of any new library, would come from a community benefit fund established by the wind farm on Hatchet Ridge. That wind farm was extremely controversial with many in Burney and surrounding areas. The benefit fund is a small recompense for the impact of the wind turbines on the wildness of the ridge. Moreover, more than a thousand eastern county residents petitioned the Supervisors on this issue earlier this year – an astonishing number for a rural area. Supervisor Glenn Hawes, who represents the Intermountain Area, strongly supported the additional funding.
Many will be disappointed that new priorities have been asserted. Some will question whether the expanded costs for a design and feasibility study are warranted. Many will be dismayed that an opportunity to develop public and private resources for a long term investment in community will be, at best, delayed.
Supervisors also received a regular monthly report on the transfer of some correctional responsibilities from the state to the county. A future column will provide some information about this issue.
Catherine Camp is currently retired. She served as a Consultant to the California Senate Budget Committee in 2001-02, reviewing Social Services, Employment Development, Aging, Community Services, Alcohol and Drug Programs, Rehabilitation and Child Support budgets. From 1989-2000, Catherine was Executive Director for the California Mental Health Directors Association. During that period, Catherine staffed the county mental health system’s restructuring of public mental health through Realignment of community and long term care programs from the state to the county, transfer of the management of specialty mental health Medi-Cal services to those counties that agreed to provide them, development of risk mechanisms for consortia of small counties, and advocacy and policy analysis for the operation of public mental health programs throughout the state. Her prior experience includes Executive Director to the California-Nevada Community Action Association, Principal Consultant to the Assembly Human Services Policy Committee, and Director of Community Action and Head Start programs in Shasta County.
