League of Women Voters of California Education Fund
	Butte County, CA November 6, 2012 Election
	Candidates Answer Questions on the Issues Member City Council; City of Chico

The questions were prepared by the League of Women Voters of Butte County and asked of all candidates for this office.     See below for questions on Open Meeting Law, Public employee benefits, Green Belt, In-fill Building, Arts and Music, Future Development Click on a name for candidate information.   See also more information about this contest. 1. In July 2012 the State Budget Act (SA 1464) suspended some sections of the 1953 Brown Act. To assure transparency in local city government, do you support a resolution reaffirming adherence to the "Brown Act" as it was prior to these suspensions? Answer from Dave Donnan: I support a resolution to assure transparancy in city government. I am against SA 1464 Answer from Dave Kelley: Yes, I support a resolution to maintain the Brown Act regarding proper agenda noticing. Chico's notification requirements exceed the Brown Act minimums. Answer from Toby Schindelbeck: Yes I do. However, since our policies and procedures still provide guidelines that mirror the suspended sections, a resolution would be a bit redundant. Answer from Tami Ritter: I support complete adherence to the Brown Act. All governing bodies need to be accountable for all decisions made as well as the conversations that led up to those decisions. The Brown Act ensures accountability. Answer from Kimberly Robin Rudisill: I would support reaffirming adherence to the Brown Act. I believe any and all elected officials should be transparent in their votes and no majority should get together and discuss issues unless it is in a open public hearing Answer from Andrew Coolidge: Yes. The Brown Act is essential to maintaining an open and accountable government. Answer from Sean Morgan: I support the Brown Act. A resolution "reaffirming" adherence? Would that be like a resolution "reaffirming" the speed limit? If so I think we probably have more important matters to (publicly) discuss. 2. How can we maintain the essential safety employees (both police & fire), meet their negotiated retirement/health benefits, and protect our city from bankruptcy? What is your solution to this problem which faces so many California cities? Answer from Dave Kelley: It is key to reform the public safety salaries and pension programs to be financially stable over the long run. I am on record in favor of a 2-tier system for new hires that substantially reduces the costs to the city. The second part of the solution is to focus on local economic growth. Answer from Andrew Coolidge: Future contracts must be negioatated with the best interest of the people. Reductions may be necessary in existing retirement and health benefits to keep the city from financial collaspe. While it is important to honor our promises to our hardworking employees it should not be done at the expense of commonsense. The City of Chico has numerous ways to save money and reprioritize our budget, many of which have not been discussed by the current Council. Currently both vehicles and equipment are left idle for great lengths of the year. Many other California cities have sold such under-used and financially draining equipment (due to maintenance, storage, up keep, etc.) and used the revenue to close their budget gaps. We must also focus the Council on the task of keeping our local businesses successful as many are leaving for Oroville, Paradise and Corning (and other surrounding cities) as the city has failed to meet their needs. Answer from Sean Morgan: We owe it to our employees to honor their current contracts if at all possible. The way to fix the completely out of whack budget picture is to raise revenue by becoming a business friendly city. Keep taxes low to encourage investment, and remove burdensome and murky regulation and permitting processes. Business growth will drive revenue up while we hold spending in check. Additionally we need to stop wasting time on feel good initiatives that create an economic drain on limited resources. Police and Fire protection help create a safe environment. These services should be #1 on the priority list of what our city spends money on. Answer from Toby Schindelbeck: First, we need to honor our existing agreements. Rather than reduce our existing public safety employees' pay or benefits, we need to focus on hiring new police and fire on a two-tier pension and pay system. The reality is that 25% of our police force is up for retirement in the next 3 years. This will allow us to fill those positions with new hires on a reduced and more sensible pension/pay system. Second, we need all of our public employees, public safety or not, to pay their ENTIRE share of their own retirement. The full 9%. This alone will save quite a bit of money. Finally, we need to increase city revenue without increasing taxes. Almost 44% of our revenue comes from sales tax, so Chico needs to attract new businesses and support it's existing businesses with incentives and reduced or waived fees. Encourage business growth, and we will add revenue to the city coffers that can be used for public safety, among other core services. Answer from Dave Donnan: we have been spending too much time over the last 4 years on feel good projects that are not essential for the majority of our community. A new 2-3 tired pension program for new employees is the most important issue. Next we need to reorganize how the city does its job and scale back and privatize selected services. Such as having ambulances answer medical calls not fire dept. Thar provides better service at much lower cost Answer from Kimberly Robin Rudisill: We have to honor all and current contracts with our public safety officers. Any new hires may be presented with a new benefits and retirement package. Answer from Tami Ritter: Contracts were negotiated during times when the city had the ability to fund generous benefit and pension packages. Now that the we owe far more than we are able to fund, we must look at future obligations to assure that they are negotiated in a manner that is sustainable. I would encourage a business-friendly culture to keep revenue streaming into our city. We can rebuild the general fund by attracting clean technologies, fostering cottage industries, and promoting the tourism industry. 3. What is your position on maintaining the green belt around Chico? Answer from Tami Ritter: I fully support maintaining the rich agricultural land to the west of Chico and the undeveloped land to the east (particularly the areas where our Tuscan Aquifer recharges and where endangered meadow foam and fairy shrimp are present). I recognize that there are some members of the greater Chico area that would like to be annexed into the city but are precluded from doing so because of the existence of the greenline. I would consider annexation of those properties with the provision that development regulations protecting the environment are spelled out prior to annexation. Answer from Dave Donnan: I am a proponent of protecting the green line as well as the gold line Answer from Kimberly Robin Rudisill: I will defend the greenline no matter what. Answer from Toby Schindelbeck: I love the green line, because it keeps Chico green and rural. However, it needs to be "tightened" up a bit in certain places. The green line should follow natural boundaries likes roads and waterways, but in some areas it is a bit weak where it does not follow these natural boundaries. Also, along Estes road, there are people who own land that is too small to farm but cannot be developed. Hopefully we can resolve that issue and get them some relief. The green line, when adopted in 1982, was recognized as flexible and that it would need to be adjusted in certain areas. Now is the time to make the green line boundary stronger by adjusting it in places to follow common-sense boundaries. Answer from Andrew Coolidge: Agriculture is an essential economic element in Chico. While I support the "greenline" even Jane Dolan, the creator of the idea of the "greenline" made a change to it. Minor changes should be done when prudent and necessary. Answer from Sean Morgan: Chico is an agricultural community and many of the businesses and jobs here are created as a direct result of agricultural. It would be a mistake to get rid of the green line and rob Chico of it heritage. That said, there may be areas where the green line no longer makes sense and land could be put to other uses. Answer from Dave Kelley: Do not move the green line. 4. What is your position on in-fill building within the city limits of Chico? Answer from Dave Donnan: I disagree with in-fill because of the traffic problems we already have and compounding it. As a realtor for 12 years people want to buy homes that have larger yards Answer from Tami Ritter: If the city of Chico does not utilize both in-fill and building up, then the result will be sprawl. In-fill must be congruent with the neighborhood in which it is proposed (i.e. no 6-story apartment building on a half-acre lot in the historic area of town). In-fill should blend with current design and density of the neighborhood. In-fill in the commercial districts, where mixed use is permitted, should be encouraged and prioritized to revitalize downtown, Park Avenue, and Mangrove. Answer from Sean Morgan: It's better than blight. Answer from Dave Kelley: I support in-fill development that is compatible with the neighborhood surroundings. One of my first acts would be to develop in-fill design guidelines. With my 8 years of planning commission experience I know that I can contribute greatly to the dialogue. Answer from Andrew Coolidge: I am certain all candidates would support in-fill building as logical. In-fill building which lends itself to poor planning or harms local neighborhoods should be avoided. Answer from Kimberly Robin Rudisill: I support in-fill building as long as its keeping within the neighborhood design and I am in favor of mixed uses. I also support the use of existing retail structures and would help businesses with the permit process as long as they are using existing buildings rather than building new structures. Answer from Toby Schindelbeck: I love Chico because of it's wide open spaces, and would like to see that continue. However, I understand that as the housing market gets stronger and our population increases, we are going to see more developers wanting to develop their land. This is inevitable, and should be managed in a way that allows landowners to develop their properties, but also preserves our parks and green spaces. I am not in favor of high-density housing like Doe Mill and other Agenda 21-type developments. 5. Butte County has become a haven for the arts and music. How can, and should, the City Council help promote this asset? Answer from Andrew Coolidge: While regionally it has become haven, we have much more work to do to properly support the arts. I believe our promotion of the city should include both music and art, however I think many of the greatest opportunities will come from the private sector as they find success within this industry. As a private promoter of the Recycled Art Compeition (one of the largest art competitions in Butte County and a Artoberfest event) I believe with the help of local businesses we can continue to promote and grow our thriving art and music assets. Answer from Tami Ritter: Butte County, and Chico in particular, is not only a haven for arts and music, Chico is a destination city. We should be supporting our arts culture through promotion (i.e. free use of downtown plaza for free concerts) as well as through contracting with local artists for all City beautification projects. We should never go beyond Chico for design or implementation of any public art project. The arts draw tourism which puts money in the city coffers. Answer from Toby Schindelbeck: I believe that Chico already does plenty to promote this asset. Artoberfest, Friday Night Concerts in the Park, and events like that are supported and in some cases subsidized, by the taxpayers. I am also in favor of art in public places. HOWEVER, only if it is paid for by private money. I do not believe that the taxpayers should subsidize art projects, nor do I believe that the planning department should require businesses to pay for art as a condition of their expansion or construction projects. Answer from Sean Morgan: Arts and music are part of the Chico experience. Unfortunately, if we don't have fully funded police and fire services we won't be able to enjoy much of anything. It's easy to distribute generosity, its much harder to be strategic in the long term. Essential city services need to be fully funded (and sustainable). This is clearly not the case in Chico and must be addressed before we move on to other priorities. Answer from Dave Kelley: Most people can agree that a community with public art is a better place to live. We should actively promote tourism and art. However, given the poor economy, public art should be encouraged on a voluntary basis. The city needs to restore the Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) portion that historically has gone to support the arts. Answer from Kimberly Robin Rudisill: My children loved performing and theater when they growing up in Chico. My two oldest kids performed in choir mostly through high school and part of college. I believe the city should do anything within their means to continue to lend support to CSU, Chico, Butte College, local schools and theater. The City should incorporate more donations from artist locally and support local businesses to as well. Answer from Dave Donnan: Most of this is due to CSUC. Continuing to promote events put on by university and private entities is essential. I would like to see some of the economic benefits that these events bring to the city treasury 6. . With the demise of redevelopment funding, how can the City address future development needs, especially in blighted areas of the community? Answer from Tami Ritter: The city should continue to focus on improving blighted areas despite the loss of RDA monies. This could be achieved by incentivizing projects with high numbers of affordable housing units, applying for grant funding, utilizing as many self-help housing projects as possible, and continuing to set aside and acquire property for future development. Answer from Andrew Coolidge: Redevelopment funds from the State will return in some form in the future. Until this happens we must start planning and addressing the needs of our failing infrastructure now. General funds must be allocated to road, sidewalk and drainage improvements. We must avoid the failings of redevelopment funds and how they were handled as often "favorite" projects were chosen over senisible updates to the entire community. We should no longer have a system which allows ornate metal sculptures on small bridges costing thousands of dollars while many children in Chico do not have safe routes to schools. Answer from Sean Morgan: It depends on your definition of "blight". RDA funds were distributed in some questionable ways. If private industry wants to redevelop "blighted" areas the city should make it easy for them to do so. The city needs to be careful defining what kind of housing goes where as that is a step toward social engineering. Answer from Dave Kelley: I favor promoting private-public partnerships with local developers/builders. The city should explore the implementation of Mello Roos districts to finance infrastructure, roads, parks and open space. Answer from Dave Donnan: During the last 8 years the city has mismanaged redevelopment funding for blighted areas and now there is no mechanism for taking care of these areas. I don't believe its the right time for increased taxes because city has not shown good stewardship of the taxes they collect now Answer from Toby Schindelbeck: This is a tough subject, because at this point we just do not have the money to allocate to any type of Capital Projects. Between the Private Developer fund and the Capital Projects fund, we are over $10 million in debt. The best way that we can help blighted areas in these tough economic times is to pursue grant funding, but most grant funds require a city match. That is a problem. Again, it all comes down to attracting more businesses to Chico so that we can increase our revenue to fund needed projects. Answer from Kimberly Robin Rudisill: We are going to have to begin working with local and private businesses to locate to specific areas of town to help promote the area and attract new clientele. Responses to questions asked of each candidate are reproduced as submitted to the League.  Candidates' statements are presented as submitted. References to opponents are not permitted. The order of the candidates is random and changes daily. Candidates who did not respond are not listed on this page.