dev.citrusheightssentinel.com

Tag: Bret Daniels

  • Guest Opinion: 7 myths about Measure M

    Guest Opinion: 7 myths about Measure M

    By Bret Daniels–
    As a citizen of Citrus Heights for many years and serving on the City Council for ten years, I am very familiar with the inner workings of City Hall and how things are done. In this position, I have become very knowledgeable about the current and future financial status of the city, as well as Measure M – a full percent increase in the sales tax for the city to 8.75% – greater than all of our neighbors and equal to Sacramento City.

    This increase would greatly harm the residents and business community of Citrus Heights. I urge you to vote NO on M.

    A sales tax is the most regressive and hurtful tax to our residents, and it makes no sense to increase the tax burden upon residents during our current economic crisis and pandemic when thousands are out of work. Plus, this tax has no expiration date.

    Measure M: Citrus Heights council votes 4-1 to put $12M sales tax increase on ballot

    And, since the proponents of this measure use a lot of flawed reasoning in the attempt to justify this flawed tax, let me expose seven of these myths!

    MYTH #1: Citrus Heights is in desperate need of money.

    FACT: Incorrect. 1.) In two years, the city will receive an estimated $6,000,000 of new funds annually from Sacramento County property taxes. It has a two-year problem but is proposing an immediate “forever tax.”

    2.) The city has a spending problem. For example, according to salary information posted on publicpay.ca.gov, there are city staff in Citrus Heights who are already paid more than the Governor!

    MYTH #2: Measure M is unique in providing local control that cannot be seized by other governments.

    FACT: The city always has complete control over all general fund tax revenues it receives – property tax, sales tax, etc. None of its general fund resources can be arbitrarily seized. The city is saying give us more money and we can stay in control. Whereas, they are already in control. They just want more money to do the things they want to do.

    MYTH #3: Citrus Heights has a long history of fiscal prudence.

    FACT: Citrus Heights HAD a long history of fiscal prudence. Until a few years ago the city carried $30,000,000 in reserves. Now the city is millions in debt! Overspending, high salaries, new city facilities, and the list goes on!

    MYTH #4: Measure M prevents devastating cuts.

    FACT: Untrue, the city just needs to reprioritize its spending, just as we do and any family does. Residents are not a bottomless pit of money. Plus, the city will receive millions in new property tax revenues in two years. They need fiscal prudence like they had a few years ago!

    MYTH #5: The tax money will go to pay for police services, homelessness, roads, etc.

    FACT: The promised list of “feel-good” spending is useless unless there are guarantees. There are no guarantees and politicians break promises. Read the measure. All funds go into the general fund and are “available for any lawful municipal purpose.” Funds can be used for salary increases, pensions, or whatever! If the city wanted all of the tax money to go to particular purposes, why didn’t they design the tax that way?

    MYTH #6: Measure M will have citizen oversight.

    FACT: Citizen oversight is after the fact, has no authority, and is a joke. The oversight committee is appointed by the City Council, almost certainly to their political insider friends. The measure says the tax revenues can be spent on any lawful purpose, which means it can be spent on anything! An annual report after the fact is mere window dressing.

    Another view: Guest Opinion: Why I’m supporting Measure M

    MYTH #7: The tax was developed with over a year of civic input.

    FACT: The city spent a year asking a limited sample of people what they would like without discussing costs! A wish list. Want doughnuts for breakfast? Sure! How about other feel-good causes? Sure!

    The reality is the city rammed through this tax at literally the last legal moment with extremely short notice and limited debate. And, the tax has no direct tie or guarantee to any of the proposed feel-good causes… such as homelessness, police services, and the like.

    Let me implore you to vote NO on Measure M. Don’t let the city fool you into burdening yourselves and your neighbors during a national pandemic and economic crisis.

    Bret Daniels currently serves on the Citrus Heights City Council and is a candidate for the District 1 council seat this year.

    The Sentinel welcomes guest columns and letters about local issues. To submit one for publication: Click here

  • Election 2020: Who’s running for Citrus Heights City Council?

    Election 2020: Who’s running for Citrus Heights City Council?

    Citrus Heights Council candidates from left to right: Tim Schaefer, Bret Daniels, Nicole Castor, Thomas Goetz.

    Updated Sept. 9th, 9:07 p.m.–
    Sentinel staff report– With two seats up for election on the Citrus Heights City Council this year, a total of four residents have qualified to run for the positions.

    Candidates for the District 3 seat are current Planning Commission Chairman Tim Schaefer and technical engineer Thomas Goetz. Candidates for the District 1 seat are Councilman Bret Daniels and environmentalist Nicole Castor.

    Notably, Daniels is the only candidate on the ballot who is also currently serving as a council member, as Mayor Jeff Slowey announced he will not be seeking another term. In a normal election year, Daniels would be referred to as an “incumbent,” but due to the city’s shift to district-based elections this year, there is technically no incumbent for the newly created District 1 seat.

    Election 2020: Citrus Heights mayor won’t seek another term

    Three of the four candidates paid for 200-word ballot statements to be included in the county’s sample ballot, which is direct-mailed to each voter. Each candidate’s statement is included below.

    The Sentinel also gave an opportunity for Castor to include a 200-word statement in this article, although her statement will not be on the sample ballot.

    Citrus Heights’ new district map was adopted in 2019.

    Thomas Goetz (District 3)
    My name is Thomas Goetz. I’m a technical engineer, veteran, homeowner, and neighbor. I am running for city council to make our community the priority of the city, including those most in need. As someone who was lucky enough to be able to rebuild from homelessness, I know the challenges that homelessness comes with and how impossible those can be to overcome.
    We know that tiptoeing around the housing issue will not solve it. The only way I was able to get back on my feet was by having a place to live. As a community, I know we can provide that to our neighbors.
    As a veteran, I know the right thing is very rarely the easy thing, and as a former member of the Army’s MP Corps. I know that doing it the right way makes it even harder. But I know the right thing is obtainable when people come together and do what’s best for the community as a whole. If I’m elected, I know we can obtain that for Citrus Heights.
    Visit www.GoetzCitrusHeights.com for more information or to contact me directly.

    Tim Schaefer (District 3)
    Born and raised in Santa Cruz California, I joined U. S. Army where I served in the military police. Following my service, I attended Cabrillo College. I moved to Citrus Heights and raised my family. Currently I’m Director of Training for Sacramento Valley Manufacturing Initiative, administering manufacturing apprenticeship programs.
    I’m uniquely qualified to serve on the Citrus Heights City Council. I served 2 years as president of Parkoaks Community Association and am currently a Citrus Heights Planning Commissioner. I served as Chairperson for Save City Hall, a successful grassroots effort to keep city hall in Fountain Square. I am a member of the Sacramento County Taxpayers Association where I advocate spending your taxes wisely. I am thoroughly knowledgeable of how Citrus Heights came from a pay-as-go city having a $32 million surplus in the bank to being a debtor city. I am committed to straightening out this mess. Find out more about me at www.electtim.org.
    I am convinced we can fix our roads and address other important needs through frugal management of our budget.
    If you’ll vote for me as your councilman, I will work hard to be a good steward of your trust by committing my energy and experience to being an involved and reachable Councilmember.
    Contact: Tim Schaefer (916) 207-7282 or tim@electtim.org.

    Bret Daniels (District 1)
    It has been a privilege and honor to serve you these last four years. My focus will continue to be your safety, your quality of life, and our economic vitality. We have experienced a declining crime rate for the last four years. Our neighborhoods are thriving. We enjoy a diverse mix of businesses and restaurants. Life is good but there is more to do.
    We must deal more strongly with the negative aspects of homelessness by helping those that want help but not tolerating the behavior of those that do not. We must dedicate more resources to keeping the city cleaner. We must embrace our youth and celebrate our seniors. And we must do so without raising your taxes.
    The area around the mall enjoys amazing revitalization but the mall is tired and old. We must embrace a significant but realistic remodeling of the property and make it our highest priority.
    My pledge is to make your life better and your decision to live, work, and play in Citrus Heights the best decision you ever made for you and your family. My supporters include my wife, my kids, my neighbors, and hopefully you. Reach me at BretDanielsForCityCouncil.com, Facebook.com/CouncilmanBretDaniels or (916) 870-7199.

    Nicole Castor (District 1)
    As a longtime resident of Citrus Heights, I have enjoyed living in a city that manages to stay affordable while still being a safe, nice area to raise a family. I love that the community is what makes it nice – we take great pride in our gardens, value self-sufficiency, we look out for each other and help our neighbors. We have much to be proud of considering what a small budget we have!
    I am a mother, an environmentalist, and a community activist. I studied Sociology at Sacramento State and earned my BA in 2008. As far as political experience, I was recently re-elected to the County Council of the Green Party of Sacramento County. In my second term, I am continuing my work in serving as our Co-Coordinator as well as Legislative Advocate.
    I am proud to be endorsed by the local chapters of the Green Party and the Peace and Freedom Party.
    I hope to be one of our city’s next leaders, and am ready to help bring fresh ideas for our city. Please vote Nicole Castor for City Council this November!

    Additional articles about each candidate’s background and positions on local issues will be published in the coming weeks. Sign up for The Sentinel’s free weekly editions, sent out each Thursday and Sunday: Click here to sign up.

    *This article originally referred to Daniels as an “incumbent” for the District 1 seat, but has since been updated to refer to him as being the only sitting member of the City Council who will appear on the ballot this year.

  • Opponents mobilize to fight Measure M sales tax proposal in Citrus Heights

    Opponents mobilize to fight Measure M sales tax proposal in Citrus Heights

    Sentinel staff report–
    Opponents of a $12 million sales tax increase in Citrus Heights are beginning to mobilize to defeat the measure in November.

    In addition to an unsuccessful, last-minute attempt to derail the measure during Thursday’s council meeting, opponents have banded together and submitted a ballot argument against the measure, calling the timing of the one-cent sales tax proposal during a pandemic “the absolute worst time.”

    The statement also takes aim at the measure’s lack of a sunset date and says “nothing prevents Measure M funds from going to salary increases, pensions, or pet projects voters do not even want.”

    Key opponents who signed the ballot argument are Sacramento County Supervisor Sue Frost, City Councilman Bret Daniels, former City Councilwoman Jayna Karpinski-Costa, local American Legion board member Jim Monteton, and Sacramento Taxpayers Association President Bruce Lee.

    The statement lists a website of VoteNoOnM.org, but as of Saturday night the website did not appear to be set up with any content.

    Measure M: Citrus Heights council votes 4-1 to put $12M sales tax increase on ballot

    Proponents of Measure M also submitted their own ballot argument, highlighting that the sales tax is needed to help maintain roads, 911 response, homelessness reduction and other city services. Proponents also note that out-of-town residents who shop in Citrus Heights will be paying “their fair share” to help boost city revenues, rather than the tax burden only falling on residents of Citrus Heights.

    Additionally, the statement highlights that the measure would create a Citizens Oversight Committee for fiscal accountability, with all tax revenue required to be spent locally in Citrus Heights.

    Proponents who signed the ballot argument in favor of Measure M are local business owner and city “godfather” Bill Van Duker, Police Activities League representative Charles McComish, Sunrise Christian Food Ministry Director Rocky Peterson, lifelong resident Kathy Cook, and neighborhood watch community leader Rick Doyle.

    The statement refers to the city’s website, citrusheights.net, to learn more about the measure.

    Polling of 404 likely voters conducted by EMC Research in late-June found as much as 71% support for a general purpose sales tax measure, which requires only a bare majority to pass in November.

    See polling results: click here

    A city manager’s office spokeswoman confirmed Friday that the polling did not include criteria to see how results might change if organized opposition arose to the measure. A prior tax proposal in 2012, Measure K, failed after only garnering 44% support.

    Rebuttals to ballot arguments can also be submitted by each side. The deadline for each side to submit rebuttals is Monday, August 17. Full statements can be viewed online here:

    Yes on M: click here

    No on M: click here

  • Election 2020: Citrus Heights mayor won’t seek another term

    File photo, Jeff Slowey comments during an Oct. 26, 2017, council meeting. // Metro Cable

    Sentinel staff report–
    Jeff Slowey, who is currently serving as mayor of Citrus Heights, was not among the names of candidates who filed by the Aug. 7 deadline to run for City Council this year.

    Slowey confirmed with The Sentinel on Friday his decision not to run for another four-year term on the City Council, saying that 17 years on the council “is enough.” He first joined the council in 2003, when he was appointed to fill the remaining term of the late Bill Hughes, who died while in office.

    In the city’s first-ever election by council district this year, Slowey would have faced current Councilman Bret Daniels for the newly created District 1 seat in the northwestern area of the city.

    New Citrus Heights district map ensures one councilman gets booted in 2020

    When the council first adopted the new district maps for Citrus Heights last year it was unclear whether both Slowey and Daniels would run for re-election. Slowey had said he was “leaning towards running,” while Daniels said he was looking forward “to a spirited contest.”

    Normally, when an incumbent does not file, the deadline to file to run for office is extended. However, the City Clerk’s Office confirmed the deadline has not been extended due to the unusual circumstances of this year’s transition to district elections.

    “With switching to District elections, current councilmembers are not considered incumbents for the purpose of extending the nomination period as they were elected at-large,” said City Clerk Amy Van in an email. “We currently do not have any councilmembers that have been elected by Districts to represent a District. Therefore, the nomination period will not be extended.”

    Daniels will still face a challenger this year for the District 1 seat. Nicole Castor, who currently serves as a legislative advocate with the Green Party of Sacramento County, submitted papers and qualified to run for the seat on Friday.

    The new district map for Citrus Heights splits the city into five voting districts, with each council member being elected to represent their own area of the city — rather than being elected at-large by all voters in the city as in the past. Two districts are up for election in 2020, while the remaining three districts — represented by Councilwoman Porsche Middleton, Mayor Jeannie Bruins, and Councilman Steve Miller — won’t be up for election until 2022.

    District 3, the other area up for election this year, is an open seat created by the new map. Planning Commissioner Tim Schaefer and newcomer Thomas Goetz are the only two candidates who qualified for the race.

    Kevin Miles Jr. also filed papers to run for the District 3 seat, but his petition did not qualify, according to the City Clerk’s website. A sixth potential candidate, Allison Sanchez, also pulled papers to run for the District 1 seat, but she did not end up filing the papers.

    Additional information about each candidate will be published in the coming weeks. Click here to sign up for The Sentinel’s free weekly e-Editions to follow all our local election coverage.

  • Citrus Heights News Briefs: election, $1M bail, police, obituary

    Latest local news briefs include supportive messages written to police from area children, a judge rejecting a request to lower $1 million bail for a man accused of assaulting a police officer, six residents pulling papers to run for City Council, and an obituary for a San Juan High School alumnus.

    Six residents pull papers to run for council in Citrus Heights
    As of Friday, the City Clerk’s office reports that six residents have so far pulled papers to run for seats up for election on the Citrus Heights City Council. Allison Sanchez, Nicole Castor and incumbent Bret Daniels have pulled papers for District 1, while Tim Schaefer, Thomas Goetz and Kevin Miles Jr. have pulled papers for the open seat in District 3. The deadline to file is August 7. (See more)

    Judge rejects request to reduce bail for Citrus Heights man held on $1M
    A Citrus Heights man accused of assaulting a police officer remains in jail after a judge denied a request to lower his $1 million bail, according to a report Tuesday by the Davis Vanguard’s Court Watch team. (See article)

    Citrus Heights police share supportive messages received from community
    Citrus Heights Police Chief Ron Lawrence retweeted a message showing hand-written letters, flowers and children’s drawings the department has received in support of police officers. “Thank you for your unwavering support of YOUR @citrusheightspd,” Lawrence tweeted. “Your partnership means more in these uncertain times, than ever before.”

    Obituary: Major Adair (1951-2020)
    San Juan High School alumnus Major Adair passed away on July 16 after battling cancer, according to an obituary published Friday in The Sacramento Bee. Adair was born in Missouri in 1951 and moved to Citrus Heights the following year where he graduated from SJHS in 1971 and worked in the railroad industry for 37 years. He is survived by two sons and four grandchildren. (See obituary)

    News Briefs are published each Sunday in The Sentinel’s Weekend e-Edition. To subscribe free, click here.

  • Citrus Heights council members take step to oppose AB 392 use-of-force bill

    Bret Daniels, use-of-force, AB 392
    Citrus Heights Councilman Bret Daniels speaks in opposition to AB 392 during a March 14, 2019, council meeting. // MetroCable 14

    Updated March 23, 8:42 a.m.–
    Sentinel staff report– The city’s mayor and at least three other council members directed the police chief during a March council meeting to draft a resolution and letter opposing proposed state legislation that seeks to narrow the circumstances for when police officers can use deadly force.

    Although the item did not appear on the council’s March 14 meeting agenda, Councilman Bret Daniels suggested in concluding comments during the meeting that the council take a position to oppose Assembly Bill 392, which he called a “very misguided, flawed effort to change the use of force standard.”

    The legislation was introduced last month by Assemblywoman Shirley Weber (D-San Diego) and has gained the backing of the American Civil Liberties Union. It seeks to raise the current standard for when deadly force can be used by an officer from “reasonable” to “necessary,” which advocates say will help save lives and reduce police shootings involving unarmed suspects.

    “AB 392, if it does continue on (and) gets passed, will get officers killed. There’s no doubt about it,” said Daniels, who has a law enforcement background as a former Sacramento County Sheriff’s Deputy. “This is just a horrible effort to fix something in a wrong approach.”

    Daniels said he believed the legislation would result in officers not being able to use deadly force if someone pointed an unloaded weapon at them.

    According to a summary of the bill by the nonpartisan Office of Legislative Counsel, AB 392 “would redefine the circumstances under which a homicide by a peace officer is deemed justifiable to include when the killing is in self-defense or the defense of another, consistent with the existing legal standard for self-defense, or when the killing is necessary to prevent the escape of a fleeing felon whose immediate apprehension is necessary to prevent death or serious injury.”

    Vice Mayor Jeff Slowey echoed Daniels comments, but added a recommendation that the council additionally take a position in support of Senate Bill 230, which is a law enforcement-backed bill that would add more training requirements regarding de-escalation and use-of-force, but would maintain the “reasonable” standard for when officers can use deadly force.

    The legislative counsel’s summary of SB 230 says the bill would refine the circumstances for justifiable homicide by an officer “to those situations in which the officer reasonably believes the suspect poses an imminent threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer, or others, or when a fleeing suspect has committed a forcible and atrocious felony.”

    “[AB 392] changes verbiage and that’s really all it does,” said Slowey. “It doesn’t provide any additional training, (it) replaces ‘reasonable’ with the word ‘necessary’, and to me that is just… really for the lawyers so they can turn around and sue departments and officers.”

    Under the council’s direction, Citrus Heights Police Chief Ron Lawrence is to draft a letter to oppose AB 392 and support SB 230, which council members are to sign. A resolution to be formally voted on by the council will also be drafted, if there is sufficient time. The council’s next meeting on March 28 has been cancelled, so some concern was expressed by council members about whether the resolution would still be timely if passed at the council’s first meeting in April.

    As of March 20, Chief Lawrence told The Sentinel a letter had not yet been drafted, but is expected by early next week. He told the council AB 392 could be heard by the State Assembly’s public safety committee later this month, or in early April.

    Councilwoman Porsche Middleton, the newest member to join the five-member Citrus Heights City Council, did not comment on the use-of-force issue during the meeting and did not return phone and email messages left by The Sentinel on Wednesday.

    Want to share your thoughts on the council’s position on use-of-force legislation? Click here to submit a letter to the editor for publication.

    *This article was updated to include a correction on the date of the City Council’s next meeting.

  • Citrus Heights City Council approves first-ever $12M line of credit

    Credit, Citrus Heights
    Citrus Heights Councilman Bret Daniels speaks prior to a 5-0 vote to approve a $12 million line of credit for the city. // Image credit: Metro Cable 14

    Updated 7:23 a.m., Nov. 18–
    Sentinel staff report–  Citrus Heights City Council members on Thursday night unanimously voted to approve a $12 million revolving line of credit, making it the first time the city has ever authorized incurring debt in its 21-year history.

    City Manager Christopher Boyd, who in 2016 assured that the city would “never go into debt,” said access to the new line of credit will put the city in a position “to invest in our community for return” and also allow “a nimble and flexible way” to get by until the city receives a long-anticipated boost from property tax revenue in four years. Assistant City Manager Ronda Rivera said the funds will be drawn on for both “unanticipated operating or known operating deficits that we have and capital needs as they come up.”

    According to a 10-year projection presented to the council, without the line of credit, the city’s current reserves of $5.3 million were projected to dwindle to about $350,000 by fiscal year 2021-22, before increasing to more than $4 million beginning the following fiscal year when the city begins receiving its property tax revenue. An updated projection, accounting for the line of credit being used, showed reserves only dropping to $2.9 million before rising to almost $5 million the following year.

    The city’s share of property taxes is currently about $5.6 million, but as part of a 25-year “revenue neutrality” agreement with Sacramento County, Citrus Heights has reluctantly had to fork those funds over to the county each year — a condition imposed to allow the city to incorporate in 1997. After an unsuccessful attempt to strike a deal with the county to get early access to the funds, the city pursued a line of credit as the most “cost effective” alternative.

    The revolving line of credit with Western Alliance Bank is structured as a site lease with the Community Center pledged as collateral and comes with an interest rate of 4.4% on $4.5 million, and 6.09% on the remaining $7.5 million. An interest rate of 0.25% will be charged for any undrawn amount.

    “Good faith estimates” included in the council’s Nov. 15 agenda packet state that if funds borrowed are paid in full at the end of the 20-year sublease, the city would pay about $9 million in interest, although that amount will be less if prepayments are made by the city. The city plans to pay any debt off by September of 2024.

    The line of credit will enable the city to fund two “big ticket” expenses — purchasing the old Sylvan Middle School property and helping fund the second phase of improvements on Auburn Boulevard, according to Mayor Steve Miller. The city recently announced around $16 million in outside funding is available for the Auburn Boulevard project, which will extend roadway improvements from Rusch Park to the Roseville border, but the city needs to put forward about $4.5 million in matching funds.

    The mayor has said the city’s intention with the old Sylvan school property is to buy it from the San Juan Unified School District and then sell it to a private party, in order to “have a full say in what happens there.”

    In comments made during the meeting, councilmembers Bret Daniels and Jeff Slowey both said they “reluctantly” were voting for the line of credit, in light of the city’s long tradition of operating without debt. Four members of the public also addressed the council during the meeting to express their general support or opposition to the proposal.

    Resident David Warren spoke during public comment and warned that another economic recession could hinder the ability of the city to repay the debt and said the council should specifically limit the use of credit for capital improvements, rather than operating expenses, arguing that “operating expense should never be something you use a line of credit for.”

    “If the city borrows money and goes into debt and it has a compensating asset, then the city’s books remain in balance,” said Warren. “If instead we are spending it for operating expenses, the city’s books go out of balance because we will have a debt without a corresponding asset.”

    The final wording of the agreement allows for the line of credit to be used for both “operating and capital funding needs.”

    Bill Van Duker, sometimes called the city “Godfather” for his role in helping with the incorporation process, also spoke during public comment and told the City Council that it was known “from day one” that there would come a time when the city would reach a “crossover point” before the end of the 25-year agreement with the county, where expenses would exceed revenues. He said if former City Manager Henry Tingle were here today, “we would still be in exactly the same position.”

    EDITORIAL: Council should re-watch tribute to ‘Tightwad Tingle’ before $12M vote

    Several other council members and the assistant city manager also referenced the “crossover point,” which was initially projected to be reached in 2010, according Councilman Jeff Slowey. However, with frugal management under Tingle’s leadership, the city steered away from debt and amassed $33 million in reserves by 2012 — enabling the city to spend $21 million in reserves on the new city hall in 2016.

    That move to purchase the new city hall was criticized by Councilman Bret Daniels, who has frequently voiced his opposition to the city draining its reserves on the new hall.

    “We’re having [this] discussion today because of the decision to build this building and spend the general fund reserve to do that,” said Daniels. “If that had not occurred, we wouldn’t be having this meeting tonight. We would have a nice healthy reserve and we would be able to make it over those next five years or so.”

    In the end, Daniels said he would “very reluctantly” support the line of credit in order to “return back to taking care of some of our different needs,” primarily referencing roads.

    Related: Henry Tingle reflects on 17 years as Citrus Heights city manager

    Vice Mayor Jeannie Bruins, who co-chaired the cityhood effort in 1996 and has served on the council since 2002, called the city’s move to incur debt for the first time a “very big paradigm shift” and said “we all hoped that this day would never come.” She said she was supporting the proposal due to its “very limited scope” and the goal “to get debt-free again as soon as we can.”

    Councilman Slowey said in comments before the vote that future council members could make different decisions about how the line of credit is spent, noting governmental misuse in funding is common across the country. As he will be retiring from the council in two years, he said voters will need to keep council members “on their toes to make sure that they’re held accountable for how that money is spent.”

    “I’m reluctantly going to support this, just because, again, it’s always nice to go everywhere and say your debt free,” said Slowey. “But, I think that fiscal frugality will continue to play on our part so that we will use that money wisely and only when we need to.”

    Related: Middleton set to join Miller, Bruins on Citrus Heights City Council

    Porsche Middleton, who won election to the City Council on Nov. 6 did not vote on the matter, as she will not officially replace Councilman Al Fox on the council until next month. Both Fox and Mayor Miller supported the $12 million line of credit.

    Two other members of the public also spoke during the meeting, Sunrise MarketPlace Executive Director Kathilynn Carpenter and resident Kelly Severin. Carpenter focused her comments in support of the city investing in capital projects on Auburn Boulevard and Sylvan Corners, while Severin cautioned about taking on debt and said the city would be better off continuing its “pay-as-you-go” approach to projects, even if it would mean waiting four years for the city to receive its property tax revenue.

    Funding from the line of credit is expected to be available by the end of this month, on Nov. 29, according to the city manager’s office.

    What do you think of the City Council’s decision? Share your thoughts in a letter to the editor: click here.

  • Guest Opinion: Three Citrus Heights council members got it wrong

    Guest Opinion: Three Citrus Heights council members got it wrong

    *Editor’s note: On July 26, 2018, the City Council voted 3-1 in favor of a resolution giving the City Manager authority to submit letters in support or opposition to “high priority” state legislation where the League of California Cities has requested such action, but where it is determined there is not sufficient time to have the City Council vote on the matter. Mayor Steve Miller, as well as Councilmen Jeff Slowey and Al Fox voted in favor of the resolution. Councilman Bret Daniels voted against the resolution, and Vice Mayor Jeannie Bruins was not present for the vote. The resolution will sunset on Dec. 31, 2019, unless extended by the council. (See full document)

    Guest opinion submitted by David Warren–
    The primary safeguard of a democracy is the requirement that officials act only under the light of public scrutiny, and the Brown Act requires placing all matters for which action is taken by the City Council on a meeting agenda with adequate notice to the public to allow community members to attend and voice their support or opposition to any action under consideration.

    David Warren

    Notwithstanding the importance of public debate and comment, councilmembers approved a resolution last month that allows them to avoid public scrutiny of their actions and simultaneously prevents public comment upon issues of significant importance, apparently believing that Edmond Burke is correct that the electorate lacks the ability to fully comprehend issues of public importance and must be treated as children to be lead to the “proper conclusion.”

    Citrus Heights is a member of the League of California Cities. The League appears before the California legislature to lobby in support and opposition to various items of legislation. The League does not answer to Citrus Heights residents.

    On numerous occasions, the League requests a letter from the City to support or oppose pending legislation, sometimes requesting an immediate response. Because the Brown Act requires minimum notice periods, councilmembers often cannot provide an immediate response to a League request.

    Three councilmembers, deeming a response to the League more important than open discourse upon all issues of public importance, delegated authority to the City Manager to write letters in support and opposition to legislation on behalf of the City in response to requests from the League.

    The three councilmembers’ justification for adopting the resolution is that placing items on the council agenda prevents rapid responses to a League request. To appease the League, and to the detriment of the city residents, three councilmembers chose to ignore their duty to the electorate by approving an end run around the Brown Act meeting notice requirements via a resolution authorizing the City Manager to issue letters of support or opposition to legislation based solely upon the League’s recommendation, without placing the League request on the council agenda for discussion and debate by both members of the council and the public.

    The resolution does purport to limit the City Manager’s power by (1) limiting the authority to matters for which there is insufficient time to obtain council direction; (2) is consistent with previously adopted policies of the City and City Council; and (3) a requirement that the League deems the legislation of “high priority,” a very subjective definition.

    In adopting this resolution, the three councilmembers abandoned their responsibility to determine whether or not the requested letter supporting or opposing legislation is consistent with City policies and in the best interests of the City, relying solely upon an unknown person at the League of Cities to make that decision, at the same time denying residents the opportunity for public comment.

    In response to objections to the motion to adopt the resolution, the City Attorney was asked by Mayor Steve Miller whether or not the City Manager could poll the councilmembers to obtain their decision to issue the letter requested by the League. The City Attorney responded that the City Manager could call each councilmember and request their position, so long as the City Manager did not disclose the decision by any other councilmember, thus sidestepping the open meeting requirements of the Brown Act which ensures councilmembers must publicly explain the reasons for their vote and guaranteeing public comment upon the matter for which there should be approving or rejecting vote.

    The councilmembers are thumbing their noses at the Government Code open meeting requirements for which reason there are three very important issues of concern to every resident.

    First, who should be making community policy decisions, the councilmembers or the city manager? The answer is absolutely clear, the councilmembers.

    Second, should the councilmembers seek to avoid the Brown Act open meeting requirements in the name of expediency? Clearly not.

    Finally, shouldn’t the councilmembers be more concerned with guaranteeing an opportunity for a public hearing than the needs of the League? Absolutely.

    The truth remains, that which is to be most feared is government acting without public scrutiny, and it is the duty of the brave to do everything possible to assure public discourse on all public issues.

    Stand up for your democratic right to assure that all matters before the City Council are decided in a meeting open to the public, not by secret telephone calls. Call your councilmember and ask that the resolution be withdrawn.

    David Warren is a Citrus Heights resident and legislative advocate at the State Capitol with Taxpayers for Public Safety. He can be reached at David@forpublicsafety.com.

    Want to share your own thoughts on this topic or another local issue? Submit a letter to the editor or opinion column for publication: Click here

  • The Civic Minute: what’s happening at Citrus Heights city hall? (Nov. 9)

    ARCO gas station proposal. Hazardous waste drop-off. Half-million dollar grant. Backyard chickens. Those are some topics on the agenda for the Citrus Heights city council’s upcoming Nov. 9 council meeting. Here’s a brief summary of what’s on schedule, followed by vote highlights from the Oct. 26 council meeting:

    PRESENTATIONS:

    • Top 20 city landmarks presentation by city staff.
    • Presentation on the city’s annual Christmas tree lighting event, to be held on Dec. 7th.

    PUBLIC HEARINGS:

    • Grant Funding: Part two of a public hearing will be held on how $589,000 in federal Community Development Block Grant funding will be allocated in Citrus Heights. A draft distribution of funds would send $383,000 to the Citywide Accessibility Improvement Project, $118,000 to program administration, and the remaining 15 percent to seven community organizations.

    ACTION ITEMS OF NOTE:

    • ARCO proposal: Councilmembers will consider a staff recommendation to approve a contract with Analytical Environmental Services (AES) to conduct an environmental impact report for the proposed ARCO gas station and car wash at the corner of Sunrise Boulevard an Sungarden Drive. Although AES submitted the highest bid of $115,000 out of four bids received by the city, staff recommended AES as “the most qualified” based on the firm’s experience with similar projects and compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act. The lowest bid received was $89,500. An additional $10,000 is included in the project proposal to cover additional traffic impact analysis, if needed. All costs will be paid for by the project’s applicant, Cal Ventures Group, LLC, and not the city.
    • Hazardous waste drop-off: Councilmembers will consider a staff recommendation to discontinue Republic Services’ three annual household hazardous waste drop-off events and instead contract with Sacramento County for disposal services at two year-round locations. The recommendation cites declining participation and complaints from residents about the inconvenience of the current drop-off events. If approved, residents would be able to drop off hazardous waste at the county’s North Area Recovery Station at 4450 Roseville Rd. and dispose of antifreeze, batteries, oils and paints at the Kiefer Landfill at 12701 Kiefer Blvd in Sloughhouse. Costs to the city are proposed to remain the same, with the city contributing the first $75,000 toward hazardous waste collection and Republic Services retaining responsibility for outreach and any additional costs.

    OTHER ITEMS:

    • Backyard chickens. The city’s economic development department will give a one-year update on how Citrus Heights’ new regulations on backyard hen-keeping have played out. In 2016, the city council unanimously voted to amend the city’s zoning code to allow for hen-keeping on smaller lots; a one-year update was requested at the time. (See 2016 story)
    • Prescription drug safety. At the request of Councilman Bret Daniels, the council will discuss prescription drug pill bottle locking devices.

    The city council will meet at 7 p.m. at 6360 Fountain Square Dr. The full agenda packet can be viewed by clicking here.

    HIGHLIGHTS FROM OCT. 26 COUNCIL MEETING:
    Present: Mayor Jeff Slowey, Jeannie Bruins, Bret Daniels, Albert Fox, Steve Miller
    Meeting length: 2 hours 25 minutes.

    Quotable: “By no means are we done with homelessness. There’s a lot of work to be done.” – Mayor Jeff Slowey, commenting on the city’s Homeless Navigator program being recognized and awarded by the League of California Cities.

    “There is no necessity for this. We don’t need it. The community doesn’t need it. The community has spoken: they don’t want it.” – Councilman Bret Daniels, commenting on FoodMaxx’s liquor license request.

    • FoodMaxx liquor license request (Denied, 4-1). A request for a “Letter of Public Convenience and Necessity” to allow the sale of distilled spirits at FoodMaxx on Sunrise Boulevard was denied by councilmembers in a split 4-1 vote. (Read more in news briefs)
    • Police salaries/benefits (Approved, 5-0). The city council approved a 3-year agreement with the Citrus Heights Police Officers Association that included a 2% salary increase for CHPOA members and a $100 increase in the monthly maximum paid by the city for health insurance premiums.
    • Debt policy (Approved, 5-0). The city council approved a recommendation by the city manager’s office to adopt a proposed debt policy. Although Citrus Heights has no debt, the approved 12-page policy is based on SB 1029, a recently passed state law which effectively requires cities to have a debt policy in place 30-days prior to taking on debt.
    • Homelessness. During public comment, Citrus Heights resident Jennifer Spurr told council members that her home has had an ongoing issue with homeless activity and said she no longer feels safe living or shopping in the city. Because the area behind her home is on Caltrans property, Spurr said she wanted to know what council members would do to work with police and Caltrans to ensure jurisdictional issues don’t get in the way of stopping homeless activity behind her home. Mayor Jeff Slowey told her he was aware of her particular issue and said he would bring it up with Caltrans during a scheduled Nov. 2 meeting. Spurr’s issue was previously featured in an April 4 report on Fox 40.

      Video of the Oct. 26 council meeting can be viewed by clicking here.

  • New map shows proposed 55-acre housing development in Citrus Heights

    Development, Watt Communities, Citrus Heights
    An updated map showing a 261-home development proposed off Arcadia Drive in Citrus Heights. // Image credit: City of Citrus Heights

    Sentinel staff report–
    While California faces an ongoing housing shortage, one developer is slowly making progress on plans to bring several hundred new housing units to a 55-acre chunk of undeveloped land in Citrus Heights, near Sunrise Boulevard and Greenback Lane.

    The housing proposal was submitted to the city by Watt Communities last November and includes 76 new single family homes, 72 “cluster units,” and 113 “alley loaded units.” The development would be situated with Montage Apartments on its northeastern border and Arcadia Drive and the Citrus Town Center to the southwest.

    In an update to the city council last month, Citrus Heights Planning Manager Colleen McDuffee said an environmental impact report (EIR) is currently being conducted for the proposal, which includes specialized studies assessing potential impacts on traffic, noise, air quality, and other aspects required by the California Environmental Quality Act. She said a draft report will be available for public review “before the end of the year,” after which public hearings and votes on the proposal are expected to be held by the planning commission and city council in spring 2018.

    In comments during the council meeting, Mayor Jeff Slowey said he recently met with the developer and is looking forward to the project moving ahead, calling it “a great addition for the city.”

    “I mean, let’s be honest, there’s a housing crisis out there — we don’t have a lot of brand new homes to sell here in town because we’re built out,” said Slowey. “And where else are you going to find a development that’s gonna have 20 acres of open space?”

    A map of the proposal presented to council members last month shows proposed housing separated into three general communities, with a large swath down the middle remaining undeveloped due to a 100-year flood plain associated with Arcade Creek. Prices for the homes are expected to range from the “high 2’s to low 4’s,” with sizes ranging from 1,400-square-feet to 2,500-square-feet, according to Kevin Webb, Northern California division president for Watt Communities.

    The map also shows three entrances to the housing development, with a pair of access roads off Arcadia Drive and another access road off Fair Oaks Boulevard.

    Asking whether a roundabout could be seen on the map at one of the two entrances on Arcadia Drive, Councilman Bret Daniels replied “sweet!” upon hearing confirmation from McDuffee. His reaction was tempered somewhat after learning there would be no fountain in the middle of the roundabout, however.

    See prior story for additional details: Watt Communities proposes huge 261-unit development in Citrus Heights

    As previously reported on The Sentinel in December, the potential for a development proposal of this size is rare for Citrus Heights, which is almost entirely built out as a city. Nick Lagura, an associate planner with the City of Citrus Heights, called the proposal’s location “the last large development site in the city.”

    The 55-acre parcel has been owned by Ted Mitchell, whose family purchased 160 acres in Citrus Heights for $1600 in gold coins over 100 years ago, according to an interview published by the city’s History & Arts Commission. Mitchell, now 91 years old, is believed to be the city’s longest-living resident and still owns a significant amount of acreage in the area, including the land where the Citrus Town Center sits.

    Related: Citrus Heights’ longest living resident reflects on history of city

    Watt Communities has worked with Mitchell in the past, purchasing property from him on Antelope Road in order to build the recently completed 46-home AutumnWood development in Citrus Heights, near Interstate 80. Webb said discussions with Mitchell about the latest project began in 2015.

    Community questions
    Unlike some development proposals in the city, like the nearby proposed ARCO gas station and car wash on Sunrise Boulevard and Sungarden Drive, the housing proposal has not generated any organized opposition.

    Addressing a handful of questions raised by residents at a neighborhood meeting at last December, Webb said the development would not include low-income housing, although he said prices would be “affordable.” McDuffee also confirmed the city does not have low-income housing requirements for new developments in Citrus Heights.

    Other questions included “where are the grandkids going to park?” “what if there was a fire?” and if the units would be so close you could “reach your hand out and touch the next house.”

    Webb said spacing between homes would differ from lot to lot, with the goal to “make more use out of less space” without becoming too crowded. He later told The Sentinel that density is planned for 8 to 13 units per acre, while in comparison he’s built up to 18 units per acre — which he said becomes too dense.

    For parking, Webb said the development is planned for one-and-a-half parking spots per unit, meaning a 30-unit community would have 45 parking spots at the street — in addition to two garage spaces.

    “We’re over-parking the project,” said developer, comparing the proposal to some in Southern California with limited parking. “We’ve done it wrong before, so we want to be careful.”

    Another question was raised by Councilman Daniels who said he was concerned about the “riff-raff” associated with the bus stop on Arcadia Drive. He noted the proposal called for homes facing outward towards Arcadia with only a three-foot wall separating them from the street, rather than facing the homes away from the street.

    Webb responded that facing the homes outward would “help prevent crime” and give a more welcoming look, rather than facing the homes inward and having a tall wall along the street — as is the case with the AutumnWood development on Antelope Road.

    Asked about similarly designed communities in the area for comparison, Webb referenced KB Home’s Marquee development off Fair Oaks Boulevard. He also said AutumnWood has similar home elevations as the new proposal.

    What do you think about Watt Communities’ proposal? Have your view published as a letter to the editor: click here.