Sentinel staff report–
California State Assemblyman Ken Cooley will be in Citrus Heights this Friday to host a question-and-answer coffee event at Rusch Park.
The assemblyman in an email to constituents announcing the upcoming meeting invited community members to “join me for a cup of coffee” at the Rusch Community Park pavillion on Friday, Aug. 5, from 9-11 a.m. An events posting on Cooley’s website says attendees are invited to bring any questions regarding legislative issues.
Cooley is a Democrat representing the 8th Assembly District in California, which currently covers Citrus Heights and much of eastern Sacramento County, including Carmichael, Rancho Cordova, Rancho Murieta, and rural areas south of Highway 16. Due to district boundary changes made during redistricting, Cooley is now seeking to represent the 7th Assembly District where he will face Republican Josh Hoover this November.
California’s newly drawn 7th district lines include Citrus Heights, Folsom, Orangevale, Fair Oaks, Carmichael, North Highlands and other nearby communities.
“Then the Lord said to Cain, ‘Where is Abel your brother?’ And he said, ‘I do not know. Am I my brother’s keeper?” – Genesis 4:9. At a recent city council meeting in Citrus Heights, an articulate community member speaking on behalf of a number of mothers expressed concern about the homeless in our community, especially in Rusch Community Park. The speaker spoke about being accosted by aggressive individuals asking for money, drug paraphernalia as a hazard in the parks, along with the homeless sitting and sleeping in public spaces with an unclean and bad smelling appearance.
The speaker feared that children playing in the park could be harmed by one of the homeless; the danger of unsanitary conditions because of no access to showers or toilets; and the drug paraphernalia which is too often found lying about would endanger children. The concerns are genuine, appropriately focusing attention on the significant problem of the homeless and habituated. However, none of the councilmembers who responded to the speaker replied in a constructive manner.
In his response, Councilmember Bret Daniels did not suggest that the residents contact Assemblymember Ken Cooley (D-Rancho Cordova), State Senator Jim Nielsen (R-Tehama), Board of Supervisor Sue Frost or Congressman Ami Bera to ask for more funding for treatment and housing. Instead, he has previously mused about the fact that the voters did not understand what they were voting for with criminal reform ballot propositions 47 and 57.
Although Citrus Heights identified about 85 homeless individuals in its most recent survey, there are only 75 treatment beds available in Sacramento County for the more than 2,000 homeless people living in the county. Some complain that these homeless individuals are not incarcerated because of laws which prefer rehabilitation to arrest and prosecution.
Councilmember comments during the Aug. 24 council meeting failed to explain to those present that (1) habituation is a nationally recognized illness and cannot be resolved by the revolving door of the penal system; (2) that since Governor Ronald Reagan systematically closed California’s mental health facilities followed by President Reagan terminating the National Mental Health Care Act which would have provided for mental health and habituation treatment beds in California, the only mental health beds constructed in California in the last 40 years are pursuant to a federal court order for a prison in Stockton; (3) because of the high cost of rental housing, the working homeless cannot find a place to live; and (4) if the homeless are forcibly ejected from Rusch Park, where they will go.
The community member apparently forgot that each homeless individual is the son or daughter of a parent that had the same fears for their children. The speaker ignored the possibility that in the future — for reasons beyond their control — one of the speaker’s children, or a friend’s child, would be one of the homeless or habituated about whom the speaker complained. If the speaker had no sympathy for the homeless now, who would offer sympathy for the potential homelessness or habituation of their children in the future?
The cause of homelessness is so complex that it cannot be addressed in full here. However, substance abuse, domestic violence, mental illness, young people aging out of foster care, and the lack of affordable housing are significant causes. Homelessness is not a crime, it is an unfortunate consequence of economic change and health issues.
Ballot Proposition 63, the Mental Health Services Act, was an effort in 2004 to address the problem. Unfortunately, the California legislature has refused to provide the necessary appropriations to build the treatment facilities and/or provide funding for mental health and habituation treatment. Because of advances in technology, many middle-income jobs have disappeared, leaving behind individuals who want to work, but cannot. Unemployment is one cause of increased rates of domestic violence and divorce, leading to increased homelessness of single mothers and children.
There are very few people that do not empathize with people that suffer from cancer or permanent injuries suffered from an automobile accident. Yet, when we see a homeless individual, the only thought is: “not in my back yard.” Instead, we should be asking where is the funding for (1) treatment for the mentally ill and habituated; (2) a safe place for women and children who are fleeing domestic abuse and aged out foster care children who have no place to call home, (3) or the families of the unemployable that want to work, but lack the skills to find employment which pays enough to pay rent.
Unlike Jesus, who did not turn away from the lepers (Gospel of Luke 17:11-19), our city council and the residents present at the Aug. 24 council meeting appeared to want only one thing, to move the homeless to make them someone else’s problem, instead of demanding help for the homeless and habituated.
All Citrus Heights residents, our city council, especially Councilmember Daniels who wishes to become the Sacramento County Sheriff, would be well served to remember Charles Dickens immortal words, “Are there no prisons? Are there no workhouses?”
The proper question we should be asking, especially if a son or daughter might become an unfortunate homeless resident of Rusch Park, is where will the homeless receive the help they need in Citrus Heights?
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.
Have a different perspective on this topic or another local issue? The Sentinel welcomes letters to the editor and guest opinion columns on local issues from Citrus Heights residents. Click here to submit one.
Updated April 20, 5:41 p.m.–
Taking a recommendation from the City police chief, Citrus Heights council members unanimously passed a resolution last week in support of a California medical marijuana regulation bill.
The bill, AB 266, is locally authored by Assemblyman Ken Cooley (D-Rancho Cordova) and enjoys support from the California Police Chiefs Association (Cal Chiefs) and the League of California Cities. If passed, the legislation would add health and safety standards for medical marijuana, provide for easier monitoring of cannabis supplies in the state, and allow counties to tax cultivation and distribution.
Contrasted with other medical pot bills proposed this year, AB 266 highlights local control and would preserve the discretionary power of cities to ban medical marijuana dispensaries, while granting the state authority to collect fees and issue conditional licenses through the creation of a new Bureau of Medical Marijuana Regulation.
Citrus Heights currently bans dispensaries and outdoor growing of cannabis, while regulating indoor growing for medical purposes — and such a policy could continue under the proposed legislation. A California Supreme Court ruling two years ago found that a 1996 voter-passed initiative known as Proposition 215 protected legal possession of medical marijuana, but did not require cities to allow dispensaries.
The text of Prop 215 states an intent “to ensure that seriously ill Californians have the right to obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes,” as long as the use is “recommended by a physician.” It also expresses an intent “to encourage the federal and state governments to implement a plan to provide for the safe and affordable distribution of marijuana to all patients in medical need of marijuana.”
Citrus Heights Police Chief Christopher Boyd, who also served as president of Cal Chiefs last year, told the council he believes the “vast majority” of marijuana consumers under Prop 215 “are not sick,” and that AB 266 provides a much-needed plan to effectively implement “what voters actually intended.”
Assemblyman Cooley was present as council members voted 5-0 to endorse the bill he authored. He told the council his bill was “a balancing act” which would protect the right of patients to access medical marijuana under Prop 215, while also “protecting the rights of communities” to regulate the controversial drug.
Several marijuana advocacy groups supported a similar bill in the senate last year known as SB 1262, authored by since termed-out Senator Lou Correa (D-Santa Ana).
The California Cannabis Industry Association views Cooley’s bill as “largely based” on Correa’s bill, which the group called “a sensible system of statewide regulation” on its website. Though expressing some concern about aspects like the authority of cities to control licensing, the group called SB 1262 “a necessary step towards [a] safe, legal, predictable business climate” for the cannabis industry.
The marijuana advocacy group does not list a current position on AB 266, and no contact phone number is provided on the Association’s website. A request for comment by email was not returned.
[follow text=”Follow us:”]
Although several residents addressed other topics during public comment at the council meeting, no statements from the public were made regarding medical marijuana or AB 266.
Cooley’s bill is scheduled to be heard by the Assembly Business and Professions Committee on April 21.
