Highlights and lowlights from the week's news
HIT >> Transparency, and community feedback, are two of the most important features of any successful taxpayer-funded operation. That's why we're encouraging everyone in Chico to participate in the Police Community Advisory Board's independent survey regarding the Chico Police Department.
Police Chief Billy Aldridge announced the launch of the survey last week with a goal to understand perceptions of the police department and areas which improvement can be made.
Among other things, the survey gives citizens a chance to express your views on department priorities, their experiences with previous interactions, and how you currently obtain information about Chico. There's also a space at the end for general comments and concerns.
Access to the survey can be found on the police department's website.
And speaking of transparency, on Thursday evening Chico Police will hold a community engagement meeting at the Chico Council Chambers beginning at 6 p.m. regarding the city's military equipment use policy. The meeting is required by law; what's notable is Aldridge has called for the meeting to gain community input ahead of the vote.
It's important to make your voices heard, and it's good that we have a police department willing to hear them. MISS >> We'll preface this by saying that under our system of law, people are assumed to be innocent until proven guilty. That being said, the allegations against a Chico man accused of literally stealing money meant for our veterans are appalling.
Michael David Zylstra, 60, was arrested March 14 on suspicion of two counts of embezzlement and four counts of forgery, according to Butte County District Attorney Mike Ramsey.
According to Ramsey, Zylstra is accused of taking more than $60,000 from the American Legion and Disabled American Veterans.
Zylstra paid bail on the day of his arrest and was released, Ramsey said. He is scheduled to appear for a hearing at the Butte County Courthouse on May 10.
All thefts are bad. Stealing money meant for those who put their lives on the line in defense of our country? Heinous.
HIT >> We were glad to see the Chico City Council agree to further evaluate their options regarding the rising costs at mobile home parks.
Mobile home park residents on fixed incomes shouldn't be expected to cover unrealistic rent increases year after year. We understand the hesitancy of many on the council to go into the “rent control business.” On the other hand, in an era where affordable housing is among the hottest topics around, it's dead wrong that people get priced out of some of the most affordable housing that still exists.
We'll also note that the mobile home park in question, Pleasant Valley Mobile Estates, sold in December 2020 for $8.2 million. Huge jump in property tax obligation. Then, a year later, it sold again for a whopping $13.6 million and yet another huge jump.
That's a pretty nice $5 million profit — and that's where the occupants' money is going.
In any case, there are no easy answers. That's exactly the time elected bodies should spend some extra time trying to find the best one.
MISS >> The tents are back in Chico City Plaza, and local officials have announced a plan to relocate the people staying there.
Again.
“Now wait a minute,” you might be asking. “I thought the plaza was already cleared out, and once an area has been cleared out, homeless people aren't supposed to be able to camp there again.”
Well, so did we. Honestly, that struck us as a pretty clear-cut part of the settlement. But in the never-ending complexities of Warren vs. Chico, there always seem to be new interpretations, and there always seem to be objections, and (ultimately) the city needs to continually go through the same set of notifications as it did in the first place. As a result, the world's longest running game of Whac-A-Mole just keeps on going — and so does the frustration from much of the public.
When will it end? Two dozen more enforcements? A hundred? Who knows? Or maybe with the Supreme Court finally providing some well-needed guidance on when and how cities are legally allowed to enforce their ordinances?
We do know this: Just as there is no one reason people become homeless, there's no one “solution” to the problem. The billions of dollars employed up and down our state in recent years should prove that.
In the meantime, we think “all of the above” might be as good of an answer as any. The Genesis Pallet shelter, Torres Shelter, Jesus Center, CHAT, Safe Space and others are each carrying an invaluable load.
We're wondering if, in the same spirit as the revisit of the mobile home park, the city might also be willing to listen to the North State Shelter Team's plan to take over management of a campground. If it gets a few more people off the street, and likely saves the city and state resources while doing so, what's the harm? Especially in just listening?