Housing and cannabis

Chico leaders must prioritize protecting renters, especially given the housing that was lost in the Camp Fire.

That was one of the main messages of the dozen-plus speakers who advocated for the city to extend its anti-price-gouging ordinance at the Tuesday City Council meeting (Nov. 19). The law initially was adopted shortly after the disaster, and several residents, like Addison Winslow, argued that it should stay on the books longer than the Dec. 31, 2020, sunset proposed by city staff.

“For a lot of us, it means the difference between remaining in our homes in Chico and either relocating completely from the area, commuting over an hour away or living on the street,” he said.

Adopted as an emergency ordinance on Nov. 16, 2018, the law prohibits rent and hotel/motel rates from increasing more than 10 percent. City Manager Mark Orme explained Tuesday that it is a cumulative cap on price increases from the original adoption date.

The fallout from this disaster is far from over, community members argued. Several council members voiced their agreement, and the extension of the ordinance passed unanimously. Mayor Randall Stone called the decision a “no-brainer.” This is the second time the council extended the law.

But Winslow, a member of the Democratic Socialists of America: Chico, still chided the council for its lack of further actions to protect renters and address the “extreme insecurity people have been facing since the fire.”

Other speakers said extending the ordinance is the least the council can do. Vice Mayor Alex Brown agreed, adding that the city will continue to work toward finding affordable housing solutions in its Internal Affairs Committee (IAC) and ad hoc housing committee.

Councilwoman Ann Schwab said she was struck by the outpouring of testimony on the reverberations of the Camp Fire, referencing several speakers who mentioned friends in Chico who were displaced as their rentals were sold. Schwab said she’d been alerted that some tenants already had received a notice of a rent increase starting Jan. 1, when the ordinance was set to expire.

Also that night, the panel spent a long time debating commercial cannabis legalization only to wind up voting unanimously to defer the item to its next meeting. The proposal before the council, which was unanimously recommended by the IAC—composed of Brown, the chairwoman, and Councilmen Scott Huber and Karl Ory—would allow cannabis delivery businesses and storefronts, testing laboratories, and distribution and manufacturing services. No more than four stores would be allowed within the city, based on population.

This topic was the most contentious. Jessica MacKenzie, head of the Inland Cannabis Farmers Association, served on the Cannabis Advisory Committee and reminded the panel that “this should not be an emotional issue, and yet it is.”

“Cannabis is here in our community. It has been forever. We just need to decide. Instead of continuing to have this conversation about whether we like it or don’t …. It’s here. How are we going to manage it as a community?”

Conversely, Teri DuBose, a local businesswoman who also served on the committee, said she was part of the minority and felt that the outcome had been “set in stone” from the get-go, that the committee was “just for show.”

“We did give our input, but it really didn’t make a difference,” she said. Brown asked her several questions, and the pair appeared to find common ground. DuBose suggested that a presentation on the health impacts of marijuana use from health officials might be helpful, and Brown later voiced support for that in conjunction with future discussions.

Schwab said she wanted to make sure there was ample time for the council and community to have questions answered and process the information regarding this significant change for the city.

While the council did not provide direction that night, it was clear there was a desire to discuss a potential THC potency cap for products (an issue on which the advisory committee could not come to a consensus), and invite Butte County Public Health to make a presentation on that issue, along with other health considerations.

Stone encouraged his colleagues to come prepared with specific questions based on the proposed policy: “What is it that you are concerned about? Are there remedies to some of these concerns?”

The city also held its first of many public meetings centered on the process of switching from at-large to district-based elections, a change prompted by the threat of litigation from not one but two law firms (see “About-face, Newslines, Nov. 14). This first hearing was designed to explain the several-months-long process for the public.

As with the last council meeting, several speakers advocated for ranked-choice voting and changing the number of council seats. Assistant City Attorney Andrew Jared clarified that such a move would require changing the city charter, which can happen only by a vote of the people. The council appeared to come to a consensus that could be discussed later—the task before them, getting the districts drawn, was most pressing.

Schwab asked if any consideration was given to where current council members reside when districts are created. Demographer Michael Wagaman said that incumbency can be considered, but shouldn’t be the predominant factor.

As part of the process, the public is invited to create maps proposing how district lines should be drawn. More information can be found at tinyurl.com/ChicoDistricts or by emailing districtelections@chicoca.gov.