So, the squeaky wheel gets the grease? Both the Downtown “revitalization” and the sewer rate increase have been put on ice because the public made some racket?
The important thing to remember is, it’s election time, and our leaders get bigger ears whenever they feel that cold breeze across their butt cheeks. Unfortunately, some people think their money talks louder than the rights of the rest of us taxpayers.
I don’t like Stoble Coffee, it’s just Starbucks with a different name and a “local” owner. When I walked in for a quick whirl, the noise level was so intense – people were shouting over each other. But it seems popular enough, and they contribute sales tax to the bottom line. I don’t have to like every business Downtown. I’ve also seen a lot of “flash in the pan” businesses over the years, that have folded up suddenly and left town, for whatever reason. Lately it’s been bad – that’s part of what is killing Downtown – the old familiar places and faces are changing, and the new places don’t stick around long enough to make an impression.
So, the thought that these Happy Wanderers would try to screw my district representative out of a vote because she also owns a business Downtown is positively offensive. According to the FPPC, ” Recusal is not required if the council member’s interest is indistinguishable from the effect on the general public.” Reynolds has also been a voice for long-time business owners who won’t be able to sustain a long-term project.
This wouldn’t be a “revitalization” for many businesses, it would be the last nail in the coffin – following really bad decisions made during the “Shelter Crisis”, COVID and subsequent downturns. It would be devastating to see businesses that fought to survive those disasters, only to be put down by further bad decisions made by the city of Chico. And especially ironic because the of the millions and millions in funding the city received for those incidents. Like the $24 million they are seeking for bike lanes, on street dining/alcohol, and “traffic calming“.
Yes, the city and the Downtown Business Owners Association have a responsibility to keep up the streets and (arguably) the sidewalks, and especially the sewer. That is all the “revitalization” Downtown needs. Business owners should never have to worry that they will be cut off from the public for any reason. Harken back to the time the sidewalk collapsed in front of Kona’s, then located on Broadway – the city told the business owner he would have to replace the sidewalk and drainage at his own expense. Kona’s – a really popular sandwich shop/bakery for years, also supplying bread to other shops – ended up relocating to Nord.
But the word “revitalization” has been enlarged beyond basic necessities to encompass a total makeover, a remodeling, changing stuff that we’ve had for over 100 years, stuff that makes Downtown special to those of us who have been paying property taxes in this town before Mr. and Mrs. “Stoble” ever showed up on the horizon.
I knew the districts would be bad, and here’s another reason – if our rep has to recuse themself it means our entire district is disenfranchised. These people, all seven, make decisions that affect all of us, and we only get to vote for one of them?
So Reynolds has my vote, for better or worse, as many times as I’ve disagreed with her and called out her poor decisions, I’m with her on this one.
Thanks Kasey. Keep squeakin’ Chico.
Chico Taxpayers Association 
The question is whether her vote was against the law. If it is, that’s not courage, it’s something else. We’ll see what FPPC and court of law say about whether she has an economic conflict of interest. I’ll withhold judgment until then.
Reread that section I quoted from the FPPC website – I believe Reynolds is voting in the public interest. Yeah, we’ll see what happens. We’ll see who else gets a call from the FPPC.