A7

OPINION
Friday, April 14, 2017 » MORE AT FACEBOOK.COM/CHICOER AND TWITTER.COM/CHICOER
EDITORIAL BOARD

David Little, Editor

Steve Schoonover, City Editor
Laura Urseny, Business Editor

» chicoer.com

Editorial Cartoonist’s take

County justified
in enforcing
marijuana laws
A law without punishment is just a sug-
gestion, and many who are accustomed to
ignoring Butte County’s medical marijuana
growing laws have viewed those regulations
as such. Maybe not anymore.
The Butte County Board of
Supervisors, which has wres-
tled with the regulations for
years, took a necessary step
at Tuesday’s meeting of plac-
ing a lien on one property that
failed to pay fees and penalties
after being caught growing
too much marijuana.
Two other landowners nego-
tiated settlements before a lien
had to be filed.
There wasn’t much ques-
tion they were flaunting the
law. They weren’t even close
to the legally allowed cultiva-
tion area. In the worst case,
the property was allowed 150
square feet of growing space,
based on the lot size, but
13,065 square feet of mari-
juana was being grown.
Even the least egregious
case was egregious. Rules al-
lowed 150 square feet of grow-
ing space, but 9,000 square
feet was planted.
Often the way it works is
that growers are found to
be out of compliance, given
a warning and then told to
abate the problem — or make
it disappear. If it’s close to har-
vest, they’ll make it disappear
by waiting for the optimum
time, cutting down the mari-
juana and selling it.
If it’s not close to harvest,
some will let the fines stack
up, then harvest, then pay the
fines with the profit.
The threat of a few thou-
sand dollars in fines isn’t
much of a deterrent to some-
body growing hundreds of
marijuana plants. They can
roll joints with $20 bills.
As Supervisor Steve Lam-
bert noted when voting for
the lien to recoup $52,000
in penalties, fines are merely
“the cost of doing business” to
some large-scale growers.
Fines are
merely
“the cost
of doing
business”
to some
large-scale
growers.
That’s why the supervi-
sors had no qualms unan-
imously approving the lien
on the property in Oroville.
As board Chairman Bill Con-
nelly said succinctly, “It sends
a message we are not messing
around.”
That’s important because
supervisors were told there
are seven more such liens on
the agenda for the next meet-
ing, nine for the meeting af-
ter that. The liens may en-
tice some landowners to set-
tle their fines, which is what
two landowners did in front
of the supervisors Tuesday.
They negotiated settlements
to pay 25 percent of the penal-
ties due and the full adminis-
trative fees.
The action proves the coun-
ty’s restrictions aren’t tooth-
less. In fact, the growing ordi-
nance is working well. When
growers are told they are out
of compliance, more than half
of them fix the problem by re-
moving the plants. Still, hun-
dreds of citations are issued.
Hopefully, with the legal-
ization of marijuana use by
all adults, along with the abil-
ity to grow it for personal use,
large-scale commercial “med-
ical marijuana” growing op-
erations will diminish. Those
growers may say 13,065 square
feet of pot — about three bas-
ketball courts of marijuana —
is for medical use. Maybe pa-
tients with recommendations
are taking some, but most of it
is likely being sold.
If there’s a good thing about
the legalization of marijuana,
it’s that the black market
should be diminishing as more
people grow their own. Maybe.
At least it puts an end to the
worst of the marijuana prof-
iteers who carry on the cha-
rade they are growing for pa-
tients..
Marijuana advocates
pleaded for “sanity” in mari-
juana laws. They got their ver-
sion of it with legalization.
Now we hope sanity is re-
stored in neighborhoods, par-
ticularly foothill areas, where
marijuana problems turned
some people’s lives upside
down.
Your opinions
City sold out its citizens
for a cut of the action
The city manager’s trash
franchise deal has one prob-
lem City Council members don’t
even seem to know about. That
one is, they are buying us a pre-
mium tax increase.
A real tax increase would
have to go to the city’s vot-
ers, and would be a fixed per-
centage added to the prices of
most of what we purchase. The
franchise deal skips the “go to
the voters” part. It tucks new
money for the city into our gar-
bage bills by handing our two
haulers competition-free mar-
kets in exchange for a cut of
their profits, and takes the pre-
caution of tying the revenues
to automatic increases in our
trash bills.
Those increases look to be
about double what we see now
(roughly 4 percent a year, vs.
the 2 percent increases I see
in my bills for the last decade).
They come by way of a serious-
sounding index (the federal wa-
ter/sewer/trash index) you’ve
never heard of. Don’t feel bad,
I’m pretty sure neither had City
Council a few months ago.
So, our trash bills start
climbing, and the city shares
the new money with the two
companies. See how that could
hurt us more than just putting
a plain ordinary tax increase
on the ballot? Did I say “could”
hurt us more? Try “will.” Actual
tax increases don’t get shared
with somebody else.
Thank you, City Council.
Finding a way to slip extra
money out of our pockets, and
only keeping part of it for the
city, it’s creative. We’re getting
cheated aren’t we?
— David P. Smith, Chico
Letter about ‘scumbags’
sounds like fascism
Letter writer Gary Cooper
has been “studying the home-
less issue.” Cooper has talked to
“many” and draws some conclu-
sions. Cooper breaks the home-
less into thirds: a third are
“mentally challenged,” a third
are destitute but willing to
work, and a third are “drunks,
druggies and basic scum-
bags.” According to Cooper,
the “scumbag” third should be
banned from “public places.”
I’ve read many of Cooper’s
letters and I always pegged him
as a libertarian. I’m not fre-
quently aligned with libertari-
anism, but I admire passionate
libertarian defenses of civil lib-
erties. For example, the quaint
notion that under our magnif-
icent Bill of Rights, a drunk is
still a citizen — as much as I am
a citizen or Cooper is a citizen.
While Cooper’s “thirds” are
arbitrary on their face, I’m not
now quibbling with his num-
bers. Rather, I’m alarmed at his
abandonment of a fundamental
principle: We don’t break peo-
ple into categories and insist
some have no right to exist — as
in this case, where the homeless
with no access to public space
would therefore be allowed no
space at all. We don’t do this be-
cause it’s immoral and, from a
libertarian point of view, it’s on
the road to fascism.
The first act of every total-
itarian regime is to round-up
“vagrants.” Setting aside issues
concerning our gross failure to
meet the needs of our most des-
titute, I suggest we might at
least see our “scumbags” as ca-
naries in a societal coal mine.
Mr. Cooper, when they disap-
pear, might you be next?
— Patrick Newman, Chico
US should strive for
peace in Syria, not war
Sadly, the United States,
along with the world establish-
ments that have guaranteed the
destruction of the secular na-
tions of the Middle East (Iraq,
Libya, Syria and more), are im-
mediately blaming the Syrian
government for recently attack-
ing its own people with nerve
gas — a vile, horrendous crime.
Other more level-headed na-
tions are saying if Assad or-
dered this, it is a war crime,
and there are international
means to punish this crime.
There must be a thorough in-
vestigation and adherence to
international law.
It would be a cruel hoax on
the people of the world if the
United States, England, France
and the other NATO coun-
tries who have brought such
deadly chaos to the Middle East
were to go over the head of
the United Nations and attack
Syria. The fate of the world’s
people should not be decided by
nations fueled from the wealth
of corporate interests that profit
so very much from war.
The last page of the NATO
Security Investment Plan —
1993 says one of the reasons
NATO still exists after the fall
of the Soviet Union is to protect
allies’ “free market economies.”
The munitions industry is the
top money maker in the world’s
free market system. I’m sorry
Donald Trump has chosen to
side with the corporate and war
interests, not the peace-making
he advocated as candidate for
president. Multinational Syrian
peace negotiations have been
in place for months. Unfortu-
nately, Trump hasn’t joined
those efforts for peace.
— Linda Furr, Chico

Foreign policy

With Syria attack, Trump pulls a surprise — on his voters

Belligerence is in the air in
Washington. President Don-
ald Trump is enjoying (ex-
tremely rare) bi-
partisan praise for
a cruise-missile
attack on Syria.
There’s tough talk
from some Repub-
licans about more.
And even tougher
talk about Russia.
North Korea, too.
Meanwhile, the public’s re-
action is ... huh? For millions of
American voters, the two most
striking aspects of the U.S. ac-
tion against Syria were 1) How
quickly Trump moved, and 2)
How little he explained his ac-
tions.
Explaining — laying the
groundwork, making a case — is
an essential part of presidential
leadership. That’s especially true
when what is involved is an act of
war. Leaders contemplating mil-
itary action prepare the public to
support that action. They explain
why it is needed. They explain
why it is in the national interest
of the United States. Then they re-
peat the explanation.
No, that doesn’t mean they re-
veal exactly what they’re going
to do and when they’re going to
do it. Trump said many times
on the campaign trail that he
would not telegraph his actions
to foreign adversaries. To do so,
he said, would be to give up the
critical element of surprise.
But leaders don’t surprise the
voters with an out-of-the-blue
act of war. In the case of Syria,
Trump moved so quickly, and
with such little effort at public
persuasion beforehand, that he
maintained the element of sur-
prise on his own voters. That’s
not a good idea.
Indeed, the public reaction,
measured by early polls, is not
optimistic for the president. Af-
ter the attack, Washington Post
pollsters asked, “Do you support
or oppose President Trump’s de-
cision to launch a missile strike
on a Syrian air base in retalia-
tion for the Syrian government
using chemical weapons against
civilians?” The result was 51 per-
cent support, 40 percent op-
pose. Among registered voters,
Trump’s support level was a bit
higher at 57 percent.
Trump campaigned day after day on a
platform of keeping the United States out
of the mess in the Middle East. Trump
often excoriated George W. Bush for the
“big, fat mistake” of going to war in Iraq.
Then the Post asked, “Would
you support or oppose addi-
tional U.S. air strikes against
the Syrian government at this
time?” Just 35 percent said sup-
port, while 54 percent said op-
pose. Again, Trump’s support
was a little better, 39 percent,
among registered voters.
Either way, the fact is, the
barest of majorities supports a
new president sending military
forces into action for the first
time as commander-in-chief.
“They are not good numbers,”
says Republican pollster David
Winston. Winston points out
that it is often hard to assess
Trump’s poll results because he
won the presidency with an un-
favorable rating of 60 percent —
that alone should tell everyone
that Trump is a different kind
campaigned day after day on a
platform of keeping the United
States out of the mess in the Mid-
dle East. Trump often excoriated
George W. Bush for the “big, fat
mistake” of going to war in Iraq.
Now, Trump’s quick conver-
sion to military action has left
some prominent supporters un-
happy — and warning of prob-
of president, as far as polling lems to come.
is concerned. Nevertheless, it’s At the same time, Trump is
possible to conclude that sup- winning plaudits of those in his
port for more military action ap- party who tried hardest to de-
pears tenuous at best — unless feat him.
Trump makes the effort to build No, that is probably not what
public support. Trump voters in Pennsylva-
“He needs to realize that nia had in mind. If Trump has
there is a level of explanation changed his views from what he
that he needs to do, particularly said in the campaign, or even if
when you’re about to put Amer- he has simply decided that Syria
ican lives potentially at risk, should be a one-time exception
given that starting point of 60 to his general opposition to mil-
percent unfavorable,” Winston itary interventionism, he owes
says. voters all around the country
Trump’s no-explanations style more of an explanation than he
is particularly bad for his polit- has given so far.
ical fortunes because, beyond
what he promised would be a Byron York is chief political
quick, intense, and winning ef- correspondent for The
fort to destroy ISIS, he did not Washington Examiner. His
campaign on the idea of going syndicated column appears
to war. Just the opposite; Trump each Friday.

How to have your say: Letters must be 250 words or fewer, signed, typed and should include a first and last name, Email: letters@chicoer.com Twitter: Facebook: Leave
home address and telephone number for verification. Letters may be edited for length, taste, libel and clarity. We print Mail to: Letters, P.O. Box 9, Follow and comments at
letters that are accepted in the order they are received. No anonymous letters will be printed. Editorials are the opinion Chico, CA 95927 send tweets to FACEBOOK.COM/
of the editorial board. Columns and letters are the opinion of the writer and not necessarily that of the newspaper. Fax: 342-3617 @CHICOER CHICOER