In Anderson, Shasta’s District 5 candidates debated mental health facilities, Measure B, and county jail operations

The old western facade of the Anderson Senior Center is befitting of its street name, Frontier Road. Inside, an audience of local voters, some in cowboy boots and hats, gathered to hear from the electoral candidates who could represent them at the board of supervisors for the next four years. 

The League of Women Voters hosted the forum which included all three candidates in the race for District 5, a jurisdiction that encompasses the southeastern flank of Shasta, from Olinda all the way to the Lassen border. Those candidates include Anderson City Council member Mike Gallagher, incumbent Supervisor Chris Kelstrom, and political outsider Gary Oxley, who described his life experiences as including decades of nursing, ownership of a pool and spa business, and a devotion to his Christian faith. 

“We need to put God first back in our lives,” Oxley said when candidates were asked to share their top priorities. One of his major goals if elected, he said, is to erect a monument to the Ten Commandments on administrative property, something he claimed would be legal if “it’s done in a historical manner.”

Audience members penned their questions on index cards that were handed up to be read to candidates by the moderator. Some addressed the same county-wide issues that were brought up during the District 1 candidate forum the day prior, including election law and how the current board has dealt with the county’s lack of mental health resources. Other questions were focused on the concerns specific to the southeastern part of rural Shasta County — like farmers’ water rights and a plan for solar infrastructure in Manton. 

A particularly thorny topic, was Kelstrom’s recent support of a proposed behavioral health facility in Anderson, a project which has elicited significant community concern from Gallagher and other local community members since being granted nearly $25 million from the state and nearly $2 million by the county.

Gallagher, who has led public opposition to the project, responded to a question about the proposed facility in no uncertain terms. 

“I spoke at the Board of Supervisor’s meeting after they decided to give $1.925 million in matching grant funds to a project that was — I’m being gentle — horrible, ill advised, unprofessional,” he chided, referring to significant inconsistencies in the project’s grant application that have since been documented by Shasta Scout. “I can’t imagine that any of the Board of Supervisors actually read the application,” Gallagher added. 

Kelstrom said he was happy the question was asked, because he’d like to “clear up some misinformation,” about Gallagher’s remarks. 

“That $2 million had strings all over it,” Kelstrom said, referring to the fact that the board’s financial pledge of nearly $2 million in opioid settlement funds was contingent on the approval of the Anderson City Council, Shasta Probation and the Anderson Police Department — conditions that Supervisor Matt Plummer, not Kelstrom, insisted on.

For his part, Oxley took a long pause — about 15 seconds of silence — before answering with the simple phrase, “I don’t have enough information that I feel comfortable discussing that right now.” It was not the only time Oxley admitted to lacking knowledge about questions that were asked. 

Candidates also disagreed over Measure B, a voter-led initiative that seeks to change local election law in ways that would violate state election code including implementing one day voting and limited absentee ballots. The question asked of candidates was, “if Measure B passes, and a lawsuit is initiated to stop implementation, what will your response be?”

Kelstrom said it’s only a matter of time until a lawsuit is initiated, predicting that the state attorney general will inevitably sue Shasta County if the measure goes forward. He added that he supports the demands of Measure B, but said that a local ordinance is not the proper channel to change election law, noting that he also supports Assemblymember Carl DeMaio’s initiative which would adjust voting requirements on a statewide basis trickling down to impact Shasta.

Gallagher’s answer was relatively brief. “If the voters vote to pass it, then we will do what it takes to implement it. That would be our obligation as elected… that’s the democratic process that sets this country apart from most others.”

Oxley went further, saying if the measure was opposed by a lawsuit the county would “have to file an injunction to sue the state and to fight back for those rights.” He added that Kelstrom shouldn’t be so sure that the state will sue Shasta.

Candidates were also asked how they would approach increasing jail capacity with a specific reference to a proposed correctional facility on the border of Redding and Anderson that has drawn the ire of neighbors of the Eastside Road property.

Gallagher said he would answer the question indirectly. “California needs to get back into the penitentiary business,” he said, stating his belief that the state needs to reopen several prisons that have been closed in recent years.

“President Trump thinks he can open Alcatraz. I bet that we could get Susanville back open,” Gallagher added later during the event in response to a different jail question, reiterating his focus on the state’s responsibility.

Kelstrom expressed support for Sheriff Michael Johnson’s current Alternative Custody Program, which is designed to divert people convicted of low-level crimes from the overcrowded county jail. But Kelstrom said that he would oppose a new expanded facility coming to Anderson against the wishes of his constituents — even though he “fully back(s) the sheriff 100%.” He floated the idea of working with other counties to take on Shasta’s incarcerated, if they have room in their jails elsewhere.

Oxley was skeptical that a new correctional site would be viable if the sheriff can’t currently keep “illicit drugs” out of the current jail, referencing recent overdose fatalities that have occurred within the facility. As for his thoughts on incarceration generally, his answer was much more existential. 

“If we’re wanting to make more beds for more criminals then we’ve been negligent in helping our families build strong character within our children,” he said. “What can we do to teach our children morals and values so that they will respect the law?”

---

Do you have a correction to share? Email us: editor@shastascout.org.