Casey Steed - candidate for District 2

Recommitting to making Merced County a safe place to have a family and open a business should be the focus of this election, according to a familiar challenger for the District 2 seat.

This election cycle is Casey Steed’s third go at the District 2 supervisor’s seat. The 53-year-old is a native of Merced, but lived a number of years in San Diego before coming back to his hometown.

Steed is an electrical contractor, and is also co-host of the weekly talk radio show on KYOS called “Citizens Watch.”

He’s been critical of the sitting Board of Supervisors, saying the county’s ills can be attributed to a “lack of leadership.” He pointed to Merced County’s unemployment rate, which is consistently twice the state average, and the county’s high level of violence.

“I think things have gotten worse in the last four years, and that’s why I’m running,” he said. “I’m not running because there’s an election. I’m running because there’s a need in this community.”

Q: Merced County Sheriff’s Office is facing a high vacancy rate as veteran deputies leave to better-paying jobs. As supervisor, how would you retain sheriff’s deputies, and what would you consider a fair compensation package?

A: The county needs to offer compensation packages that are competitive with the region we are in. We need to retain as many of our existing law enforcement officers as we can. So, we need to protect the investment we make when hiring and training deputies. Field personnel need to know they will be treated fairly at all levels, supervision and administration, so that they know there are opportunities for advancement within the department based on performance, education and experience. We need to empower our field force and stand behind them in the face of difficult times.

Q: Each supervisor is allocated $40,000 every fiscal year to use as they please. Typically, supervisors choose to spend the money on community projects or nonprofit organizations. The leftover amount at the end of each fiscal year rolls over to the next. Do you agree with this policy? Why, or why not?

A: The current discretionary fund is just another form of a political patronage system that has no place in Merced County politics. No other supervisors in the surrounding counties have this. County expenses have outpaced revenues for many years now, yet our supervisors cannot ween themselves from what I call a “re-election slush fund.” A fund that is used by elected officials to hand out taxpayer dollars without even an official request form from the requester detailing what the monies will be used for or how they will be spent.

Q: Crime statistics show violent and property crimes in Merced County are on the rise. How should the Sheriff’s Office tackle crime in the county?

A: I think it takes more resources not only for the sheriff, as I talked about in your first question, but also a commitment by the district attorney to prosecute, or otherwise dispose of in a timely manner, those cases brought to it. It takes allotting resources to county corrections so that the intake process of prisoners is timely for the field units. It doesn’t matter to me who makes the arrest or apprehends someone, sheriff’s deputies or officers from other departments, inter-agency cooperation should be something the county promotes.

Q: What should be done to spur economic development in Merced County?

A: I would make structural personnel changes to our current county Economic Development Department. I would work to ensure a sustainable groundwater management plan that would be to the benefit of all stakeholders. Without this in place, there will be no economic development. Whether it’s housing, manufacturing/industry, or our No. 1 economic driver – agriculture – they all depend on a plentiful, stable supply of water. I would replace the pathetic example of a welcome sign Merced has on westbound Highway 140 at the county line. About 4 million visitors a year visit Yosemite – more of those tourists should be staying in Merced. We need to be more of an inviting and safe community.

Q: Merced County has been negotiating a revenue-sharing agreement with city governments for about 10 years. The agreement would help cities win authorization to annex land and provide services such as sewer and water to new developments. In your opinion, what needs to be done to finalize the agreement?

A: There are six agreements we need to reach with the incorporated cities. Each agreement is unique as each city has different needs. You cannot have a one-size-fits-all approach. I think in the city of Merced’s case, the county has been a little heavyhanded in its dealings regarding fire protection costs. My view is a robust economy is good for both the city and county. To quibble for the last 10 years over how to split up a dollar bill and lose in the process hundreds of millions of dollars in private investment and development is asinine. I do not think negotiations have to get to the point of bringing in an outside party to negotiate what we elect and pay handsomely our current county leaders to do as part of their current job responsibilities.

Q: The county currently allows residents with a medical marijuana card to grow 12 plants per parcel. Do you agree with medical and/or recreational marijuana use? Do you think the county should change its policy on marijuana? If so, what kind of policy would you propose?

A: It is my job to uphold state law, not pass judgment. Currently California has no recreational ‘420’ laws. Medicinal use and regulations should be consistent countywide including the incorporated cities within it. This makes it easier for all law enforcement to effectively and efficiently perform their duties. Ambiguity in the current patchwork of rules is used by those wanting to take advantage of the Compassionate Use Act for criminal activity. Dispensaries need to be regulated and sited no differently than businesses that engage in alcohol sales. Safe access should be made available, but in a responsible way and in coordination with area residents in vicinity of their operations.

Q: Do you support the High Speed Rail coming through the Central Valley, specifically Merced? How do you think the High Speed Rail Authority’s current proposed plan, which bypasses Merced, will affect the county?

A: I think public transportation dollars, federal or state, could be used much more effectively and efficiently than any of the business plans proposed by the rail authority to date. I think we should support regional rail along existing transportation corridors. Investments in the ACE train and Amtrak would be money better spent and at a fraction of the cost of a completely new roadbed for HSR. There are few if any public transportation systems that do not have operations subsidized by the taxpayer. I think we could get an exceptional level of service on new dedicated passenger rail tracks along existing rail lines for a fraction of the cost of what HSR will eventually cost the taxpayers.

Q: The Merced County Association of Governments is proposing a half-cent tax to be placed on the November ballot to improve county roads. Would you support this tax? Why, or why not?

A: I do not support the general incremental sales tax increase on private individuals or the business community that may be on the November ballot. We have a billion-dollar road maintenance problem now in the county. This tax will generate only half of this current need in the next 30 years. The ongoing needs will far outpace whatever revenue this proposed tax will bring. I think the proposed revenue from the tax is spread out among too many projects and does not address the real issues with our deteriorating roadbeds. The assistant county public works director when asked if this tax will solve the problem with current road conditions said “it won’t even come close.”

Q: California is emerging from a historic, five-year drought that has impacted the Central Valley’s agricultural economy particularly hard. Moving forward, how should Merced County proceed on water-related issues?

A: State and federal regulations make this process lengthy and costly. I think there is opportunity to locally manage and ensure our future groundwater supply and the recharge of our groundwater basins. Groundwater drafting has been our “savings” account in times of drought and inadequate surface water deliveries. New regulations on surface water supply will put more stress on this fragile resource from both ag and urban needs. We need a system of recharge basins and filling our conveyance systems (ditches) with storm water/runoff during the off season. Allow farmers to take water deliveries during non planting or off season periods to recharge the basins under their fields. The time to prepare for a flood is in times of drought and to prepare for a drought when you’re in a flood. We need to position our county for the next drought.

Q: If elected, what would be your top priority?

A: In my mind, for Merced County to have the designation as the highest murder per-capita rate of all counties in California is completely unacceptable. This situation must be addressed immediately for our county to grow. If people do not feel safe in their communities, no one will want to move here, raise a family or invest and start a business. If visitors feel unsafe, they will not patronize our businesses and they will leave. I feel my priorities are public safety, and fostering and providing an environment for private enterprise to thrive and prosper. This has been neglected by county leaders for many years and we are suffering greatly as a community for it. I believe in public service, not self-service.

This story was originally published April 27, 2016 at 5:00 PM with the headline "Casey Steed - candidate for District 2."