On the issues: Kevin McCarty and Josh Pane, candidates for 6th District Assembly seat

The following interview was conducted by members of The Sacramento Bee’s Editorial Board and the two leading candidates for California’s 6th District Assembly seat, Assemblyman Kevin McCarty and lobbyist Josh Pane. It has been edited for length and clarity.

The Sacramento Bee: Can you start by telling us about yourself and why you’re running?

McCarty: I am the Assembly member for District 7, currently serving in my eighth year. Previously, I was a City Council member for 10 years. I’m running here again, in my hometown of Sacramento, in a new district, the 6th District, which is about 70% of my current district, and the 30% that’s new is really special for me. It’s the area where I grew up, where I went to elementary school, middle school and high school, where my late mom bought her first house. This is my community, and I am proud of the work I’ve done as a public servant for the last eight years in the Assembly and as a prior council member. I’ve always prided myself on being somebody with ethics and values and a progressive vision. I’m not just a show horse but a workhorse — somebody who can literally get things done and deliver for my district and for California. I have been chairing the Assembly Budget Committee for eight years, overseeing the higher education budget, from early ed, K-12 to higher ed, college and universities. I’ve been able to do record investments in our public education system. Last year, my law, after eight years, became a reality — now we have free pre-K for every 4-year-old in California, which isn’t just great for low-income kids but middle-class families (who) can’t afford $2,000 a month for pre-K. That’s more than it costs to go to UC Berkeley. Now it will be free for middle-class families as well. I’ve been working to get our schools back open during this pandemic, which has been hard. Kids and our youth are our future, and they are so important to our global economy. Higher education is of course something that’s my passion. I’ve been working to expand access for California, not just in terms of access to financial aid, but focusing on health. I have a big measure this year to make affordable student housing available on all campuses. I’m focused on the issues that matter. I’ve authored bills on substance abuse disorders that revolve around our criminal justice system and homelessness. I’ve been working to come up with allocations for the city and county to address the homeless crisis right here in Sacramento.

Pane: I served on the City Council back in the ’90s and on the county Board of Education back in the ’80s. As I look back, I said to myself, “What is going on on our streets, in our river parkways and in the parks that we so dearly love?” What’s going on is a crisis in homelessness. But the crisis is really in mental health, it’s in criminality and, most importantly, it’s in the open drug scene that we’ve seen on the streets. This is the problem that we see. That means public safety, and then it goes to accountability. I decided to run because I saw nothing happening in those areas. A lot of money was being spent, but the facts are the facts. In the county budget for homelessness, there’s $43 million — all of that’s going to homelessness in the county. That’s money coming from the state and the federal government. What we see is absolutely ludicrous. No one has spent the time to really look at what we need to look at, and that is, first and foremost, mental health. My mom was mentally ill for 59 years. There was a system of treatment, but today we have no system of inpatient treatment. This is causing major problems on our streets, our sidewalks and our parks. Public safety comes out of this issue of Proposition 47, Proposition 57 (reducing prison sentences) and, most importantly, the reduction of the prisons in California and the population in the prisons. That alone contributed 45,000 people to the streets in one year when it passed in 2012. And then each year thereafter it contributed more people. We’re not doing anything for these poor souls on our sidewalks. We have to have inpatient treatment; outpatient treatment is going to get us nowhere.

The Sacramento Bee: Homelessness is one of the biggest issues in our city right now, at the city and county level but also at the state level. Assemblyman McCarty, you lent your support for a bill that would clear encampments on the American River Parkway, which has obviously been an issue in our region for some time now. Is it reasonable, given the lack of shelter and housing, for us to relocate them at this time? And how would you explain this policy to someone who might be skeptical of clearing encampments with our shelter capacity obviously lacking?

McCarty: The parkway is our jewel of Sacramento. I’ve delivered $20 million to improve public access. It literally is our regional Yosemite, our Tahoe — it’s our draw. I think there are some places you can’t have camping. You can’t camp in the middle of a football field at McClatchy High School. You can’t camp on the state Capitol (grounds). You can’t camp in the middle of Highway 50. You can’t camp in Yosemite. You can’t camp on the beach in Tahoe or Santa Cruz. This is a sacred place and a public park. It’s not safe for people who use the park, and it is not safe for the homeless. This is an area where we’re saying, “Hey, we should not have camping here.” There were 60 fires last year. It impacts our environment as well. It impacts the parkway. But we need to work in concert, which is why I’m doing exactly what Mr. Pane talked about, delivering money for the city and county to build sites. I’m excited the county is opening a tiny-home site that I read about in The Bee this week. I wrote a bill last year to create a Cal Expo site, 10 acres to have a campus there. I’m very optimistic about this ballot measure the city’s putting on to keep them from dragging their feet. It’s not a panacea, but one thing is clear: We can’t have camping on the parkway for public safety, environmental and recreational reasons.

Pane: Even if there isn’t necessarily shelter or housing that we could put these people into, these are Band-Aids, Band-Aids, Band-Aids. If the sssemblyman had stayed more than 15 minutes in the nine-hour hearing on the Lanterman-Petris-Short (LPS) Act (governing commitment to mental health institutions) last year, just sat through that hearing and listened to who’s out on the streets, this is a Band-Aid. We don’t need any more Band-Aids. We need to change the LPS Act. I said this in front of the Senate on a piece of legislation in 2020 as a volunteer, but it got ignored. The Band-Aid won’t help anymore. We have to recognize that we need to change the LPS Act. (Former Assembly Speaker and San Francisco Mayor) Willie Brown in his autobiography in 2004 said something very simple. He said, “If we don’t admit that we need to impose treatment on some of these folks, we will be sitting here at the end of Gavin Newsom’s second term as governor.” We need to admit that this is not a housing crisis for these folks who are burning down the parkway. There were 60 fires there last year — I’m on my bike every day — there were hundreds of fires over the last eight years, and nothing has been done about the basic problem. The LPS Act has to be changed, and the assemblyman has done nothing on that. When we look at police and public safety, we have to look at Proposition 47, Proposition 57 and AB (Assembly Bill) 109, the early release of all of those prisoners starting in 2011. If we don’t look at those three elements, the open drug scene, mental health and criminality, we’re just spending. We don’t want to put Band-Aids on this anymore. So please, let’s look at it for what it is. People don’t even go to the parkway, and it’s not because of the $20 million for access. It’s about the human beings that we need to take care of. And some people will need treatment. Ninety-five percent of our money is going to outpatient care. Come on now, we can do better than this.

The Sacramento Bee: Assemblyman, since Josh has criticized some of your work and some of the bills you have supported would you like to respond?

McCarty: Yeah, there’s a lot to unpack there. But the highlights are Proposition 47 and 57. That’s the will of the voters, so I’m not sure what Mr. Pane is talking about. As far as the LPS Act, I am leading on that. There’s a proposal called CARE (Community Assistance, Recovery and Empowerment) Courts — I’m a coauthor of that — which would have mandatory treatment for those people that are homeless and have serious mental health disorders. Three years ago, I tried to include Sacramento in the pilot, which included San Francisco, but I wasn’t successful. So I’ve been leading on this issue for a number of years. I also have a bill about people shuffling through the criminal justice system which would add drug treatment for people that are homeless, have drug disorders and (are) in the criminal justice system, and there’s a vicious triangle of those three.

The Sacramento Bee: Josh, CARE Court is navigating the Legislature right now. Is that a program you’re supportive of? Do you feel like that’s LPS reform, that’s similar?

Pane: There was already a mental health court in Sacramento County. We need to change the law on the LPS. Nick Petris was convinced of that in 1989 — the P in LPS. All you have to do is read 24 of his 500 pages in his oral biography. I wrote about it in a 2020 article I published called “The Third Way.” Nick Petris said, ‘This is not complicated. It’s about getting people treatments.” There’s a mental health court to help do that. Prop. 47 and Prop. 57 — the Legislature has the ability to amend those acts, either by its own power or put it on the ballot for people to reconsider. We can’t just ignore these facts that are there. First and foremost, there’s a mental health court already.

The Sacramento Bee: The debate over criminal justice reform and increasing public safety is top of mind for many voters right now. There’s been an increase in violent crimes over the last few years in Sacramento, but unfortunately much of the political discourse revolves around ballot measures that address over-incarceration and misdemeanor crimes. What’s your view on this debate in California? And what policies would you introduce or support to ensure our criminal justice system is fair but also protects the public?

Pane: We have to reverse these items. Just because the voters passed the Safe Neighborhoods (and Schools) Act (Prop. 47) — we have to reverse these specific problems. Every day, I walk, and I hear the same thing — that Prop. 57 and Prop. 47 has reversed these ideas that if someone had committed a crime, whether it was a misdemeanor or not, that there were consequences. There are no consequences right now. There are no consequences (for theft) up to $950. That’s under this Legislature, that’s under voters, but we can reverse that and we must reverse that. I don’t know how much clearer I can be on it. But remember one thing — just sitting around, just looking at it, we’re not going to do anything. We have to identify it for what it is. This is not a housing crisis; this is specifically a crisis of drugs, criminality and mental illness. I can’t ride my bike down the street without seeing someone laying over a pole with their pants down. When my mom left the house completely naked when I was 5 years old, 7 years old, 9 years old, she was apprehended and given treatment. That doesn’t happen now. We need to create that treatment again — treatment inpatient.

McCarty: Crime is an issue, and voters want to address crime, but they don’t want the old solution. They don’t want us to warehouse people like in the 1990s, right? They want innovative solutions. What does that need? Healthy people who went through the criminal justice (system) actually reintegrate. I’ve worked on bills for employment for people getting out, allowing them to join the Conservation Corps to get their lives back in order, and (I’m) doing another bill where we’re focusing on helping people not become a statistic as far as recidivism. First and foremost, we need to think outside the box. We have way too much gun violence. Guns are way too easy to get in the wrong hands. I’m working on that. There’s too many loopholes for people to go and get guns and too many people who are domestic violence abusers who have restraining orders that haven’t been properly enforced. We make sure that we step it up on that. We need to do things differently. That’s why I’ve been working on this bill for two years that the governor vetoed last year — I don’t know why — that passed through the Legislature unanimously. It’s going to be a pilot for Yolo, San Joaquin, Sacramento and Santa Clara (counties), and what it would do is focus on what we just talked about earlier with drug court. We would have drug treatment as opposed to incarceration for people that are convicted of a felony that would have a two- or three-year sentence in either a county jail or a prison. In lieu of that sentence, you go get drug treatment, which many times drives their criminal acts. A lot of people are committing these crimes to feed their drug addiction. We need to acknowledge we have a crime issue, but we need to have real smart, data-driven solutions to address it.

The Sacramento Bee: Should the Legislature pass an excise tax on guns to fund violence prevention programs, a version of which died last year for lack of support? What else can state lawmakers do about this?

McCarty: I support that measure. I coauthored it last year and will support it again. Negative stuff happens when you buy a gun. We know there are data-driven programs that work, and I would use those revenues to fund programs that we know are effective. California does have 100 gun laws; I think four I have authored myself. But it’s a national issue. People can drive to Reno in 90 minutes and buy an arsenal of weapons and come back and sell them on the street. They can go on the internet and buy ghost gun parts and make their own guns. They can go to gun shows that don’t have proper oversight and buy weapons, which Rob Bonta worked on. I’m working on a couple of bills to clean up some of those issues. I’m actually working on a bipartisan issue with Senator Nielsen here in the Sacramento area which would focus on people who get flagged, and it would prohibit them from buying guns or ammo and would notify local law enforcement right away. This law is actually based upon an ordinance I wrote as a council member 15 years ago which was really effective in getting guns off the streets. I’m trying to look for a smart solution.

Pane: This is ignoring our societal problem. This isn’t so much about those guns — and I don’t own a gun, I don’t want a gun — this is about our society. The assemblyman has reigned over eight years of this society. It’s ludicrous, this thought. We have to do more programs in the neighborhoods where we need help. AB 109 incarcerated 45,000 people (in county jails instead of state prisons), and they spent $3.2 billion. They released that amount in 109, to the extent of $1.2 (billion), to the sheriff and probation. They kept the other $2 billion. That money should have gone into neighborhoods where there are problems. We’re not going to solve this by (not) allowing guns to come in from Nevada, because they’ll continue to do so. We’re gonna solve this by going into the neighborhoods. The assemblyman wants to defund the police. That’s his whole concept. I disagree. When I was on a Meadowview neighborhood call, the first thing they wanted to tell their council member was simply, “Hey, don’t defund the police; help us with more programs.” These are problems of a neighborhood. That’s where we should put the money. Stop putting so much emphasis on this idea of the gun. Put more emphasis on education, more emphasis on family and society. That’s the way we’re gonna get out of this. We’re not going to get out of it by charging more money on guns. If you believe it’s all about housing, as the assemblyman has for eight years, it’ll continue to be about housing. But we know it’s about drug abuse and the open drug scene we have now. We know, specifically, it’s about criminality and it’s about mentally ill folks. We’ve got to help them get off the streets.

The Sacramento Bee: Josh, did you have specific ideas in terms of curbing crime?

Pane: The $3 billion that we’re spending on prisoners in 2011. The Legislature then appropriated $1.2 billion to sheriffs and probation. I suggested the other $2 billion each year should be going to neighborhoods where they need the help.

The Sacramento Bee: What programs specifically would you give that money to?

Pane: The Roberts Family Foundation in North Sacramento, which I support. Those are real programs. Those are doing something. Those programs help the family, help the community with after-school programs, used for summer programs, and the Roberts family has to struggle to find funding. Let me just be clear: We were spending $3.2 billion on these 45,000 people in jail. The Legislature dismissed 45,000 out; they sent $1.2 (billion) to probation and sheriffs, and they kept the other $2 billion.

McCarty: I think Josh is reliving the past with some fuzzy math there. Assembly Bill 109 was literally like 12 years ago, in a different era of the budget during the Great Recession, and (then-Gov.) Jerry Brown has these great maneuvers to keep the state afloat. This is when the economy was falling off a cliff. We’re in a different era now. That’s apples to oranges; it’s not relevant. I worked on this excise tax that would fund programs — exactly like what he’s talking about — in the neighborhoods which are proven to keep gang members from reoffending, and keeping guns out of the hands of people who shouldn’t have it. I’m all for that. And just for the record, I don’t support defunding the police. I’ve never said that. I’m not saying anything about my opponent here. I think we should focus on the facts, not a fallacy.

The Sacramento Bee: The debate over local control has been a deterrent to passing sweeping housing policy in recent years. How much discretion should local governments have given the multimillion-unit housing deficit and the barriers that often delay or kill housing projects?

Pane: I’m involved in a project in El Dorado County, and we’re proposing 112 cottage units to the Board of Supervisors up there. Ninety of those units would be for the workers of two hotels that we’re proposing. The local government there has been very receptive to that — binding housing to jobs so people don’t have to drive up the valley or come down the road. These are tiny homes — 112 total, 90 would be used for this purpose. I think local governments have the ability to do this, and they will if you give them a shot at it. I don’t know that there needs to be more restrictions by local government. You have to link housing with jobs. Otherwise, it’s no good at all.

McCarty: I think this is a big issue, and cities aren’t doing what they should be doing and approving housing. I think the city of Sacramento has done an amazing job. They’re a pro-housing city, but other jurisdictions aren’t. Other jurisdictions in the foothills, for example, aren’t building their share of apartments. And it’s the crisis of this state. Young people have a difficult time buying a house; you have a good job, but not all graduates can afford housing. Why? It’s pure economics — supply and demand. We’re not building enough housing. A couple of years ago, I worked on a bill which became law which says that if cities don’t zone enough land to build multifamily housing, we’re going to hold them accountable and hold back some state tax dollars. I supported measures SB (Senate Bills) 9 and 10, as far as zoning for duplexes and fourplexes. It’s really not a relevant issue for Sacramento because we’ve stepped up, and the county of Sacramento has done a good job as well. But other cities in California have not kept up with their share. And that’s why the housing industry is having a tough time building enough housing. We need to do more on this front. I’m also working on a big bill this year on student housing in which we fund 25,000 new housing units with this surplus in California, with a revolving loan fund for UC and CSU — more housing for Sac State and Aggie Square here, which I’m working on. More housing for students helps those students, but what else does it help? Those neighborhoods that are getting squeezed, that don’t have enough housing because they’re serving students now. We need to look at this from all fronts, but having cities step up and do more of their fair share is a priority for California.

Pane: We can just keep spouting these tried-and-true concepts, or we can look at the budget numbers. It takes almost $170,000 per lot to build a new home — that’s before you even start building. We have to address that problem, the root of the problem. We can’t believe that just putting pressure on cities is going to do that. If we believe these Sacramento duplexes and quads are going to solve our problem, that’s unbelievably ludicrous. You have to look at the core issue of how much this is costing just to get something out of the ground.

McCarty: There are a lot of fees for housing, I concur, but (that has) nothing to do with being a state Assembly member. Those are city and county needs. So if you’re in the City Council, you can change the fee structure, but the state Assembly doesn’t have a role in local housing fees for new developments.

The Sacramento Bee: The Public Utilities Commission (PUC) is considering a reform of rooftop solar programs that give generous subsidies to households and make it easier for widespread adoption. Utility companies say the cost for these programs gets pushed onto lower-income residents. Two-part question: Where do you stand on this issue, and what role does rooftop solar play in California’s clean energy transition?

McCarty: I’m a big supporter and fan of rooftop solar. We launched the industry here in California — before my time, 10, 15 years ago. It’s taken off. I think we need to stay the course, but like everything else, it’s not black and white. Politics is a lot of gray in the middle. I think the PUC can come up with a common ground solution, which I think the governor has asked them to do. I know the Sacramento Municipal Utilities District has that here locally, which hasn’t killed the solar industry and allows the energy companies to realize their fixed costs on transmission lines. I do understand that the majority of people who were early adopters of solar, just like electric vehicles, are the people with means, but I don’t think we want to get rid of it because we do have a massive climate change and air quality problem here in California and in our region. A lot of that is because of the electrical impacts and power plants and so forth. Having more of that going to a carbon-neutral energy plan with rooftop solar is a key ingredient to our future. It’s not something we’re going to vote on; this is an action of the Public Utilities Commission. I believe they’re finalizing something that I hope can be a middle ground that allows the utilities to recoup what they need to pay their bills but also doesn’t kill the ... rooftop solar industry.

Pane: We need the rooftop solar industry, but we need each individual to be able to do what they need to do at their home.

The Sacramento Bee: California was once considered a leader on climate and environmental policy, but in recent years, a Democratic supermajority in the Legislature has routinely stalled or killed sensible policies that could aid the clean energy transition and reduce greenhouse gasses. The building trades and labor groups have put their thumbs on the scale time and time again to kill climate proposals supported by most Californians. If elected, are you willing to stand up to the trades if and when they organize against future climate bills?

Pane: I could stand up to anybody, but we have to get at some of these problems. Let me give you one example of how ludicrous this is to think that we have to go completely to electricity. Our garbage and recycling companies have created systems to put gas in their trucks from food waste. Food in the landfill and organic food — the second-highest emitters in our world, next to black carbon. The idea that we’re not going to incentivize that specifically to get this food waste out of the landfill is ludicrous. Some of these ideas have to be looked at. Just to say, “No more combustion engines,” when we have engines that are produced with and driven by food waste — this is where we get too far. I think that we have to just sit back, look at this and say, “No, we need to use food to power our garbage and recycling trucks.” To say that they all have to go to an electric truck is outrageous. I can stand up to anyone, but the issues at hand have to be commonsense as well.

McCarty: Yeah, this is Exhibit A: I have a bill which mandates zero-emission vehicles, not just electric. It could be hydrogen, it could be alternative fuels like food waste, and the trades opposed that last year, but I still pushed my bill forward. Interestingly enough, that became policy this week anyway, with the governor’s Energy Commission essentially doing it through a regulatory action. The big picture is that we have a massive climate change and air pollution issue in California. We need to get cars off the road that are gross polluters. And you know who doesn’t like that? Oil companies. They’re the ones who really fight against these policies. Sometimes the trades are part of that, and they’re part of the industry and some of the refineries, but it’s oil. We need leaders to stand up to that industry, and I’ve done so over and over, and I’ll do so again. I know they probably don’t like my policy, but I know my constituents do — the people of California do. And let’s face it, climate change became a really political hot button issue. You know what wasn’t a hot button issue? Air pollution. That was embraced by President Nixon, President Reagan, George Bush and the Environmental Protection Agency. Air pollution is a real issue that we can all get around — a public health issue. I’ll continue to go after that issue, pivoting this year and focusing on the electrical grid because even if everybody does get a (Nissan) Leaf tomorrow or a Tesla, we don’t have enough power in the grid to turn over (to all electric cars), so it’s going to take some time. I’m working on those issues to speed up charging stations. My bill became law last year, focusing on the electrical grid to make sure we’re there to meet the needs of the zero-emission car future.

The Sacramento Bee: Both the Legislature and Governor Newsom backed down on requiring COVID vaccinations in California’s schools this fall. Many Republicans and vaccine skeptics celebrated. But for many families and immunocompromised or vulnerable populations, this was a disappointing backslide on public health policy. Do you agree with this decision from California lawmakers?

McCarty: I was open to both of those bills. I never had a chance to vote on them, but my kids are in school. We already mandate kids to get vaccinated to go to school. There’s a list of over 13 things on there. This will be adding an additional one to the list. I support that in concept. I know the state is saying, “Let’s wait till it’s fully approved at the federal level before we add it on.” I think that this has gotten too politicized. People historically have been against vaccines. It was an issue five or six years ago. But public health is paramount, and when those are officially approved at the federal level for kids, I would support adding those to the list. As far as the employee mandate, I support vaccinations for public health workers. But I do, in concept, think employers should be able to have policies to make their workforce meet their needs. But this pandemic is evolving on a monthly basis, and we need to see where the facts are and go from there.

Pane: We need to be guided by science and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. I don’t (think) there’s been proven science for vaccinating school children. We’re on the other side of this for now. I think if science comes along and proves it, perfect — we should do it.

The Sacramento Bee: This week we’ve heard about the population losses in California’s public education system. Obviously, there’s a variety of reasons for that, but it’s become another example of loss of public faith in the public education system. How would you use your role in the Assembly to restore public faith in public education given the hardships experienced during the pandemic?

Pane: We’ve tried to Band-Aid over all of these things and pretend like we had a magic wand to make it all better. But the magic wand has not worked in the last eight years, obviously. I would simply give voters and parents a choice. We have to have strong choice in schools. I think that’s absolutely essential. Too often, we pretend and we think that throwing more money at this will work. We need more revenues for teachers to help restore faith. We have to get down into the family structure, and we have to get down in the societal realm. The Roberts Family Foundation is one I support and I continue to support. They help the families.

McCarthy: The big picture is, we do have declining enrollment. That’s birth rate and population in California — it’s not just this year, it’s going back. That’s not necessarily a crisis. We’re giving more money for schools to serve fewer students. It’s kind of a good issue to have if you’re a school. They’re not going to get less money, because 40% of the state budget goes to education. We’ve doubled funding for education in the last 10 years — we’ve given schools way more money. We used to be in the bottom five states; now we’re in the high 20s. So we’re doing a good job there. But there are still issues that linger. We still have a stubborn opportunity achievement gap, which is why my marquee thing is to make universal pre-K a reality here in California. Every economist says if you want to address achievement, early ed is the number one thing you can do. I’m proud of my law — it’s going into effect in a couple months. We do have an issue of recruiting more teachers. We don’t pay enough for people to work in this profession. We make them go through hoops and serve another year in school to get their credential and get more student debt. That’s why I’m working on a bill this year to make the teacher credential something you can get in your four-year degree. You don’t have to go to school for another year and forgo income and get a salary less than your friends who graduated with a four-year degree. So that is a factor. Overall, education is a mixed bag here in California. Sac City (school district) is a great example. Eighty percent of our district here are low-income students. We need to have other pieces at play — more mental health support in the classroom. I’m funding a bill this year to have universal after-school programs because those keep kids out of trouble after school. It also focuses on student achievement. It’s shown that it really does well. And it also helps working parents who can’t afford child care after school.

The Sacramento Bee: We want to give you both the opportunity to share some closing thoughts.

Pane: It really comes down to homelessness, public safety and accountability. Homelessness is about mental illness. It’s about criminality. And it’s about the open drug scene we’ve seen. Three years ago, I called (Sacramento County Supervisor) Phil Serna and told him about three women on the streets who needed to get help. They really needed it. This one poor gal laid on the sidewalk on Capitol Avenue. She’s been there for six years. I finally, embarrassingly, say, “I need to help her.” I called Phil, and he said, “Well, we’re putting $88.5 million more in our mental health system. That’s on top of the $300 million that the state sent down.” Three years later, the three women are still there. Three years later, the three women are still there. This is the problem. We don’t have any way to help them off the street. Nobody’s talking about it, but I keep talking about it. My mom was there. We had facilities for my mom; we have no facilities now. We have students that can’t get underneath the freeway because there are needles, camps underneath the freeway. These are just Band-Aids.

McCarty: I’m running for the same (reason) I ran for City Council — to make a difference in my hometown of Sacramento; to be effective and deliver solutions to the problems that we face. I’m proud of my record of making a difference. Some of these issues aren’t easy. Homelessness is an issue (that’s) top of mind. It’s going to take the federal government, the state government and the county governments. I think I’m doing my part by looking for innovative solutions. Whether it’s focusing on more sites by Cal Expo, giving money to the cities and counties so they can find their locations as well, lowering barriers for emergency housing under Caltrans property. I’m also looking at issues that are top of mind for addiction in the criminal justice system. But first and foremost is the issue that I care about: The future of California is determined by an educated workforce. It helps families break cycles of poverty and break intergenerational poverty, but it’s also the ticket to our economy going forward. We need a highly educated, highly skilled workforce to build the jobs of today and tomorrow. I’ve been delivering results for a number of years and will continue to do so as the Assembly member for the 6th District.