By JULIE JOHNSON
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT

The sheriffs of Sonoma and Mendocino counties joined law enforcement from across the state in Sacramento this week to bend Gov. Jerry Brown’s ear about the impact of the diversion of state prisoners to county supervision.

From dental floss added to the commissary, metal doors replacing wooden ones and an increase in violence, the impacts have been wide-ranging, North Coast jail officials said.

The average stay at the Sonoma County Jail has increased from 22 days to 287 since the so-called realignment of prisoners to county custody began in October 2011.

The mental health block at the Sonoma County’s Main Adult Detention Facility in Santa Rosa on Friday. The shift of the prison population into county jails has placed a greater burden on facilities the previously held criminals and suspects for shorter periods of time. (Kent Porter / PD)

“We are hiring staff, but that isn’t keeping up with influx of inmates,” Sheriff Steve Freitas said. “We have extreme overtime rates and worker-related injuries and burnout related to that.”

Jails were once places where inmates stayed for a year or less.

That changed in 2011, when the state began transferring inmates convicted of nonviolent crimes to county jails to alleviate crowding in California’s $9 billion-a-year prison system. The decision followed a string of legal defeats in federal court over conditions at the prisons, which were holding more than double the number of inmates for which they were designed.

Now, the longest terms currently being served are 15 years for a woman at the Sonoma County jail and 14 years for a man in Mendocino County.

The longest sentence for a California jail inmate is a 43-year term for a man in Los Angeles.

“That was beyond what anyone had thought about,” Mendocino County Sheriff Tom Allman said. “No one would have thought it would have come to this.”

The average daily population at the Mendocino County Jail jumped from about 195 inmates prior to October 2011 to about 275 inmates today, Allman said.

Realignment boosted Sonoma County’s female inmate population the most, by about 33 percent, Detention Division Lt. Mazen Awad said. About 16 percent of women incarcerated would have gone to prison prior to the change. Women now take up two wings at the main jail, rather than just one.

For the population as a whole, a daily average of about 1,078 inmates through May 22, about 20 percent of people currently in the Sonoma County Jail would have previously gone to prison.

Whereas jails were set up to manage urgent health matters until release, they are now facing long-term health needs among those people who will spend years of their lives in jail.

Medical staff now must start planning for annual dental cleanings and other preventative care previously unnecessary with the majority of inmates staying less than a month.

Health care “is truly the 800-pound gorilla,” Freitas said.

Counties are on the hook for medical care, but currently there are no funds coming from the state dedicated to boosting jail health services, Freitas said.

The county isn’t yet feeling the pinch because of an existing contract with the company that provides the jail’s health care, Monterey-based California Forensic Medical Group.

But the Sheriff’s Office will renegotiate its contract in January and is bracing for what could be a steep increase in costs, Freitas said.

The so-called realignment inmates have far greater mental health needs, and treating them could be expensive, Allman said.

“That’s going to cost us not just extra time, but huge amounts of resources to pay for professionals that we hadn’t budgeted for,” Allman said.

The diversion of state prisoners to the county came after three years of a steady decline in jail populations across the country.

About 785,533 people were incarcerated nationwide in county and city jails on June 30, 2008, after years of rising inmate populations, according to a U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics jail population survey published Wednesday. Jail populations then took a downward turn across the nation, dropping 6.3 percent in three years.

By June 30, 2011, researchers counted 735,601 jail inmates in the country, according to the report.

An overall decrease in crime since 2008 contributed to the decrease, as well as the widespread embrace of sentencing alternatives.

Beds opened up at Sonoma and Mendocino jails, matching the national trend, unlike some of California’s largest urban jails that still faced overcrowding.

The North Coast had plenty of space to house additional inmates. But the cells weren’t necessarily built for people to live in for years, said Assistant Sheriff Randall Walker, who heads Sonoma County’s detention division.

The average inmate diverted to the jail will stay about three years.

They have seen a steady influx of visitors, paperwork and violence since October 2011.

Assaults against staff have jumped 15 percent and incidents of verbal aggression jumped 35 percent, according to jail statistics produced Wednesday.

“Assaults on staff, assaults on inmates, major contraband like weapons and drugs, all those things have increased dramatically,” Freitas said.

Jails were once largely immune to prison politics based on race and gangs. But staff now are seeing those conflicts flaring up in local jails.

And they are understaffed. In Sonoma County, local budget cuts coupled with retirements and medical leaves have left the Sheriff’s Office short-handed.

In May, correctional officers worked 46 hours of mandatory overtime, which doesn’t include overtime for unpredictable incidents that arise.

“That’s a long time to be in an environment that is more tense than it used to be,” Awad said.

Many of the jail’s activity programs have been run by volunteers. But that is no longer enough for people incarcerated for years, who must keep occupied during their time in jail and gain skills so they can stay out of trouble once they’re released.

The Mendocino County Sheriff’s Office just spent $35,000 on a new modular building to make room for additional educational programs, Allman said.

In Sonoma, they’ve begun adding conflict resolution, anger management, parenting and other life skills to programs such as Starting Point, which helps long-term inmates start dealing with underlying problems that got them arrested in the first place.

But they need more, Walker said.

“An inmate, she can plant flowers, but her decision making isn’t going to get better,” Walker said, referring to a gardening program.

The Sheriff’s Office is preparing to ask for a new position for the next budget cycle, a sergeant to both handle new programs and classify inmates to help track factors like gang affiliations.

But it’s also the little unexpected details that are adding up. Jail staff researched a type of dental floss that wasn’t strong enough to use against another inmate that they now sell in the commissary.

“Any doctor will tell you you can’t go a year, two years, without flossing,” Awad said.

Sheriffs Freitas and Allman were in Sacramento on Tuesday and Wednesday for the California State Sheriffs’ Association annual conference with the governor.

How jails are grappling with long-term inmates was the primary discussion.

“Everyone agrees that’s a significant problem, that’s our number one legislative platform.” Freitas said.

You can reach Staff Writer Julie Johnson at 521-5220 or julie.johnson@pressdemocrat.com. On Twitter @jjpressdem.

Write your own caption …

Every week, we’ll post a new cartoon on Watch Sonoma County and invite you to write the caption. Enter the contest by posting your caption below. Vote for your favorite by clicking “thumbs up” or “thumbs down” on each entry.

PD staff will select several winners and publish them every Friday on the Forum page in the Empire News section. Want a shot? Leave your real name and your email address for verification.

The cartoons are drawn by Gary Varvel, who has served as political cartoonist for the Indianapolis Star since 1994.

Click here to see last week’s winners

By JEREMY HAY
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT

Sonoma County officials appear close to enlisting another city into the fold of its clean power agency — albeit one of the smaller ones.

The Cotati City Council on Wednesday expressed some concerns about voting procedures on the proposed agency board, issues that county officials promised to address.

But overall, council members voiced support for an enterprise meant to displace PG&E as the county’s chief source of electricity and offer a greener energy portfolio, with sources including solar, wind, geothermal and small hydroelectric projects.

The city’s concerns centered primarily on language in the joint powers agreement that will govern operations of the county power program. That language allows the agreement it to be amended by a two-thirds vote with those votes possibly coming on a weighted basis, with member agencies’ votes based on electrical use. That, said Mayor Mark Landman, means Santa Rosa and the county alone could make decisions that would impact the smaller cities without their concurrence.

“We’re hopeful they’ll be able to make some adjustments to that,” Landman said Thursday. “I wouldn’t call it a sticking point, but let’s just say it’s very important to the city and to all the small cities in this county.”

Cotati has the smallest share of the county’s PG&E energy usage at 1.3 percent, except for Healdsburg, which because it runs its own municipal energy agency has just 250 PG&E meters.

The Cotati council asked that the issue — and perhaps an ordinance to join the agency — be brought back for consideration June 26, just before the June 30 deadline the county has set for cities if they want to participate in the rollout of the power system on Jan. 1.

The county intends, at a minimum, to launch the agency for residents and business customers outside of the nine cities. So far, only Windsor has agreed to join for the launch of the agency, although other cities can join later.

Electrical customers will be able to opt out of the county program and stay with PG&E.

Cotati residents have indicated that they want both options on the table, Landman said. “The clear thing we heard from the community is they wanted the ability to be able to choose for themselves,” he said.

“If we choose to vote ‘no’ on this, they don’t have the ability make that choice,” he said. “They want an up or down vote for this.”

Second District County Supervisor David Rabbitt on Wednesday voiced reservations that he has sounded before about the speed at which the power project has progressed and whether it is ready for launch. Landman on Thursday said the council seemed satisfied.

“There’s been an incredible amount of work on this,” he said. “I think they’ve done the groundwork and they had the answers to all our questions.

By KEVIN McCALLUM
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT

Santa Rosa plans to refinance about $35 million in pension bonds in an effort to control costs and prevent the city credit rating from slipping further.

By locking in historically low interest rates and spending about $4 million to pay down debt, the city expects to save about $870,000 in today’s dollars over the next 12 years, according to Chief Financial Officer Lawrence Chiu.

“This will help preserve the city’s credit rating,” Chiu told the City Council on Tuesday.

Credit ratings agency Moody’s has twice reduced the Santa Rosa’s credit rating on the bonds out of concern over the pension debt of cities throughout the state.

In June 2003, Santa Rosa sold $50.7 million in bonds to finance the increased costs associated with more generous pension benefits for its workers.

The proceeds from the bonds were paid to the California Public Employees’ Retirement System. The idea was that the city could save money by financing the cost of the increased benefits with bonds that paid a lower interest rate than what CalPERS would have charged the city.

Today, $38.3 million in principal is outstanding on the bonds with a maturity date of 2025. Some of the bonds have a fixed rate and some have a variable rate. Because current rates are low and are expected to rise in coming years as the economy improves, the city’s financial advisers recommend that city refinance the bonds now.

The city isn’t extending the term of the bonds, but rather is committed to paying them off by 2025.

“We want to pay this off on schedule,” City Manager Kathy Millison said.

Another reason to move away from the variable-rate bonds is that it is becoming harder and more expensive for the city to find banks willing to guarantee the bonds through something called irrevocable letters of credit. The city’s current letter of credit with Wells Fargo Bank expires in 2014. Fixed-rate bonds require no such letters.

Much of the savings will come from lower rates. The city currently is paying about 1.1 percent on its variable-rate bonds, but that is expected to rise to an average of 3.6 percent for the remaining 12 years of the debt. Its fixed-rate bonds are rising to 4.9 percent in 2014 and 5.4 percent in 2019.

The city expects to get a new fixed rate of about 4.3 percent when it sells the new bonds later this summer.

Additional savings will come from paying down the principal by $4 million. The city had been planning to set up something it called a “pension stabilization fund” with a recent $1.6 million settlement with Sonoma County over property tax administrative fees.

But it changed gears after it recently received higher pension cost estimates from CalPERS for the 2015-16 year. It decided instead to put that settlement money, plus an additional $2.4 million, toward the extra principal payment.

Some council members wondered whether some of that cash might be better spent fixing streets, given how much repair costs increase once the pavement deteriorates past a certain point. But Millison said she was convinced that paying down and refinancing the debt is the wisest option.

“We think this is the better investment in terms of helping the city better manage its cash flow for the general fund,” Millison said.

The measure passed 7-0.

You can reach Staff Writer Kevin McCallum at 521-5207 or kevin.mccallum@pressdemocrat.com. On Twitter@citybeater.

By KEVIN McCALLUM & BRETT WILKISON
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT

Sonoma County’s two largest cities appeared headed down divergent energy paths Tuesday, with Santa Rosa vowing to move swiftly toward a decision on whether to join the Sonoma Clean Power Authority the day after Petaluma delayed a decision until at least September.

Santa Rosa City Council members expressed both strong support and deep reservations about the proposal, but all agreed to try hard to make up their minds one way or another by the impending June 30 deadline or shortly thereafter.

“I love the concept. I want it to work, but I’ve got to make sure it’s right for our city, and I’m not there yet,” Councilman Jake Ours said.

The council decided to convene its three-member subcommittee in coming weeks to get answers to myriad questions it has about the plan’s governance, rates, green energy mix, and impact on greenhouse gas emissions. It proposed another full public hearing on the issue in late June.

Mayor Scott Bartley said the city would “move as fast as we can move,” but warned that pressure on it to act quickly was like “pushing on string, and that doesn’t work.”

The call for quick action follows a unanimous move Monday by the Petaluma City Council to further study the proposal, effectively putting off any decision until after the county’s June 30 deadline and possibly until next year. The county’s second-largest city joins Cloverdale, its smallest, which also decided to sit on the sidelines for now.

“It may be that there’s a better path for Petaluma,” Mayor David Glass said Tuesday.

So far, Windsor is the only city to formally join the power agency. Rohnert Park and Sebastopol could join in a second round of hearings next month. Cotati’s first presentation in the current series is today, while Sonoma’s council takes up the issue June 3.

The creation of a public power agency is intended to supplant PG&E as the county’s primary source of electricity and offer a greener energy portfolio, with sources including solar, wind, geothermal, biomass and small hydroelectric projects.

The agency intends to start with power that is 33 percent from renewable sources, a greater proportion than PG&E’s 20 percent.

County officials estimate that in 2014, Sonoma Clean Power rates for residential customers would be 1.8 percent lower to 1 percent higher than PG&E’s, and for commercial customers 3 percent lower to 0.5 percent higher.

It was difficult to read the leanings of many Santa Rosa council members Tuesday. All said they wanted the agency to work, but they also voiced a litany of questions they wanted answered before they could fully support it.

But at least two council members said that if Santa Rosa didn’t participate, it wouldn’t have a seat at the table of the Joint Powers Authority and therefore couldn’t influence the policies that might affect it if it joined later.

“A lot of these decisions have been made without us, and rather than letting more of them be made without us, I’d like to see us hop on that train before it goes by us too much further,” Erin Carlstrom said to a round of applause from a chamber packed mostly with supporters.

First District Supervisor Shirlee Zane kicked off the afternoon session with an impassioned plea for political courage. She invoked Monday’s horrific tornado in Oklahoma as yet another sign that climate change is happening and local jurisdictions need to take bold action before it’s too late.

Anticipating the barrage of highly detailed questions that followed, Zane urged council members to remain focused on the bigger picture.

“We need to stop quibbling over 1 or 3 percent rates and remember that this earth will be inherited by our children,” Zane said. “This is about leadership.”

She appealed directly to Carlstrom, who is several months pregnant, as an example of someone who should act with the future in mind.

“It’s always nice to call out the pregnant lady, because you do reflect our children,” Zane said.

But Kathy Millison outlined the complexity of the decision facing the council. She noted that it needs to make a decision not only on behalf of the city’s residents, but on behalf of the city budget. In 2012, the city government itself used 40 million kilowatts of energy, costing taxpayers and ratepayers $5.6 million, Millison said. With 791 separate PG&E meters paying 20 different rates, figuring out the budget implications for the city is daunting, she said.

Several speakers pointed out that Sonoma County’s 70 percent opposition to Proposition 16 in 2010 was a virtual mandate from voters to support the new power authority. Resident Ben Zolno, who worked against the PG&E-backed proposition to require a two-thirds public vote to join so-called Community Choice Aggregation programs, called Santa Rosa’s support crucial.

“Without Santa Rosa as part of this, Sonoma Clean Power is either really weak or it’s dead,” Zolno said.

He stressed that the city’s participation would give the fledgling agency significantly more leverage in negotiating contracts with potential power suppliers. Santa Rosa accounts for nearly 35 percent of PG&E-supplied power in Sonoma County.

One of the few critics of the plan was Novato resident Jim Phelps, an engineer who said he opted out of Marin County’s power authority and questions its legitimacy.

Phelps singled out the agency’s reliance on renewable energy certificates to achieve its 33 percent green power goal. The agency says roughly half of its renewable supply will come from energy credits that some critics say amount to greenwashing, allowing a user to claim renewable sources while actually getting conventional power from the grid.

Phelps held up a plastic cup full of dirty water and likened it to brown power. Then took a white paper receipt, which he said was, in essence, all a renewable energy credit is. He said the claim that such certificates ensure the production of green energy was “patently false.” He then wrapped the receipt around the cup and said “Voila! Instant green energy that your constituents will buy, and they won’t know it.”

He then held the cup up to the council and said: “This is clean water. Who’d like a drink?”

Following the hearing, Cordel Stillman, deputy chief engineer for the county Water Agency and the lead staff member on the proposal, said he was pleased with the support the council members showed and said their numerous questions were easily answerable.

The detail of the questions showed they are on board with the concept, and are now “in the weeds” working out the details, which Stillman said was promising.

Petaluma appears to be much more wary of the county plan.

The city’s discussion kicked off Monday with a presentation by Supervisor David Rabbitt, the south county representative and a former Petaluma councilman. Rabbitt, the only county board member to vote against the power plan launch this year, said he had wanted more time to study and develop the plan. Several Petaluma council members echoed him with their own comments.

“There’s no urgency because the county already has the go-ahead to meet their capacity in the first year,” said Glass, the mayor.

Petaluma council members voiced concern especially about the sway that the county and Santa Rosa — the two biggest power users — would hold on the agency’s governing entity, the Sonoma Clean Power Authority.

Councilwoman Teresa Barrett questioned whether the city might partner instead with Marin County’s public power program, launched three years ago. The program recently expanded to serve customers in the Contra Costa County city of Richmond.

That possibility and other questions will be the focus of a staff report that is set to take at least three months to compete. Glass was adamant in an interview Tuesday that a closer look was better for Petaluma.

“We’re going to continue to investigate our options and explore possibilities,” he said, brushing aside questions about possible political blowback from the county and the powerful coalition of business and environmental interests pushing the proposal.

“That’s not my worry,” he said. “My worry is to get the very best deal for the people of Petaluma, period.”

By BRETT WILKISON
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT

Jim Leddy, Sonoma County’s community and government affairs manager, has been hired by Mono County as its top administrative officer.

Leddy, 45, a former candidate for the state Assembly and Santa Rosa schools trustee, has been Sonoma County’s chief spokesman and government relations official since 2008. He was recently promoted to deputy county administrator. His 2012 pay was $154,916.

Jim Leddy.

He is set to start work in Mono County on June 10. His annual salary will be $160,000, according to a Mono County announcement. His last day of work for Sonoma County is June 7.

“It’s an incredible opportunity to work for another great organization and live in another beautiful part of California,” said Leddy, a Monte Rio native.

Mono County, centered in Bridgeport, takes in the Eastern Sierra near Mammoth Lakes and stretches to the Nevada border. It has a total population of 14,200 and a county government yearly budget of $71 million, with 305 full-time positions.

Leddy was executive director of the Napa County Planning and Transportation Agency from 2006 to 2008. He was a Santa Rosa city schools trustee from 2001 to 2008 and ran for the state Assembly in 2004.

From 1993 to 1998 he was a field representative for then-state Sen. Mike Thompson. He served as district director for then-state Sen. Wes Chesbro from 1998 to 2006.

Write your own caption …

Every week, we’ll post a new cartoon on Watch Sonoma County and invite you to write the caption. Enter the contest by posting your caption below. Vote for your favorite by clicking “thumbs up” or “thumbs down” on each entry.

PD staff will select several winners and publish them every Friday on the Forum page in the Empire News section. Want a shot? Leave your real name and your email address for verification.

The cartoons are drawn by Gary Varvel, who has served as political cartoonist for the Indianapolis Star since 1994.

Click here to see last week’s winners

By BRETT WILKISON
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT

With four cities down and four to go, Sonoma County officials this week enter the second half of their roadshow to convince cities to take part in the county’s planned public power agency.

The presentations are intended to tout benefits and answer questions about the effort to displace Pacific Gas and Electric Co. with an alternative that offers a higher share of energy from renewable sources.

Sonoma County supervisors have voted to launch the agency on Jan. 1 encompassing — at a minimum — the unincorporated areas of the county.

So far, they’ve successfully enlisted one city — Windsor — while two others, Rohnert Park and Sebastopol, could decide to join next month. The Cloverdale City Council has decided the city will sit on the sidelines for now.

Next up are the two largest cities, Santa Rosa and Petaluma, which together account for nearly 48 percent of the electricity use in the county. Alone, Santa Rosa’s share is nearly 35 percent.

The public presentation before the Petaluma City Council is Monday evening and Santa Rosa council members are to hear the issue Tuesday afternoon.

Participation by the cities — and power bills from their residents and businesses — are a key if not critical part of the county’s plan, which aims to serve 80 percent of PG&E’s local customers. The higher the participation — customers would be allowed to opt out and stick with PG&E — the sooner the program will have a positive cash flow and be able to plow money back into rate stabilization, energy efficiency programs and local generation projects.

“You work with the revenues you generate,” said Cordel Stillman, deputy chief engineer for the county Water Agency and the lead staff member on the proposal. Without Santa Rosa and Petaluma, he said, “we may not be able to do things we would have been able to do with all of the cities’ participation.”

Santa Rosa and Petaluma also would add political momentum to the program, which is set to begin serving homes and businesses Jan. 1. County officials and supporters insist it would be viable without urban customers, but they want all cities, and especially the biggest ones, onboard.

“We can have this going without any of the cities, but that’s not what we want,” said Ann Hancock, executive director of the Climate Protection Campaign, the main advocacy group behind the power proposal. “We’re looking for a nod from all of them, and we’re putting a lot of work into Santa Rosa.”

Supporters, including environmental and business leaders, have been lobbying council members heavily in recent weeks, honing a message that focuses on consumer choice, shrinking the county’s carbon footprint and the promise of economic development through construction of local energy projects.

They’ve sent out notices that signal they intend to pack council chambers this week.

Opponents, including fiscal watchdogs and critics of government, argue that many of the touted benefits could be illusory. In emails and newspaper opinion pieces, they have been getting their points across, too.

The tug-of-war means the proposal could face a stiff challenge in the remaining cities. After the presentations in Petaluma and Santa Rosa, the roadshow rolls on to Cotati on Wednesday and Sonoma on June 3.

Some city officials have been vocal about their desire to see final numbers on customer rates and greenhouse gas emissions before they sign on.

Those answers are not expected prior to a county-imposed decision deadline of June 30, leaving some officials saying the process is being rushed.

“I think it’s going too fast,” said Santa Rosa Councilman Jake Ours, who has served on a public-private steering committee providing input on the plan. “We’re not going to have time to make a decent decision.”

County officials have begun negotiations with a final group of four companies competing for the initial energy supply contract. They’ve also begun a search for an interim chief executive to lead the power program and started work on a branding and public relations campaign.

In the meantime, they have reiterated initial figures they say would make the program competitive if not cheaper than PG&E and immediately greener, drawing 33 percent of power from renewable sources such as solar and wind versus the 20 percent portfolio projected for PG&E next year.

Program skeptics have questioned those numbers, disputing especially the emissions comparison because about half the public power would initially come from renewable energy credits packaged with conventional power sources, a tool they deride as “greenwashing.”

But city officials have focused most on the rate implications, both for their residents and businesses and for City Hall.

In Santa Rosa, the county’s largest city with almost 170,000 residents and 97,360 electrical meters, city government is the biggest power user, with more than 700 PG&E accounts.

Some of those accounts, such as the city’s wastewater treatment plant on Llano Road, pay wholesale power rates that are “dirt cheap,” Ours said, while others pay far higher rates.

That’s why the initial rate range provided by the county is insufficient to help the city understand implications for its bottom line, Ours said.

“I think everyone in the city wants it to work, but we don’t know how it’s going to work,” he said. “The devil is in the details.”

Supporters cheered Windsor’s decision last week to formally join the county power agency. The move gives them a seat on its governing authority, alongside county representatives. The entity is designed to have nine voting members — one from each of the eight participating cities, plus the county.

Healdsburg is not a candidate for the system because it already has a municipal power agency.

County officials have touted that seat at the table in their pitch to cities.

But the bigger cities, especially, have lingering questions about governance, including how much sway they would have on the authority board.

“I don’t want to be taking part in something that hasn’t had all the wrinkles run out,” said Petaluma Mayor David Glass, discussing a number of questions he has about the program. “The prudent thing is to wait and see how it plays out.”

Politics could be a significant factor in the larger cities’ decisions. Support for the power venture now cuts across the county’s main camps, shaped by environmental and business interests that commonly duel over elected seats in Santa Rosa and Petaluma.

But that assessment made one politician uneasy last week.

“We need to spend less time on politics and handicapping whether a city is going to come on board or not,” said Supervisor Mike McGuire, one of the four-member majority that last month backed the program’s launch for the unincorporated area; Supervisor David Rabbitt was the lone no vote.

Politics, McGuire said, should take a back seat to the program’s business plan, which he repeatedly called “solid.”

“There’s no doubt we’d want Santa Rosa and Petaluma to join now,” he said. “But because we have this solid business plan, if they join later, we’d welcome them.”

Staff Writer Kevin McCallum contributed to this report. You can reach Staff Writer Brett Wilkison at 521-5295 or brett.wilkison@pressdemocrat.com.