A Q&A with Congressman Kevin Kiley

Congressman Kevin Kiley is representing California's new Third District that stretches from Plumas County to Death Valley and includes Nevada County. It also includes the Sacramento-area suburbs of Rocklin, Roseville, and Folsom.

Redistricting happens once every 10 years, after every census, to ensure that each district has the same amount of people, according to Calmatters' Election 2022 website.

In addition to balancing population numbers, the commission in charge of redistricting had to comply with the federal Voting Rights Act, ensuring that no minority group's vote was drowned out. And to create fair maps, the commission didn't consider current district lines and isn't supposed to weigh partisan politics.

The Union requested an interview with Kiley to learn about his approach to issues that matter to residents of Nevada County.

Q: Fire is one of the top concerns for folks in Nevada County. What legislative actions do you and your team support that can help protect communities in our area? What is the one most important thing Congress should do in order to prevent the spread of wildfires in Nevada County?

A: We need to place a priority on wildfire prevention and safety in the area. Removing barriers that stand in the way of forest management. Supporting forest management and clearing vegetation and undergrowth are preventative measures we can take.

I recently spoke to President Biden urging him to fulfill his commitment to victims of the Caldor Fire, which destroyed the town of Grizzly Flats. But to this date, President Biden has yet to keep that promise by providing federal assistance under FEMA'S individual assistance program to the hundreds who lost their homes, their livelihoods, and their community.

I will do everything in my power to secure the same federal aid that was provided to victims of similarly destructive wildfires.

Q: There's a dire need for local workforce housing options in Nevada County. What plans, if any, do you have to help ease the local housing crisis?

A: Many of these issues originate with state policy that delays or adds costs to the developers. There are ways that federal policies add costs. I will focus on lowering costs.

Housing poses huge challenges for employers. It all leads to further inflation — the cost of supplies and labor and energy supply. It relates to inflation. I support increasing domestic energy production so that we don't see gas prices continue to go up.

Q: Broadband and internet connectivity is a big issue for many residents in Nevada County. How will you advocate for legislation that removes bureaucratic hurdles and processes?

A: I'm certainly familiar with the broader challenges of getting connected and getting access and having reliable service is of course vital to participation in our 21st Century economy, not to mention simply being able to stay connected with loved ones and to operate in modern life. So I've worked on broadband issues with members of the legislature and I intend to do everything I can to continue to make this a priority, and with the funds that are available, we want to make sure we get as much access to them as possible. I am certainly looking forward to working with the leaders in Nevada County to make sure that we identify the areas that most need support and do everything we can to support them.

Q: How will you approach CALAIM implementation that is intended to transform the Medi-cal delivery system? What steps have you taken to advocate for effective delivery of Medi-cal, especially when it comes to mental health services and substance use disorder services?

A: That's a great question. Right now, we're seeing mental health challenges like we have never seen in this county, especially for young people. Coming out of the last few years of COVID shutdowns, school shutdowns, the periods of isolation. We had huge challenges even before that.

So actually, in the legislature, I worked to try and get greater access to the mental health services in a variety of ways including to enable school districts to implement health services with funds that allow them to provide services

directly to students. So, I'm very interested in working on solutions along those lines.

I just actually met with a coalition from our region when I was in Washington D.C. to advocate for mental health for young people a couple of days ago.

Of course all of this is related as well to the epidemic of fentanyl in this country which is taking lives on a staggering and tragic scale. And that includes a local student, Zach Didier, who is 17 years old, and died two days after Christmas. He was a senior at Whitney High School; it was an absolutely devastating story. He was a stand-up student, soccer player, Eagle Scout, star of the high school musical. His parents have become leading advocates for raising awareness around fentanyl. I actually met Laura Didier as part of the group I mentioned meeting with last week.

One of the points they brought up is that we really need to address the mental health component of this. One thing I felt was that Laura Didier, the mom of Zach, is going to be my guest at the State of the Union this next Tuesday. As a member of Congress, I'm allowed to have one guest at the State of the Union, so she's going to be there. I hope that will help to bring attention to what happened to her son, his story, and to save other families from having to go through the same unthinkable situation.

Q: Legal cannabis farming is a topic that is evolving much like the days of prohibition, when regulation had to sort of catch up with the production, distribution and consumption of alcohol. Describe your views on the cannabis industry in Nevada County and federally?.

A: What we need to do is get the illegal grows under control because they are swamping the legal market and creating enormous problems in terms of the use of resources like water and power.

In terms of the many types of criminal activity that are connected to these enterprises. You have just horrifying reports of human rights abuses, workers who are being paid next to nothing under terrible conditions, reports of kidnapping and sexual assaults occurring at these places.

We are seeing instances like where one officer who lost his life in the line of duty in El Dorado County responding to a call at an illegal grow. So this is a very clear consequence of how California has mismanaged the legalization of marijuana here in California.

It's a situation that is almost to this point, it falls beyond the capacity to control. It's like playing whacka-mole, they shut down one illegal grow and there's others that pop up. So I'll need to look at changes we can make in state and federal law to shut down this illegal activity and all the other issues associated with it.

Q: Organic waste removal is one of those issues that seems to put the cart before the horse. AB 1826 and SB 1383 outlines specifics that local governments may not have in place such as organic waste sites or composting on a large scale. How can you help local governments with the problematic and premature requirement?

A: Unfortunately, it's nothing new for the state of California, because there has been a recent tendency to impose mandates at the state level that are very difficult for local communities to comply with. They fail to account for the unique circumstances that affect certain jurisdictions.

So, at this point, I am a representative of Congress, so my role is to help the folks deal with federal law and interact with federal agencies.

But, I will take the same approach as I tend to believe that local communities are in the best position to govern themselves. I will continue to fight against mandates that are unrealistic and disruptive to the federal laws.

Q: Zero emissions is a statewide push for change that affects rural communities differently than other communities. Have you advocated for regulatory flexibility for rural communities

that depend on wood-burning fireplaces, gas stoves, gas-powered tools to clear large areas of vegetation? Will you promote legislation that recognizes Nevada County's way of life?

A: Absolutely. This is the problem with one-size-fitsall mandates is that they might make sense for Los Angeles, or San Francisco, but they don't necessarily make sense for our community.

That's why I'm an advocate for the idea that local communities should have the ability to govern themselves. And to account for their own way of life and the values of their community.

We have, obviously, large portions of Nevada County that are rural, and it doesn't make sense to say that they have to follow the exact same mandates and be subject to the exact same regulations in areas like Los Angeles or San Francisco where they have a much larger population density and a different economic profile.

So absolutely, I will continue to fight for the folks in Nevada County to protect their way of life. So when you see things like gas powered stoves now on the chopping block — and then you see the recent gas prices all because of new gas taxes — all those things I'm going to fight against. And I'll look forward to working with leaders at all levels in Nevada County to do so.

Q: I noticed that you were appointed to serve as a member of the Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education this week, congratulations. Public education continues to debate issues such as ensuring “equitable outcomes.” How do you view the definition of “equitable outcomes”? Also, what is your view on school choice – specifically, the idea that the ADA money allocated per student should be given to the families of the student to bring to any school of choice, including private schools? What is your view on this idea that the money should follow the student?

A: I believe parents are in the best position to make decisions about the education of their child. There are some in our government that believe the opposite; they believe the government is in the best position and that parents shouldn't have options, that parents shouldn't have choices. They should only have one choice, at most. I think that is fundamentally wrong.

So, I advocate strongly for school choice, parental choice. I think parents should have a wide variety of options when it comes to the education of their child.

I think that when it comes to educational equity, we have large achievement gaps in this state, there are some communities that are being served better than others, and that's unfortunate because every child in this state and in this country should have the opportunity to get an outstanding education.

So, I think we have to look at the bearers that are limiting opportunity across California and across the country, but at the end of the day, and I say this as a former high school teacher myself,

I think it is imperative that we empower parents.

I think that, generally, it's best to have decisions about how school districts are run made by school boards, made by local communities of parents who are closer to the needs of the communities.

Like we were saying before, if you have state policies and federal policies, those are one-size-fits-all, and they don't account for the unique circumstances of the affected communities.

That's why I always think it's best to make decisions closest to those that are affected, and those are the kinds of policies that I'm going to fight for.

Q: Is your view on “equitable outcomes” a priority? How do you define that? I think that's in itself a debate.

A: Well, I am for equal opportunity. And I think what you see is that when you have an educational system that allows for local decision making and gives parents options and that has accountability, then that tends to improve student achievement, across the board, and there are many many examples of that.

Of course you're going to have unique needs, for different communities. Some communities need extra forms of assistance given the challenges that they face.