How to resolve AdBlock issue? 
Letters
- Details
- Written by: Eva Johnson
I recently saw a draft expenditure plan on the potential use of funds that will be generated by the Measure E sales tax proposal.
The majority of the monies would be spent on the quagga mussel prevention, and the weeds and algae part will be the same old process that has been done these past years, which is not working!
The invasive species (quagga) expenditure was very specific, but the algae process was very vague and the weed program is much the same we have been doing.
Nobody is thinking of trying something new – like maybe a pilot project of nutrient removal so weeds and algae don’t grow.
I can’t vote for this kind of increase in the sales tax without some assurance that there will be some change in the process and accountability.
The Clear Lake Advisory Committee has monthly meetings and I have been attending. I was told by my supervisor they are checking on the lake and advising the board. Is the Board of Supervisors listening?
If you care as I do about the Clear Lake (our jewel) contact your supervisor and ask questions before we commit to something we have no control over.
The CLAC meets on the fourth Friday of the month at the supervisors chambers at the Lake County Courthouse, 255 N. Forbes St. in Lakeport, at 9 a.m. It next meets on Oct. 26.
See you there – ask questions and find out what’s going on before you vote to pass this measure.
Eva Johnson lives in Kelseyville, Calif.
- Details
- Written by: Nola Montgomery
Judy Conard is running for Judge on her qualifications. I’ve decided to vote for her because in my assessment, there is no question she has the broader, more comprehensive, experience to offer.
No ill intended, but Judy’s opponent does not have the full range of experience I think we need in a Superior Court Judge. He does not have prosecutorial experience at all while Judy has worked both as a prosecutor and a public defender.
Also, Judy’s taken many jury trials to verdict and it seems her opponent has not – at least from what I’ve been able to determine from reading his campaign literature.
Another thing that really impresses me about Judy is how hard she’s worked to get where she is today. Imagine earning a law degree at night while raising a family and working full time as a teacher? That takes a high degree of commitment and dedication, two important attributes she will bring to the judiciary.
I checked Judy’s website and noticed that she’s been endorsed by a cross-section of people in our county, including two judges, the superintendent of schools, attorneys, teachers, peace officers and people from all walks of life.
I also noticed she was evaluated by the California State Bar’s Commission on Judicial Nominees. I looked them up on the Web and found out that this is the commission that vets candidates for the governor’s judicial appointments. That tells me her experience and background was subjected to a lot of scrutiny. To me, that speaks volumes.
If you got a mailer from Judy’s opponent or saw his recent ad, you may wonder about the issue of Judy being sanctioned by the courts. This is a distraction. In fact Judy was doing her level best to represent her client and she’s standing by her decision. That’s what an honest, dedicated, ethical attorney does.
Sometimes it’s difficult to distinguish between candidates. Not in this case. Judy Conard is clearly the most qualified candidate for Superior Court Judge.
Nola Montgomery lives in Lower Lake, Calif.
- Details
- Written by: Randy Ridgel
The contradictory responses from different parts of the Obama administration regarding the Muslim killing of the ambassador and three others in Libya were interesting.
The president has been implying for months that he had personally killed Osama, thus destroying Al Qaeda and eliminating terrorism from the world. Therefore he couldn’t admit that terrorists had invaded the embassy and murdered Americans since terrorists no longer exist.
So he stood at the United Nations and apologized to the world for an imagined uprising caused by an unknown American producing a silly video about Mohammed.
Intelligence testified that nothing like that happened; they said it was a terrorist attack.
Hillary Clinton at the State Department mostly kept her powder dry while she wondered which way she jumped would be best for her 2016 campaign for president.
In debate Joe Biden grinning and grinning over the death of four people while he idiotically smiled through almost every topic, stated, contrary to his boss’s assertions about the silly video, that we really didn’t know why the embassy was invaded but, by golly, when we get to the bottom of it (after election day) those criminals will get their comeuppance.
The Obama administration’s conflicting explanations reminded me of the punch line to an old joke: “Nobody was driving, officer; we were all in the back seat singing.”
Is this, “leading from behind”?
Randy Ridgel lives in Kelseyville, Calif.
- Details
- Written by: Annelle Durham
I find that it is very easy to get off topic when discussing Proposition 37, which would simply require the labeling of genetically engineered (GE) foods.
The list of what Proposition 37 isn’t about is longer that what it is about.
It is not about the possible health consequences of eating GE foods, the increased use of Round-up herbicide on Round-up Ready GE crops, the revolving door between Monsanto and the FDA, or even that the seeds that give us food and life are now patented.
These issues are close to my heart but they are not what Proposition 37 is about.
Proposition 37 will require the labeling of GE foods so that when we take a product off the shelf at the supermarket we will be able to clearly read for ourselves if it contains GE foods or not. That’s it!
It doesn’t tell anyone what they may grow, what kind of research they may do, how they may use this new technology, or in any way restrict the use of GE drugs.
This is simply about truth in labeling of GE food. Many countries already have labeling of GE food and have not suffered ill consequences or increased food prices as a result.
As an organic farmer here in Lake County, I have to pay attention to the consumer’s desires and adjust my crops as needed.
What is lacking now, with regards to GE crops, is this feedback loop. Without labeling the consumer has no choice and then the farmers and food processors have no way of knowing what the consumers really want. Nothing speaks like the dollar in the marketplace.
Polls show between 85 and 95 percent of us – including Democrats, Republicans, men and women – want labeling of GE foods, but polls don’t make law or policy.
We have tried and tried again to get the FDA to require labeling but they aren’t listening to the consumer, even when they received almost one million letters in support of labeling.
The Vermont legislature tried to require labeling but backed down when Monsanto threatened to sue them.
So here we are in California, trying to make history, thanks to Pamm Larry, a grandmother who passionately wants GE foods labeled and got the proverbial ball rolling.
Proposition 37 is simple – label GE foods. Yes, there are some exemptions but we have 15 years of not labeling GE foods, and it will take more than one initiative to completely reverse directions.
We know how badly the opposition wants this initiative to fail by the amount of money they are putting into the “No on 37” campaign, upwards of $35 million, of which $7 million is from Monsanto alone! The “Yes on 37” campaign has raised barely one-tenth of what the opponents have to work with.
Fortunately it is not just about dollars when it comes to ballot initiatives. It is about voting, it is about all of us voting.
It is about reminding each other that just because there are many more ads against Proposition 37 (thanks to all that money) than for Proposition 37, it doesn’t mean that they are right and that is how we should vote. We should vote for what we want – not for what “they” want.
If you want a choice, and truth in labeling, when at the supermarket, you should cast your vote for Proposition 37. I know I will.
Annelle Durham farms in Upper Lake, Calif.