How to resolve AdBlock issue? 
Opinion
In her recent letter to the editor, Ms. Hicks says that Mr. Anderson has several hundred endorsements, but he does not advertise them because “a judge should not seek endorsements from people or organizations that may appear before him while he is on the bench.”
There are two problems with this assertion.
Mr. Anderson has, in fact, sought endorsements. For example, he sought the endorsement of the Deputy District Attorneys Association – precisely the people who would appear before him on a regular basis as a judge.
He also sought the endorsement of the Lake County Democratic Party which Ms. Hicks now refers to as meaningless. But Mr. Anderson obviously seemed to find it worth his time to go through the rigorous endorsement process in the spring. The endorsement was given to his opponent, Shanda Harry.
I know people personally who were called by Mr. Anderson requesting an endorsement, but they declined. They had already committed to Ms. Harry, believing her to be better qualified to be the next Lake County Superior Court judge.
Perhaps the area of greatest concern in Ms. Hicks’ letter is the claim of Mr. Anderson keeping secret the list of “several hundred” endorsements. How will we know if any of these people appear before him while he is on the bench? We have no list against which to check. It brings to mind how Mr. Anderson handed out up to $250,000 to various charities in this county from public funds without any checks or balances causing concerns for the Grand Jury and the Board of Supervisors about the appearance of impropriety.
On the other hand, Ms. Harry has all of her endorsements publicly available for scrutiny on her Web site and has her financial reports containing a list of her donors and expenses filed online for public access – not so, Mr. Anderson.
Ms. Harry has run a completely transparent campaign. The suggestion that there is any payback expected by any of Ms. Harry’s endorsers is repugnant. It is also insulting to those who have endorsed her.
Endorsements in political campaigns are as old as time – citizens stepping up and proudly putting their names forward publicly for their chosen candidate.
Mr. Anderson’s latest “stunt” of disparaging endorsements as the campaign winds down seems an act of desperation by a candidate who has fallen short in garnering sufficient support.
Vote for the candidate who put in the hard work to build an impressive list of endorsers from all political backgrounds and who values transparency in all that she does – Shanda Harry for Superior Court judge.
Pierre Cutler lives in north Lakeport, Calif.
There are two problems with this assertion.
Mr. Anderson has, in fact, sought endorsements. For example, he sought the endorsement of the Deputy District Attorneys Association – precisely the people who would appear before him on a regular basis as a judge.
He also sought the endorsement of the Lake County Democratic Party which Ms. Hicks now refers to as meaningless. But Mr. Anderson obviously seemed to find it worth his time to go through the rigorous endorsement process in the spring. The endorsement was given to his opponent, Shanda Harry.
I know people personally who were called by Mr. Anderson requesting an endorsement, but they declined. They had already committed to Ms. Harry, believing her to be better qualified to be the next Lake County Superior Court judge.
Perhaps the area of greatest concern in Ms. Hicks’ letter is the claim of Mr. Anderson keeping secret the list of “several hundred” endorsements. How will we know if any of these people appear before him while he is on the bench? We have no list against which to check. It brings to mind how Mr. Anderson handed out up to $250,000 to various charities in this county from public funds without any checks or balances causing concerns for the Grand Jury and the Board of Supervisors about the appearance of impropriety.
On the other hand, Ms. Harry has all of her endorsements publicly available for scrutiny on her Web site and has her financial reports containing a list of her donors and expenses filed online for public access – not so, Mr. Anderson.
Ms. Harry has run a completely transparent campaign. The suggestion that there is any payback expected by any of Ms. Harry’s endorsers is repugnant. It is also insulting to those who have endorsed her.
Endorsements in political campaigns are as old as time – citizens stepping up and proudly putting their names forward publicly for their chosen candidate.
Mr. Anderson’s latest “stunt” of disparaging endorsements as the campaign winds down seems an act of desperation by a candidate who has fallen short in garnering sufficient support.
Vote for the candidate who put in the hard work to build an impressive list of endorsers from all political backgrounds and who values transparency in all that she does – Shanda Harry for Superior Court judge.
Pierre Cutler lives in north Lakeport, Calif.
- Details
- Written by: Pierre Cutler
Given my direct involvement with the Westshore Pool for over 25 years, I wanted to clear up a few misconceptions about the maintenance and operation of the pool.
The city of Lakeport was the only public entity that paid for the operating costs of Westshore Pool. The Channel Cats paid rent for the use of the pool (and paid for heating costs during the winter). Without the city of Lakeport, the Westshore Pool would have been closed over a decade ago. The city’s maintenance staff was responsible for the chemicals, cleaning and repair; and
the city provided lifeguards and staff that maintained the pool when the Channel Cats were not in the water.
Further, the Clear Lake High School swim team was completely funded by the Lake County Channel Cats. The district did not participate financially in the operation of the pool while its swim team used it. There has been no cost sharing involving the district. The city of Lakeport and the Lake County Channel Cats were the only participants in its operation and maintenance
financially. The current $3,000 budget that the city has allocated is because of their commitment to our children and is their effort to help continue offering swim lessons at the Quail Run Fitness Center.
What the voters asked the school to do with the bond proceeds of Measure T was improve/renovate the pool. That fact was indisputably clear in the ballot language before voters. The bond was advertised in such a way that the pool was shown to be a major priority. One of the two advertisements mailed to voters for Measure T included six pictures – three of the six pictures were for the pool.
The voters were clear – they wanted a pool. It is heartbreaking to think that the voters might never again vote for a school bond when their trust in the system has been eroded. It’s time for our elected school board to make good on their promises.
Robert Dinsmore lives in Lakeport, Calif.
The city of Lakeport was the only public entity that paid for the operating costs of Westshore Pool. The Channel Cats paid rent for the use of the pool (and paid for heating costs during the winter). Without the city of Lakeport, the Westshore Pool would have been closed over a decade ago. The city’s maintenance staff was responsible for the chemicals, cleaning and repair; and
the city provided lifeguards and staff that maintained the pool when the Channel Cats were not in the water.
Further, the Clear Lake High School swim team was completely funded by the Lake County Channel Cats. The district did not participate financially in the operation of the pool while its swim team used it. There has been no cost sharing involving the district. The city of Lakeport and the Lake County Channel Cats were the only participants in its operation and maintenance
financially. The current $3,000 budget that the city has allocated is because of their commitment to our children and is their effort to help continue offering swim lessons at the Quail Run Fitness Center.
What the voters asked the school to do with the bond proceeds of Measure T was improve/renovate the pool. That fact was indisputably clear in the ballot language before voters. The bond was advertised in such a way that the pool was shown to be a major priority. One of the two advertisements mailed to voters for Measure T included six pictures – three of the six pictures were for the pool.
The voters were clear – they wanted a pool. It is heartbreaking to think that the voters might never again vote for a school bond when their trust in the system has been eroded. It’s time for our elected school board to make good on their promises.
Robert Dinsmore lives in Lakeport, Calif.
- Details
- Written by: Robert Dinsmore
I have been on one Lakeport Unified School District campus or another every day for over 25 years as a parent, substitute teacher, full-time teacher and daily volunteer.
I have to write in response to the two letters I just read regarding the climate at LUSD from current board members and a citizen. I feel I can speak more authoritatively than any of the last contributors as there have been very few days in the last 25 years that I was not on a campus.
So much of what I read in those two letters sounds fluffy and good. Yes, it sounds good, but the reality of how the district is actually working is not that pretty.
I have seen huge changes in the last two years, most of what I have seen has not been "positive."
I have seen almost no change in the quality of the meals provided for the children delivered from this $4 million kitchen. The students are still being served frozen chicken nuggets, beans from a can warmed up, pre-packaged dinner rolls in cellophane, burritos in cellophane packages and pizza bought from a local store.
It is too bad that the school board thinks the school climate is improved … quite the opposite. If they had come to campus and spent some time talking to teachers, they would have known why there was a mass exit from teaching positions.
Believe me, these teachers did not WANT to leave! Moves to other positions in the district and out of the district completely were to escape the stress of hostile work environments, lack of support from administration and lack of an effective discipline policy. Teachers being hit, kicked, slapped and spit on, called f*****g b**ch, food and class objects thrown at them. When this goes on all year long, this is a hostile work environment. Is this in the best interest of the students?
Restorative justice requires that a student come back to the classroom he has just destroyed by tearing work off the walls, throwing chairs, climbing on cabinets and yelling four letter words at everyone … and then apologizing. Then back to teaching as usual? How safe do you think those other students feel now that that student is back, and how well do you think they will learn after that?
Administration had to hire noncertified people to fill these vacancies because so few certified teachers are available. There are not enough curriculum coaches to meet the needs of these untrained teachers in the classrooms. How well do you suppose these untrained teachers are dealing with these events? Is this really what is in the best interest of the students?
What makes me sad is that the current board and administration are so blind to what is really going on. They don't seem to want to know what the real truth is, otherwise they would come to campus, spend hours to really observe, listen and enact change that would be in the students' best interest. How sad.
Jeannie Markham is a retired Lakeport Unified School District teacher. She lives in Lakeport, Calif.
I have to write in response to the two letters I just read regarding the climate at LUSD from current board members and a citizen. I feel I can speak more authoritatively than any of the last contributors as there have been very few days in the last 25 years that I was not on a campus.
So much of what I read in those two letters sounds fluffy and good. Yes, it sounds good, but the reality of how the district is actually working is not that pretty.
I have seen huge changes in the last two years, most of what I have seen has not been "positive."
I have seen almost no change in the quality of the meals provided for the children delivered from this $4 million kitchen. The students are still being served frozen chicken nuggets, beans from a can warmed up, pre-packaged dinner rolls in cellophane, burritos in cellophane packages and pizza bought from a local store.
It is too bad that the school board thinks the school climate is improved … quite the opposite. If they had come to campus and spent some time talking to teachers, they would have known why there was a mass exit from teaching positions.
Believe me, these teachers did not WANT to leave! Moves to other positions in the district and out of the district completely were to escape the stress of hostile work environments, lack of support from administration and lack of an effective discipline policy. Teachers being hit, kicked, slapped and spit on, called f*****g b**ch, food and class objects thrown at them. When this goes on all year long, this is a hostile work environment. Is this in the best interest of the students?
Restorative justice requires that a student come back to the classroom he has just destroyed by tearing work off the walls, throwing chairs, climbing on cabinets and yelling four letter words at everyone … and then apologizing. Then back to teaching as usual? How safe do you think those other students feel now that that student is back, and how well do you think they will learn after that?
Administration had to hire noncertified people to fill these vacancies because so few certified teachers are available. There are not enough curriculum coaches to meet the needs of these untrained teachers in the classrooms. How well do you suppose these untrained teachers are dealing with these events? Is this really what is in the best interest of the students?
What makes me sad is that the current board and administration are so blind to what is really going on. They don't seem to want to know what the real truth is, otherwise they would come to campus, spend hours to really observe, listen and enact change that would be in the students' best interest. How sad.
Jeannie Markham is a retired Lakeport Unified School District teacher. She lives in Lakeport, Calif.
- Details
- Written by: Jeannie Markham
I have been reading the fliers and literature from the judicial candidates and notice one big difference besides their qualifications. Shanda Harry is advertising endorsements she claim to be about 200.
Even though Don Anderson has several hundred endorsements, he does not advertise them. His reason is simple, a judge should not seek endorsements from people or organizations that may appear before him while he is on the bench.
As an example, the sheriff regularly is sued and has thousands of criminal cases before the court. How does it appear if he publically helped a judge get elected? What if you are a appearing in court and find out the other side has this relationship with the judge?
You obviously would be fearful of what favors that judge would give to the other side. This defeats the need for judges to be fair and unbiased.
Shanda Harry also boasts about having the Democratic Committee endorsement. But what does that really mean? Remembering this is the same Democratic Committee that endorsed Sheriff Frank Rivero both in 2010 and 2014.
This is the sheriff that received a “no-confidence vote of the Board of Supervisors; was put on the “Brady list” as a peace officers who cannot be trusted; that violated people’s civil rights; endangered police officers’ lives many time, and so many other things. It makes you wonder what goes into making these endorsements, obviously not good judgment.
Janice Hicks lives in Hidden Valley Lake, Calif.
Even though Don Anderson has several hundred endorsements, he does not advertise them. His reason is simple, a judge should not seek endorsements from people or organizations that may appear before him while he is on the bench.
As an example, the sheriff regularly is sued and has thousands of criminal cases before the court. How does it appear if he publically helped a judge get elected? What if you are a appearing in court and find out the other side has this relationship with the judge?
You obviously would be fearful of what favors that judge would give to the other side. This defeats the need for judges to be fair and unbiased.
Shanda Harry also boasts about having the Democratic Committee endorsement. But what does that really mean? Remembering this is the same Democratic Committee that endorsed Sheriff Frank Rivero both in 2010 and 2014.
This is the sheriff that received a “no-confidence vote of the Board of Supervisors; was put on the “Brady list” as a peace officers who cannot be trusted; that violated people’s civil rights; endangered police officers’ lives many time, and so many other things. It makes you wonder what goes into making these endorsements, obviously not good judgment.
Janice Hicks lives in Hidden Valley Lake, Calif.
- Details
- Written by: Janice Hicks