How to resolve AdBlock issue? 
Opinion
Every year at the beginning of February, Girl Scouts stand outside of local businesses to sell their cookies to loyal customers.
The girls are working hard to learn business management, personal and business finances, customer relations and marketing strategies.
The money the girls earn is for them to go do things like going to camp, or to a water park or even Disneyland.
These 10- to 12-year-old girls stand at a booth sale for three to six hours at a time. Their only protection from heat, rain or wind being a canopy, an umbrella or the building's overhang. And all of this is done with little complaint.
However, as a leader and a member of this community, I am finding the stealing of cookies off of our tables or the deliberate shorting on payment totally unexceptionable!
The cookies are $5 each and every time an individual steals from our girls, the girls still have to pay for the loss. We do not have the protection that businesses do and can not simply write it off.
Each girl is making $0.75 per box they sell. This meas that our girls now have to pay $4.25 for the box of Tagalongs that a young girl and two young men stole from our table at Safeway in Clear Lake.
Several customers at Walmart were trying to “short pay” by rapidly counting ones only to have me discover a "folded" bill in the center. To a 10 year old, it looks like you counted 5 ones.
We are trained as Leaders to allow those who steal from our table to do so and then call the police. The suspect is usually not apprehended due to the girls having a hard time describing the suspect, and again, they have to pay what was taken from them.
I am sending out a plea to all those who would take from a little girl. Please, don't teach them that the world they have to grow up in is out to take everything from them, or that stealing is right. It's not!
But most importantly, stealing from these girls sends them an unspoken message that they are weak and easily taken advantage of. Do you have a daughter? Would you want someone to steal from her and teach her the lesson I've mentioned?
Girl Scouts thanks you for your time.
Lee Whitewater lives in Hidden Valley Lake, Calif.
- Details
- Written by: Lee Whitewater
I read an essay on violence the other day and the author argued that violence is not instinctive; it had to be taught.
That got me thinking about a fight that I had had after school, long ago.
The fight was not of my choosing, and my opponent was bigger than me. However, I knew that I would be the physically dominant one, because this other kid did not have a violent nature.
So, we began flailing away at each other, and in the corner of my eye, I saw my mom pull up. I wanted to impress her, so I increased the ferocity and quantity of my punches until she got out of her car and yelled at me to stop.
Later, my mom castigated me for hitting the other boy, and informed me that he had asthma and it was horrible that I had been pummeling him. I felt terribly guilty and made up with the boy the next day.
I only put it together, today, 60 years later, how ironic the incident was: my mother would hit me, in a fury, with a belt or wooden coat hanger when she got angry with me.
The epiphany I had was that the rage that she inflicted on me I had passed on to that unfortunate young man.
I could emotionally revisit that moment and viscerally feel that at that moment, I had been passing the violence that I had learned from my mother onto my victim.
I guess that is why I never hit my own children, nor do they hit their children. That is not to say that children don’t need discipline.
And, here is what many people, in my experience, don’t understand: violence and discipline are not the same things. Parents must set limits.
When parents do not set limits, they create in their children, what one psychologist calls “tyrannical child syndrome.” This occurs when a child does not know his/her limits and thus becomes frightened. This fear leads to anger, and then, you have an out of control and angry “brat” on your hands.
So, the point that I am making is this: don’t hit your kids. It may make you feel better, but it does not help them. It teaches them to hit.
And, don’t let them run wild either; that will make them angry and they will probably hit out of anger in that scenario as well.
Nelson Strasser lives in Lakeport, Calif.
- Details
- Written by: Nelson Strasser
The Board of Supervisors chamber was standing room only when I got there a bit after 9 a.m. Tuesday morning, as the supporters and opposition to the state of Jefferson proposal filled the room along with a few familiar faces in county government, who were there for other business.
After a few minutes the sheriff walked in along with several of his staff members, who were there for the midyear budget review.
I told him that it might be a while before they got around to his agenda item, and he replied that the two sure ways to pack that room were to talk about “weed and Jefferson,” both statements were as accurate as they were obvious.
In spite of the huge crowd, only 30 minutes were alloted to the public's input and the board's discussion and decision on joining the state of Jefferson movement, rather amazing considering the huge step that would be.
Sure enough time slid by far past the scheduled end of the Jefferson debate, and after waiting the better part of an hour the sheriff left to try to salvage some of his morning, though his staff and other department heads remained behind to make sure they didn't miss their agenda item.
I stuck around too, not because of a real interest in the state of Jefferson issue, the reorganization of our watershed-related agencies was my item of the day.
This particular issue was deemed of such insignificance that it was relegated to the untimed agenda, the home of unimportant and noncontroversial business – in theory anyway. The Jefferson issue dragged on for another half hour before a break was needed and the meeting was briefly adjourned.
I used this opportunity to ask Board Chairman Anthony Farrington why the Jefferson issue rated such a short agenda slot and why the watershed agency issue had been banished to the “who knows when we'll talk about that” untimed agenda, and got a rather shocking response.
Mr. Farrington said he was surprised the decision about joining another state would have generated so much public interest, and it didn't matter if the watershed issue was timed or not because you never really know how things will work out time-wise.
As it was the watershed issue was discussed after lunch, long after I had decided to leave, since I had already wasted nearly three hours waiting and still had no idea when it would be addressed.
The irony here is that the board voted to join the state of Jefferson in large part because they felt that we had no real voice in Sacramento, yet once again when the chairman of the Board of Supervisors (who is responsible for the agenda) took an issue that he knew people had a keen interest in and would be there to talk about, and made public input on it nearly impossible by making us guess wildly as to when it might be discussed.
I agree that oftentimes we don't have a strong enough voice in Sacramento, but many of us common citizens here feel the same way about our county government as well.
One thing we should all be able to agree on is that wasting large amounts of county staff time due to absurdly unrealistic agenda scheduling is something that is unprofessional and unacceptable, particularly when the person in charge has 15 years of experience on the board.
Another point that needs to be understood is that the time of the unpaid members of the public who care enough about their community to get involved in the democratic process has value too, and when it is wasted in what oftentimes seems to be a deliberate attempt to inhibit that participation that is unacceptable as well.
Philip Murphy lives in Finley, Calif.
- Details
- Written by: Philip Murphy
As Lake County News has reported, on Feb. 17 the Board of Supervisors appears to have voted (the end of the meeting was extremely confusing) to support the county's secession from California to become part of the (so far fictional) “State of Jefferson,” with Supervisors Farrington and Steele in dissent.
This action was taken despite obvious disadvantages to the residents of Lake County, despite the absence of anything approaching a comprehensive financial analysis, despite the last minute news from proponents that a resolution of support would probably involve us in litigation to overturn Reynolds v. Sims (one person/one vote), and without the benefit of the coherent list of options offered by County Counsel Anita Grant.
As a particular touch of irony, one of the most frequent arguments given for the formation of a new state is rural Northern California’s supposed “lack of representation” in Sacramento.
This unfortunate state of affairs may apply to counties such as Siskiyou and Modoc, but its relevance to Lake County was decisively refuted the morning after the meeting by the announcement that Assemblymember Bill Dodd and State Senator Mike McGuire have introduced legislation to provide $2.4 million in funding to protect and restore Clear Lake.
Our supervisors need to work with these excellent legislators for the benefit of the community instead of seizing self-indulgent opportunities for grandstanding and making reckless accusations.
The actual motion, with its wording determined after rather than during the meeting, states “Upon approval by the State Legislature of the petition for withdrawal from the state of California and to form the state of Jefferson, the Lake County Board of Supervisors will consider the measure for placement on the ballot of the next general election.”
Does this mean that the county will be listed as a secession supporter in the meantime?
To clarify the situation, the subject is coming back to the board at 9:15 a.m. on Tuesday March 3.
Although the opportunity for public comment is likely to be restricted to details surrounding the timing and legal standing of a popular vote, it is nonetheless vital to attend this meeting.
In the meantime please write or call your supervisor: Tell him that you oppose the secession of Lake County from California, and that at the very least the people of the county should have an opportunity to express their will at the ballot box BEFORE the board takes it upon themselves to speak for us on such a momentous matter.
Unless the Board of Supervisors is willing to back away from this destructive proposal immediately, they should act to place it on the ballot at the first reasonable opportunity, and in the meantime refrain from stating an opinion in our names.
You can leave a voice mail for any of them by calling 707-263-2368 or send a fax to 707-263-2207. Email addresses are
Victoria Brandon lives in Lower Lake, Calif.
- Details
- Written by: Victoria Brandon