How to resolve AdBlock issue? 
Opinion
I will keep my support for Hannah Faith Lee for assessor-recorder short and to the point.
I am very impressed with Hannah's determined goal to have an “open door” for the county of Lake's property owners to ask questions and receive answers in a timely manner.
Being available is essential and it reduces a person's frustration when they are not being heard.
I believe Hannah will be a positive addition to Lake County's Assessor-Recorder's Office.
She has my vote and I hope she will have your's. Hannah will make a difference!
Claudine Pedroncelli lives in Upper Lake, California.
I am very impressed with Hannah's determined goal to have an “open door” for the county of Lake's property owners to ask questions and receive answers in a timely manner.
Being available is essential and it reduces a person's frustration when they are not being heard.
I believe Hannah will be a positive addition to Lake County's Assessor-Recorder's Office.
She has my vote and I hope she will have your's. Hannah will make a difference!
Claudine Pedroncelli lives in Upper Lake, California.
- Details
- Written by: Claudine Pedroncelli
In the district attorney election, it’s important to focus on the actual job — not a politically manufactured version of it.
The district attorney is the chief law enforcement officer in the county. The DA’s most essential duty is investigating and prosecuting criminal offenses on behalf of the people.
There’s a seasoned pro in the job — Susan Krones — a highly ethical attorney who has dedicated her entire career to effectively prosecuting criminals — thousands — right here in Lake County. Under her leadership this office is doing very well.
In this election, there are two choices — a seasoned pro who is doing the job that needs to be done; and a politician, who has never done this job but is willing to use deception and spend a lot of money to make voters think he can do it.
Sadly, about anything goes in the competition for an elected office. Case in point: DA Krones’ opponent has mailed out at least three deceptive, high-priced slick and glossy mailers.
These self-promoting mailers are a ruse to camouflage the inexperience of this politician — they are, in essence, designed to buy votes. It’s been said but worth repeating: Mr. Farrington has no criminal prosecuting experience — none. He finally admitted so at a recent candidate’s forum. Of course, he’s banking that most voters don’t know anything about that — so he keeps perpetuating this deception in expensive mailers.
Deception won’t get the job done — nor will a “blueprint for crime reduction,” another ruse concocted by this politician to deflect from the requirements of the job he isn’t trained to do and his inexperience.
In his so-called blueprint, he describes all the ways he will work with the Board of Supervisors and city councils. Too bad he didn’t focus on that in the 16 years he worked with them as peers because now not one county supervisor — current or former — or city council member will endorse him.
Be that as it may, two points in his blueprint stand out — the promise of vigorous prosecution and incentive pay — both nonstarters.
First, he says he wants to vigorously prosecute perpetrators of murder — as though serious cases aren’t already prioritized and vigorously prosecuted. As others in the DA’s office have pointed out, he has never put one murderer, or any criminal for that matter, behind bars.
Serious cases are often extraordinarily complex, require intensive and lengthy preparation, a profound understanding of criminal law and procedure, and experience in handling a jury. We now know, with certainty, that this politician has provided zero evidence of his capacity to either prosecute these cases or supervise those who do.
More importantly DA Krones, who has done thousands of criminal prosecutions, has and continues to deliver real results.
Case in point: Alan Ashmore got 140 years to life for killing two people and shooting a California Highway Patrol officer. In another recent heinous and complex case, a criminal who raped his daughter was convicted on all 12 counts in a jury trial and sentenced to 72 years in prison. And last week, under DA Krones’ leadership, a 32-year-old man, convicted of furnishing a controlled substance to a 16-year-old teen he sexually assaulted, was sentenced to 16 years in prison.
And it may interest you to know that very recently, DA Krones was contacted by Oxygen-True Crime, a mainstream television program, for her handling and conviction of an unusual and complex murder case with jurisdictional issues and other complications.
As to the promise of incentive pay for higher caseloads and conviction rates — this controversial idea is just another buzzy worded promise this practiced politician won’t be able to keep.
Promising bounties (“incentives”) for higher caseloads and/or conviction rates raises practical and ethical issues. As noted, serious cases are hard to try and win. A prosecutor responsible for even one of them may not be able to take on other cases. Will a prosecutor be penalized for vigorously prosecuting a serious case? A very high conviction rate, however, might suggest that a prosecutor is rejecting harder cases to keep that rate up. Bounties for conviction rates threaten public safety. The DA’s office is respected because it is motivated by justice, not profit.
There’s considerable evidence that incentive pay (aka pay for performance), which has been tried at the federal, state and local levels of government, is fraught with problems. These experiments have been studied (see the American Society of Public Administration); findings conclude a zero-sum gain, at best.
Having implemented various pay for performance models in two government entities, I know firsthand it is an expensive experiment that takes an army of human resource professionals, managers, employees, and their unions to achieve. The results are messy and highly questionable as to their value.
These two promises — vigorous prosecution and incentive pay — conflict. One of the reasons the understaffed District Attorney’s Office is highly productive and successful is its team culture. Deputy DAs are cross-trained and readily step up for each other. The politician would turn them into competitors instead of team players. It’s a bad idea.
In this highly important elected office on the June 7 ballot reject these ideas, reject deception, reject political theater, reject the politician.
Reelect a seasoned pro — that’s a winning idea for the county.
Olga Martin Steele lives in Clearlake Oaks, California.
The district attorney is the chief law enforcement officer in the county. The DA’s most essential duty is investigating and prosecuting criminal offenses on behalf of the people.
There’s a seasoned pro in the job — Susan Krones — a highly ethical attorney who has dedicated her entire career to effectively prosecuting criminals — thousands — right here in Lake County. Under her leadership this office is doing very well.
In this election, there are two choices — a seasoned pro who is doing the job that needs to be done; and a politician, who has never done this job but is willing to use deception and spend a lot of money to make voters think he can do it.
Sadly, about anything goes in the competition for an elected office. Case in point: DA Krones’ opponent has mailed out at least three deceptive, high-priced slick and glossy mailers.
These self-promoting mailers are a ruse to camouflage the inexperience of this politician — they are, in essence, designed to buy votes. It’s been said but worth repeating: Mr. Farrington has no criminal prosecuting experience — none. He finally admitted so at a recent candidate’s forum. Of course, he’s banking that most voters don’t know anything about that — so he keeps perpetuating this deception in expensive mailers.
Deception won’t get the job done — nor will a “blueprint for crime reduction,” another ruse concocted by this politician to deflect from the requirements of the job he isn’t trained to do and his inexperience.
In his so-called blueprint, he describes all the ways he will work with the Board of Supervisors and city councils. Too bad he didn’t focus on that in the 16 years he worked with them as peers because now not one county supervisor — current or former — or city council member will endorse him.
Be that as it may, two points in his blueprint stand out — the promise of vigorous prosecution and incentive pay — both nonstarters.
First, he says he wants to vigorously prosecute perpetrators of murder — as though serious cases aren’t already prioritized and vigorously prosecuted. As others in the DA’s office have pointed out, he has never put one murderer, or any criminal for that matter, behind bars.
Serious cases are often extraordinarily complex, require intensive and lengthy preparation, a profound understanding of criminal law and procedure, and experience in handling a jury. We now know, with certainty, that this politician has provided zero evidence of his capacity to either prosecute these cases or supervise those who do.
More importantly DA Krones, who has done thousands of criminal prosecutions, has and continues to deliver real results.
Case in point: Alan Ashmore got 140 years to life for killing two people and shooting a California Highway Patrol officer. In another recent heinous and complex case, a criminal who raped his daughter was convicted on all 12 counts in a jury trial and sentenced to 72 years in prison. And last week, under DA Krones’ leadership, a 32-year-old man, convicted of furnishing a controlled substance to a 16-year-old teen he sexually assaulted, was sentenced to 16 years in prison.
And it may interest you to know that very recently, DA Krones was contacted by Oxygen-True Crime, a mainstream television program, for her handling and conviction of an unusual and complex murder case with jurisdictional issues and other complications.
As to the promise of incentive pay for higher caseloads and conviction rates — this controversial idea is just another buzzy worded promise this practiced politician won’t be able to keep.
Promising bounties (“incentives”) for higher caseloads and/or conviction rates raises practical and ethical issues. As noted, serious cases are hard to try and win. A prosecutor responsible for even one of them may not be able to take on other cases. Will a prosecutor be penalized for vigorously prosecuting a serious case? A very high conviction rate, however, might suggest that a prosecutor is rejecting harder cases to keep that rate up. Bounties for conviction rates threaten public safety. The DA’s office is respected because it is motivated by justice, not profit.
There’s considerable evidence that incentive pay (aka pay for performance), which has been tried at the federal, state and local levels of government, is fraught with problems. These experiments have been studied (see the American Society of Public Administration); findings conclude a zero-sum gain, at best.
Having implemented various pay for performance models in two government entities, I know firsthand it is an expensive experiment that takes an army of human resource professionals, managers, employees, and their unions to achieve. The results are messy and highly questionable as to their value.
These two promises — vigorous prosecution and incentive pay — conflict. One of the reasons the understaffed District Attorney’s Office is highly productive and successful is its team culture. Deputy DAs are cross-trained and readily step up for each other. The politician would turn them into competitors instead of team players. It’s a bad idea.
In this highly important elected office on the June 7 ballot reject these ideas, reject deception, reject political theater, reject the politician.
Reelect a seasoned pro — that’s a winning idea for the county.
Olga Martin Steele lives in Clearlake Oaks, California.
- Details
- Written by: Olga Martin Steele
I am supporting Hannah Faith Lee for Lake County assessor-recorder in the June 7 election.
She is a demonstrated problem solver, and a forward-thinking person who wants to increase the accountability, communication and transparency of this office.
The incumbent’s arbitrary policies about when the title companies could come in to record their sale documents have caused delays by at least one day, often three days if it is a Friday.
This has had real impacts on consumers who want to move in over the weekend. It also has meant lost revenue to the county.
For months after the county COVID-19 restrictions were lifted, the incumbent would only allow the title companies into his office to record documents at 10 and 11 a.m.
Here is the problem with that: Loan funds often don’t arrive until late morning or early afternoon, and same with overnight documents.
Requests to change the recording times to afternoons to allow people to complete their home purchase sooner fell on deaf ears.
To be fair, with the election looming, title companies are now allowed to record documents twice a day since March 25. The incumbent’s announcement said the recording times were doubling because COVID restrictions were over, but this was months after restrictions had been lifted.
I tried to find out how severe the backlogs are for reassessing improved properties, and in mailing back the recorded documents.
I asked the Board of Supervisors if they had any reports from any department heads, including the Assessor-Recorder’s Office, tracking the extent of the backlogs we hear about in all departments.
The Board of Supervisors has no ongoing record of any department backlogs, and no goals for tracking and reducing those backlogs. I, for one, would like to know whether we are making progress.
I submitted a public records act request asking for backlog and other information from the Assessor-Recorder’s Office. The incumbent refused to answer that question, but interestingly, in public forums he will say, “The backlogs are reduced by 75%.” So either the incumbent has that data and refused to provide it as required under the public records act, or he is simply making up the 75% figure.
And it still doesn’t address how backed up they are in reassessments and in mailing out documents. Ask anyone who works at a title company how many calls a day they get asking when they will get their recorded documents mailed back. This has cost immense lost time by the staff at Fidelity National Title and First American Title explaining they have no control over when documents get mailed back by the assessor-recorder.
We are one of the last counties in California to adopt electronic recording for documents. Escrow officers from out of our county say to me, “Your county is still recording by hand? What year is it up there?”
When I researched electronic recording in 2019, I spoke with the assessor-recorders of Sonoma County and Napa County. Both told me it was a 12- to 18-month process to get the program going, and while it took time and staff needed training, it saved them substantial time and postage from not having to mail out recorded documents.
The incumbent started in 2018 that process to put electronic recording in place. More than three years later, it still isn’t up and running. We have yet to hear when it will be operational.
Even with the pandemic slowing things down, a 12- to 18-month process started in 2018 should have been almost done before the lockdown in March 2020.
I looked at the county budgets over the past several years. Each department head justifies the department’s budget by stating the goals they want to achieve. The incumbent’s only goal has been to recruit and train more staff. Is this a measurable goal? How do you know if you have achieved it? And where are goals to reduce backlogs?
I understand there were no funds allocated for communicating with the public. The Board of Supervisors insisted on the incumbent putting money in the budget for this. There is no excuse for our citizens to not be notified of a big increase in their next property tax bill.
The Board of Equalization audited the Lake County assessor-recorder in 2014, before the incumbent took office. There were 11 recommendations. The incumbent responded to those recommendations at the time the report was issued in 2016 and was supposed to submit annual reports until such time that all recommendations had been implemented. No other reports were filed, and Lake County is out of compliance with the Board of Equalization.
Similarly, each of the 58 county assessor-recorders are required to submit annual figures on budget, personnel, appeals and roll data; Lake County is one of 11 counties that fail to do that. Once again, we are out of compliance. This was the first finding on the 2014 audit. When we are out of compliance with the first finding (arguably the easiest to comply with), where else are we out of compliance?
I support Hannah Faith Lee for assessor-recorder because she wants to improve the department such as modernizing the office’s operations, setting measurable goals and being accountable for them, communicating with the public about issues affecting their wallets, finally getting the electronic recording program implemented, and allowing the title companies to come in when they need to.
I believe our county cannot afford another four years of the incumbent assessor-recorder. To quote one of the incumbent’s own staff, “At some point, we have to start serving the public.”
Please join me in voting for Hannah Faith Lee for assessor-recorder in the June 7 election.
Mary Benson lives in Lower Lake, Calif.
She is a demonstrated problem solver, and a forward-thinking person who wants to increase the accountability, communication and transparency of this office.
The incumbent’s arbitrary policies about when the title companies could come in to record their sale documents have caused delays by at least one day, often three days if it is a Friday.
This has had real impacts on consumers who want to move in over the weekend. It also has meant lost revenue to the county.
For months after the county COVID-19 restrictions were lifted, the incumbent would only allow the title companies into his office to record documents at 10 and 11 a.m.
Here is the problem with that: Loan funds often don’t arrive until late morning or early afternoon, and same with overnight documents.
Requests to change the recording times to afternoons to allow people to complete their home purchase sooner fell on deaf ears.
To be fair, with the election looming, title companies are now allowed to record documents twice a day since March 25. The incumbent’s announcement said the recording times were doubling because COVID restrictions were over, but this was months after restrictions had been lifted.
I tried to find out how severe the backlogs are for reassessing improved properties, and in mailing back the recorded documents.
I asked the Board of Supervisors if they had any reports from any department heads, including the Assessor-Recorder’s Office, tracking the extent of the backlogs we hear about in all departments.
The Board of Supervisors has no ongoing record of any department backlogs, and no goals for tracking and reducing those backlogs. I, for one, would like to know whether we are making progress.
I submitted a public records act request asking for backlog and other information from the Assessor-Recorder’s Office. The incumbent refused to answer that question, but interestingly, in public forums he will say, “The backlogs are reduced by 75%.” So either the incumbent has that data and refused to provide it as required under the public records act, or he is simply making up the 75% figure.
And it still doesn’t address how backed up they are in reassessments and in mailing out documents. Ask anyone who works at a title company how many calls a day they get asking when they will get their recorded documents mailed back. This has cost immense lost time by the staff at Fidelity National Title and First American Title explaining they have no control over when documents get mailed back by the assessor-recorder.
We are one of the last counties in California to adopt electronic recording for documents. Escrow officers from out of our county say to me, “Your county is still recording by hand? What year is it up there?”
When I researched electronic recording in 2019, I spoke with the assessor-recorders of Sonoma County and Napa County. Both told me it was a 12- to 18-month process to get the program going, and while it took time and staff needed training, it saved them substantial time and postage from not having to mail out recorded documents.
The incumbent started in 2018 that process to put electronic recording in place. More than three years later, it still isn’t up and running. We have yet to hear when it will be operational.
Even with the pandemic slowing things down, a 12- to 18-month process started in 2018 should have been almost done before the lockdown in March 2020.
I looked at the county budgets over the past several years. Each department head justifies the department’s budget by stating the goals they want to achieve. The incumbent’s only goal has been to recruit and train more staff. Is this a measurable goal? How do you know if you have achieved it? And where are goals to reduce backlogs?
I understand there were no funds allocated for communicating with the public. The Board of Supervisors insisted on the incumbent putting money in the budget for this. There is no excuse for our citizens to not be notified of a big increase in their next property tax bill.
The Board of Equalization audited the Lake County assessor-recorder in 2014, before the incumbent took office. There were 11 recommendations. The incumbent responded to those recommendations at the time the report was issued in 2016 and was supposed to submit annual reports until such time that all recommendations had been implemented. No other reports were filed, and Lake County is out of compliance with the Board of Equalization.
Similarly, each of the 58 county assessor-recorders are required to submit annual figures on budget, personnel, appeals and roll data; Lake County is one of 11 counties that fail to do that. Once again, we are out of compliance. This was the first finding on the 2014 audit. When we are out of compliance with the first finding (arguably the easiest to comply with), where else are we out of compliance?
I support Hannah Faith Lee for assessor-recorder because she wants to improve the department such as modernizing the office’s operations, setting measurable goals and being accountable for them, communicating with the public about issues affecting their wallets, finally getting the electronic recording program implemented, and allowing the title companies to come in when they need to.
I believe our county cannot afford another four years of the incumbent assessor-recorder. To quote one of the incumbent’s own staff, “At some point, we have to start serving the public.”
Please join me in voting for Hannah Faith Lee for assessor-recorder in the June 7 election.
Mary Benson lives in Lower Lake, Calif.
- Details
- Written by: Mary Benson
Susan Krones is running for reelection as the district attorney of Lake County. She has worked diligently for the last 30 years prosecuting cases as an officer in the Judge Advocate General's Corps, or JAG, of the Army and then as a deputy district attorney and as district attorney of Lake County.
I suggest you take a moment to review the list of individuals who have endorsed Ms. Krones for this position.
Retired judges Mann and Crone, former county supervisors who had to work with Anthony Farrington when he was supervisor, the Lake County Democratic Party, the North Bay Labor Council, community leaders, Congressman Mike Thompson and a number of attorneys.
Who is endorsing Mr. Farrington?
I found one client endorsement online and then received a flyer with an endorsement by Fiona Ma (a politician he has endorsed this year and in the past); Bill Dodd, who is NOT our state senator (another politician Farrington has endorsed in the past); and by Alexandra Gallardo-Rooker, a political bigwig in the State Democratic Party.
He has a picture of Vice President Kamala Harris swearing him in as an attorney! Surely he is not implying that she has endorsed him!
Where are the local endorsements? Where are endorsements by other attorneys … the "colleagues" he works with (or against) every day? I could not find a single endorsement on his website.
Admitted to the State Bar of California just short of 10 years ago he has practiced several different types of law, but has not specialized in or become an expert in any of those fields.
Farrington tells us that he has a contract with the state to represent abused and neglected children. What he did not disclose is that dependency attorneys, who are all under state contract, also have to represent the parents who are abusive or neglectful. They don't get to choose who they represent ... they are appointed by the court.
Farrington has not worked as a deputy district attorney or as a criminal defense attorney. I am not certain that he knows the definition of the word prosecution (“The institution and conducting of legal proceedings against someone in respect of a criminal charge.”) based on his use of the term.
The only way a criminal charge happens is when the District Attorney’s Office charges a case, not when a civil attorney brings a case against another party.
Farrington claims “100% prosecution rate for domestic violence protection orders for abused women and children.” But how many cases make up that “100%”? Is it five cases or 500 cases? Domestic violence cases are usually civil cases brought by one party against another, but they are not criminal prosecutions.
He advocates tossing out our basic constitutional right to a jury trial. The right to have a jury trial applies to any criminal case, not just the ones that make headlines.
How exactly is Mr. Farrington going to fight crime and “take back our streets?” By making new law on his own without input from the legislature or the voting public?
He claims to “know” how to manage the district attorney, sheriff’s office and juvenile hall by participating in budget oversight of those offices. As supervisor he voted on the budget but county staff made the budget work.
He claims to have jury trial experience at the state and federal level. How many cases and what were the results? How has he managed to do jury trials in state (where in the state?) and federal courts, but has avoided jury trial experience in Lake County?
Enough of political talk and self aggrandizement.
Vote for Susan Krones.
Attorney Mary Heare Amodio lives in Lakeport, California.
I suggest you take a moment to review the list of individuals who have endorsed Ms. Krones for this position.
Retired judges Mann and Crone, former county supervisors who had to work with Anthony Farrington when he was supervisor, the Lake County Democratic Party, the North Bay Labor Council, community leaders, Congressman Mike Thompson and a number of attorneys.
Who is endorsing Mr. Farrington?
I found one client endorsement online and then received a flyer with an endorsement by Fiona Ma (a politician he has endorsed this year and in the past); Bill Dodd, who is NOT our state senator (another politician Farrington has endorsed in the past); and by Alexandra Gallardo-Rooker, a political bigwig in the State Democratic Party.
He has a picture of Vice President Kamala Harris swearing him in as an attorney! Surely he is not implying that she has endorsed him!
Where are the local endorsements? Where are endorsements by other attorneys … the "colleagues" he works with (or against) every day? I could not find a single endorsement on his website.
Admitted to the State Bar of California just short of 10 years ago he has practiced several different types of law, but has not specialized in or become an expert in any of those fields.
Farrington tells us that he has a contract with the state to represent abused and neglected children. What he did not disclose is that dependency attorneys, who are all under state contract, also have to represent the parents who are abusive or neglectful. They don't get to choose who they represent ... they are appointed by the court.
Farrington has not worked as a deputy district attorney or as a criminal defense attorney. I am not certain that he knows the definition of the word prosecution (“The institution and conducting of legal proceedings against someone in respect of a criminal charge.”) based on his use of the term.
The only way a criminal charge happens is when the District Attorney’s Office charges a case, not when a civil attorney brings a case against another party.
Farrington claims “100% prosecution rate for domestic violence protection orders for abused women and children.” But how many cases make up that “100%”? Is it five cases or 500 cases? Domestic violence cases are usually civil cases brought by one party against another, but they are not criminal prosecutions.
He advocates tossing out our basic constitutional right to a jury trial. The right to have a jury trial applies to any criminal case, not just the ones that make headlines.
How exactly is Mr. Farrington going to fight crime and “take back our streets?” By making new law on his own without input from the legislature or the voting public?
He claims to “know” how to manage the district attorney, sheriff’s office and juvenile hall by participating in budget oversight of those offices. As supervisor he voted on the budget but county staff made the budget work.
He claims to have jury trial experience at the state and federal level. How many cases and what were the results? How has he managed to do jury trials in state (where in the state?) and federal courts, but has avoided jury trial experience in Lake County?
Enough of political talk and self aggrandizement.
Vote for Susan Krones.
Attorney Mary Heare Amodio lives in Lakeport, California.
- Details
- Written by: Mary Heare Amodio