Along with Journal publisher Judy Hodgson, I support Mark Lovelace for re-election as our 3rd District County Supervisor. During his first term Mark has supported jobs and resources in forestry, fishing and agriculture while protecting the environment. He achieves this balance by a thorough understanding of the issues and the needs of the community as a whole as well as the needs of individual constituents. Mark works long, hard hours for the good of our community and I am honored to have him as my supervisor.
We need this kind of evenhanded approach for Humboldt County and will be well served by giving him a second term on the Board of Supervisors. On June 5 I'll be voting for Mark Lovelace and I urge you to also.
David Glen, Blue Lake
Karen Brooks seems like a nice person. She has volunteered at the last two Freshwater Grange breakfasts, where she was in campaign mode. In this letter, I want to compare her campaign ad to that of her opponent Mark Lovelace. Mark's ad is filled with glowing testimony of his accomplishments as supervisor. Nary is there a negative word. It certainly gives me the impression that Mark has done a great job.
On the other hand, Karen's ad is rife with hyperbole, fear tactics and ad hominem attacks. First, Mark Lovelace is not an advocate of "high-density social engineering." Mark, as have all supervisors, has been struggling with Humboldt County's general plan. It's his job. He is not going to be building any high-rises out in Freshwater anytime soon. Nor is he about to impact our own neighborhoods with so-called "urbanism of Humboldt."
I mistrust ad hominem attacks. Why does Karen have to attack a man who's done so much good? Look at Mark's ad. He's helped Cypress Grove, helped get the second fiber optic line built, and helped protect the Usal Forest from development and more. Sounds like he knows how to "preserve our rural lifestyle and sustain the future of it," unlike pro-development candidates. Wait a minute. ... Your cover article on "District Soup" identifies Brooks as receiving financing from major donors in industry and development.
Oh! That's how she can afford all of those colorful feel-good signs I see every day driving home to Freshwater. Such nice signs; and who could disagree with their general pronouncements about children and the future. But I'm not voting for a sign. This election is not about slogans and is not a popularity contest. I hope all clear-thinking voters can decide between colorful (or cute-shaped) signs and who they want to have represent them. Experience and results are what truly matter. That's why Mark Lovelace has my support. And if I were in the 1st District, Cheryl Seidner would have it. Vote smart. Look at their records; vote for the facts not the signs or the personalities behind them.
James Floss, Freshwater