Letters + Opinion » Mailbox

Rorschach Blots

by

comment

Editor:

John Osborn was spot-on with his article about big money in the Eureka City Council race ("Interested Parties," Oct. 14). It is apparent that certain interests in this town are blatantly trying to buy their way into City Hall.

It also points out the futility of trying to put limits on individual donations. The last financial statements from the candidates clearly showed that $500 donations to Brady, Newman and Jager have come in large bunches from single sources. It is easy to have multiple family members or "divisions" of businesses each give $500. Money serves money. What other motivation makes sense? Ask yourself what is there in the few dollars a month the job pays that warrants all this spending? Read John Osborn's article. It quickly becomes obvious who is working for you and who is serving the special interests.

There are three people in this race who are receiving small donations and are working on minimal budgets. They are trying to get the word out about their very real accomplishments and qualifications. Larry Glass, Ron Kuhnel and Peter LaVallee have shown many times in the KEET Forums, radio interviews, campaign literature and conversations with voters to be by far the most qualified candidates. Don't let the big money media and misleading mailers overwhelm and fool you. Vote for the people that can do the best job for Eureka. Vote for Larry Glass, Ron Kuhnel and Peter LaVallee.

Tom Peters, Eureka

 

Editor:

On your lament about our elections and voters: True, True. True. Sadly True ("Town Dandy," Oct. 14).

That's why I work to elect DA Paul Gallegos -- arguably an inept politician, but someone who simply wants to do the job in the most principled way he can. He has been skewered from the day he took office for his different approach to management. Now he's built a team that, as you reported last spring, hums with geniality and cooperation. Everyone I've met there knows they are doing important work and approach it in a strictly ethical manner. And, despite their unwillingness to bow to the pressure to win at all costs, those guys have racked up an impressive record of victories in court as well as in services to victims of domestic violence (note yesterday's proclamation by the Supes), seniors, children -- for all of us.

The challenges of this DA's race, sadly, are not about the facts of what's going right and what needs improvement. One side says everything is all wrong. The other responds that everything is just fine. How do we change that?

Can an incumbent acknowledge weakness in a particular area and not be attacked unmercifully and vituperatively by the challenger? Can a challenger acknowledge the strengths of the opponent and pledge to keep those programs in place?

I would suppose the press has a role in public education here and I am not confident the current configuration of media is courageous or interested enough to perform that function. Thanks for trying. Given the present crisis of government throwing in doubt whether democracy will survive, you and we have got to do better.

Michael Evenson, Petrolia

 

Editor:

Instead of acetaminophen, I send you my own confession. I don't look to someone else to be my savior and change does not come from one elected official. Many complain, but very few get involved. It is our responsibility to educate ourselves on the facts and look at what benefits the community as a whole and not the narrow, self-serving agenda of me.

This election season I confess to my preference for RealSpeak over Progspeak. Submitted for consideration for publication: Progspeak 101.

Real solutions to a working Eureka: Dependency on grants, plus growing the government bureaucracy.

Developer candidate: If it's the Marina Center, you are a developer's candidate; if it's Forster-Gill, it suits our agenda and it is okay to take outside money.

Protecting the environment: If it's backed by someone we don't like, let's sue; if it's a project that we want it's growth we need.

Candidate for the people: If it's Bonnie Neely, it means paying yourself longevity pay while your constituents struggle with rent and food. If it's Virginia it means asking the people face-to-face what their concerns are.

Gay rights: If it's Neely, photo-ops and lip service for 24 years. If it is Bass, actions and support of people in real life and a willingness to admit that she has expanded her understanding further.

Homelessness: If it's Neely, the solution is to mention invisible housing and county services that don't have the resources to make a dent. If it's Bass, it's acknowledging that single men and women fall through the cracks of a system where they do not matter.

Candidates that the progs allege are backed by money actually have a clue what the person on the street struggles with daily, whether it is the economy or crime. Enough with the red herrings of big-box, anti-gay, anti-environment mud slinging. And just because a voter disagrees with you, it doesn't mean we are ill-informed, disgruntled or don't care about our community and environment.

On Nov. 2, I plan to vote for Measure N, Bass, Jackson, Jager, Brady and Newman. It's time for a change and time for voices that have not been equally heard for years.

John Chiv, Eureka

 

 


 

Add a comment