Candidates Night Loy

Loyalton Candidates Night 042210

I’ve never read a newspaper account of candidate’s night. I’ve seen many, just never read any; if I were interested in people aggrandizing themselves and whining about each other I’d go to a family dinner.

Now that I have to report on one, let me say this: it was like a family dinner.

About 75 people were present, and since it was held in the Church of the Holy Rosary social hall, Jesus and several saints looked down on the participants, making it particularly difficult to politic freely.

This reporter wisely dropped his butt between Bill Copren and Don Russell, so when the action on stage slowed down I was treated to two deaf old boys trying to whisper inside jokes about the candidates. That witty subtext and the lavish food made the trip worth while. Oh, and the thoughtful remarks of the candidates and so on.

Let’s state up front, it takes courage to be a candidate, and tremendous courage to get up in front of a potentially hostile crowd and expose your soul. Studies show that most people fear speaking in public even more than help from the government and spiders. Everyone who showed gets points.

Rather than repeat the boring stuff for each candidate, I’ll urge you to go to their website or read the stuff they’re all leaving everywhere.

Rather, this is my impression of how each candidate did. Others might not agree; read their account for something different.

First candidates up were those running unopposed. Running unopposed can increase the likelihood of being elected by 50% in some cases, and is the preferred method of running for office for those in the know.

Van Maddox, dapper as always, told everyone all the things he does in addition to being auditor. Laura Marshall explained her position(s) including assessor. Stan Hardeman explained his position with the schools. Stan also asked some of the most insightful questions of other candidates through the evening. Larry Allen, District Attorney, said he saw a lot of familiar faces, which he allowed was good and not so good. Heather Foster was late due circumstances beyond her control, but has been doing a great job as County Clerk and other key roles.

Then, the real event began.

The first contested office was Supervisor, District 2. District 2 is a glandular giant, covering from Sierra City to Verdi and to Loyalton. Peter Huebner is the incumbent, Todd Sloan is the challenger.

Each began with their qualifications. Peter has held the position for three terms and he outlined the many things he’s accomplished during that time. In fairness to Peter, he’s a workaholic, putting in many hours and traveling thousands of miles each year to knit together alliances with other counties. He’s a champion of biomass in the county. Todd is an auctioneer, has been a cop, and has been a small businessman.

Todd was the first person of the evening to misunderstand the Loyalton Community Pool, and he blamed Peter for not seconding Pat Whitley’s motion to put it on the ballot. Here’s a brief pause to explain the Loyalton Pool to the many who obviously still don’t get it:

Todd accused Peter and others of not supporting the pool. He made it sound like wishing could somehow make it so, and insisted that, even though the pool couldn’t make it a decade ago when times were better and Valley census higher, somehow now it could make it. He was also confused that the $80 bucks a year was "not a tax".

Peter, while not responding in a sophisticated way to the issue of the "referendum" clearly understood the business reasons the pool wouldn’t work, and he held fast that "putting it to the people" was not democracy, just a waste of money.

Then, Peter began to lose points. He asked Todd why he was on 5 different committees and quit all of them. On the one hand, the move demonstrated that Todd isn’t great at staying on committees, but on the other, it changed Peter from a victim to an accuser, and brought up points the audience didn’t understand. He was right, but he didn’t seem right, he seemed bogged in details. What should have been a concise attack on his opponent’s reliability turned into confusion, with Sloan’s fatalistic approach to county networking sounding almost prudent.

Todd responded that nothing was happening on the committees, which included Sierra Economic Development District board, and NORTEC. Sloan made his own impatience seem like a virtue and the organizations, which are fighting epic battles against the more urban counties, seem like do-nothings that a conscientious businessman would have nothing to do with.

Fortunately, Sloan responded with his own dud: Peter, what is your position on sexual harassment? Peter responded correctly that he’d leave such matters to the County staff responsible. He was against it generally, what was the point? Sloan had no point, but made some vague reference. The audience drifted off.

Bob Macey, Chairperson of Friends of Loyalton City Pool, attacked Peter with the broken concept of "give the people the vote" and it played well with people who didn’t understand the facts of the situation, but was starting to piss off those who did.

Peter was attacked for his lack of support for the East Sierra Valley Chamber of Commerce. Peter responded the way many people have: we already had a chamber of commerce for the whole county. Why can’t you just work within that? We need a unified effort.

Peter lost points there. The Sierra County Chamber is a very professional chamber organization, and one that leaves a lot of small business people, particularly on the East side of the hill, wondering what the hell the "Chamber" is doing. The Prospect is a member of both chambers of commerce, but generally prefer ESVCC, and we agree it needs county funding.

Todd boasted he was once chairperson of 12 chambers of commerce, which seemed excessive to us.

                            Presentation             Knowledge of the office

Huebner                 2                                     2.75

Sloan                     2                                     1

District 5 Candidates

There is no incumbent for District 5, since the tough and savvy Pat Whitley decided to stop driving over the pass every winter. The candidates are Scott Schlefstein, and Karen Rickman. Both are well known in their community. Please read their literature to find their relative experiences. In summary, Schlefstein is a generally nice guy who loves his family and understands the needs of the common people. Scott lost points both for being a good listener and for having common sense. Those things are true of Schlefstein, he is a good listener, and he does have common sense, but see the "scoring" section, above. Scott jumped into the wrong side of the "pool debate" in his intro.

Rickman has plenty of experience with fiscal matters both private and public. She also has government experience. When comparing her government experience with Schlefstein, she’s a hands down winner.

But, that isn’t all there is to the contest. Schlefstein challenged her on her responses to questions about the Sierra Brooks water system. She correctly responded that she’d been over the documents, and that there were actually 4 options for taking care of the problem there. Her response was correct, but not really convincing. Pretty much everyone who knows about the problem agrees it isn’t as simple as all that. Tim Beals has done a lot of hard work on the project, and has several workable solutions, but any realistic solution is going to require changes—unpopular changes—in the Brooks. Rickman was correct that everyone in Sierra Brooks would have an opportunity for input.

But Schlefstein seemed to get points on the exchange. Even though his actual knowledge of the job is poor, he’s only getting his feet wet. His presentation was good. He did stumble a few times, but one was left with the sense that, once he was oriented to the job, he would provide leadership.

Rickman spoke of leadership, but this is a contest, and her expression was rather subdued. She spoke of bringing clarity to county fiscal matters, and was very convincing, so convincing that out of the corner of my eye I though I saw Van Maddox, Auditor, start to stand. But, she scored points with the audience on this. In truth, the clarity she’ll produce is the same stuff that Maddox puts everyone to sleep with now. You can clarify tying a shoe, but no matter how many times you try or how patient you are, your dog is never going to tie a shoe, and most of us will never see those issues as "clear".

Then Rickman brought out what must have been considered a bombshell by her supporters: Schlefstein’s affiliations with local conservatives. She asked him how his affiliation would effect his performance in a non-partisan position.

What she was really asking, to those with that point of view, is this: how is your relationship with a handful of people who have proven themselves to be dedicated more to conservative ideology than to the county’s reality going to effect your behavior on the board? Are you going to be a nutcase?

Unfortunately, unless you knew all the players and agreed the identified people are right-wing whackos (the case has been made) you didn’t know it was a bombshell. The "boom" some people heard was the "phhhhht" other people heard.

Schlefstein answered with what appeared to be candor and pleased the crowd with talk about conservative values and reassured her he wasn’t rigidly right-wing. He ducked the boom and the phhhht and scored a solid point, making Rickman seem like a conspiracy theorist (the correct term for the group she referred to is the "Black Hats").

Liz Fisher asked the candidates "what do you mean by ‘common sense’". Fisher was throwing bait: the term "common sense" is what people who don’t know about the issue use instead of understanding. It is a way of saying "I don’t know what the job really is." Schlefstein fell for the bait and repeated the pool misunderstanding, drawing a titter through the crowd of Rickman supporters.

Rickman responded with a description of how the "let the people vote" on the pool issue was not sense of any kind. Rickman was the one candidate who had any solid understanding of the pool issue, and for those who got it, she scored big, but for the "waaaa, we wanted to vote" crowd, she wasn’t as convincing.

Robert Eschleman, member of the local chapter of Citizen’s Alliance for Property Rights, asked how each would deal with the challenges coming down from the state.

Schlefstein was ready and popped out a horrific law and a potential horrific bond act, both of which make life hard for those of us in the Sierras.

Rickman said something I didn’t catch.

Stan Hardeman popped out a great question about "Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000," a program which compensates rural counties for money that once came from timber receipts, which might well be in jeopardy at the federal level. Rickman, working for "First 5" (a frequent target of right-wing zealots) understood the significance far better than Schlefstein, but what could either do about federal legislation but be in favor of it?

                            Presentation             Knowledge of the Office

We disagree that Mr. Prouty was prevented from having an opinion. We feel he dodged the question.

                        Presentation         Knowledge of the Office

Archer                  1.75                        1.75

Ervin                     2.5                          2.25

Larson                  2                             1.5

Prouty                  1.75                         2.25

Sheriff Candiates

John Evans is sheriff; John Fatheree is the significant challenger; Tim Standley ran because the other guys were running, it seems.

Evans has been sheriff for a full term, and not everyone is happy with him, but only some people are unhappy.

The deputies are said to be unhappy with Evans. They each get one vote, that’s all. In careful thought I could remember only one boss I ever had that I would have voted for. Lots of people expect the deputies to have a problem with the sheriff.

Evans enumerated his promises from the last campaign and stated what he’s accomplished. He instituted a drug detective and as a result 53,000 pot plants were captured, keeping the price high in the county for those who didn’t get busted. They stumbled on some mushrooms, thereby dampening sweat lodges and alternative rock concerts in the Sierras. He instituted a prison chaplain. He’s arranged temporary kenneling so people don’t have to go out of county to get their dogs. He stated that the budget was tight, he was understaffed (though staff has been approved by the Board) and he wasn’t able to do all the things he’d like to.

However, he also bought black and white police cars, spending, according to some sources, $2,000 extra on each for the black parts. He stated, "taxis are yellow, fire engines are red, police cars are black and white. That’s so people can recognize them easily."

Standley stood forth as the guy you’d most like to have pull over if you had a flat tire. He’s clean cut, youthful for his years, disarmingly honest and completely sincere. He isn’t sure why he’s running, and neither are we, but if there were some terrible alternatives, we’d sure vote for him, because he’s clearly a good guy. He knows the job pretty well, and wishes the vacant positions would get hired, and doesn’t know why Evans won’t hire them. In general, he signed on with Fatheree. In the contest between Fatheree and Evans, Standley can only win if they knock each other out and he has the good sense to step back when they fall.

John Fatheree was a good solider and he’s a good cop. He believes in doing things by the book, feels that Evans is a poor administrator, states that the Loyalton substation has no supervisor, states that there isn’t enough training, claims to have benefited more in two years in Plumas county than he did for ten years in Sierra County (which pissed off a lot of Lee Adams fans in the room), states that evaluations aren’t done on time and thinks he can do better.

Bobbie Yegge stood and threw a softball to Fatheree to keep the contest going.

Evans pointed out that he lives within walking distance of the substation and supervises staff there himself. He admits that evaluations aren’t done, because they are time consuming. He points out that in the past evaluations were spotty. He pointed out that he knows staff is unhappy, but these are hard times and he’s not their friend, he’s the sheriff. He has to make decisions people don’t like. He pointed out he has no undersheriff, and has to do everything on his own.

Our assessment: Fatheree is a tough competitor, but he’s against the incumbent, and in the last four years Evans has become more confident. He controlled the stage when he spoke and was able to clearly position Fatheree as a challenger, not on such stable footing.

                        Presentation     Knowledge of the Office

Evans                     2.75                         2.5

Fatheree                2.25                         2.25

Standley                 1.5                           2

Thanks to the Rotary and the Sierra Booster for presenting the event, and thanks to all the candidates, who have done what few others of us have, and put themselves up for public inspection.