By Jon Fleischman






There are 17 propositions on the California ballot next month.  They range from good, to bad, to downright ugly.
 
Below is a quick summary of the seven ugliest of the bunch - those easily deserving your "no" vote.


Prop. 55 & Prop. 56 - Because we need taxes in California to be the highest in the nation, here are two massive tax increases placed right in front of you.  Both of these are in the vein of the expression, "Don't tax me, tax the guy behind the tree."  In 2012 voters passed higher income taxes on those making more than $250,000 a year - billed at the time as a needed "temporary" measure to fund state government reeling from the economic downturn.  Public employee unions have placed Proposition 55 on the ballot, extending these higher income tax rates through 2030, costing taxpayers billions of dollars annually.  Proposition 56 adds a $2 tax to every pack of cigarettes sold (currently, the tax is 87 cents).  This tax would generate around $1.4 billion, a small fraction of which would go to anti-smoking efforts.  The rest will be spread around to a lot of special interests groups like Christmas-come-early.


Prop. 57 - Jerry Brown's "Let's Put Violent Criminals Back On The Street" Act is a terrible measure.  Don't be fooled by the false and misleading ballot title and summary that leftist Attorney General Kamala Harris put on this one - it will reduce prison sentences for many, many violent criminals and put them back on the streets.  Worst of all - the sentencing "reforms" in it are retroactive - so victims of violent crimes trying to recapture some dignity and meaning in their lives will be re-victimized because of this cruel and dangerous ballot measure.  (Read more here.)


Prop. 58 - The "Kids Don't Need To Learn English" Act.  In 1998, when it was clear that many, many kids whose primary language was not English were rising through public schools being taught in their native language, and not gaining English fluency, California voters passed Proposition 227, the English for the Children Initiative.  That measure requires that non-English speakers be taught English through English-language immersion.  After its first year in place, the numbers of those achieving English literacy shot up by over 20%.  This year's cynical measure was placed on the ballot by those who apparently do not want English fluency to be a goal in public education.  There is one line in the measure that matters: its passage would allow the legislature to repeal Prop. 227 on a majority vote.


Prop. 62 - The death penalty for the death penalty.  This is as straightforward as it sounds. If you think California shouldn't have a death penalty for those who commit the most heinous acts of premeditated violence, often with deadly outcomes, then vote yes.  If you believe, as I do, that these worst-of-the-worst criminals should have to pay the ultimate price for their acts, then vote no.  (You'd also want to vote yes on Prop. 66, which would "mend it, not end it.")


Prop. 63 - This measure, cooked up and funded by left-wing former San Francisco Mayor-now-Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newsom, seeks to lock into place yet another layer of gun control regulations in what is already one of the most anti-gun rights states in the country.  Highlights include a new permit, fee and background check to be able to purchase ammunition; a ban on bringing in ammunition from out of state; eliminating online and mail-order ammunition sales; and banning magazines that hold more than ten rounds. If you love gun control, you'll love this measure.  If you think enough is enough - vote no.


Prop. 67 - A couple of years ago, after years of failed attempts, the nanny-staters in the California legislature teamed up with the greedy California Grocers Association to pass a statewide ban on single-use plastic grocery bags, simultaneously adding a new ten-cent tax on paper bags and thicker "re-usable" plastic bags.  The grocers joined the bag-ban coalition when it was agreed that they could keep all of the hundreds of millions of dollars in paper bag tax collections.  Many local governments have already banned plastic bags, but many communities around the state have chosen not to do so.  This one-size-fits-all ban was referred by hundreds of thousands of California voters, through signatures on petitions, to the ballot; in doing so, they halted its implementation.  A vote for Proposition 67 would impose the bag ban.  A vote against it would reject the ban, leave local control in place, and foil the cynical play by the greedy Grocers.  (Prop. 65 on the ballot also would hose the grocers, if Prop. 67 happens to pass.)


Wondering if any of these 17 Propositions deserve positive consideration? I'm definitely voting "yes" on four of them, which you can read about here.





​

​On October 24, 2016 at approximately 7:40pm our agency was notified by the Sonoma County Sheriff’s Office of a possible sighting of the vehicle and subject of the Amber Alert issued out of their county in the Pike area of Sierra County.  The California Highway Patrol, Yuba County Sheriff’s Office, and Nevada County Sheriff Office also were notified of the sighting and began searching for the vehicle which was able to evade law enforcement.
 
On October 25, 2015 at approximately 6:40am, a Sierra County Sheriff’s Deputy spotted the vehicle on Highway 49 traveling north towards Downieville.  A pursuit ensued but the deputy lost sight of the vehicle.  The vehicle was soon located abandoned and a massive search began for the mother and child utilizing CHP and Placer County Sheriff’s Office canine search dogs, a CHP helicopter, and several uniformed officers on foot.
 
At approximately 3:10pm the mother, 35-year-old Hannah Ashley and the 7-month-old child, Henry Massey, were located in the Downieville area.  Both were evaluated by local medical personnel and transported to the nearest hospital for precautionary measures.  We’re happy to report that both mother and child are unharmed and appear to be doing well.  After medical evaluation, Hanna Ashley will be booked into the Wayne Brown Correctional Facility for charges related to child abduction and evading police.  The investigation is ongoing.
 
Our agency is indebted to the California Highway Patrol, Placer County Sheriff’s Office, Sonoma County Sheriff’s Detectives, and California Office of Emergency Services for their assistance. 
 

Rhonda's Lil' Frosty is well decorated for the throngs to visit the Haunted House starting at dusk on Halloween! Thanks to Rhonda and her crew for a fun season! She is closed for the season November 3rd.

East Sierra Valley Chamber of Commerce held its annual Pumpkin Carving on Saturday, October 22nd. As shown below, it appears the giant spider is about to eat President Mike Welbourn. - Photo by Bonnie Jessee

​COUNTY COSTS incurred for drug enforcement activities on national forest system lands was discussed at the Sierra County Board of Supervisors’ meeting held in Loyalton on October 18th. Chair Lee Adams stated Sierraville District Ranger Quentin Youngblood wrote a letter to the Board over the Board’s concern regarding the cost of the recent drug enforcement activities. In this letter, Youngblood stated, “While I am also concerned with the expenses which Sierra County is incurring specific to incarceration and prosecution of the offenders for illegal activities of which largely occurred on National Forest System lands, there is no mechanism that I am aware under federal law for reimbursement to a county for the prosecution and housing of inmates convicted of violations of state law.”  He added, “Federal law does authorize the Forest Service to reimburse state and local law enforcement agencies for expenses related to the detection, eradication, and investigation of controlled substance violation on National Forest Lands.” Adams made it clear that all of the decisions made law enforcement wise, were not under Youngblood’s control.  He said the real problem seemed to be the Federal Government does not fully fund the U.S. Attorney’s office and they have high charging standards. Youngblood said one option, though not a mechanism to provide for any meaningful reimbursement would be to take a look at the Drug Eradication Agreement to see if there were any opportunities where money could be added to it. He said he doesn’t think marijuana grows will go away on forest system lands and ultimately feels the forest service is the responsible party. Youngblood concluded that Sierra County definitely had his commitment with these discussions. Adams stated while the forest service distributes money across the country none is put aside for these kinds of things. He said there were two programs at the state level, which are used to help small counties; Homicide Reimbursement Program and State Voting Program. Adams was willing to write a letter, asking the forest service to put some money aside for counties like Sierra in instances like this one. Sierra County Planning Department Director Tim Beals thought the world of Youngblood and didn’t want him to think this was a criticism of him, but was concerned about the impact this had on the County budget and the lack of federal action was offensive to him. He was also concerned about the lack of a meaningful dialog above the district ranger, adding the County should have the ear of the Forest Supervisor. Beals stated if there was such a severe pollution on federal land, why was the federal government not prosecuting on that alone. Adams said this easily could have been a six-figure cost and right now it’s $30,00 to $40,000. He was open to suggestions on where the Board wanted to go with this. He likened the problem to beating a mule in the head with a 2x4, adding it is a learning experience and a tough balance. Adams concluded the problem was how does a county of 3,000 solve it. He had not heard from Congressman LaMalfa and said LaMalfa could call the head of the forest service and “yell,” but by himself it wouldn’t do anything.  Supervisor Jim Beard meant no disrespect to Youngblood but felt this was the second time this year the forest service had slapped Sierra County in the face. He said the forest service had refused to assist with the convicted persons and refused to collect the transient occupancy taxes owed Sierra County. Beard thought maybe the County should pull a New Mexico and seize control of Forest Service land. He thought it was time the County took a stand. Sierra County Sheriff Tim Standley said last year was difficult to work out a cooperative work agreement with the forest service. He added the agreements were met with additional funding and also included a controlled substance grant of $5,000. Standley didn’t have the total cost analysis that all deputies have put in but felt it was over $5,000. He said next year this needed to be vetted in depth, adding the $5,000 is a reimbursement and thought this might be an area they could look at. Adams stated the problem with contracts was they are a set amount each year and felt an emergency fund would help. He worried about the supremacy clause and didn’t think seizing Forest Service lands would be a long-term solution. Beals thought Sierra County should send the federal government a bill. Supervisor Peter Huebner agreed they needed to be more aggressive and send a bill. Sierra County Auditor Van Maddox said to send them a bill as part of a larger plan had value, but on its own it would hit a circular file. He said the next step was to have backing so the “noise gets loud enough to get attention.” Adams asked how much political pressure the County apply. He said Sierra County is part of a nationwide coalition for Secure Rural Schools and may not get it, adding even with statewide pressure we lose these battles.  The Board decided to send a bill and Adams will work on a letter to the regional forester and forest supervisor 

​AN LED SIGN was approved for downtown Loyalton at Tuesday night’s City Council meeting after East Sierra Valley Chamber of Commerce President Mike Welbourn made a presentation. Mike told of having made “leaps forward” as the chamber now being a complete non-profit. The sign will be located on the chamber kiosk, be 75-feet off the Highway 49, 40-feet off 2nd Street, be multi-faceted with ten settings and hold up to 99 messages. 
Under question, Mike said it is powered by electricity. He further stated it will make a “pleasant presentation” in downtown.
The mayor found no problem and Brooks Mitchell verified it did not flash and faced downward. No permits are required. The City would only be involved if there are any complaints.

DISCUSSION over City of Loyalton’s policy of allowing water and sewer bills be paid by tenants was discussed Tuesday night. Mayor Mark Marin said he agreed with Kathy LeBlanc that property owners should be responsible and should add it to the rent. Brooks Mitchell suggested both owner and tenant should get the bill. Mark said renters don’t even know about water restrictions. Bookkeeper Kim Lombardi said City computer software doesn’t support billing the tenant. City staff isn’t asking for changes but just to get the landlords to pay. From the audience, Kristin Gallegos felt it should be the renter’s responsibility. Councilman John Cussins was right when he stated he’d turned off more water than anybody and he felt it works better with the landlord. If water has to be turned off and landlords don’t know it, pipes can break and the property owner has no idea. 
Brooks moved, seconded by John to alleviate tenants and bill landlords for water and sewer. Ernie Teague voted no.

​CITY COUNCILMAN Ernie Teague discussed discarded vehicles in the City at Tuesday night’s meeting. He asked County Supervisor Jim Beard about 8¢ a month paid for each licensed vehicle to pay for disposal. Jim couldn’t answer but said there’s a Plumas County program. Carla Lopez asked about those on private property. Sheriff Tim Standley stated, “Once on private property, it’s your baby.” Brooks Mitchell told about NRA and other organizations that pay for old junk cars. With Loyalton’s Enforcement Committee, it could put the 8¢ on the June ballot for approval.

A REQUEST FOR CONVENING of Health and Social Services Committee meeting regarding Social Services and Facilities Management was pulled from the consent agenda and added to the regular agenda on October 18th at the Sierra County Board of Supervisors’ meeting in Loyalton. Health and Human Services Director Darden Bynum reported on an email regarding facilities management around the concept for a county services annex. He called it an opportunity to combine different county functions together at one locale at the site of the county landfill to consolidate energy, rent, security and access simultaneously. Bynum said they could embrace state of the art solar efficiency on the north side of Santa Clara property, which is county owned. Bynum said through the lease buy-back program this would be an opportunity to have entities both in and out of county such as seniors, district attorney, Board of Supervisors, meeting rooms and conferences, combine clinics and ultimately have a smaller footprint. He stated it’s an opportunity to take a gesture toward the University of California system and their interest in the cogen plant. Bynum thought an ideal location would be the industrial park. Supervisor Jim ​Beard stated there were issues involving the county and the City of Loyalton and thought they should refer the matter to the Health and Social Services Committee.  Adams felt it was far bigger than social services and mentioned the “tug-a-war” over the existing building that is a partnership with the city and county. He said the concept involved a lot of county government and felt it needed to be vetted to the county family through the Government Committee, or an adhoc committee.  The Board voted unanimously to create an adhoc committee consisting of Supervisor Peter Huebner and Supervisor Scott Schlefstein.

The food bank in both Sierraville and Calpine will be curtailing operation as of October 31, 2016.  The Loyalton Food bank is NOT closing!  That rumor has been heard from locals in Loyalton and from Clio….


The Family Resource Center is operated by High Sierras Family Services, on Main Street, Downtown Loyalton.  FRC has been operating the food bank for Eastern Sierra County residents and will continue to do so! 


We, at the Family Resource Center of Loyalton, are prepared to welcome the Clients of both the Sierraville and Calpine Food Banks!  Executive Director, Tammy Muldoon, has received information from the Sierraville and Calpine food banks, so that FRC-Loyalton will be prepared to have plenty of food and produce for incoming Clients.


The FRC Food Bank-Loyalton is held bi-monthly, on the 1st and 3rd Fridays of each month.  FRC-Loyalton receives its food and produce from the Northern Nevada Food Bank, in Reno.  


We start sign ups at 2pm and start distributing food at 3pm.  Please come prepared for the fall/winter weather and with water and a snack.  We do ask Clients to plan to stay on site, after signing up for the service line.  If Clients leave the general area and their name & number are called  - We DO NOT hold places in line!  Missed names are moved to the end of the list….just so everyone is prepared. 


At the FRC Food Bank-Loyalton clients are required to fill out a simple Intake Survey, comply with our Rights and Responsibilities and provide documentation supporting their income.  We DO NOT do deliveries of Food Bank food!  We ask our Clients to "Please make your own arrangements for pick up and deliveries". 


The FRC Food Bank-Loyalton is looking forward to seeing some new faces at our upcoming Food Bank Fridays….October 21st, November 4th and November 18th, 2016 and continuing into December 2016.


For more information or questions, the community can contact the Family Resource Center @ 530-993-1110 !!  Please leave a  detailed message !! 


Thank you, Jan!
Sincerely, Kathi Bertagnolli - FRC Receptionist & Alternative Resource Coordinator

FUNERAL SERVICES for June Polastrini will be on October 15, 2016 at 1 p.m. at the Loyalton Assembly of God Church.