Letters (March 14, 2018)

• Another Great Show
• It Should Concern All Of Us
• Marijuana Agriculture Blues
• We Agree: Good Idea
• The National Shooting Gallery
• Would A Dog Help?
• Where’s The Disaster Review, Mendo?

ANOTHER GREAT SHOW

Editor,

The Anderson Valley 27th annual Variety Show was a smashing success, and we want to thank each and every one of the people who participated in making it happen.  First and foremost, we had an excellent, enthusiastic audience, without whom the show would not have been the same.  We want to extend a big thank you to our wonderful community for their continued support.

It really takes a village to pull this thing off, from the rental and initial set up of the Grange Hall, we thank Wendy Kurski, David Norfleet and Eric (the Eggman).  Thank you to Morgan and Laura Baynam for help with parking.

Thanks to the Teen Center for providing us with yummy food for the tailgate party on Friday, and for Jay Newcomer for his delicious BBQ dinner on Saturday.

Thank you to Seasha Robb, Patrick Dilley, Shira, Zoe, David, and Michael Butler for their festive, friendly, and effective help with ticketing.  We know that this is not an easy task!

Thank you to Taunia Green, the Raffle Queen, for her enthusiastic and always well dressed self and crew: Joshua Tree Spirit, Sierra Peters, Arline Bloom, Sunny Pettijohn, and Miriam Martinez.

Thank you to Cozette Ellis for the creative poster art, and to Gail Meyer for the always fantastic interior stage decorations.

Thank you to the concessions and popcorn folks: Mary O'Brien, Judy Nelson, Judy Basehore, Renee Wilson, Donna and Jeff Pierson-Pugh.  We need those treats to keep us going all night!

Thank you to our house manager crew for keeping us safe and well taken care of: Andy Jones, Roy Laird, Erick Jonas, Derek Roseboom, and Brandon Wagner.

Thank you to Mark Weaver for his videography skills.  The 2018 AV Grange Variety Show videos will be available on their YouTube channel in a couple of weeks!

Someone wanted to thank me, Robyn Spector McCallister, for writing these promotional pieces and wrangling the Green Room and the Variety Show act participants.

Thanks to the lighting crew, Eric Frege and Jimmy On-the-Spot. Thanks to the backstage crew, Joansey DeWolff, Mark Pitner, Cob, Justin Laqua, and Katie Williams.  Thanks to the sound crew, Dave Martin, John McCallister, Michael O'Brien, Evah DeWitt, and Jade Paget-Seekins.  Most of you have been here for many Variety Shows and have been actively keeping the dream alive.  We know it couldn't happen without you, and we depend on your many hours of hard work, we know it couldn't happen without you all!

Thanks to the Pit Band: Lynn Archambault, Kevin Burke, Dennis Hudson, Greg Krause, and Jennifer Schmitt, for creating the soundtrack: the lively music and hilarious and timely sound effects.

Many thanks to our amazing M.C's, Captain Rainbow and Angela DeWitt, you somehow embody class, grace, and humor all at once, and are the face and voice of this amazing collective endeavor.

And finally, thank you to everyone involved in the hilarious opening act that set the stage for such a fantastic show: Katie Williams, Joshua Tree Spirit, Misha Vega, Marcus Armando Magdaleno, Cob, Doug Read, J.D. (Justin) Laqua, Julianne Maidrand, and Denver Tuttle.

Let's do it all again next year!

Robyn Spector McCallister

Boonville

IT SHOULD CONCERN ALL OF US

To Whom It May Concern,

My name is Tai Abreu and I am currently incarcerated in the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation for the offense of PC187(a)17(a), being a special circumstance murder charge with a special allegation of murder in the course of a robbery. I was convicted under the faulty Felony Murder rule at age 19 in Mendocino County, California. There were initially two codefendants in my case, but we were separated at preliminary hearings and charged individually. Of the three individuals involved in my arrest, I am the only one to take the case to trial where I was found guilty and sentenced to life without the possibility of parole (LWOP). One of the other individuals received a plea bargain for second-degree murder and received 15-to-life as part of a plea bargain, while the third individual received 19 years and eight months at 85% for charges including voluntary manslaughter (also a plea bargain).

I was represented by the County's Public Defender's Office and Linda Thompson was assigned to my case. On her advice, I rejected all plea deals that were offered and took the case to trial. The trial lasted approximately eight hours from commencement to conviction (including jury deliberations). Once the prosecution presented its case (led by then Deputy District Attorney Kevin Davenport), Ms. Thompson was asked to call her first witness. Her response was to stand and state, "The defense rests." She presented no evidence on my behalf, called exactly zero witnesses, and stated privately to me that she felt the prosecution failed to present an adequate case and that the jury would have to find me not guilty. Her closing statement essentially acted as a scathing indictment of my character, admitting that I had done "some terrible things" but was clearly not involved in this heinous act. She didn't even address the video confession that was the sole evidence against me. During preliminaries it was challenged as having been unconstitutionally obtained in the absence of my request for the presence of counsel. During a 995 motion Judge Nelson essentially agreed with our argument (that the confession was illegally obtained), but stated that it wasn't his job to tell another judge what to do.

It is my belief that Linda Thompson not only failed to represent me, but the actions she did take constituted a "second prosecution" based on the evidence present in the transcripts of the trial.

I, along with Bruce Anderson, am seeking any individual or group willing to review the facts of my case and determine what courses of action can be taken to rectify the gross miscarriage of justice perpetrated by the Government of the State of California and the officials of Mendocino County. Please contact either myself (at the address below) or Mr. Anderson who has the authority to act on my behalf in all of these matters.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,

Tai Abreu, CDCR# T-61118

High Desert State Prison/PO Box 3030

Facility A5-215/Susanville, CA 96127

ED NOTE: I think the most effective way we can get this atrocity somehow reversed is by a committee dedicated to getting the Abreu matter back into the Mendocino County Superior Court. I hope interested persons — especially people with legal know-how — will join me to at last get justice for Mr. Abreu. Incidentally, the characterization of him as a bad person by his own defense attorney is not borne out by the facts of his life in Fort Bragg, brief as that young life was. Please contact me via the AVA and we'll meet to get rolling.

MARIJUANA AGRICULTURE BLUES

Editor,

Cannabis regulation in Mendocino County is not going well and things just got worse. Since marijuana cultivation is regulated as an agricultural crop under the Food and Agriculture Department, it is a key post. Former Modoc County Ag Commissioner, Joe Moreo, retired after 25 years in that position, was hired two weeks ago by Mendocino Supervisors to lead the local regulatory program through the local Ag Department.

Joe lasted one week. No one is talking about why he resigned. Local papers aren't covering it. Supervisor McCowen responded with something vague about them having different ideas about the nature of the job. A resignation of this significance at this juncture in marijuana legalization should be news. A newly hired veteran Yolo County Ag Commissioner for 25 years — suddenly quits.

Here is what we know. After being hired to oversee the county's cannabis regulatory program under the Ag Dept, Joe Moreo was introduced at a BOS subcommittee meeting with a Planning and Building official on hand to deal with questions from the Board. The story goes that Joe corrected the local official regarding particulars in running the program. The tension developed into an open dispute as to who had authority in the chain of command and who was the subordinate.

Joe is reputed to have said he had authority over the regulatory program, which prompted the official to claim that Joe was subordinate to the county's "main contact." Apparently the Supervisors took the side of the planning and building rep, who they said was especially familiar with rules and regs in the department.

"Joe wanted to run the show on the legalization aspect, but found out someone else was going to be the main contact," is one person's take on the conflict. When it became clear that Joe was not going to be allowed to run his own program, he quit!

Relinquishing authority as Mendocino County Ag Commissioner is not what he had in mind after 25 years as Modoc County Ag Commissioner, where his authority was not in doubt. When Carmel Angelo first contacted him about the job, he thought it would be a step up, not a step down in authority. But a mere week in county office showed him he would not be allowed to be the "main contact" in his own program.

This is especially unfortunate since Joe Moreo is known to have savored his new job, having for years harbored the dream of regulating a cannabis cultivation program under legalization guidelines. His heart was in it. Imagine that!

All the more reason it would seem important to have control over his regulatory process. But the County's "main contact"/bureaucrat in the chain of command apparently superseded the authority of the Ag Commissioner as a matter of policy. In the regulatory process for cultivation, he becomes subordinate under someone else's authority, even though he's the one doing the regulating. Isn't this backwards?

The County should be applauding a responsible Ag Commissioner who wants to build a workable program with authority over his own cannabis regulations, in concert with, not subordinate to, the county planning and building agent on call.

Given Joe Moreo's 25 year experience in regulating agriculture and the Supervisors total lack of any, it makes sense to give the Ag Commissioner the authority and leeway needed to make the program work and blossom. Instead Mendo's chain of command policy reduced the Commissioner's authority arbitrarily and without cause. So Joe resigned rather than be reduced!

Such dedicated public servants don't come along every day, and when they do, it is unseemly to turn them away. A wise regulatory system would involve knowledgeable farmers and the public in decision making as well as enlightened public officials whose platforms are underused. Mendocino County is turning off the cream of the crop with overly controlling outdated protocols that harm our community and the county. We continue to lack a cohesive forward-looking cannabis program because we are being held back by our own Supervisors. This has to change.

It's really about us. We need to raise more of a fuss. Or they'll say it didn't happen.

Pebbles Trippet

Elk

ED NOTE: The AVA not only announced his resignation, we described the circumstances as we knew of them at the time, although the particulars of whatever dispute he had with Planning and Building is interesting.

WE AGREE: GOOD IDEA

Greetings AVA:

I read with interest your recent item about Charles Hensley and it reminded me about something I've wanted to do for a long time. That is, get out there and talk to some of these people, tell their stories. When they're noticed at all it’s as statistics or booking numbers. I thought it might be a nice change if someone reminded the general public that they are actually human beings. I have in mind a series, as lengthy or limited as needed or wanted. I would spend some time with these guys, maybe even track down families and loved ones and talk about what and when they were, what went wrong, what now? Etc. I would personally be intrigued by something like that. I don't know if you agree that the readership would be interested, but let me know if you think there's any meat in on this bone. It could be a project for when I hit the bricks in a few weeks.

Also, glad to read that we do finally agree on something: that being Paul Beatty’s, “The Sellout.” Brilliant and hilarious piece of work.

Flynn Washburne

Adelanto

THE NATIONAL SHOOTING GALLERY

Editor,

The Second Amendment of the US Constitution reads: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed." In 1787 many Americans feared that the new Constitution would create a strong central government that would become a tyranny. The state militias were seen as a way of protecting the liberty of the people. The courts have consistently interpreted this Amendment to be a limitation on the federal government's right to eliminate the state militia. As a result, the federal and state governments may regulate, or even prohibit the ownership of weapons.

The Second Amendment is a constant reminder of the healthy fear the Founders had for the concentration of political and military power and the importance they invested in a citizen's army instead of a standing professional army.

Literally interpreted, the Second Amendment would protect the right of the people to form well regulated militias armed with muskets. This was affirmed in a 2008 Supreme Court ruling by Justice Antonin Scalia who emphasized that the Second Amendment is restricted to weapons "in common use at the time."

The National Rifle Association's radical interpretation of the Second Amendment protects the rights of individual Americans to act as unregulated militias armed with automatic assault weapons. Militias of one. Each against all.

America the Great has become a whack-a-mole shooting gallery — collateral damage from "The American Way of Life." And NRA stalwart, Dead-Eye Dick Cheney, says "The American Way of Life is not negotiable."

So, how can the ultra-powerful gun lobby be outflanked to regulate the sale of fire arms? Cynics have suggested raising the legal gun purchase age to 100. Anything lower will just result in older shooters.

Arming teachers won't work because there are too few of them. We should arm students instead, since the student/teacher ratio is about 30 to 1. That would significantly increase fire power to thwart would-be assailants.

Some have even suggested banning gunpowder, but the best idea yet came years ago from then KGO Radio talk show host, Jim Eason, who said guns should be banned and we'll all be armed with swords.

En Garde!

Cheers,

Don Morris, Ghost Town/Willits

P.S. Regarding your recent exposure to a lady plumber's cleavage, you wisely acted nobly by ignoring the display rather than charging the damsel with elder abuse or sexual harassment. You're lucky she didn't cut a fart. I always carry a can of Spackle and a putty knife to deal with these situations. It's a lot more fun.

WOULD A DOG HELP?

Editor:

As his staff departs for one reason or another, Donald Trump is becoming more alone and angry. I read elsewhere that he has snubbed White House tradition by not having a dog or other pet there.

I’m more than halfway serious when I say that perhaps what Trump needs is an emotional support animal — a dog? — a clean, quiet friend who would offer him unquestioned obedience and steadfast love, who would be there for him in the dark hours of the night to settle his restless and tormented soul.

And if a dog is truly man’s best friend, he would do for him what needs to be done: eat Trump’s iPhone.

Holly J. Pierce

Santa Rosa

WHERE’S THE DISASTER REVIEW, MENDO?

To the Editor,

It has been nearly five months since the tragic event that is now known as the Redwood Complex Fire changed the lives of hundreds of our friends and neighbors. The shocking ferocity in which this fire attacked our county will be remembered for generations. What is equally shocking is the near total silence from our elected Public Safety officials tasked with understanding how failures in emergency communications contributed to or may have been directly responsible for the unacceptable loss of life.

Our neighbor to the south, Sonoma County, for which Mendocino County public officials frequently mimic the same policies and procedures, has been engaged in a very public and robust deconstruction of the facts and events that did cause the same terrible and preventable deaths that very same night. Sonoma County’s newspaper, The Press Democrat, not only provided excellent coverage of the multiple fire complexes that burned concurrently within their county, but also provided leadership in the public discussion that followed in the aftermath of those incidents. The examination of the failure of Sonoma County’s Office of Emergency Services (OES) to use current technology to warn citizens, in real time, of the imminent threats that approached them that October night, has not been silenced. Additionally, the State Office of Emergency Services conducted their own investigation of the actions of Sonoma County and issued a separate report. As a result, real change is now being discussed and implemented immediately. This same level of self-examination (and state-level investigation) is not happening in Mendocino County. This begs a simple question: Why not?

Sonoma County, unlike Mendocino County, manages their Office of Emergency Services (OES) as a department within county government and is managed by civilian (non law-enforcement) personnel. Mendocino County’s OES is contained within the Sheriff’s Department and is not managed by civilian County managers. In review of the Mendocino County Sheriff’s Department website, under the section of Office of Emergency Services, the opening caption states:

“The Office of Emergency Services (OES) coordinates the overall county response to disasters. OES is responsible for alerting and notifying appropriate agencies when disaster strikes; coordinating all agencies that respond; ensuring resources are available and mobilized in times of disasters; and developing and providing preparedness materials for the public. OES provides for coordination of plans and programs countywide to ensure protection of life and property”.

In review of the above mission statement, shouldn’t it also clearly state: “to be responsible for and ensure the timely notification of county residents to the existence of imminent threats to life and property”? It is reasonable to assume that this language describes the core duty of the Sheriff’s Department OES.

On November 9th, 2017, Sheriff Tom Allman held a post incident press conference to go over the “timeline” of the Redwood Complex fire. In that presentation, the Sheriff stated “it’s important to understand the first 12 hours of the fire is when lives and the vast majority of structures were lost.” But further review shows that the loss of life occurred much faster than twelve hours. Starting with Potter Valley Fire Chief Pauli’s first call to Calfire at 11:41 p.m. and the report of fire in Redwood Valley as early as 12:50 a.m., the fire was moving at approximately 15 MPH as estimated by Chief Pauli. The Golden Rule Mobile Homes community, 11 miles northwest of Potter Valley, was ordered to evacuate at 1:50 a.m., two hours after Chief Pauli’s call to Calfire.

It is safe to say, given the locations of the fire victims, the majority loss of life occurred within those two hours. What is still unanswered is what decisions were made inside the Sheriff’s OES regarding the timing, type and nature of notifications to the public.

What was the nature of the conversations and what was the chain of command? What protocol was followed? What technology was relied upon versus what is the current state of the art? These are the same questions that have now been answered in Sonoma County.

In the same November 9th press conference, Sheriff Allman offered “I know that some people are watching this very video for the purposes of litigation, so you’re not going to hear me be critical of other departments.”

What exactly did the Sheriff mean by this? What “other” departments was he referring to? Who else would have the same level of responsibility for an emergency incident that would trigger questions of liability and exposure to litigation? What “other” department was responsible to enact lifesaving notifications to the public in the event of an emergency?

In questions related to liability, there exists two fundamentally different responsibilities related to this incident. There is the responsibility of the public safety and the clear expectation that public entities entrusted with that responsibility will ensure the delivery of that responsibility. There is also commercial responsibility, which is where you have a private commercial enterprise that, in the course of its operations, must own any impact created as a result of those operations. There is a clear distinction between the two in this situation.

Regarding communications failures, the Sheriff’s OES has had two events in the past few years that tested and demonstrated performance of the OES capabilities. Both incidents involved fiber-optic cable cuts. One in the Comptche area and one in the Hopland area. These cuts shut down the majority of emergency communication traffic each time, demonstrating the need for backup communications systems. The OES, in each event, failed in all metrics of performance. These events should have been opportunities for the OES to learn and react in ways that insured better performance in the future. Unfortunately, this didn’t happen. What differentiates the fiber-optic cut events from the Redwood Complex Fire incident in terms of the OES performance is that on that fateful October night, the OES had the opportunity to issue lifesaving alerts before communication links were lost. The tragedy is decisions were purposely made to not issue these emergency alerts, at a time when they were needed the most.

Now that Sonoma County has examined its own performance in their emergency response to the fires, clear parallels existed in Mendocino County. Wireless emergency alerts, like the Amber Alert system, where viewed as being too-broad and not appropriate for specific geographic events. This understanding was incorrect, as pointed out in the State OES report to Sonoma County. The Mendocino County Sheriff’s OES relied upon opt-in notification systems like Nixle or reverse 911 calls on landlines to notify county residences. Many people no longer own landline telephones and in many circumstances, telephone lines had already burnt. Compounding the problems of using outdated systems or systems requiring citizens to opt-in was that the first notification wasn’t sent out until 1:47 am, two hours after the fire started.

Moving forward, the events leading up to and following the Redwood Complex Fire must be understood if there is any attempt to be made at preventing such a tragedy from happening again. Silence on the part of our elected officials charged with the public safety is clearly unacceptable. There can be no after-action report that is credible if no honest review of the systems, procedures and chain of command decision making is not publicly examined. Additionally, regarding the previous question as to why there has been no State OES review of the Mendocino County Sheriff’s OES actions and performance, the answer is simple: The Sheriff, as head of the OES, must request such a review. This, apparently, has not yet happened. Hopefully it will happen soon.

Name Withheld

Ukiah