PD Editorial: Lynda Hopkins for 5th District supervisor

[sohemi]

For me, Community Officers and Community policing are not about the militarization of police, or wanting people to "understand the misunderstood Sheriff" as you put it. The concept is so the Sheriff' Department and their personnel, have a sense of Community, and they understand us and our lives. It is through cultural exchanges that we break down stereotypes and recognize the humanity in others.

JMHO

... we need More deputies on school campuses- damn, Really Lynda?!! why don't we militarize the whole damn County. ...

[beshiva]

too bad Erick Gelhaus didn't quite understand the "sense of Community"and recognize the humanity in others.
before this Deputy purged his site after killing Andy Lopez, he was ALL About Killing. and he is A Sheriff in
Sonoma County!

... The concept is so the Sheriff' Department and their personnel, have a sense of Community, and they understand us and our lives. It is through cultural exchanges that we break down stereotypes and recognize the humanity in others.

[pbrinton]

This is a masterful analysis of the local political structure. Barry if you have a best of list this should be on it (maybe deleting the time dependent part after this election.)

Patrick Brinton

Sonoma County supervisor contests will determine balance of power ...

[Barry]

This is a masterful analysis of the local political structure. Barry if you have a best of list this should be on it ....

It already is! It's a highly rated Barry's Pick. I haven't posted about this, but Barry's Picks are weighted, so that the best and most durable (not time specific) posts have a higher weight. This allows the higher weighted Picks to be displayed on the Barry's Picks widget on the right side of the website. The tabs allow you to select from my picks from the specified time frame. If you click the All tab, you'll get links to our all-time best posts. Feedback on the selections, both over-rated and under-rated is welcome.

[Lisa Maldonado]

...It does seem that there are real problems with the public pension funding ...

Once again- there are not " real problems" with the public pension issue. And I am surprised that people continue to buy the lies that Tom Lynch and Ken Churchill post here from that Koch Brothers website- " Transparent California". I have heard Ken Churchill repeatedly called out for his incorrect numbers many times publicly (including once by David Rabbit- no friend to unions)

If you wish to know the truth about pensions simply go to the Sonoma County website and the SCERA pages. All of the real numbers are there.

Lynch and Churchill bring up this phony issue repeatedly because it's the only thing they can use to try to distract voters from the fact that Lynda Hopkins is being funded by the county's business and wineries and being used as a tool for their interest.

It's the same thing that right wingers and 1%ers have been doing on the national scene and Bernie Sanders has called out this politics of distraction repeatedly. I'm surprised to see progressives and people who should know better buying the lies.

[riverosprey]

Lisa,

I took your advice (see below), and simply went to SCERA's (Sonoma County Employee Retirement Assn.) Kelly Jenkins, and asked for ALL of the pension data--Names, Position, Years of Service, Retirement Year and Monthly retirement.

If anyone wants an Excel file with all this data (it's only 300 Kilobytes---less than an emoticon), I'll send it to Lisa and Barry, they can forward it on, or I will, OR you can go to www.transparentcalfornia.com and look for yourself.

Lisa ALL that DATA matches dollar for dollar what Transparent California posts for Sonoma County, Do you really think the Koch Brothers are manipulating the data at SCERA?

Below is the top 500 pensions of the 4500 retirees Lisa, beginning with one who retired in 1991 (I removed their names). Guess how many retirees make the top 500 before Noreen Evans on SR City Council and the Board of Supervisors increased retirements by 50% without funding it?

20 retirees, who retired before 2003, are in the top 500 highest pensons, because Noreen and her peers approved massive unfunded retirement benefits in 2003. Noreen went on to represent every single bill the first wave of retiring baby boomers controlling the unions, gave her to rubber stamp, throughout her legislative career (fortunately her Democratic peers voted them down).

Sorry Lisa, I keep trying to educate you to the fact that the five fold increase in pensions, corresponds with massive cuts in all the social programs and union jobs once provided, and has put ALL Pensions on the road to insolvency, but you don't have a clue...I will not give up, I like you and I still believe one day you will learn what's going on in the real world.

kind regards, Tom Lynch
p.s. One more week you will see how smart the people of the Fifth District are. We do not need Noreen Evans failed policies destroying the last of the social programs we need for the least of thee among us.


[list of top 500 pensions removed by Barry for brevity. Contact Tom if you want the list ~ Barry]

...And I am surprised that people continue to buy the lies that Tom Lynch and Ken Churchill post here from that Koch Brothers website- " Transparent California". I have heard Ken Churchill repeatedly called out for his incorrect numbers many times publicly (including once by David Rabbit- no friend to unions)

If you wish to know the truth about pensions simply go to the Sonoma County website and the SCERA pages. All of the real numbers are there....

[rossmen]

If you want to dismiss Churchill then you dispute his numbers. Rabbit didn't want him on the county budget committee cause rabbit is on the scera board and was elected in the last years of the sweet pension deal, he's looking out for number 1. He also wants credit for fixing the pension problem. All the BOS did was borrow a few hundred million and curb spiking. Brown did far more by rolling back the increases for new hires.

Churchill could be a union ally if the union wanted to really challenge supervisor and management bloat and salaries. Transparent California publishes public salaries and has nothing to do with Churchill and Co site new sonoma. Scera dropped the expected return .25%, it's still way to high, as demonstrated by past returns.

You continue to pump out misleading propaganda. Playing the partisan political game does not contribute to the effectiveness and efficiency of government and gives the people you represent a bad reputation.

Once again- there are not " real problems" with the public pension issue. And I am surprised that people continue to buy the lies that Tom Lynch and Ken Churchill post here from that Koch Brothers website- " Transparent California". I have heard Ken Churchill repeatedly called out for his incorrect numbers many times publicly (including once by David Rabbit- no friend to unions)....

[jbox]

Lisa,

I took your advice (see below), and simply went to SCERA's (Sonoma County Employee Retirement Assn.)

Golly!! Maybe I made the wrong career choice. I wish I could get $60/hr for being retired like just about all deputy sheriffs who worked 30 years. Lots of retired county folks making $7,000 to $11,000 per month.

We do need to honor this though, that was the deal that was made in the past by our elected officials. I do see this as an unsustainable model, however, and it can't just go on the credit card. We are not the federal government, we just can't just print money.

Lisa Maldonaldo, care to comment or do we just get a little more warmed over baloney again?

[Lisa Maldonado]

Golly!! Maybe I made the wrong career choice. I wish I could get $60/hr for being retired like just about all deputy sheriffs who worked 30 years. Lots of retired county folks making $7,000 to $11,000 per month. ...

Mr Lynch- Deputy Sheriffs are NOT SEIU1021 members. The top pensions are exactly as I said - department heads, administrative managers and directors ( also NOT SEIU members) If you were truly interested in solving any REAL pension issue, you would join with seiu1021 workers who have been complaining about excessive management and administrative salaries FOR YEARS.

Your constant nonsensical ravings about " baby boomers" and "billions of dollars" and "unfunded liabilities" are just that- ravings. I guess you think that by screaming large numbers as if it were the apocalypse- you are going to distract people into thinking that "pensions" are a bigger issue than climate change, water issues, pesticides and GMOs and the lack of housing and income inequality that is destroying our country.

The words " unfunded liability" are themselves one of your scare tactics.
Most people understand the concept of unfunded liabilities as they do a mortgage- it's a big amount when you look at it all at once but you pay for it little by little.

And your argument that pensions are the reason we " can't have nice things" is equally specious.
As you may have noticed- there is always plenty of money for tax breaks for wealthy corporate wineries.

[rossmen]

I think hopkins is more realistic in her answers to these two questions, evans panders. The bos can't/won't ban roundup in soco, at least hopkins would try to start a process where the county would stop using it. Library funding is set by a percent of property tax. Evans seems unaware of this. Hopkins knows this, would check it out, and is honest enough to name higher budget priorities.

Do you want a representative who will tell you she will get what you want done, details latter, or a representative who says these are the challenges in getting what you want done, this is what is possible now, more will require this. No wonder business interests want to work with hopkins.

...I watched all the Sonoma Independent's videos (thanks to Jonathan for making them) querying the candidates and for me it's no contest--Evans gets my vote. Lynda Hopkins seems like a sincere person; very pro-organic ag and other good things, but Noreen is so much more solid, so much clearer on her positions. ...

[podfish]

I think hopkins is more realistic in her answers to these two questions, evans panders. The bos can't/won't ban roundup in soco, at least hopkins would try to start a process where the county would stop using it. Library funding is set by a percent of property tax. Evans seems unaware of this. Hopkins knows this, would check it out, and is honest enough to name higher budget priorities.

Do you want a representative who will tell you she will get what you want done, details latter, or a representative who says these are the challenges in getting what you want done, this is what is possible now, more will require this. No wonder business interests want to work with hopkins.

out of all the arguments, this seems most convincing to me. Especially with the echoes of the top-of-ticket contest, where we also have someone focusing on policy vs. someone describing aspirations. Though it's just an echo, because in the county we have the track-record vs. experience going the opposite way. The best argument I've seen that tilts pro-Evans (since I'm not impressed by all-developers-and-growers-are-evil arguments) is that if Hopkins does indeed turn out to be relentlessly pro-business-community and doesn't follow through on policies that benefit everyone else, we don't get to reverse our choice. She's good at sounding even-handed, while the other side is pretty happy to sound polarized.

[Lisa Maldonado]

No wonder business interests want to work with hopkins.

Business interests don't pick who they want to work with based on who sounds the 'most open'. They pick and give money based on who they think shares their values and will give them what they want.

Obviously gravel miners like Syar and Wineries like Taft Street and Balleto are giving money and supporting Lynda Hopkins because they KNOW Noreen Evans Can't Be Bought- but they think Lynda Evans can. As 5th district voter do you want a candidate who has already demonstrated she will stand up to big business interests or one you hope will stand up to in the special interests who are funding her?

Ask yourself why the chamber of commerce and business alliance continually pick candidates who have no record . It's because they can promise anything on the campaign trail.

Noreen Evans has a STRONG record and a LONG history of fighting for working families and our environment. She's a candidate with proven interests and experience. We don't need another Efren Carrillo.

out of all the arguments, this seems most convincing to me. ...

[jbox]

No wonder business interests want to work with hopkins....

It sure sounds like you are against business interests. Now as the head of a union may I ask you if business interests create jobs, even union jobs? But you oppose a candidate because local businesses donate to her campaign. Mind you Hopkins has stated she will not consider donations after the election. But I say Noreen has been bought like all professional politicians, look at your own union. Aren't you buying influence?

[Lisa Maldonado]

I am not against business interests unless they are trying to put their private profits and thirst for money ahead of the beauty of our environment and the public commons. I am against them having too much money and political power and the environmental consequences of having a Board of Supervisors run by Real Estate developers and Wineries.

Yes jobs are important- but the environment and nature are more important- and there are NO jobs on a dead planet. So no, I am not willing to trade our beautiful county and the Russian River for another winery and a bunch of low wage service jobs, so that we can keep building an underclass of workers who can't afford to live in their own county.

Which brings me to your second question. I am surpised that you can't see the difference between a public interest, non profit organization like a union, which fights for ALL workers and increasing the minimum wage and rent control and low income housing and equal pay and family leave...and safe working conditionns...etc. etc. ..and a private for-profit SPECIAL INTEREST like the Syar Gravel Mining plant and private wineries like Balleto and Taft Street Wine (Hopkins' supporters all!) whose only allegience is to their private profit and money for their stockholders. They are private corporations that exist to put their profit ahead of ALL ELSE. And that includes our community, our environment, our health and our public commons.

No we are not trying to buy influence. We are in this race to let voters know the realities of what is at stake and to show the people that just because someone claims to be running as an 'environmental advocate' , that doesn't mean that an informed voter should not still look behind the label and folllow the money. It's exactly what we ask consumers to do when trying to shop for green and sustainable products. And it is even more important in politics- Buyers Beware when Chevron tries to sell you "green" and Voters Beware when wineries and real estate and construction companies try to sell you 'environmentalism"

It sure sounds like you are against business interests. Now as the head of a union may I ask you if business interests create jobs, even union jobs? But you oppose a candidate because local businesses donate to her campaign. Mind you Hopkins has stated she will not consider donations after the election. But I say Noreen has been bought like all professional politicians, look at your own union. Aren't you buying influence?

[riverosprey]

Au Contraire Mon Ami Lisa...but Noreen is bought-hook, line and sinker...by the first wave of retiring baby boomers who control the unions, the management, and most elected's. The latest from the mysterious law firm in Sacramento, SEIU PAC has given Noreen $80,000 in "support". What a bunch of crap, the pot calling the kettle black, trying to say Lynda Hopkins is in the pocket of these nefarious, dastardly, special interests. Noreen talks about what she has done, not what she's gonna do...she is a failed political figure trying to get back in the trough to continue rubber stamping whatever the boomer bosses feed her. At the Roseland debate Noreen said the Fifth District includes "most of the Sonoma Coast", I had to correct her that it includes ALL of the Sonoma County Coast!

Do you really believe the voters of the Fifth District are so ignorant, to allow someone from East Santa Rosa, who has a 100% voting history of jeopardizing the pensions of older union workers (retiring before 2003), and supporting second tiers that compromise the next generations of union workers to pay for "the boomers"? Someone who has been part of twenty years of failed policies, that have resulted in the loss of tens of thousands of new union jobs, to fund retirements without rehirement. You are part of this system Lisa, with full knowledge and participation in the destruction of all the services we used to provide to the least of thee among us, and you act like you support "working families" really? You are willfully blind to the consequences of what Noreen has been part of for twenty years.

... No we are not trying to buy influence. ...

[pbrinton]

I find this anti union invective very disturbing. Certainly there have been serious abuses perpetrated by unions, usually when the upper management lost touch with their membership and became another kind of power structure similar to that which the unions were founded to oppose. But let us never forget the immense force for good that unions have been. Union members literally fought and died for child labor laws, for the eight hour day and the five day week, the minimum wage, the right to strike and countless other improvements in the lives of the working people of this country. Do you think any of these would have happened without the unions? Without the unions all the power was in the hands of the owners and the workers were helpless.

Today those social advances are being chipped away at. Union busting is common. Many workers are no longer employees, they are independent contractors without any ability to join together to promote their common cause. The working classes are being set against each other in a divide and conquer strategy. Generations are being set against each other; in the present case Tom Lynch is holding up the baby boomers as whipping boys.

We cannot, must not fall victim to this kind of demagoguery. If we are to call ourselves progressives we need to recognize that the welfare of the workers must be one of our prime concerns, and unions exist to promote that welfare. This does not make them a special interest in the sense that a profit seeking entity is a special interest. Neither are they solely concerned with wages and working conditions. They understand that all the jobs in the world will not help if the environment is destroyed. The union movement has been in the forefront of the battle to recognize the dangers of climate change. They are a strong voice against the kinds of international trade agreements that enrich the already rich and victimize workers everywhere. They fight on behalf of underclasses of all kinds.

As to the pension issue, this is being seriously misrepresented. It is not the pensions of SEIU members that is burdening the system, it is upper management pensions and those of public safety employees.

Upper management have a built in advantage when negotiating benefits. It is very disruptive to a public agency to lose a top manager, so something like an arms race occurs as agencies give more generous packages to retain important staff, and other agencies have to follow suit. What happened locally was a reflection of what was happening all over the country, and many jurisdictions are now feeling the effects.

Public safety employees have very strong lobbying power, and have traditionally enjoyed very generous retirement benefits. They also enjoy a great deal of public support; it is very difficult politically to oppose them, especially in our post 9/11 security state.

Pension plans are difficult to administer as the amounts that will be needed and the available funds are uncertain. Statistical information in the form of actuarial predictions based on historical data provide some guide as to how long retirees are likely to live and also how much the funding sources will be likely to yield, but both are uncertain. Pensions are funded (in the case of public agencies) from employee contributions which are invested, yielding dividend income, and tax revenues. In good economic times extra money is generated over and above what is needed, while in hard times the expenses may exceed the income. The skill in managing such systems lies in trying to as much as possible average out the ups and downs. The unfunded part refers to the fact that we do not know where the money is going to come from to pay some portion of the debt. In periods of economic growth it is easy to assume that growth will continue, and there will be enough to cover what is needed. Unfortunately as we have seen we cannot count on sustained growth.

This is undoubtedly a problem, and the solutions to it may well be painful, but it hardly seems fair to hang its entire weight around Noreen Evans' neck. Certainly it would have been better if someone had called a halt to the folly, but never underestimate the difficulty of going against the general prevailing consensus. People inside the financial world warned about the impending housing crash long before it happened and were ridiculed at best and often lost their jobs for doing so.

Without knowing the context of the vote, and what kind of debate and public input preceded it, it is very hard to judge how much to blame someone for how they voted on this issue. It seems that the vote in question was a unanimous vote of the Santa Rosa City Council, which means that those who say the issue is particularly relevant because it directly impacts the present financial problems of the county are mistaken. Noreen's vote only impacted the city of Santa Rosa. And curiously enough, I understand that at least some of the other participants in that unanimous vote are now Linda Hopkins supporters. Does that mean we can expect the same kind of policies from her too?

I suggest that this issue is being used as a smokescreen, and that it is not one on which to base one's vote.

Patrick Brinton

[spam1]

I find this anti union invective very disturbing. ... Without the unions all the power was in the hands of the owners and the workers were helpless.

I have tried to articulate that there is a true difference between Public and Private unions, the most obvious is there are no owners controlling the money issues in public unions. Do you agree there is a difference?

Public safety employees have very strong lobbying power, and have traditionally enjoyed very generous retirement benefits. They also enjoy a great deal of public support; it is very difficult politically to oppose them, especially in our post 9/11 security state.

Agreed.

Pension plans are difficult to administer ... Unfortunately as we have seen we cannot count on sustained growth.

And that is why almost all businesses have moved to "defined contribution" and puts the risk burden on the employee. But, it is the only feasible way a business can sustain because unlike governmental organization, a business cannot force future customers to pay. This is also limited in CA, but in Illinois, they just had a huge tax increase on homes to cover pension costs. Would public sector employees accept defined contribution (401K style)?

This is undoubtedly a problem, and the solutions to it may well be painful, but it hardly seems fair to hang its entire weight around Noreen Evans' neck....

What we must demand in our leader is the ability to eschew the popular decision and make a hard call to protect the future against unsustainable choices. So, no, it's not entirely unfair to point out the case where Evans didn't do this. But it is fair to point out Hopkins hasn't faced this choice.

[podfish]

And that is why almost all businesses have moved to "defined contribution" and puts the risk burden on the employee. But, it is the only feasible way a business can sustain because unlike governmental organization, a business cannot force future customers to pay. This is also limited in CA, but in Illinois, they just had a huge tax increase on homes to cover pension costs. Would public sector employees accept defined contribution (401K style)?

a little OT again, but why should they? for well-paid financially literate people it may be (jury's still out) that 401K works as end-of-life income support. But removing pensions altogether because of the problems funding them is as bad as solving the health-care system's funding problems by denying care to people who can't afford it. Oh wait, that's exactly what we see proposed!! never mind then.

seriously, I'm with Lisa on this part of it - it looks like burdening public employees with the consequences of bad public policy. Maybe instead of worrying that public employees are being taken care of, we should look at how to get everyone else taken care of too. The hell with the concept of 'the deserving' vs. 'the moochers' which underlies so many political issues today.

[pbrinton]

I have tried to articulate that there is a true difference between Public and Private unions, the most obvious is there are no owners controlling the money issues in public unions. Do you agree there is a difference?

I think that public employees need to have the right to collective bargaining. I was married to a high school teachers who, being a good teacher, would occasionally cross swords with the administration, and more than one time her union stood behind her when otherwise she would have been railroaded. Just because it is a public institution does not change the dynamic between employer and employee.

Patrick Brinton

[Michael Anthony]

Published first on Wacco and again [with many edits] in today's Press Democrat letters to the editor.

Letter pasted starting here:
_____________________

Fear-mongering politics

EDITOR: Last week, I received four mailers supporting Noreen Evans for supervisor paid for by the Service Employees International Union Local 1021 Candidate PAC. I also received two mailers supporting Lynda Hopkins for supervisor.

The SEIU/Evans mailers exploit negative fear-mongering words like “WARNING” (in capital letters) and name the source of that fear — Hopkins, a 32-year-old mother with two children. Hopkins’ mailers don’t contain any words that evoke fear and don’t name or attack her opponents but rather excite positive ideas.

Fear-mongering attack campaigns no longer serve the greater good of the United States, and locally we should do everything we can to stop this detrimental routine. Evidently the SEIU, as seen by these actions, wants to perpetuate this destructive tradition.

Noreen Evans, Lynda Hopkins, Marion Chase, Tim Sergent and Tom Lynch are all caring members of our immediate community who aspire to serve the 5th District citizenry. As such, they deserve to be treated respectfully and welcomed into the democratic process by emphasizing their positive characteristics. If we can achieve this, then, by example, we will change our country for the better.

MICHAEL A CARNACCHI, Sebastopol

[juna]

Mudslinging campaigns make me nauseous and deter me from voting for the person who the mudslingers support.

Although I find this very interesting on Lynda Hopkins latest mailer with the PD editorial. (located on the mailer's bottom left between the highlights)

"She suggested using Open Space District Land already paid for with taxpayer funds to help mitigate requirements for tiger salamander habitat to encourage needed projects such as affordable housing."

Don't we currently give substantial permit discounts and expedite the permits to developers of affordable housing ...and now they want our taxpayer Open Space District Land to mitigate tiger salamander requirements ????

Hmmm, I am not liking this. Could be a real indicator of Lynda's true direction?

[Richard Nichols]

If you look carefully, you can spot where the real mudslinging comes from. The only reason that charge is out there against Evans is that the Hopkins people put it out there. It is a form of tactic used widely by right wing republicans, that is, accuse the opposition of doing what you doing. All Evans has done is point out where contributions and endorsements come from. That is just stating facts, not mudslinging.

Not surprised by hopkins position on open space. Developers just don't want to have to give up land for enviro reasons.

Mudslinging campaigns make me nauseous and deter me from voting for the person who the mudslingers support....

[Lisa Maldonado]

I am not sure when publicly detailing the supporters of a candidate and the possible implications of that support became "fear mongering". After all, we as consumers are constantly exhorted to "look behind the label' when food and other consumer products are labeled "green" or "sustainable". Why would we abandon those critical thinking skills when it comes to political claims?

...The SEIU/Evans mailers exploit negative fear-mongering words like “WARNING” (in capital letters) and name the source of that fear — Hopkins, a 32-year-old mother with two children. Hopkins’ mailers don’t contain any words that evoke fear and don’t name or attack her opponents but rather excite positive ideas.

Fear-mongering attack campaigns no longer serve the greater good of the United States, and locally we should do everything we can to stop this detrimental routine. Evidently the SEIU, as seen by these actions, wants to perpetuate this destructive tradition....

[Richard Nichols]

So I gather "warning" on cigarette packs is ok, but not to point out possible political implications for candidates.

So here is a warning: Noreen Evans has gone up against the big shots in the past, and won, and she will do it again, if what big money wants is against the public interest. WARNING WARNING, WATCH OUT.

I am not sure when publicly detailing the supporters of a candidate and the possible implications of that support became "fear mongering". ...

[rossmen]

What a ridiculous thing to write. Examples of Noreen and her supporters going negative abound. Take effrans endorsement of hopkins, he wrote that evans was an unresponsive representative, she responded that it was the personal revenge of a predator. If evans and hopkins do make it to a runoff as predicted, I hope evans cleans up her act. I didn't vote for either of them and I will vote in november. Evans needs to defend her record from seemingly legit critique. She should have been able to blow carrillo away with examples of her collaborative approach with local elected officials.

If you look carefully, you can spot where the real mudslinging comes from. The only reason that charge is out there against Evans is that the Hopkins people put it out there.....

[twodogs]

The bad news is that tomorrow's election likely will likely result in a run-off between Lynda Hopkins and Noreen Evans in November.

Why is it bad news?
Because followers of this site likely will be deluged for the next six months by the approximately 10-15 participants who must have writer’s cramps believing the more they wrote their well-worn attacks (on the What do you think of Lynda Hopkins & Lynda Hopkins for 5^th District Supervisor strings) that they’d be able to convince the unconvincable of the righteousness of their candidate and the evilness of their opponent’s choice.
Maybe three or four missives per person would have sufficed, you know, squeezing in a cogent argument in a few graphs. But after two months or so of this back-and-forth game of tag-your-it, War & Peace would have been a shorter read. Some folks just like to hear themselves write, and write and write. After awhile, no one is listening anymore

[Barry]

Sweet shot:

[beshiva]

me thinks me doth protest too much!

The bad news is that tomorrow's election likely will likely result in a run-off between Lynda Hopkins and Noreen Evans in November.

Why is it bad news?
Because followers of this site likely will be deluged for the next six months by the approximately 10-15 participants who must have writer’s cramps believing the more they wrote their well-worn attacks (on the What do you think of Lynda Hopkins & Lynda Hopkins for 5^th District Supervisor strings) that they’d be able to convince the unconvincable of the righteousness of their candidate and the evilness of their opponent’s choice.
Maybe three or four missives per person would have sufficed, you know, squeezing in a cogent argument in a few graphs. But after two months or so of this back-and-forth game of tag-your-it, War & Peace would have been a shorter read. Some folks just like to hear themselves write, and write and write. After awhile, no one is listening anymore

[Michael Anthony]

On October 11, 2010, Noreen Evans accepted $1,500 from Monsanto. Here is the link; Noreen Evans and Monsanto.

[mouse]

According to that janky website, the "contribution" in 2010 is the only contribution she has received from anyone in 6 years. Doesn't seem altogether accurate considering she just ran for Board of Supervisor.

What does seem correct though is that "environmentalist" Hopkins took $15,000.00 from Syar Industries gravel mining this year.

https://www.sonomawest.com/sonoma_we...8ca94a9d1.html

On October 11, 2010, Noreen Evans accepted $1,500 from Monsanto. Here is the link; Noreen Evans and Monsanto.