Site search
sponsored by
| Welcome, Guest |
|
| LOGIN | Become a Member | What's This? |
Please enter the following information:
| Email or Screen Name: | |
| Password: | |
| Remember Me | |
|
Forgot Password?
Didn't receive your verification email? Become a Member |
|
Jobs
Real Estate
Classifieds
Search for homes by MLS, classified listings, rentals, and much more!
Even though it’s getting colder outside, the political season is heating up in the Fourth Congressional District.
On Thursday morning, Rep. John Doolittle’s communications director called to complain about a story that appeared on page A3 of that day’s newspaper. Laura Blackann said the story was only a half-truth since it did not explain why Nevada County received nothing from a $65.9 billion appropriations bill. She was adamant while pointing out that you need to ask your congressman for a piece of the action.
Our conversation led to the editorial that appeared in Friday’s paper. It began with the explanation as provided by the congressman’s office on why we were shut out of this appropriations bill. The editorial ended with a plea to make sure this doesn’t happen next year.
Some have interpreted that editorial as a criticism of our local elected officials. That was certainly not the intent. It was simply an effort to relay what the congressman’s office thought was vital information and to complete the story.
Blackann also had other complaints about our coverage of the Republican congressman. She feels that in general we have not been fair to Rep. Doolittle, specifically citing a story we did earlier this year.
The story appeared in the Aug. 5 edition. Rep. Doolittle was visiting the area while Congress was on its summer break. We had arranged for an interview with him and waited patiently as the interview got pushed back two or three times, which wasn’t a big deal.
Once the congressman and his small entourage arrived, we were informed that we only had 20 minutes for an interview, a fact we mentioned in the story. Blackann thought it was unfair to include that information in the story. I thought it was important for our readers to understand that we didn’t have time for follow-up questions. In other words, I was addressing the very concern that Blackann had with the story that appeared in Thursday’s paper.
But Laura’s concerns are my concerns. It’s popular these days to characterize the media as liberal or having its own agenda. While this is a difficult accusation to avoid in our politically polarized environment, it’s one that troubles me nevertheless.
As a result, we’re going to be stepping up our coverage of Rep. Doolittle as well as his opponents in the upcoming House race. We’re going to try and be more thorough so we avoid being accused of only running stories that advances a certain point of view.
<B>About five hours after I finished talking</B> with Laura Blackann, I was listening to Charles Brown, a Democratic candidate for the Fourth Congressional District House seat. The retired Air Force lieutenant colonel was speaking to fewer than 20 supporters at the Elks Lodge in Grass Valley.
His challenge in this predominately Republican district that stretches from Roseville to Alturas is formidable. Doolittle is a member of the House leadership team and a longtime incumbent.
Brown is an interesting candidate. He spent 32 years in the Air Force as a helicopter and airplane pilot, is a Vietnam and Gulf War I veteran, has a son who is doing his third tour of duty in Iraq, and is a former Republican who claims the party left him.
The Roseville man said he officially switched parties about a year ago although he had been drifting away from the GOP for a few years.
He joins Lisa Rea, another Democrat, and Mike Holmes of Auburn, a Republican, as challengers in this race.
Overall, this contest holds the promise of being one of the most interesting House races in this district in years. There’s a solid group of challengers here while at the same time Rep. Doolittle has been linked in some interesting ways to former super lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who is under investigation by the Justice Department.
<B> Ken Waterhouse, the new owner</B> of the Grass Valley Mobile Home Park, wanted to meet with me on Tuesday after he addressed the Board of Supervisors about the concerns that have been raised by his purchase of the park.
Although he was diplomatic about it, he couldn’t have been too pleased that I described him as a cold-blooded speculator in my previous column. He pointed out to me that he didn’t have to travel Tuesday from Roseville to the Rood Center to promise that his company would not to evict residents who are having trouble with the proposed rent increases of $50 per month to start.
Waterhouse said his parents were blue-collar workers who did not have a lot of money, so he could relate to the concerns of the working poor. If they had problems paying the higher rent, something would be worked out, he promised more than once. The owner or manager of more than 60 mobile home parks also said he’s never evicted anyone who was having problems paying the rent.
Waterhouse said that he has to raise the rent to cover the increase in property taxes, which amounts to $40 per lot, per month. He also said he agreed to pay for around $500,000 in improvements that were made before the park was acquired. He also admitted that the timing for the rent increase was unfortunate since Christmas is just around the corner. He said state law, however, requires him to notify the residents of a rent hike within 90 days after the purchase, which was closed in October.
He’s right about not having to face his critics. He could have stayed in Roseville and let his employees take the heat. On Tuesday, he made the 50-mile drive to speak for three minutes before the Board of Supervisors. The previous Wednesday he faced a crowd of anxious residents and spent more than an hour talking about how he plans to manage the park as well as taking questions about the rate hikes.
I do admire his willingness to keep returning to this area even though he’s been criticized. But nonetheless the rent will climb next year and the following year for the 104 residents of that park. For some it will be $100 per month in two years while others will see it climb by $125 per month in that same period of time.
That is still a considerable amount of money for many of us, especially those on a fixed incomes and those people constitute a considerable number of that park’s residents.
<I>Pat Butler is the editor of The Union. He can be reached by e-mail at patb@theunion.com or by phone at 477-4235.</I>
On Thursday morning, Rep. John Doolittle’s communications director called to complain about a story that appeared on page A3 of that day’s newspaper. Laura Blackann said the story was only a half-truth since it did not explain why Nevada County received nothing from a $65.9 billion appropriations bill. She was adamant while pointing out that you need to ask your congressman for a piece of the action.
Our conversation led to the editorial that appeared in Friday’s paper. It began with the explanation as provided by the congressman’s office on why we were shut out of this appropriations bill. The editorial ended with a plea to make sure this doesn’t happen next year.
Some have interpreted that editorial as a criticism of our local elected officials. That was certainly not the intent. It was simply an effort to relay what the congressman’s office thought was vital information and to complete the story.
Blackann also had other complaints about our coverage of the Republican congressman. She feels that in general we have not been fair to Rep. Doolittle, specifically citing a story we did earlier this year.
The story appeared in the Aug. 5 edition. Rep. Doolittle was visiting the area while Congress was on its summer break. We had arranged for an interview with him and waited patiently as the interview got pushed back two or three times, which wasn’t a big deal.
Once the congressman and his small entourage arrived, we were informed that we only had 20 minutes for an interview, a fact we mentioned in the story. Blackann thought it was unfair to include that information in the story. I thought it was important for our readers to understand that we didn’t have time for follow-up questions. In other words, I was addressing the very concern that Blackann had with the story that appeared in Thursday’s paper.
But Laura’s concerns are my concerns. It’s popular these days to characterize the media as liberal or having its own agenda. While this is a difficult accusation to avoid in our politically polarized environment, it’s one that troubles me nevertheless.
As a result, we’re going to be stepping up our coverage of Rep. Doolittle as well as his opponents in the upcoming House race. We’re going to try and be more thorough so we avoid being accused of only running stories that advances a certain point of view.
<B>About five hours after I finished talking</B> with Laura Blackann, I was listening to Charles Brown, a Democratic candidate for the Fourth Congressional District House seat. The retired Air Force lieutenant colonel was speaking to fewer than 20 supporters at the Elks Lodge in Grass Valley.
His challenge in this predominately Republican district that stretches from Roseville to Alturas is formidable. Doolittle is a member of the House leadership team and a longtime incumbent.
Brown is an interesting candidate. He spent 32 years in the Air Force as a helicopter and airplane pilot, is a Vietnam and Gulf War I veteran, has a son who is doing his third tour of duty in Iraq, and is a former Republican who claims the party left him.
The Roseville man said he officially switched parties about a year ago although he had been drifting away from the GOP for a few years.
He joins Lisa Rea, another Democrat, and Mike Holmes of Auburn, a Republican, as challengers in this race.
Overall, this contest holds the promise of being one of the most interesting House races in this district in years. There’s a solid group of challengers here while at the same time Rep. Doolittle has been linked in some interesting ways to former super lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who is under investigation by the Justice Department.
<B> Ken Waterhouse, the new owner</B> of the Grass Valley Mobile Home Park, wanted to meet with me on Tuesday after he addressed the Board of Supervisors about the concerns that have been raised by his purchase of the park.
Although he was diplomatic about it, he couldn’t have been too pleased that I described him as a cold-blooded speculator in my previous column. He pointed out to me that he didn’t have to travel Tuesday from Roseville to the Rood Center to promise that his company would not to evict residents who are having trouble with the proposed rent increases of $50 per month to start.
Waterhouse said his parents were blue-collar workers who did not have a lot of money, so he could relate to the concerns of the working poor. If they had problems paying the higher rent, something would be worked out, he promised more than once. The owner or manager of more than 60 mobile home parks also said he’s never evicted anyone who was having problems paying the rent.
Waterhouse said that he has to raise the rent to cover the increase in property taxes, which amounts to $40 per lot, per month. He also said he agreed to pay for around $500,000 in improvements that were made before the park was acquired. He also admitted that the timing for the rent increase was unfortunate since Christmas is just around the corner. He said state law, however, requires him to notify the residents of a rent hike within 90 days after the purchase, which was closed in October.
He’s right about not having to face his critics. He could have stayed in Roseville and let his employees take the heat. On Tuesday, he made the 50-mile drive to speak for three minutes before the Board of Supervisors. The previous Wednesday he faced a crowd of anxious residents and spent more than an hour talking about how he plans to manage the park as well as taking questions about the rate hikes.
I do admire his willingness to keep returning to this area even though he’s been criticized. But nonetheless the rent will climb next year and the following year for the 104 residents of that park. For some it will be $100 per month in two years while others will see it climb by $125 per month in that same period of time.
That is still a considerable amount of money for many of us, especially those on a fixed incomes and those people constitute a considerable number of that park’s residents.
<I>Pat Butler is the editor of The Union. He can be reached by e-mail at patb@theunion.com or by phone at 477-4235.</I>
Ads by Google
Other Top Items
|
Related Articles
|
Most Recommended Articles
|
Comments
You must be logged in to leave a comment.
GET MORE NEWS
