Our small county has little impact on the federal and state election. But we control the entire local election.
Red White & Blueprint has a saying: “Drain Your Own Swamp”. That doesn’t necessarily mean that we need to oust the currently elected officials – it means that we need to get better at selecting candidates on future elections.
That starts now.
It’s not enough to read the campaign statements, go to the campaign forums or count signs around the county. We have to get to know the people running. We need to listen to understand their platforms, we need to understand their values, we need to listen to what others have to say about them (positive and negative).
We need to vote for people who listen to WE THE PEOPLE once they get into office.
When there are people who have grave concerns about specific candidates – we need to listen. It’s not enough to excuse certain actions because the candidate has an explanation – we need to vote for ethical people. If we don’t, then we will simply continue to get the same swamp we’ve always had.
If you have read my posts, you know where I stand on this years local elections. But I am sharing my decisions again here and I want to encourage you to take the time to really dig into discussions with people.
The decision to vote for any candidate lies with each of us as individuals – but if we can’t talk about the real issues, we will continue to vote for unethical individuals who don’t listen to WE THE PEOPLE.
Board of Supervisors
We have 5 BOS members in Tehama County – each representing approximately 1/5 of the county population (by district). These individuals make up the executive and legistlative branches of our county and hold some judicial powers as well. They oversee the entire operation of the county and make decisions about how our county operates. LEARN MORE ABOUT BOS HERE
For about 8 years, the board was made up of 4 men and 1 woman (Candy Carlson). If you’d attended any of the meetings during that time, it was easy to see that the men were closely aligned and often took a stand against Candy. In recent years, 2 of the men stepped down and men who replaced them are not aligned with the other 2.
The 2 remaining men are up for election this year. My personal opinion is that both men are good men, but they have failed to listen to the people of the county for too many years and that has hurt their reputation with many. I believe they try to do their job well and in the interest of what they believe is right.
The county government employees are represented by one of 6 unions. In 2020, the County Administrator (who is appointed by the BOS and is the top staff member) was up for contract renewal. 5 of the 6 employee unions voted not confidence in this person. Many employees shared their concerns with the BOS either in writing or at their regular meetings, and the Board held a special evening meeting which allowed members of the community to come speak alongside the employees. MANY attended and spoke, and at the end of the meeting, the 4 men voted to renew the contract, Candy voted against and shared not only her conversations with employees and the public, but her own troubled interactions with the Administrator, who refused to provide important information to her and often refused to meet with her at all.
I personally met with some of the men to discuss my own concerns about several appointed individuals. One of them told me point blank that if someone complains about one of his employees, that person loses credibility – he will protect his employees at all cost.
I’m sorry, but that simply does not sit well with me. Our elected officials have a responsibility to listen to us. THEY REPRESENT THE PEOPLE – not just the employees. If one of their employees is doing a bad job and multiple people have a complaint, they should be taken seriously and the issue needs to be addressed.
For this reason, the two men up for re-election have opposing candidates. (My district is not up for election this year, so I am not voting for these positions)
Dennis Garton is the sitting Supervisor. Email: email@example.com https://www.co.tehama.ca.us/board-of-supervisors/district-3/
His opponent is Pati Nolan. I don’t know Pati well, she seems very nice but I’m not sure I agree with all of her issues or the way she has spoken about other elected officials (not just the one she’s running against). Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
So I’m not sure how I would vote here. I think if I were in this district, I would start by sitting down with Dennis Garton and asking what he will do to change the way he is viewed by the community. Will he listen to the people he represents? If not, I’m not sure he’s the right choice.
Bob Williams is the sitting Supervisor. He is well liked by some of his district and engages with those people often. Others in the district don’t feel like he represents them at all. Email: email@example.com https://m.facebook.com/supervisorbobwilliams
Matt Hansen is a Lieutenant at the Red Bluff Police Dept. He is retiring at the end of this year and wants to make a difference in the community. He has a lot to say about how Mr. Williams has handled district 4 issues. https://hansen4tehama.com/
The auditor/controller is the chief accounting officer for the county and is responsible for things like the county budget, payroll, accounts receivable & payable, assets & liabilities, and required financial statements. LEARN ABOUT A/C HERE
The current A/C is retiring. The second in command, Krista Petersen, is running as replacement. She has been with the county for nearly 20 years and has been training for this role. I met her briefly at a candidates forum – we spoke on personal matters and she was incredibly kind to me. That said, I was disappointed in how she treated her opponent during the public debates, at one point wagging her finger and chastising the other.
Candy Carlson (current district 2 Supervisor) is Krista’s opponent. I’ve personally spoken with Candy on many occassions and while we are not of the same political party, she has always checked her party politics at the door and has been very unbiased in our discussions. She listens and she is open to changing her mind.
Candy has shared publicly and in private conversations about her concerns about the county budget for years. She has many years of experience in accounting and has the benefit of having been on the Supervisor end of the county budget, so she has a different perspective than Krista.
I will be voting for Candy because while I believe Krista has the experience to do the job, her behavior towards Candy has shown she has no interest in listening to either the citizens of the community or the Board of Supervisors.
I’ve spoken a lot about my views on the sheriff’s candidates. I want to dig in even deeper here because there are critical issues people need to understand before they make their selection.
The current Sheriff, Dave Hencratt, is retiring. Sheriff Hencratt is a good man and a good cop – he is very well respected in our community and by my husband and me.
Background on My Involvement
My husband, David Greer, retired as a Lieutenant from the Sheriff’s office in 2018, not because he was ready to be done, but because the environment and morale were so toxic that it wasn’t worth staying. If you’re interested understanding more – contact me, I’m happy to talk about this.
He went to work as a part-time reserve investigator at the RBPD focusing on standards and ethics (in large part, this was to keep his badge active so he could run for Sheriff in 2020). MANY current employees (including several on Kain’s current campaign) met with my husband and were eager to be part of his campaign team. Their concern? Dave Kain, current Captain and 3rd in command, was also going to run and they did not want that because of the way he treats others.
Due to several very severe family health issues, when it came time to start a committee and file paperwork for the campaign, David made the decision not to run.
Shortly after, Chad Parker threw his hat in the ring. Chad and I had began having discussions – largely because he wanted to better understand what Tehama Citizens for Freedom was all about and how he as Sheriff could support our efforts. Through these discussions, I got to know Chad better and learned about his thoughts on changing the Sheriff’s office. And I liked what I heard.
The issues our family was facing changed and David became available to be more involved. Chad and David have talked about David returning to the Sheriff’s office as 2nd in command – and David has agreed. He wants to make a difference – he wants to see the agency return to the family environment it used to be – he wants to see our county return to the safe community it used to be.
I say all this because I want you to understand that yes, we have skin in the game, but I also want you to understand WHY. Both of us are happy to answer any questions about our involvement. But what I really what you to know is that we didn’t back Chad only because our views on Kain were negative – we back Chad because of his own ideas and values.
There is absolutely NO benefit to David returning to work. It doesn’t impact our finances. It takes him away from home and creates a toll on our family. If we did not believe wholeheartedly that our county desperately needs a change in leadership, he would continue in his retirement, enjoying our property and family, traveling in our RV and simply living life.
I fully support my husbands desire to make a difference for our county and I pray he gets the chance to do that under Chad’s administration.
Chad has great plans – I encourage you to get to know him and decide for yourself if you like what he wants to do. You can read about his plans and watch his videos: https://chad4sheriff.com.
He is also happy to talk and answer questions – so feel encouraged to reach out to him! firstname.lastname@example.org
If you’ve followed me at all, you know I have major concerns about Kain. My concerns continue to build the closer to election we get. I’ll share all of this below, but I also want to encourage you to reach out to me if you have any questions – email@example.com.
I add this first because this is the biggest issue. And while there is one incident we keep talking about, it’s not just one incident – it’s a pattern of behavior that is known by law enforcement throughout the county.
The issue is what’s called a Brady violation. Learn More Here
You may have heard him state he has been exonerated. What’s the truth?
Here are the facts:
- In 2002, Kain was part of a drug task force investigating a certain individual. He and another officer falsified the reason for making a car stop on that individual.
- Other officers involved were disturbed by this incident and reported it.
- The District Attorney’s office did an investigation.
- The DA sent the investigation to the Dept of Justice for review.
- The Dept of Justice responded with 2 recommendations:
- They did not think criminal charges were warranted (because they were protecting an informant)
- They believed the incident should be discoverable under Brady v Maryland. LEARN MORE ABOUT BRADY HERE
Below is a copy of the DOJ letter (which I received directly from the DOJ via a public information request – you can submit your own request at: https://oag.ca.gov/contact/publicrecords_form)
I personally obtained this letter directly from the DOJ via a public information request (you can read that here). This is public information folks!
Why is this letter so important? Because it shows that the officer was willing to violate someone’s constitutionally protected rights.
Let me pose a hypothetical theory to you. What if you were the driver who was pulled over? An informant told the officer you had drugs. You don’t – but instead of providing honest information about the real reason for the car stop (the informant info), the officer manufactured a cause saying you were not using your wipers in the rain (even though it wasn’t actually raining). The officer searches your car and finds nothing. Would you be angry? Is this not a violation of the constitution? Yes – it is!
Kain has provided information that he considers to be “exoneration”. One is a letter from his current boss stating Kain was cleared of the incident. The other is a letter from county counsel. Neither of these letters are exoneration. Any evidence proving his innocence would be sent to the DOJ and they would issue the exoneration. Short of that – NOTHING ELSE MATTERS!
To add insult to injury – Kain also states that Dave Greer “cleared him of this incident” when he performed his background investigation to be hired by the Sheriff’s office. Kain stated publicly (even put a video of himself on his FB) that he was given authorization to read his background file because of the accusations.
There are a few things that need to be addressed here:
- The investigator doesn’t “clear” the individual of wrongdoing. He provides information to the sheriff so he can make an informed decision about the applicant.
- Was the letter available to the investigator? If not, then the background doesn’t matter.
- The investigator is prohibited from commenting on the background – IT IS CONFIDENTIAL!
- When a potential employee agrees to a background, they sign a waiver stating they understand they are never allowed to read the file. Why? Because the investigator needs to be able to assure the people he speaks with that nothing they say will get back to the individual in question.
If anything, the fact that Kain read his own background file simply shows he continues to practice unethical behavior. Couple that with the fact that his initial response when the letter was released on social media was to deny it completely and call the other candidate a liar, I am more convinced than ever that having him as sheriff would be an absolute nightmare for our county.
Kain often touts his relationship with some of the community organizations. The ones I’ve heard him mention do not feel the same way.
Board members of 2 of those agencies are part of Chads campaign, as is a retired CPS worker. These individuals (4 total) have all shared that Kain does not have a good relationship with any of the organizations.
Some of the employees of one of those agencies asked for a private meeting with Chad, which I attended. They expressed individually their disappointment in the current lack of engagement by our sheriffs office.
501c3 agencies are prohibited from ANY involvement in politics. The employees and board members are not allowed to publicly talk about the candidates (positive or negative) in representing those orgs. So they cannot make formal statement to say that one candidate lies about their involvement. They can speak privately and of their own views.
This leads back to ethics. It is not ok to say you have a strong relationship with someone who cannot rebut that statement when that relationship does not exist.
If you know someone who works for these organizations, you can speak to them one on one.
I sense these individuals are all ethical and want to do the right thing. Unfortunately I think some of them do not understand what the citizens want (and at least one just doesn’t care).
These positions will be up for election in 4 years – others will be up in 2 years. I want to encourage people to consider running. Look into the roles, think about your own qualifications (most require nothing more than residency) and really consider it.
I’d be happy to support you and help however I can!
- Assessor – Kenneth Brown
- Clerk/Recorder – Jennifer Vise
- Disrict Attorney – Matt Rogers
- Tax Collector – Parker Hunt
Yes – some of this is harsh. Honestly, there is a lot more I could share about the subject of ethics in regards to this individual. The list is long and disturbing. Even more disturbing is that I’ve learned other officials in our county have been complicit in attempting to keep us, the people, from knowing about some of it.
So I’ll say it again – I want ethical people in positions of power in our community. It starts with voting for people who will do the right thing FOR US – no matter what.
Ask questions. Don’t settle. Vote well.
And if at all possible – VOTE IN PERSON!