Voting – Nov 8 2022

Tehama County Polling Locations

Drop Box Locations & Info

The League of Women Voters put out a voters guide which explains the National and state positions & propositions.

Easy Voter Guide

I’ll be voting Republican for those that are party designated – below are my thoughts for the non- positions and propositions and how I plan to vote.

State Superintendent of Public Instruction

Lance Christensen has had massive support from conservative mama bears! He’s my choice.

Tony Thurmond (current Sup) – endorses by Nancy Pelosi, Alex Padilla and the Democratic Party.

California Supreme & Appellate Court Justices

California Court Justices are appointed by the Governor. Newly appointed judges are listed on the ballot during the next gubernatorial race. This is a YES /NO vote for a 12 year term – they will be listed again at that time. Take the time to read about the individuals and decide whether you want to vote to keep them in their roles. Keep in mind that if Brian Dahle (R) wins the election, he would be in the position to appoint the new justices.

JusticeAppointed byMy Vote
Patricia GuerreroGavin Newsom (D)NO
Martin J. JenkinsGavin Newsom (D)NO
Joshua GrobanJerry Brown (D)NO
Goodwin LiuJerry Brown (D)NO
Stacy Boulware EurieGavin Newsom (D)NO
Laurie M. EarlGavin Newsom (D)NO
Harry HullPete Wilson (R)YES
Peter KrauseJerry Brown (D)NO

State Propositions

I’m in agreement with all but Prop 31 in the Reform California Voter Guide. Decide for yourself what you think is important – my decisions are below.

PROP 1: Reproductive Freedom

My Vote: NO – Prop 1 isn’t about healthcare – it’s about politics. This proposition allows for abortion up to and including birth. I personally believe life begins at conception. I understand their can be circumstances when difficult decisions need to be made, but I am not in agreement with a blanket law allowing abortions at all stages of pregnancy.

The questions you have to ask yourself:

  • When does life begin?
  • Does this proposition allow for abortion after that point?

PROP 26: In -Person Sports Betting in Tribal Casinos

My Vote: NO – This gives more power to 5 wealthy SoCal casinos that are behind this proposition. It hurts small business.

PROP 27: On-line Sports Betting

My Vote: NO – Online gambling creates too much opportunity for youth involvement.

PROP 28: Funding Arts & Music Education

My Vote: NO – Arts & Music are important, but I’m not convinced this is the right solution.

There is NO formal opposition to Prop 28. Opponents argue that the measure would limit schools’ options to navigate future budget crises.

“Proposition 28 would require the state to set aside 1% of revenue in the general fund for arts education in K-12 public schools.”

Carl DeMaio, chairman of Reform California, believes Prop 28 would lead to budget cuts in core education programs like reading, writing, and arithmetic.

“Prop 28 sounds good on the surface — more funding for arts and music — but the language is fatally flawed to allow diversion of funding from other education programs that are already not meeting the performance goals we’ve set,” says DeMaio.

He further notes, “California’s public schools are failing and it isn’t because we aren’t offering enough music and arts programs – it is because we have a total lack of accountability within the bureaucracies that run these school districts.”

PROP 29: Kidney Dialysis Clinic Requirements

My Vote: NO – dialysis patients are they will not be able to get proper treatment. Prop 9 is too restrictive. Dialysis patients, nurses & doctors support NO on this proposition.

PROP 30: Income Tax on Millionaires for Electric Cars

My Vote: NO

“The state of California recently ruled that 90% of rideshare vehicles must be electric vehicles by 2030. Lyft is trying to force the taxpayers to foot the bill – rather than spend their own corporate money to support their drivers and comply with the new law.”

“Prop 30 revenue will be put in a special interest lock box overseen by an unelected board, redirecting general fund monies traditionally used to support California’s public schools, teachers and students.”

PROP 31: Yes or No to Banning Flavored Tobacco Products

My Vote: YES – Prop 31 makes it more difficult for youth to get their hands on addictive tobacco products. (Note: the major tobacco companies oppose prop 31)



Below is a link to the local candidates who will be on the November ballot, including contact info.

Tehama Candidates on the Ballot

Ask the hard questions – share answers with your community.

Questions for City Council & School Board Candidates

IF ANY CANDIDATES are willing to answer the questions on the above link, I would be happy to share those answers here!

RBJUHS District Board

  • Barbara Klotz is a conservative who has been supporting our group and coming to rally’s. I support her candidacy! She’s the only one I know anything about.

Red Bluff City Council

I don’t live in the city limits so I don’t get a vote, but their decisions still impact those of us who call Red Bluff home.

Who I would vote for if I were in the city limits:

  • Kris Dieters is a current councilwoman and is aligned with the majority of our local political beliefs. There is a talk about a recent decision made by Ms Dieters and 2 other councilmen in regards to Dog Island Park being a designated homeless encampment. Before you write them off, talk with them. The 3 that voted this way are and have been representing the people of Tehama County as we would want to be represented. Get the full picture before voting out the good ones!
  • Pat Hurton is a long time resident of Red Bluff, retired law enforcement officer, and pastor. He is also the current chairman of Christian Peace Officers of Tehama County. He has been attending the council meetings for quite some time and has been disappointed with some of the decisions made in the past. He sees the need for good, local representation and wants to make a difference.
  • Johanna Jones is also a current councilwoman. She is often aligned with Ms Eyestone. However – compared to those listed below, she is a less problematic choice.

Who I would not vote for:

  • Danielle Eyestone is a current councilwoman and former mayor pro tem. She was removed as mayor pro tem last year when she became visibly and verbally angry toward the other councilmen about an incident that she believed was a violation of the Brown Act (which is designed to ensure public transparency). She ended up walking out of the closed session meeting. The DA ultimately determined no violation had been committed. However 3 of the other councilmen (Parker, Dieters & Gonzales) determined her behavior was not appropriate for someone leading the council; they voted to strip her of her title as mayor pro tem. KRCR Article
  • Cody Strock ran for council 2 years ago. He is young, which is not in and of itself a bad thing! But his grand ideas, which sound good on the surface, are not realistic. When problems were pointed out to him during the last election, he became defensive and argumentative. Ask the very hard questions – but make sure you have the same conversations with some of the other sitting councilmen (Kris Dieters, JR Gonzales, Clay Parker).
  • Colton “Magi” Douglas Epperson is clearly connected to Strock. Check him out on FB.

Measure E

PLEASE VOTE NO! Measure E would repeal and replace City Council ordinance 1063, which was developed through an extensive Committee process that ultimately provides accountability among government officials and commercial cannabis businesses within Red Bluff.

Contact City Council members Kris Dieters, JR Gonzales, Clay Parker to better understand the impact of Measure E.

Measure E Text


Cannabis dispensaries, distribution, delivery, cultivation, manufacturing, microbusiness, and testing laboratories are currently allowed. In fact, three dispensary permits have already been approved for operation within the City of Red Bluff.

Passage of Measure E would rescind and replace City of Red Bluff Ordinance 1063 and while it would not invalidate the permits and development agreements that the City has diligently been working on for the past two years, current permittees may not be re-permitted at their annual review under Measure E.

Measure E has several legal deficiencies that would subject it, and the City, to legal challenges and at least partial invalidity:

(1) the residency preference would subject commercial cannabis permit applicants potentially violating our Constitution’s Commerce Clause, Privileges and Immunities Clause, and Equal protection Clause,

2) the restrictions on criminal background of applicants could be unconstitutionally vague; and

(3) the process for revoking commercial cannabis permits may violate a permittee’s procedural due process rights.

Finally, there are ambiguities within the Measure that will complicate implementation if passed and Measure E does not reflect best practices for commercial cannabis permitting ordinances.

Measure E would have a detrimental financial effect on the City because the initial fees will likely not cover the City’s costs of processing applications, requiring a subsidy from the General Fund. Additionally, Measure E does not provide for public benefit payments in connection with their applications. The financial loss to the City if this Measure is passed is estimated to be approximately $400,000 annually. Furthermore, Measure E allows consumption lounges within the City, while City of Red Bluff Ordinance 1063 does not allow consumption lounges.

The City Council is opposed to Measure E. It is unnecessary since the City has passed Ordinance 1063 which already permits cannabis operations within City limits and urges the public to vote No.

s/Kris Deiters
Councilmember Kris Deiters, Mayor

Letter to the Editor RB Daily News

“This is a misguided and ill-informed effort to remove and replace Red Bluff’s recently adopted Cannabis Ordinance. The language contained in Measure E to replace the ordinance has already been rejected by the City Council, after legal counsel determined that several clauses are non-enforceable and would subject the city to expensive and lengthy litigation.”


In February 2022, the City Council of the City of Red Bluff adopted Ordinance 1063 which authorized Commercial Cannabis dispensaries, manufacturing, cultivation, delivery, and microbusinesses within the City of Red Bluff.

Measure E seeks voter approval to repeal and replace Ordinance 1063 with an ordinance that would amend the Zoning Chapter of the Red Bluff Municipal Code to permit and regulate commercial and personal marijuana or cannabis activities.

Measure E would not invalidate the cannabis storefront permits or development agreements currently in place pursuant to Ordinance 1063, however the permit renewal process would be modified and there is no guarantee that the current permit holders meet Measure E standards for re-permitting.

Measure E would allow the following state commercial cannabis license types to operate in the City: storefront retail, retail delivery (non-storefront), microbusiness, manufacturing (including volatile), distribution, testing, cannabis events, and indoor cultivation. It would also permit cannabis consumption lounges if permitted by state law.
Measure E allows 1 storefront retail business, delivery retailer or consumption lounge for every 5,000 people in the City.

Measure E establishes a “first come, first served” process for selecting applicants to obtain a retail or consumption lounge cannabis permit. The City must select applicants based on a ranking system of “social equity” factors which prioritize applicants living in or within 10 miles of Red Bluff for the last two years.

Cannabis businesses must be at least 500 feet from schools, day care facilities, and youth centers when established.

Retailers may operate in the central, historic, and general commercial zoning districts, and industrial districts. Other commercial cannabis businesses are allowed in certain commercial or industrial zones, though cannabis event organizers may be located in any district when operating as a home occupation.

Measure E creates a permit procedure that gives the City Planning Director authority to approve applications. There is no requirement for Planning Commission approval.

The initiative requires permittees to maintain odor control systems but does not require security systems. It provides the City cannot be liable for its permitting decision, but it also prevents the City from requesting applicants indemnify the City for claims others may bring due to the applicant’s conduct.

Measure E allows personal cannabis cultivation inside a dwelling or accessory building that complies with state and local building codes. However, it does not create a mechanism for inspections to ensure compliance with such codes. Although outdoor personal cultivation is prohibited, the City Council may allow it.

Measure E allows up to 6 plants to be grown indoors per property unless cultivation is for medical use. It then allows up to 12 indoor plants per qualified patient or primary caregiver.

The City estimates that the Measure E will result in approximately $400,000.00 in lost revenue annually due to the lack of Public Benefit Fee provisions in the initiative.

Measure E can be approved by the voters by a majority vote of the ballots cast on the measure.
Measure E was placed on the ballot via a Proponent Driven Ballot Initiative.

Measure F


Measure F Text

Impartial Analysis and Tax Rate Statement


Our elementary schools are the most important asset in our community and should be our number one priority. From higher achieving students, to greater neighborhood safety and improved property values, quality schools make a difference. Teachers and staff do their best in educating our children, many classrooms and school facilities at the Red Bluff Union Elementary School District are outdated and inadequate to provide students with the schools they need to succeed. This is why our children need your YES vote on Measure F!

Although our elementary schools have had some major renovations recently through the successful passage of Measure C, our work is not done. It’s time to finish our plan to fully renovate all our schools and provide quality education to our local children. These aging schools need major classroom and infrastructure improvements to preserve the quality of education provided to local children. By investing in our schools, we can meet today’s safety, technological, and educational standards and better our community.

If passed, Measure F will provide funding to make facility improvements at local elementary schools including:
• Repairing or replacing leaky roofs
• Replacing outdated heating, ventilation and air-conditioning systems
• Upgrading inadequate electrical systems
• Replacing deteriorating plumbing and sewer systems
• Making health, safety and handicapped accessibility improvements
Measure F makes financial sense and protects taxpayers.
• All funds must be spent locally and cannot be taken by the State.
• By law, spending must be reviewed and annually audited by an independent citizens’ oversight committee.
• Funds can only be spent to improve our schools, not for teacher or administrator salaries.

Measure F upgrades and renovates old and inadequate school facilities, improves the education of local children, and maintains the quality of our community.


s/ Kate Grissom

s/ Ron Clark

s/ William R Moule

s/ Richard DuVarney

s/Adriana Griffin


Tina Peters is the Mesa County, Colorado Election clerk.

She believed the the election system, including the Dominion machines used in that county, was secure and invulnerable to attack.

But she had numerous complaints that said otherwise. Enough so that she hired a forensic auditor to dig into the machines.

What she found is shocking.

Selection Code is a documentary tracking her discoveries and showing the lengths corrupt people will go to cover up their acts. They upended her life.

All it takes for ever to triumph is for good men to do nothing.

This wasn’t just the 2020 general election. She also found corruption in a local city council election.

Folks – WE HAVE DOMINION MACHINES in Tehama County!!!!

Our election clerk and our Board of Supervisors believe they are safe. We know they’re not.

So what do we do? How do we convince them we/they need to dig into the elections data? How do we convince them to get rid of the machines? How do we get them to validate the recent elections? Why is asking to verify the validity of our elections such a bad thing?

Learn more about election fraud:

Corrupt and Unethical – How Do You Know?

On the last Station 19, one of the fire chiefs who is known to be cruel and unethical is now a candidate for mayor.

Many of the fire guys are frustrated when they see him on camera talking about how he knows so much about the inside, he knows how to fix things and he’s already doing what needs to be done. Sound familiar?

One of the guys, frustrated, says “What is the point of anything we do when this stupid city and this broken country and this absurd world seems to be just fine with ‘Dixons’…. we keep giving them platforms, power and government positions. Isn’t not trying to stop him like giving him a platform?”

I’ve been hearing about corruption and unethical actions of certain people in this community for years. Somehow they seem to end up getting promoted or elected to higher positions.

Why do we allow this? I hear people talk all the time about how sick they are of representatives and leaders who don’t listen to their people. And yet when we have a chance to weed them out, we don’t do it.

Why is it that we don’t demand goodness from the people in decision making roles? We keep electing them. We don’t speak up when we know there is wrong being done.

Next week, I plan to share my ballot – not because I think you should vote the same, but because I think it’s important to talk about why we vote.

You have to make your own decisions about how to vote. But I hope my willingness to talk about why I’m voting certain ways will encourage you to do the same.

I don’t really know how much our vote truly counts at the state or federal levels, but I do believe our vote counts locally. So let’s vote well. Let’s vote for people whose ethics are not questionable. Let’s vote for people who have a history of listening to people.

Qualities of an Election Candidate

I’ve been attending the candidates nights, which honestly have been a bit disappointing. One of the questions at one event was “what characteristics do you think the person in this position should have?”

This is a question we should be asking ourselves of every single position on the ballot. Honestly – for me the answer is the same across the board.

  • Strong moral values comes first: Integrity – Honest – Transparency – Sincerity – Compassion
  • Interest in the concerns of EVERY citizen they represent – including their competition, including those who are less than desirable, including those with whom they disagree. And treating those individuals with respect.
  • Elected officials take an oath to uphold and defend the constitution – I want to know they take this seriously (not just the 2nd amendment – but the whole constitution). I hear too often “I have to follow the law”, “I have to do what the state tells me”. No – you first have to know the constitution and respect it as the supreme law of the land. Period.

I don’t care if the candidate is a great public speaker. I don’t care if they have more experience. I don’t even care if they’ve had some personal life issues.

For too long, I have voted for people because I liked what they wrote in their candidate statement. Yes – that’s probably gonna tell me something, but it’s written to entice me – it’s advertising, that’s it. If I don’t sit down and talk with them, will I know what they really think?

Over the last couple of years, I’ve chatted with quite a few of our currently local elected officials. I’m disappointed in some of them – as are a lot of people.

But WE voted for them! So now it’s time for me to rethink how I make the decisions on which box to check on my ballot.

There are more candidates nights coming up. I’ll be attending them not to hear what they say from the podium, some of them are just better speakers – does that make them better human beings? No! In some cases, it just makes them better public fibbers.

What I Don’t Want in a Candidate

Apathy – Indifference

I had emailed one of the candidates a while back and I spoke to her briefly at one of the forums. I gave her my business card and after I walked away, I watched her hand my card to an associate. I don’t know what she said, but the associate rolled her eyes and the official nodded her head.

I suppose there’s an off chance she wasn’t speaking about me, but that’s not the first time I’ve felt her lack of interest in my concerns. Her email responses have given me the same impression. They’re short and snippy and basically have the tone that my concerns are not important to her.

Unfortunately, she doesn’t have an opponent or I would very seriously be talking with them.

Disrespect – Passive Aggressive

Some of the candidates are being unbelievably disrespectful to their opponents.

I understand having disagreements with the other persons platforms. I understand looking back at past experience and actions that have been taken. But using a public forum to try to embarrass or belittle your opponent will not win any points with me.

One of the candidates for controller/auditor is Krista Peterson, currently the 2nd in command of that office. She has worked there for 19 years, literally training for this position. On paper she might seem like the logical choice.

Her opponent is Candy Carlson, current Board of Supervisors member (which is an elected position that makes the decisions about how our county is run overall).

I’ve had several opportunities in recent years to have lengthy discussions with Candy. Long before she put her name in for this position, she had been publicly stating that she has concerns about the way our finances are being managed. She has an opportunity to make changes that will help the BOS make better decisions and I commend her for wanting to do so.

During the candidate forums, Krista chastised and belittled Candy because Krista doesn’t think that the controller’s office is doing anything wrong.

I take issue with this For 2 reasons:

  1. Candy is a current elected official who has been doing her job well and is respected by many – she is voted into office by the people and is responsible for the overall budget of the county. In asking deep questions about the finances, she is looking to protect her constituents. If Krista truly thinks the finances are properly handled, she should have simply offered to sit down with Candy and discuss the issues.
  2. Candy is also a citizen. If she has concerns about the practices of an elected official, it is her RIGHT to seek answers. No elected official should ever speak down to a citizen. When that citizen has a concern – it should be addressed. It’s really that simple.

History of Bad Behavior

I support one of the candidates for sheriff in large part because I know the history of bad behavior in regards to the other.

Chad Parker wants change for that office. he has great ideas about how to affect that change. Don’t get me wrong – I think he has the experience to do the job, but if the other candidate had integrity, it would be a toss up.

Dave Kain is currently 3rd in command at the SO and seems to think he deserves to be sheriff because he’s in the line of succession. But he won’t even acknowledge the concerns that many of us have.

Both my husband and Chad left the agency because the environment had become incredibly toxic. Approximately 40 other people in the last 4 years have also left. That’s more than 30% of the entire agency staff.

People need to hear this – no one wants to talk about it publicly because they don’t want to be thought of as whiners. But how do you know that there’s a morale issue if you don’t listen to the people who are suffering?

Kain would have us believe employees left because of salary. That’s simply not true – we know this because we’ve spoken with numerous people who have left. Yes some went to other agencies at a higher wage, but that’s not why they started looking.

He claims the exit interviews all support his line of thinking. Well, he actually did my husband’s exit interview – he was told about the concerns, he didn’t acknowledge a single one.

I have a huge list of issues like this – true concerns about whether he will continue to bully and belittle people if he becomes sheriff. He is doing it now during the campaign – so why wouldn’t he continue it in office?

It makes me sick to think people have bought into his ability to con them.

He’s led a dirty campaign and continues to treat my husband and Chad with disrespect. I don’t want someone like that in any elected office.


If you are like me and have historically voted based on who has more name recognition or a better candidate statement, I want to challenge you to rethink how you’re voting. Ask yourself questions and have conversations with others.

What are qualities you think are important in a candidate?

What issues with current candidates do you see?

Do you want to see continuity in the way an office is run? Or do you want to see change?

I’m sharing my concerns because I think people need to know more about who‘s on the ballot. I want to hear from you too. Email me confidentially at if you want to share information about a candidate.

AND VOTE IN PERSON! Learn more here:

Tehama County Republican Central Committee

The Republican State Central Committee (RSCC) is the governing body of the California Republican Party.

Each of the 58 California counties have a county central committee – which governs the local Republican Party and appoints delegates to the RSCC.

Committee members represent the county designated district in which they live.

The Tehama County central committee holds meetings once a month. They are looking for citizens to become central committee members.

You do not have to be a Committee member to attend the meetings.

Precinct Strategy

Most of the committees have fewer than 50% of their seats filled. Learn about the power of the committees here:

Live Local Field Manual

I got my copy of the Live Local Field Manual (LLFM) a couple days ago and have been flipping through it a little – digging into the first section this morning, which is about individual accountability and seeking God every day.

If you’re not familiar with Live Local – I encourage you to learn a little about the concept.

The main goal is to combat globalism by living local. We do that by getting involved.

“The Declararion of Independence states that the government derives its ‘just powers from the consent of the governed’. Live Local is about ensuring the consent has consequence, so that government is just.”

Jarrin Jackson, LLFM

Living Local isn’t just shopping local or showing up to community events. Where we fail immensely – and trust me, I’m pointing the finger at myself here – is getting involved in our government & schools.

“Consent of the governed” simply means that if we don’t object to the decisions our elected officials make, we consent to them.

But do we even know what decisions they’re making?

Did you know that in 2020, the Tehama County Board of Supervisors we’re drafting a “Penalty Ordinance”? This would allow them to hire enforcement and hearing officers to cite and fine citizens for not wearing a mask and businesses for not enforcing the governors “guidelines”.

How do we know what they’re doing if we don’t read the agendas and go to the meetings?

How do we know what they think if we don’t sit down and talk with them?

Candy Carlson holds a townhall meeting every month to hear from her people. Until recently, the other supervisors were not doing this.

Do you know who your supervisor is? Each county has 5 districts & supervisors.

Learn About Local Government and Find Your Supervisor Here

If they hold townhall meetings, GO. If not, make an appointment to meet with them.

We need to:

  1. stop voting for people who don’t have our best interest at heart
  2. hold our elected officials accountable for the decisions they make – especially when those decisions go against the will of the people

Elections: How Do You Decide?

Every election, I pull out my ballot and fill in the circle next to the name of a person or next to a Yes or No on some issue.

These are HUGE decisions!

But honestly, I usually didn’t give those decisions the time and energy they deserved.

Whose name did I remember from signs around town? Which propositions seemed appropriate? Didn’t I see a commercial or a letter about that? Did my party support it?

We vote people into office to made decisions for us. If they think it’s good – maybe it is.

Or maybe we voted the wrong people into office.

I listened today to interviews of certain candidates running for local office. One says a lot of right things – he is well rehearsed and seems knowledgeable. The other says good things too, but he doesn’t seem to have as much support.

So it would make sense to vote for the first guy right?

But how do you know the smoothe talkin, educated, experienced candidate isn’t just a good actor?

We’ve seen it enough – people sweet talk us during campaign season, they do everything right, they say everything we want to hear – then they take their oath and everything they said during campaign season goes out the window.

If you vote the way I used to – name recognition, and what sounds good – please shift gears this years.

Do your homework. If one person sounds too good to be true, maybe find out why the other candidate is so passionate about running against him.

Read the details of the propositions. Don’t just read the pro and con blurbs – I mean really get into the details.

And if you have questions – ask. If you don’t know someone to ask – reach out to me. I may not always have the answers and I’ll never tell you how to vote – but I’ll certainly tell you why I’m voting the way I am.

No Matter What It Costs

This election year is unlike any other for me. Over the last 2 years, we have learned so much about our world, and in particular, our country.

The covid chaos has taught us how much our government has deceive us.

The 2020 election opened our eyes to election fraud and the great lengths people will go to win.

“There are people willing to stand up for other people no matter what it costs them.”

Johnny – Dirty Dancing

But the biggest thing for me has been seeing how many people have their heads in the sand. And I’ve been one of them for far too long.

There are so many individuals in local office (both elected and appointed), that have gotten there by taking advantage of the system and of the people. They do not have Tehama County citizens best interest at heart.

I never cared before. I just trusted the people running our county were doing the right thing.

But now I can’t unsee what I’ve seen. I can’t I hear what I’ve heard.

So this election, I am much more alert to the people running running for office. I want to know how they’ve conducted themselves in their own lives and in their work.

Some of our candidates have not been known to act with integrity. And yet at the first sign of public information that shows that, people jump in to defend that person.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, —

~from the Declaration Independence

Integrity is important. We have to be willing to get out of our comfort zones and have more detailed discussions about difficult issues. We have to be willing to identify weaknesses in our candidates.

That doesn’t mean we have to condemn them for those weaknesses. But we should expect them to overcome them. We should expect them to learn from their past mistakes and do better in the future.

We are all complaining about the people in office across the country and in our county who are doing bad things. But guess what folks – WE PUT THEM THERE!

It is OUR responsibility as voters to put the right people in office – not the one with the most experience, not the better public speaker, not the more popular person. We have to find the ones who will do what’s right and represent the individuals they govern, even when it’s hard, even when it goes against their own personal interests.

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

~from the Declaration Independence

Listen to what people say – even if it’s hard to hear.

If you know that a candidate has a history of wrong-doing – reach out to me confidentially. Let’s find a way to get that information on the table.

How that person responds will tell us whether he or she is truly acting with integrity.

I want to encourage you to read the Declaration of Independence excerpt below. Our founding fathers understood that people become accustomed to suffering and that we would be more willing to suffer wrongdoings than to fight to correct them.

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

~from the Declaration Independence

It’s time for change friends. We don’t necessarily need to establish a new government – we just need to get the right people into office and then hold them accountable to the oath they take.

It starts with us. It ends with us.

Integrity in Our Community

When I first started this group, our BOS was considering a penalty ordinance for individuals not wearing masks and businesses not enforcing them.

I was proud of our board for listening to our hearts and not instituting that ordinance. I truly believed we had a largely ethical and moral community leadership overall.

Since then, more and more information has come to light that has completely destroyed that belief – creating a passion in me to work towards educating our community and helping people get involved in our county.

Integrity: the quality of being honest and having strong moral principles

Integrity is a critical component to anyone holding an elected or appointed government office, as well as for being an officer, prosecutor, etc. People aren’t perfect, we all have failings in their lives – we are all just human.

But how do we handle things when we mess up? Do we own it and work towards improving? Or do try to cover it up and act like we didn’t do wrong?

To me – that’s what integrity is all about. It’s not just trying to do the right thing – it’s also having the willingness to acknowledge our failures.

Over the last 2 years, people have brought to my attention concerns they’ve had in the running of our county. Concerns at every level of local government.

Initially, I dismissed most of the complaints because they came from people I thought were being petty or had wrong motives.

But here’s the thing – even if they are petty and have wrong motives, they aren’t necessarily wrong!

The more I learn, the more disappointed I am in how unethical the people are who manage our local lives. We elect people into positions of authority and responsibility – people who represent us in making decisions about our community.

Shouldn’t we be able to ask them anything BEFORE we vote? Shouldn’t we want potential problem areas made public BEFORE we vote? Shouldn’t we be digging into their lives so we know we are voting for the person who will accurately and effectively represent us with integrity and intention?

Yesterday, information was made public about one of the candidates for sheriff. The person who shared this information had an anonymous account. The initial response from the candidate in question was to deny it and accuse the other candidate of dirty politics.

Some people understand the gravity of the issue – others immediately trusted the candidate in question and offered him support – without doing any research into whether the allegation was true and without understanding the weight of the issue.

It was that easy to convince people.

Why? Because we don’t like confrontation. We don’t like hard conversations. We don’t want to be part of the yucky stuff.

Where has this gotten us? We feel bad for the person “being attacked” and so we go vote for them. And we end up with a bunch of people in office who have a history of deceiving us!

Politics are ugly because people have a history. The question isn’t who has more history – the question is who handles their own history with integrity.

There are several positions in Tehama County that have more than 1 candidate. Don’t just watch for who has the better sign – don’t make your decision on who presents him or herself better. Dig in when issues come up and go learn the truth.

Ask questions of everyone! Someone has answers.

Tehama Tomorrow: Petition Drive

Tehama Tomorrow is circulating a petition to add a measure to the November ballot.

The measure would include:

  • Limit BOS to 3 terms (12 years)
  • Establish rules assigning work to BOS members & limit them from serving more than 2 terms on any commission, committee, etc.
  • Require each Supervisor to hold quarterly town meetings in their districts
  • Increase BOS compensation levels to median of nearby counties (currently salary is $12,540 per year)
  • Require county to live stream meetings

I think these are all good things. Read the full document below and let me know if you see any red flags.

Sheriff’s Office Salaries & Staffing Issues

More than 40 employees have left the operations & administration divisions of the sheriffs office in the last 4 years. Many of these were long time employees who understood the salary issues. I have personally spoken with or know others who have had direct conversations with a lot of those who have left, as well as several who are still employed at the SO.

As I understand it, salary is not the only, nor even the primary, reason for the exodus. Morale at the SO has been very low for quite a few years and has gotten increasingly worse in recent years. This issue isn’t discussed – IT NEEDS TO BE!

There are a lot of questions we should be asking of the prospective sheriffs and as citizens who have a critical interest in the future management of our county law enforcement, we should not be criticized for asking the hard questions:

  • Why has the SO been giving $1M per year in annual salary savings back to the county? And for how long?
  • How do the SO salaries compare to other county employee salaries?
  • What other options are available to manage the staffing issues?
  • What actions have been taken and why?
  • What would the new sheriff do differently?
  • What is and will be done to address morale issues and identify other reasons for employee retainment challenges?

It would also help to really talk with former employees, each of the BOS members, and other county employees who might be familiar with these issues.

I also encourage those who are concerned about the salaries to do some research. Transparent California is a website that makes government employee salaries available publicly. You can filter by Tehama County and 2021 – then search by “sheriff” to see the salaries. Is it less than other agencies? Yes. Is it not a livable wage in Tehama County?

Below are the Tehama County SO salaries so people can quickly see the 2020 salaries. Please note that if a certain individuals salary seems to be significantly lower, it means they were not paid for the entire year, but you can get a good idea of the salaries being paid. Now – while I do agree that our entire county needs to increase wages, I also understand that we do not live in a rich county.

That MUST be taken into consideration when we address salary issues. We are not going to compete with Shasta County.

The median household income for the US is $65,712.

The median household income for Tehama County is $44,514. Shasta County is $54,667.

I personally believe our BOS and County Administrator can and should do a better job of managing the county budget and finding new ways to increase income for the county. Salary issues will not change until our county budget management changes.

In the meantime, our sheriff and his key management team are going to have to find creative ways to retain staff, hire new staff, and provide necessary services to our community.

The question we as citizens need to answer ourselves is who will be able to best utilize the current staffing and find creative ways to bring in new employees?

Talk to the men running – call them and ask to meet. Talk to ex-employees (seek them out – they’re not hard to find, Chad is one, my husband is one, there are 4 more on Chads campaign, there are several that have gone to work at the RBPD and other county agencies).

Oct 26 – District 1 Board of Supervisors Interviews

The Board of Supervisors held interviews for the vacant District 1 Supervisor position on Tuesday, October 26th.

This position will be on the ballot in June. I believe several of the candidates are planning to run. If you are in District 1, I strongly recommend you watch the entire interview process to help you make a decision. You will learn a lot about the candidates.

The following applicants were invited to be interviewed:

  • Robert Burroughs
  • Daniel King
  • William Moule
  • Justin Donaldson (chose not to interview)
  • Terry Knight
  • Dale Morgan
  • Jason Browne

You can read thier candidates statements here: Agenda Packet

The interview & selection process was awkward but certainly entertaining.  
There is no formal process for how a supervisor gets appointed in situations like this.  The only rule is that the supervisors must appoint a person within 90 days of the vacancy, if not, the governor appoints one.  
None of us – or the supervisors – wanted that.  

Ultimately our board agreed to run the position as a PT hire (which is ridiculous) and accept applications. They also allowed the administration (their staff) to select questions to ask during the interview process.  The board was not allowed to ask their own questions.  

They allowed public comment before the interview – which again, seems ridiculous.  How can we comment if we haven’t heard their responses?  
Overall, the questions were mostly from a staff perspective (something you’d ask an employee), not a public perspective and not from the supervisors perspective.  

The Q&A happened – the supervisors took a “poll” – each writing down their 1st choice:

  • Bob Williams & Dennis Garton – Daniel King
  • Candy Carlson – Bill Moule
  • John Leach – Jason Browne

The vote requires a majority – so 3 votes to pass.

After some debate, which was largely focused on a statement from Mr. King that he had cleared 1 day a week for the job (Candy expressed her concern for that), Supervisor Garton moved to open public comment again.  

It really is a FT job, and there were at least 4 other very good candidates.  
Seeing they were at a stalemate, they sought direction from counsel, who stated that once they make a motion, they must make a decision or the selection moves to Newsom.  She also stated they were allowed to make 3 motions.  

So Dennis motioned to appoint Dr. King.  Bob 2nd.  

  • Candy motioned to appoint Moule, no 2nd (so it doesn’t count).
  • John motioned to appoint Jason Brown, 2nd by Candy.      
  • One more motion would force a vote for all 3 items.  There would not have been consensus and it would go to Newsom.

After what was a visibly difficult decision, Bob Williams spoke and said King was his #1 choice and he didn’t want to select his #2, but that his #2 would be Moule – so he suggested Candy motion again.  

She did – Bob 2nd – chairman Garton directed staff to call the role (in reverse order of the motions) – she called Role to appoint Moule, Dennis, Candy & Bob all voted yes – John voted no.  Moule is now District 1 Supervisor.  

You can listen to the recorded audio on the county website of watch the whole 4 hour meeting on Liz Merrys Facebook – links below.  

Audio: County Recording
Part 1 – 1st few hours

Part 2 – Ending

BOS Letter re Executive Director, Health Services Agency

Item 19 of this Tuesday’s agenda is the request for approval and authorization to sign an Employment Agreement with Jayme Botke for the position of Executive Director, Health Services Agency.

In light of the current issues relating to mandates and restrictions being set forth by the state and federal government, I strongly urge you to delay filling this position on a permanent basis until we, your constituents, can be assured that her values and beliefs on covid mandates and issues align with ours.

The majority of our county residents strongly oppose these mandates and we are actively fighting against them.

We strongly oppose ANY official who does not agree with the following:

  1. Covid mandates are ineffective and not supported by science. Numerous studies have shown masks to be ineffective and shutdowns do more harm than good.
  2. Covid mandates do not take into account very serious health and financial consequences of individuals, businesses and communities.
  3. Areas that have the most strict mandates also have the most severe covid cases. Case in point, Los Angeles has 25% of California’s population but has 35% of California’s Covid cases and over 40% of the deaths.
  4. Masks, testing and shot mandates deny persons their constitutional right to make an individual decision about his or her own medical treatment. Doctors in our county are already denying treatment to patients who have not gotten the shot and employers are already terminating employees who choose not to get it.
  5. Safe and effective outpatient treatment protocols are being used by doctors throughout the world. Our local doctors are not even aware these protocols exist. You can learn more here:

Our public health Director should be open to supporting our county in our efforts to bridge the education and communication gap on all of the above issues.

My understanding is that Jayme Botke agrees with and supports all mandates.

While we wish her no ill will, we do believe it is critical that our Health Director supports the efforts of our community and not place additional burdens on local businesses, employees, families, and students.

I urge you to reconsider this decision and seek an alternative solution.

Please – do not enter into contract with Jayme Botke. Delay the decision pending further discussions on her stand on the above mentioned issues and consider other options.

Our county cannot bear another official who sides against us.


Shawn Greer

Red Bluff Daily News

I was confronted by a man last week after he overheard a conversation I was having about our rally on 8-14.

He let it be known he was against our stand and proudly stated he was a columnist at the RBDN, as if that somehow made his opinion more valid than mine.

I truly believe news should be unbiased. The daily news has proudly announced to the world – they are not.

This horrible man attended our rally and perused our website – picking and choosing information to use against us, calling our rally a “pro-disease rally” (because we are against masks and the shot), calling us extremists and ending his article with “if you listen to these people or to the base of the Republican Party, you just might end up very ill or even dead”.

Honestly, I wouldn’t give this moron the time of day. He clearly came with an agenda of collecting anything he could to write a hit piece against us.

I’ve had it with our media and I want to ask you to do two things:

  1. If you have a subscription, consider canceling it. They clearly don’t understand that the majority of Tehama County are aligned with our thinking.
  2. Write a letter to the editor, or call or go see him. Let him know how you feel about their writers deliberately attacking Tehama citizens.

We have to take a strong stance. We cannot support businesses that so blatantly disregard our views and flat out lie about the information we share.

If you have ideas about how to continue our efforts, get in touch with us at

BOS – IMPORTANT MEETING! (Draft Resolution in Support of Voter Rights)

Our county Board of Supervisors meets tomorrow, Tues, Aug 17 for their regular meeting.


I would like to encourage you to attend this meeting if possible – or you can send emails or call in to have your comments included in the meeting minutes.

There are 3 issues I think need to be addressed:

1. Covid mandates: while there is nothing on the agenda at this time, it is important for our board to hear from us every week. They need to know we are taking a stand – and we need to ask them to stand with us.

You can speak on this during public comments at the beginning of the meeting.

The next issues are the last 2 items on the agenda – you can speak on these issues when they are discussed during the meeting:

2. Discussion of salary increase for management employees – most of the employees in our county are paid a much lower wage than other counties in California. It is time for this to be rectified. To their credit, the board recently passed an increase for our sheriffs association. The fact this is on the agenda is a good sign.

I will be supporting this effort.

3. Draft Resolution in Support of Voter Rights

As you can see in the draft resolution below, there is one statement of grave concern:

  • “…curtailment of early voting, elimination of same-day registration, reduction of polling places, vote dilution tactics, and needlessly cumbersome voter ID laws reduce and restrict the full expression American political voice.”

This draft resolution is being considered because a former supervisor brought it to the table.

H.R. 1 is currently being circulated through congress, sponsored by a Democrat representative, is very concerning. I encourage you to read more about it here: HR 1

I am strongly against these measures because they create opportunities for fraud in our elections.

I believe EVERY American has the right and responsibility to vote. EVERY AMERICAN!

But making it easier for people to vote also makes it easier for people to cheat. This is not ok.

I will share more today about my concerns but I wanted to get this out to you all as quick as possible.

Please please please – if you can, plan to attend this important meeting tomorrow.

Public comments will be shortly after 10am – salary increase and voter integrity at the end of the meeting (dependent on how long the other items take).



Agenda Packet

Red Bluff City – Cannabis Advisory Committee

Red Bluff City Council is holding a special session on Tuesday, May 11 at 11:00 am to discuss recommendations of a cannabis advisory committee.

The agenda packet from the May 4 meeting can be reviewed here: RB City Council Agenda Packer May 4

I will post the link to the zoom meeting and any additional info when available.