Issue link: https://www.epageflip.net/i/11051
6A – Daily News – Wednesday, May 26, 2010 Opinion D NEWSAILY RED BLUFF TEHAMACOUNTY T H E V O I C E O F T E H A M A C O U N T Y S I N C E 1 8 8 5 Important workshop to Greg Stevens, Publisher gstevens@redbluffdailynews.com Chip Thompson, Editor editor@redbluffdailynews.com Editorial policy The Daily News opinion is expressed in the editorial. The opinions expressed in columns, letters and cartoons are those of the authors and artists. Letter policy The Daily News welcomes let- ters from its readers on timely topics of public interest. All let- ters must be signed and pro- vide the writer’s home street address and home phone num- ber. Anonymous letters, open letters to others, pen names and petition-style letters will not be allowed. Letters should be typed and cannot exceed two double-spaced pages or 500 words. When several letters address the same issue, a cross section of those submit- ted will be considered for publi- cation. Letters will be edited. Letters are published at the discretion of the editor. Mission Statement We believe that a strong com- munity newspaper is essential to a strong community, creating citizens who are better informed and more involved. The Daily News will be the indispensible guide to life and living in Tehama County. We will be the premier provider of local news, information and advertising through our daily newspaper, online edition and other print and Internet vehi- cles. The Daily News will reflect and support the unique identities of Tehama County and its cities; record the history of its com- munities and their people and make a positive difference in the quality of life for the resi- dents and businesses of Tehama County. How to reach us Main office: 527-2151 Classified: 527-2151 Circulation: 527-2151 News tips: 527-2153 Sports: 527-2153 Obituaries: 527-2151 Photo: 527-2153 On the Web www.redbluffdailynews.com Fax Newsroom: 527-9251 Classified: 527-5774 Retail Adv.: 527-5774 Legal Adv.: 527-5774 Business Office: 527-3719 Address 545 Diamond Ave. Red Bluff, CA 96080, or P.O. Box 220 Red Bluff, CA 96080 attend today Dear Editor: Iwould like to announce a red alert for the citizens of Tehama County. Those that are familiar with me know that I do not get involved politically unless the issue is of great importance to our county. Presently, the county will take under consideration the adop- tion of a development impact fee for any new construction. The proposed fee for the unin- corporated area is $14,392.80 for a single family residence. This fee would be added to the building permit fees and the school fees. Assuming I did the math correctly, the total for a 2000-square-foot home with a 24-by-24 garage and 500- square-foot of covered deck- porch would be approximately $23,847. This figure includes the proposed development impact fee, building fees and school fees. There is a work- shop scheduled for the public today at 6 p.m. at the Board of Chambers next to the Veterans Building. If you or a family member ever wants to build a home in Tehama County you should attend. Government at all levels have given the word “tax” a new name to be able to circumvent the process of raising taxes, the new rod is “fee.” If you have any interest in ever building a resi- dence in Tehama County please get involved and attend today’s workshop. Larry Lalaguna Arizona law Editor: People are getting it wrong because they think this law is about illegal immigration. I believe Arizona should be able to protect its borders but this law does no such thing. However you feel about ille- gal immigrants is unrelated to this issue. The Arizona law tar- get is not illegal immigrants. The Arizona law target is legal immigrants. Illegal immigrants sent to jail for any offense com- mitted in the US already have an immigration hold placed upon them and they are deported. The target for this law is the legal immigrant for the follow- ing reason. It requires legal immigrants to carry documenta- tion of their legal status at all times. Failure to do so will result in a $500 dollars fine and a class 1 misdemeanor. Do you see? Illegal immigrants would be deported. Illegal immigrants would not be required to pay $500 dollars and be charged the misdemeanor. It is the legal immigrant who is required to do so. The law therefore target is the legal immigrant. I was a legal immigrant in my first years in this country. And for those who know me I have being known for forget my purse or my cell phone behind more than once. Although in regular circumstances forgetting your wallet would not be a crime, under this new law it is. So if you are running down the street after your dog, for me in my first seven years, that could be a $500 fine and a class 1 misdemeanor that would per- haps prevent me from ever fin- ishing the process of becoming a citizen. This law still applies to me today. I look and sound foreign born. Although I would not be charged a fine or a misde- meanor, since today I am a citi- zen, I still could be detained until able show my citizenship documents. Your Turn Being detained because I did not carry my citizenship certifi- cate would really be something would it not? This is very differ- ent than showing your driver’s license when you are driving a car. Still I would not complain about carrying papers if the same were required of all. I don’t think any of us here in Red Bluff would want to live in such a police state. But are we Americans so ready to give up our American values and relinquish our 4th and 14th amendment rights? Are we all forced to carry our birth certificates at all times? Or just people like me? If just peo- ple like me, how can it not be profiling? Where did the land of the free go? Daniela Sartori, Red Bluff Applaud Arizona Editor: I applaud Arizona's governor for her legislation dealing with illegal immigrants. The problem is and always has been racial profiling. It's impossible to enforce anything because of it. Parolees aren't suppose to associate with certain criminal types or carry guns, how is that not racial profiling? I'm sure it has been taken advantage of but how can you control every- thing? If a legal citizen is caught with illegals, tough. He took the chance, he can show his identity and he goes home. What the heck is wrong with that? These people are here illegal- ly. We have laws on the books now restricting businesses to hire them, but they're not enforced. And why is it these people are entitled to benefits? They don't belong here. My heart goes out to them but we can't support the whole world. We have Americans here who live in poverty. Think they could go to other countries and be taken care of? Mexico is not a poor country, they have many resources, the problem is the whole country is mostly corrupt and has been for years. We have legislators making laws continually. They vote them in and forget enforcing them. Look at all the money we've spent on the border wall and it's still not complete and doesn't work anyway. We need to take the incen- tives away that draw illegals here and prosecute employers that employ them, large and small. We just seem to go around in circles and then when a governor stands her ground, she's the criminal. Maybe if our laws worked and were enforced, this wouldn't be necessary. Bernice Cressy, Cottonwood Your officials STATE ASSEMBLYMAN — Jim Nielsen (R), State Capitol Bldg., Room 4164 P.O. Box 942849, Sacramento 94249; (916) 319-2002; Fax (916) 319- 2102 STATE SENATOR — Sam Aanestad (R), State Capitol Bldg., Room 2054, Sacramen- to, CA 95814. (916) 651-4004; Fax (916) 445-7750 GOVERNOR — Arnold Schwarzenegger (R), State Capitol Bldg., Sacramento, CA 95814; (916) 445-2841; Fax (916) 558-3160; E-mail: gover- nor@governor.ca.gov. U.S. REPRESENTATIVE — Wally Herger (R), 2635 Forest Ave. Ste. 100, Chico, CA 95928; 893-8363. U.S.SENATORS — Dianne Feinstein (D), One Post Street, Suite 2450, San Francisco, CA 94104; (415) 393-0707. Fax (415) 393-0710. Barbara Boxer (D), 1700 Montgomery St., Suite 240, San Francisco, CA 94111; (415) 403-0100. Fax (202) 224- 0454. Sex harassment for kids Commentary Boy, have sensitivities changed since I was a kid in the '70s — especially where sexual harass- ment is concerned. I speak of an incident that occurred three years ago at an ele- mentary school in Oregon. According to abcnews.go.com, two 13-year-old boys were arrest- ed for "slapping girls on the rear end." Both spent five days in a juve- nile detention joint. Both were charged with several counts of felony sex abuse. If convicted, both would have had to be registered lifelong as "sex offenders" — and spend up to 10 years in the clink. That surely wasn't the reaction when I was a victim of sexual harassment in my sixth-grade year. A girl in my class — I'll call her Susie Smitten — had the hots for me. Who could blame her? I was one of the better "keep-away" players. And even though I had big ears and a bad haircut, I wasn't a bad catch by sixth-grade standards. One day during recess, I noticed that Susie was looking at me with misty eyes. I'd never seen a girl look at me like that before. The only female look I'd known prior was the one my sisters gave me when I failed to change the toilet paper roll when the paper ran out. During the last month of school, Susie tried multiple times to hold my hand under our desk in biology class. She followed me into the hall and tried to hug me. One day she really crossed the line. Our biology class was in the woods, studying leaves, when she tried to blindside me with a kiss. Tommy Gillen shouted out a warning and I managed to jump from her path. She nicked me, but, for the most part, I got away clean. Susie's harassment was relent- less, but there was nothing I could do about it. Had I reported her conduct to our teachers, they wouldn't have believed me. Had I told my parents and sis- ters about it, they would have made fun of me. And a lawsuit was clearly out of the question. It was 1973, after all — well before numerous sexual harass- ment laws were on the books. It was before women's groups, such as the American Association of University Women, released numerous stud- ies that claimed sexual harassment is rampant in American schools. It was before the courts could hold schools responsible for sexual harassment under ambiguous laws. It was before Con- gress was appropriating millions of dollars under laws such as the Women's Educational Equity Act to provide "gender-equity training programs to make boys treat girls more sensitively and to ensure an environment free from sexual harassment and abuse." I had little recourse to get Susie to back off — at least until I made it through puberty. we delegitimizing genuine sexual- harassment cases by overreacting to marginal ones? Which brings us back to the incident at the Oregon middle school. Tom Purcell Police investigators soon discovered that "slapping girls on the rear end" was a fairly common practice at the school — some girls were doing likewise to boys. Most agreed that the behavior was inappro- priate. But criminal? Four females listed as victims asked the judge to drop the charges and the judge finally did. On one hand, it's good that our society is now more aware of, and sensitive to, legitimate sexual- harassment concerns. On the other hand, with all our laws, rules, policies, research and advocacy groups in place, aren't According to the News-Regis- ter of McMinnville, Ore., a settle- ment was reached that called for both boys to pay the four girls $250 each, apologize to them and complete a "boundaries education" program, whatever the heck that is. As I said, sensitivities sure have changed since I was a kid in the '70s.