Letters to the Editor
Am I next on the list?
Dear Editor:
I want to thank Angela Evans for having the courage to report on the recent issue concerning a Mono Basin RPAC member. The article said Katie Bellomo has an “adversarial” nature of interactions with other members, county staff and members of the public during meetings. I have known Katie for almost forty years as a friend and a fellow member of the RPAC and I respect the detailed research, knowledge and intelligence with which she speaks on many topics at meetings. It is not adversarial, in my opinion, to disagree with issues on any subject and at times points of view must actually be “argued” to be recognized, if this is what Mr. Alpers and Mr. Lizza are referring to in the article. Robust debate must be allowed on county proposals that concern citizens or on any other subject, for that matter. This is free speech.
Clearly we are in a constitutional crisis that has reached the lowest level of government corruption even in our wonderful little County of Mono. Furthermore, the county has no business owning property such as the Conway Ranch or being involved in a fish hatchery operation. If this was feasible, private enterprise would do it.
This also brings to mind many questions that must be answered. When a person’s character or performance is being discussed at a public meeting, are they not allowed to be present to defend themselves? Why is the Jan. 14th RPAC meeting cancelled? Will this issue hopefully be forgotten by the Feb. meeting and shoved under the rug? Am I next on the list for speaking my mind?
Mark Logan
Mono County
I know Bellomo
Dear Editor:
I was both angry and saddened when I read Angela Evans’ article: “Bellomo-no basin RPAC” in the Jan. 8 issue of The Sheet. Attorney Katie Bellomo has served the Mono Basin citizens well during her years of service on the local RPAC committee. Reappointment of the five RPAC members was the first item on the Regular Agenda of the Jan. 6 meeting of the Mono County Board of Supervisors. The Recommended Action on the Agenda was to reappoint Katie Bellomo and the other four current RPAC members. The tape recording of this Board Meeting indicated that the Supervisors discussed the merits of the five RPAC members and ultimately voted their conscience regarding the respective reappointments. Given that the Mono Basin RPAC is listed as under Boards and Commissions on the Mono County web site, I feel that the Supervisors’ discussion of the pros and cons of reappointing individual members should have been considered a “Personnel” issue and voted on in a Closed Session, not in a public meeting.
In the taped transcript of the Supervisors’ public discussion of Katie Bellomo’s reappointment to RPAC, a number of very negative comments were made in her absence about her past performance on that Committee. They included the “adversarial” nature of her interactions with other RPAC members, County staff, and members of the public at past RPAC meetings. In my experience, Katie always presented her well thought out comments on issues before the Mono Basin RPAC in a clear and concise manner without animosity to positions voiced by other RPAC members, County Officials, County Employees or members of the public present at the meetings. Supervisor Alpers previously told all five RPAC members that he had nominated them for reappointment because of their excellent work on the Committee during their last term. In a meeting with Katie the day before the Board Meeting, he told her there was no need to attend the meeting. Then at the Board meeting Supervisor Alpers criticized Katie’s past service on the Committee and informed the Board that he no longer thought she was a good fit for RPAC.
The result of the foregoing events is that the Mono Basin RPAC has lost one of its most informed and concerned members who really cared about the welfare of the Mono Basin citizens. Katie brought to the Committee a lawyer’s perspective on how Mono County politicians and Mono County officials could best serve their constituents. She also provided wise counsel on the design and execution of new projects that would affect the quality of life of the local citizens. Both of these rolls are consistent with the duties listed for the Mono County RPACs listed on the Mono County web site, www.monocounty.ca.gov/rpac/page/about-regional-planning-advisory-committees.
If forcefully speaking one’s piece in a public forum is seen by Mono County politicians as adversarial and needing to be suppressed, something is clearly wrong with the local democratic process.
John Boynton
Mono County
Projects, not administration
Dear Editor,
I read last week’s editorial regarding Mammoth Lakes Recreation (MLR) with interest. I agree that the intent of Measures R and U were for building projects, acquisitions and enhancing existing Town owned/managed properties (short of supplanting facility maintenance), not for another layer of administration.
The priorities that you listed were spot-on as well. Every priority you mentioned has been discussed by staff, the Recreation Commission or Town Council on many occasions in the past. Most of the projects are already in the works – some already implemented and some close to fruition. For example, the Mammoth Lakes Trail System Coordinating Committee (MLTSCC) was comprised of community volunteers and key Town staff which were functioning successfully for almost 3 years until being disbanded by Town Council when the MLR was formed. The MLTSCC prioritized trails projects, received Measure R funding and implemented a variety of Trail projects, with the Forest Service as an active attendee.
The Recreation Commission and staff have been working towards ice rink roofing solutions for a year or so and are close to resolving the problem. The Recreation Commission had some discussions about acquiring Sam’s Wood Site, in addition to Town Council; and Foundation efforts to build a Performing Arts Center have been underway for many years beginning with the passage of Measure C in 2000, and it appears that they are very close to the Center becoming a reality. Hopefully when these projects materialize, credit will be given where credit is due.
All of these projects required funding, and in my opinion, MLR would be a great vehicle to raise the needed funds. Efforts to raise significant funds for these projects, and projects endorsed by many community members participating in last summer’s Plan Your Parks workshops, would be a good use of our tax dollars. Proposed projects such as a new Community Center and an Aquatics facility that will benefit the community for years to come will never become a reality without significant funding.
To date the all-volunteer MLR Board has been diligent in their approach to forming the organization and has spent limited General Fund and Measure R/U funds. However, with the imminent hiring of a Director and Assistant/Trails Coordinator, hopefully the priority will be for tangible projects that the voters expected, and for raising the millions of dollars necessary to make the community’s recreation dreams come true. Time for action!
Pat Agnitch
Mammoth Lakes
Far from threatening
Dear Editor:
The Boulaalam case, which has been reported in your publication, is only one of many examples concerning unlawful Mono County Sheriff’s Department misconduct. To it, I add my own unbelievable experience as a passenger in a vehicle driving through Bridgeport after Burning Man, this one also involving the notorious Officer Torres.
He stopped the vehicle in which I was a passenger because he said it didn’t have a front license plate. OK, so why not just write a fix-it ticket and let us be on our way?
What happened was an inexcusable abuse of authority. Officer Torres asked the driver and me for our driver’s licenses. Since I wasn’t the driver and the vehicle was not mine, I asked why he needed my license. He got angry and demanded it without explanation. I gave it to him to avoid a confrontation.
After a delay, he shouted to get out of the vehicle. So my friend the driver and I both got out. He screamed at me to get back in. He apparently only wanted the driver to get out.
After another, longer delay, I poked my head out of the window and asked why it was taking so long. He screamed at me from behind the vehicle to get out. As I opened the door and looked back, I saw that he had drawn his gun, gripped by both his hands and pointed directly at my body. He continued yelling, “Get out of the vehicle!” a second and a third time. I stepped out and turned to face him. I was stunned and paralyzed with fear. His hands were shaking and he was quite angry. He searched me and then put handcuffs on. With my hands painfully pinned behind me, I was made to sit uncomfortably in the back of his patrol car. He called for backup. Two other Sheriff’s patrol cars showed up.
I am a short-haired, clean-cut white male, then 58 years old, an attorney for over 33 years, with a corporate/business law practice in Orange County. I was dressed in shorts, t-shirt and sandals. I could hardly have been less of a threat. Nothing in my conduct should have a provoked such a violent response on the part of Officer Torres. The driver, a friend, witnessed the entire episode. He told me he thought Torres was going to shoot me!
I was cited for “resisting arrest.” I had to hire a local attorney at a significant cost to get the charges dismissed. When I told him the story without having mentioned the officer’s name, he asked me if the deputy was Officer Torres. Apparently Torres is notorious in your community.
It is appropriate that the voters of Mono County rejected former Sheriff Obenberger’s bid for election. He sanctioned his deputies’ harassment and abuse of members of the public and was deemed unfit to hold public office, and rightly so.
One wonders whether Officer Torres is still pulling over travelers for no good reason, badge on chest and gun in hand, putting them through nightmares similar to what I and Mr. Boulaalam experienced.
And what of your District Attorney, on whose desk these and I’m sure many other sham cases regularly land? What action he took or alarms raised is a legitimate question to ask when he’s up for reelection.
Gerald Bloch
Lake Forest, Calif.
