A diverse field of eight candidates is vying for the 1st District seat on the Kern County Board of Supervisors. It is unlikely a single candidate will win the majority of votes needed to win outright in June; the top two finishers will likely advance to a November runoff.
The candidates are Roy Ashburn, Heidi Carter-Escudero, David Freeland, Mick Gleason, Deborah Hess, Marshall "Chip" Holloway, Daures Stephens and Sam Ramirez.
The Californian asked the eight to answer the following questions. Gleason did not respond. A few answers exceeding the 100-word limit were edited down.
Q: Explain why you believe recent contract deals with county unions have/have not done enough to address the impacts that the housing crash and increased pensions handed out in the past decade have had on county pension funds?
Ramirez: Concerns regarding the pensions have grown out of a down economy. Thus, the answer is doing our part to grow our local economy. I have proposed a series of programs that will save the county revenue, which could offset any current or future liabilities related to the current pension system. In regards to addressing the housing crash, I believe cities and the county of Kern could provide better incentives to stimulate the local housing market. A stronger housing market will pay off for the county in the short and long run. I have outlined my plan at www.votesamramirez.com.
Stephens: According to the county of Kern, their proposal of making the senior employees paying a portion of their retirement will fix the current problem of funding retirements. The future housing market will be one of the determining factors whether future adjustments will need to be made.
Holloway: Thankfully due to the creativity of the Kern County Planning Department and the ability to expedite bringing wind energy to fruition much quicker than usual combined with current high oil prices, we have been able to offset the declines in residential and business property values. While the property tax situation seems to be stable, other revenues are suffering due to high unemployment. The steps we have taken in pension reform is good, but when the contribution has increased from $50 million to over $200 million in seven years, we are on an unsustainable path. We will have to continue to address this issue.
Hess: If the economy never tanked, I doubt we would be having this conversation. The lucrative decisions made several years back didn't seem fiscally responsible to me at the time and have proven irresponsible. County employees deserve a competitive wage and benefits package. Receiving close to 100 percent or above your salary for retirement is unjustified. I also believe those instances are few. Not being privy to recent negotiations and all the detail provides speculation on my part. Future negotiations will happen. There must be give and take on both sides; open, honest communication is imperative and rebuilding trust between employees, management and the supervisors.
Freeland: The housing market crash and faulty actuarial data have caused county-wide pension and benefit plans to be significantly underfunded. As a result, limited county operating funds are tapped to shore up the county's retirement fund and to pay principal and interest on pension obligation bonds. I commend the Board of Supervisors and union representatives for taking necessary steps to begin reducing the impact on county operating funds. Recent concessions made by both parties to revise retirement formulas and to implement changes over a reasonable period of time, should lessen the financial burden on both the employees and to taxpayers who foot the bill.
Carter-Escudero: Because these new contracts are new, it will remain to be seen if the new deals have done enough to help us keep our pension liability in check from this point forward. However, the new deals will not affect any change on the pension situation that exists already for those who have already retired, or for those still eligible for the old deal. We will be paying for these deficits for some time, and new contracts do little to address the situation we are already in.
Ashburn: Pension obligations for county employees are a critical concern both for the employees whose financial interests are involved and for the public whose tax dollars are increasingly stretched. I support a different retirement benefit for employees hired in the future. For future employees, a greater employee contribution, increasing age of retirement and reduced percentage of salary are necessary. This acknowledges the reality that pension obligations, once made, are virtually impossible to change. For current workers, negotiated pension changes are the only way to achieve cost savings, while recognizing that budget dollars are tight now and into the future.
Q: Would you support the construction of new jail facilities at Lerdo Jail or back alternative technologies and programs designed to reduce recidivism given the possibility that there will be limited funds to support both approaches? Why?
Ramirez: Before I would support construction of new jail facilities, I would make sure we are best using current facilities that are empty in Delano, Shafter and Taft. Using these facilities could potentially save the county a substantial amount. At the same time, I think it is important to make sure we fund programs that keep people out of prison. We can do this by giving school-age children better opportunities, and adults the necessary treatment needed to reduce recidivism.
Stephens: I support examining both avenues. During my 25-year career with the Kern County Sheriff's Office, I have seen those who have responded positively to programs and those who have only responded when they were in custody. The number one goal is protecting the citizens of Kern County. The key is identifying what will work best in a given situation. Limited funding means efficiency of operation that will also be paramount to ensure the successes of either plan.
Holloway: I think it's important to support both, although we must be able to identify a funding source for any new construction and viability of long-term operating cost. No matter how good alternative programs are, there will always be criminals who fail to rehabilitate. It is important that we have capacity and get those individuals who may harm others off the street. We are already experiencing a great deal of pressure and a lack of resources due to realignment, but our number one requirement above all else is to provide public safety.
Hess: I don't see any facilities being constructed anytime soon. As a society we need to re-think incarceration. We should explore options outside the county and state for successful cost-effective programs. Partnering with local nonprofits and faith-based organizations can and have produced positive results. Maybe privatization of additional jails is the answer. My understanding is private facilities locally are negotiating with Los Angeles to fill their beds. For unknown reasons to me, our sheriff is not in favor of this. We should at least discuss the possibility. Could that produce income offsetting costs or help pay for new innovative programs?
Freeland: I do not believe constructing new jail facilities and implementing alternative technologies and programs is mutually exclusive, even with limited funding. However, priorities will need to established. With the passage of AB-109, some new construction and reconstruction of inmate facilities will be necessary. I also support broadening the skills of inmates by putting "low-risk" inmates to work. As state inmate wildland fire crews diminish, county inmate wildland fire and hazard reduction crews should be trained and utilized. Inmates could also be used to assist county employees in trash cleanup and for cleaning and maintaining parks and other county facilities.
Carter-Escudero: We need to explore all possible options for new programs and technologies available for our low-level offenders for two reasons. One, Kern County cannot afford to go into the prison business. Two, the cost of repeat offenders is too high compared to any program that will get them back to work, supporting their families. We currently not only pay to incarcerate the inmate, we are also supporting the families of inmates who end up in single-parent situations, and even sometimes caring for their children when both parents are behind bars. Additionally, we need to do better with community/grant funded programs.
Ashburn: It is unlikely that new programs are going to keep people with criminal histories from committing new crimes which land them back in jail. It is the basic responsibility of government to keep bad people away from law abiding citizens. I do not support shifting state prisoners to county jails, but this is the law and we must do all we can to protect the public and keep costs as low as possible. There is no doubt having the county incarcerate prisoners will be less costly to taxpayers than housing them in state facilities.
Q: Explain why you support or oppose wind and solar energy projects planned in the Mojave Desert and the Lake Isabella area?
Ramirez: It is important to explore alternative energy projects, but not at the expense of removing important farmland or disrupting the environment in various parts of Kern County. While wind and solar projects may make sense for some, we must keep continuously examine the size and scope of each project and how it affects the overall county. I would promote the county explore solar projects to offset the costs of operations, but I wouldn't mandate that the private sector do the same.
Stephens: Supervisors must take into account the needs of the county and the wishes of the citizens. When researching this topic, as of now I have found very little support for these energy projects in the mountains and in our deserts. If I was approached by a corporation requesting to install one of these types of alternative energy, I would personally respond to the proposed location to better educate myself with the citizens' concerns.
Holloway: I have nothing but respect for Lorelei Oviatt and the efforts she has incorporated in the Kern County Planning Department with red, yellow, green planning maps. I think it is a well-thought out, balanced approach and while I think all projects need to be evaluated individually on their own merit, I am generally supportive of both solar and wind energy as well as other alternative technologies like geothermal, biofuels and waste to energy. I think we have a unique advantage and we need to leverage it to our benefit. I do understand there is no plan for wind in Lake Isabella, solar may be another story.
Hess: I support responsible land use decisions when approving wind and solar projects. With those approvals the public needs to understand the possibility of new transmission infrastructure or upgrades to existing lines may follow. Renewable energy does not equate to lower rates. Many of these projects tout job creation; remember the majority of those jobs are temporary. I do not support taking productive agriculture land and turning it into an industrial use. We also need to be smart on projects around our military installations. All aspects of these projects must be vetted prior to approval.
Freeland: I support all forms of energy production including, but not limited to, oil, natural gas, wind and solar. It is critically important, however, that every project be planned and located in areas within the county that reduce potentially negative impacts, such as impacts to visual quality and excessive noise, especially near neighborhoods. County officials and energy developers must work closely with interested members of the public during the early stages of the planning process to identify viable mitigation measures and to gain acceptance of the project.
Carter-Escudero:
Each solar and wind project must be evaluated on a careful, case-by-case basis, I support these alternative energy projects "in concept" because they can bring long lasting benefit and further establish Kern County as an energy producer. However, we must be careful in balancing the benefit of any project against any possible negative impacts to the area.
Ashburn: Wind and solar energy projects in eastern Kern County can be a great benefit to our county. We can gain from alternative energy three ways: 1) Tax dollars generated; 2) Jobs created; and 3) New energy produced. Not all areas, however, are ideal or suitable for these energy projects. As with all land use projects, location and impacts on surrounding property must be considered.
Q: What is the top issue you hope to focus on if elected to the Board of Supervisors and why?
Ramirez: My time and energy as supervisor will be focused on JOBS, JOBS and more JOBS. Our county is positioned to be the center of growth. I would continue to promote our central location, easy access to rail and major freeways (Interstate 5, Highways 99 and 58), available land and a ready and willing workforce. I will work to recruit more employers like Paramount Citrus, Railex, etc. I recognize that government can't solve all our problems, but I also recognize that we can work on those problems that confront us all, and in this climate it is the need for JOBS and more JOBS.
Stephens: The citizens of Kern County have indicated to me that the top issues are jobs, efficient government and public safety. All three of these concerns are linked to each other. When the American workforce is thriving there are more employed individuals. The more people that are employed, the less likely they are to commit crimes because they do not want to lose their jobs. Employment opportunities can be created by having a more efficient and less intrusive government, which promotes the cycle of economic growth.
Holloway: I ran 14 years ago with an eye on diversifying our economic base. I think Kern County is poised to absolutely explode if we can rescind some of the regulations and restrictions preventing businesses from expanding and hiring. We must get people back to work and I think we have so much to offer. We are strangling our ag producers and the oil industry is still misunderstood but they will both have a champion with me. The Mojave spaceport and alternative energy remain bright spots of growth and must be supported. So economic diversity and expansion of the base will be my first priority.
Hess: District 1 is diverse and many issues overlap. At the forefront, is economic development. A strong private sector is the backbone of our communities. Public safety is at risk from the state's shifting of prisoners to county jails. The lack of infrastructure from roads to increased broadband capacity. Water is of grave concern to agriculture, recreation and future development. Lastly, we must protect our military bases from BRAC and encroachment. None of these issues can be resolved overnight. It will require collaboration with cities and elected officials, private-public partnerships, creative thinking along with community involvement. Together we can be successful.
Freeland: The number one issue in the county is the struggling economy. Therefore, I will focus my energy on protecting and improving the economic engines located within District 1. This includes assisting China Lake Naval Weapons Center through any proposed Base Realignment and Closure reviews to keep the base operating and growing, supporting tourism within the Kern River Valley, including helping the residents and businesses successfully through the Army Corps of Engineers' Lake Isabella Dam remediation project, and protecting the tremendous oil production and agricultural industry, including fighting for adequate and sustainable water delivery to the county.
Carter-Escudero: Because this district is so large, there cannot be a single focus. The top three issues are and will remain for the 1st District:
1) Bringing reliable water to Kern County farmers and residents.
2) Solving the immediate safety concerns for Isabella Lake Dam while preserving the region's economy and quality of life.
3) Assuring the future and growth of China Lake Naval Air Weapons Station.
These three priorities for the 1st District should also be priorities for the county, because the water issue directly affects our countywide unemployment, and the safety of Isabella Lake Dam should be a concern for all.
Ashburn: Jobs and economic growth are the top priority. Every regulation, rule, requirement, tax, assessment and fee will be scrutinized to make Kern County the most business-friendly, competitive county in California. While many of these mandates come down from the state or federal government, the way they are implemented is a decision at the local level. The county will do well, when the people in our county have jobs and hopeful futures. We have a bright future because of the wonderful people here, our abundant resources and the genius of the private sector. My role is to get government out of the way, so business can succeed and people can work.
aladdin black forest ufc 144 fight card ufc 144 results
