Letters to the editor: Authoritarianism; Measures A & B; DA and sheriff races

Authoritarianism is on the ballot

Donald Trump and authoritarianism are implicitly on the June ballot. You can see this in the code words candidates use to rally the faithful. Two of my favorites are “election integrity” and “parental rights.”

By raising election integrity as an issue, candidates are implying the election system is flawed and that the “Big Lie” about the 2020 presidential election is true. There are no facts supporting that fiction. “Big Lie” supporters have tried to prove it in court without success. Even Trump’s lackey attorney general admitted there was no fraud. Anyone supporting the lie is using a traditional authoritarian tactic that should not be countenanced.

“Parental rights” is another rallying cry of Trump and his authoritarian supporters. This phrase is so general as to be meaningless but is usually a criticism of lessons on gender acceptance and difficult historical topics. Authoritarians throughout the ages understood that to the extent you eliminate certain groups from the course of study, those people cease to exist. If you don’t discuss LGBTQ issues, they are invisible again. If you don’t discuss Reconstruction, redlining, slavery, and Jim Crow, you have eliminated hundreds of years of racial injustice that have led to the racial problems of today.

Moreover, parents’ rights beg the issue of which parents. For example, if you eliminate a difficult decision of lynching during Reconstruction, you may avoid a divisive discussion, but you unfairly negate the wrongs done to others.

As with most generalities, the devil is in the details. In this case the details are deliberately unclear except that they support Trump and authoritarian government and are contrary to America’s principles and greatness.

Steve L. Rice, Thousand Oaks

Measures A & B must be stopped

Count me in as another Ventura County resident who is voting no on Measures A and B. These measures are a deceptive attempt to shut down the local oil and gas industry, an industry that provides thousands of jobs and tens of millions of tax revenues to our county.

A and B will increase our dependency on foreign oil and drive energy prices even higher. A and B would give unprecedented new power to politicians. Just three county supervisors would have the power to shut down any project for any reason they see fit — or for no reason at all — without regard for local jobs or people’s wallets. It begs the questions: What will be the next industry they come after? And, with gas prices at $6 per gallon at the pump today, how much more will we have to pay for energy?

Measures A and B must be stopped. Vote no.

Louise Lampara, Ventura, Executive Director of the Ventura County Coalition of Labor, Agriculture and Business

Nasarenko should remain DA

I am pleased to add my support for Ventura County District Attorney Erik Nasarenko. As a trustee for the Ventura Unified School District, I worked closely with Erik when he was on the Ventura City Council. He was always a strong supporter of public education and worked tirelessly at establishing. and maintaining cooperative working relationships with VUSD students and staff.

Now, as Ventura County DA, Erik brings that same authentic leadership style to his work in crime fighting. After more than 20 years of service to our community as a prosecutor, Ventura City Council member and Mayor, the Ventura County Board of Supervisors unanimously appointed Erik to be our County District Attorney. I believe he received this vote of confidence due to the integrity, determination, and dedication he brings to the position.

Erik has refocused the department to concentrate on critical areas of crime fighting including, to name a few, increasing the focus on domestic violence crimes, securing $2.5 million to expand the cold case sexual assault program, bringing home invasion and gang related criminals to justice and increasing punishment for violent crimes and drug dealers. Erik is determined to continue these strong and innovative crime-fighting programs and knows he and his colleagues have much more work to do.

We are extremely fortunate to have Erik Nasarenko as our DA. I encourage everyone in our county to vote for District Attorney Erik Nasarenko.

Debbie Golden, Oak View

Yes on A & B is right answer

When I saw “No on A and B” signs on virtually every available surface in my neighborhood, I kind of knew yes was the right answer.

I have been a California voter since 1957. I’ve learned that the funding needed for this level of saturation means what was being promoted was not in my interest, no in the public’s.

While skyrocketing gas prices are devastating ordinary people’s budgets, reducing power of our elected leaders to decide on oil drilling permits will not lower these prices. The profit-rich oil industry sets the prices. Its owners could lower them and still remain very, very profitable.

Instead, we see a massive campaign that harnesses momentary discontent to the service of thwarting governmental processes. (Kind of like the recent expensive and failed recall of Governor Newsom.)

Anyone who thinks the oil business is already sufficiently regulated or capable of regulating itself has not been paying attention to its egregious history of violations, spills, and leaks. What we have been doing isn’t enough.

Hypothetically jobs could be lost by holding drilling leases to newer standards, but do we want to take the risk?

By the way, extensive new health research indicates your general health, even your longevity greatly depends on your zip code, to your proximity to pollutants — like oil drilling.

I note that a major backer of the “No” campaign is Exxon, a company notorious for hold back its own scientists’ findings on global warming and then spending millions to fund climate disinformation. You want these guys or their tame regulatory boards to decide standards?

Margaret Morris, Ventura

Put people ahead of politics

I’m voting no on Measures A and B because a vote for yes would mean a vote for more uncertainty in an already uncertain world. I am a spouse of an oil worker in here Ventura County. With my husband being the sole provider, losing his job is not an option, but that possibility would be imminent if we allow politicians instead of experts to get the final say on oil and gas production. That is why I am voting no on A and B. We must protect our local industries instead of outsourcing our energy needs.

The well-being and economic stability of my family and families like mine depend on Ventura County to act in the interests of the people, not politics.

Rita S. Bell-Hill, Ventura

Many reasons to vote for Ayub

I’m a retired sheriff’s deputy and had spent over 30 years with the organization. I am supporting Bill Ayub in this election for many reasons; chief among them his sure and deft steerage of the office which ensured that our county remain safe during the turbulence of the last three years.

His challenger is a commander but still has very limited experience in running a large organization. Having the gumption to run for office does not mean that one is competent to lead that office.

Most importantly, the challenger has not provided any coherent reason for replacing the Sheriff, except to say that the Sheriff has not communicated effectively with the rank and file and is therefore regarded as distant from the troops. Since he is member of the Sheriff’s command staff, it was his duty to voice that concern directly to the sheriff and assist him in finding a solution.

If he had failed to do that then he was derelict in his duty and his current attempt to replace his boss is utterly self-serving and demonstrates a lack of emotional maturity; not good indicators of principled leadership that the job of sheriff demands.

Dante M. Honorico, Camarillo

This article originally appeared on Ventura County Star: Letters: Authoritarianism; Measures A & B; DA and sheriff races