Letters to the editor: Thoughts on county seal and Measures & B

Seal should recognize Mission

Re: your April 28 story, “Public invited to choose design for county seal”:

The Ventura County Board of Supervisors has begun a process to elicit public input on a potential redesign of the County Seal.

The Board of Supervisors has stated that a more relevant design will better reflect the county in today’s milieu. “Our current seal was adopted in 1964 and while we appreciate its historical value, some of the images featured are no longer representative of Ventura County and we believe it is time for an updated County seal.”

Of the eight options presented two have a reference to the Chumash who are rightfully represented; citizens of the county today inhabit the land of the Chumash. None of the designs recognize Mission San Buenaventura founded in 1782.

I find it incredible to conceptualize a County of Ventura Seal without recognition of the Chumash people and Mission San Buenaventura, the namesake of the county. Both are relevant to the history of the past 240 years as well as the present; descendants of both Chumash and Spanish-speaking settlers continue to reside here. The Mission system represents the expansion of Western culture that brought much of the agriculture that thrives throughout our county today. The Mission serves as an iconic tourist and pilgrimage site that has a measurable impact on the local economy and culture.

I urge all residents of this great county of Ventura to express their opinions to preserve the historic heritage of our county on any redesign of the County Seal at www.ventura.org/seal/

Tom Elewaut, Pastor, Mission Basilica of San Buenaventura

Separating church, state crucial

A recent letter writer postulated that the phrase “separation of church and state” should be ignored because it is not expressly found in the First Amendment.

The Constitution and Bill of Rights were drafted primarily by James Madison with input from Thomas Jefferson.

In 1803 Madison made his view clear stating that “... the purpose of separation of church and state is to keep forever from these shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of Europe in blood.”

Jefferson made his view clear ... liberty cannot exist without a “wall or hedge” separating church from state.

In the “Why We Fight” films at the outset of World War II there is a clip of schoolchildren reciting the authentic Pledge of Allegiance, authored by Ralph Bellamy, a Methodist minister. The original, authentic version did not include the divisive phrase “under God.”

While the original pledge was in use, America was generally united and successful. Since the divisive “under God” phrase was inserted in 1954 for the express purpose of dividing America into two groups, those who were loyal Americans by virtue of their adherence to Christianity and “non-Americans” to be excluded because they do not adhere to Christianity or any religion. Since then, America has been increasingly divided. And that was the pernicious intent of the proponents of inserting “under God” division.

America’s future is at stake. Without reinforcing the wall of separation that future is cloudy.

Ira Cohen, Thousand Oaks

Changing emblem waste of money

I just sent the following to the Ventura County Board of Supervisors. Please contact your own board member if you are concerned about this waste of time and money.

I would like to express my objection to the proposed change in the County Emblem. While I understand the controversy over Father Serra, the expense is something the taxpayers should not have to shoulder at this time. Do you realize how many signs there are throughout the county? Both outside and in every single county office? On every county vehicle? On every county form, letterhead, and document, both online and in hard copy?

The emblem is displayed on every county employee’s ID badge and uniform, and most employees have multiple uniforms. And it’s not just in Ventura County. The emblem is displayed in Sacramento and in numerous other counties throughout the state.

The board needs to provide the taxpayers with a firm budget figure before even considering this kind of expenditure, and I certainly haven’t seen that published with the current “contest” to choose a new emblem. There are far more needy projects that could use our money more efficiently. And there are far more important issues that could and should occupy the board’s time and energy.

Christine Weidenheimer, Ventura

Measures A & B just a power grab

I am a longtime Ventura County resident, small business advocate, and car salesman, and I will be voting no on Measures A and B.

A and B are a power grab being pushed by politicians and activists who want to shut down local energy production. Any energy shutdowns will have a ripple effect throughout the economy, and my business could suffer.

I know that oil and gas companies here in Ventura County operate under extensive regulations. But A and B would override those regulations and give the Board of Supervisors, not experts, the power to shut down oil and gas projects for any reason they see fit, notably political reasons. This just adds red tape, delays, and legal challenges to existing business operations.

Bottom line, Measure A and B are an unfair power grab and are bad for our economy, so I will be voting no this June.

Bruce Holley, Ventura

Compelling case for A & B

Two recent letters to the editor, supporting a yes vote on ballot Measures A and B, make compelling cases to vote yes on Measures A & B. Clean water, air and uncontaminated soils are essential to residents’ health, safety and the county’s agricultural economy.

There just isn’t any common sense to a decades-old, antiquated permitting process when permitting the drilling of a new oil or gas well. If modern methods for drilling oil and gas wells are used, it makes sense to apply “modern-day reviews” of new drilling projects. As one author noted, “oil and gas companies can use any method of extraction, even if it entails injecting hazardous chemicals dangerously close to underground water supplies.”

The EPA’s 2016 study on fracking found evidence “that chemicals related to oil and gas production through fracking were winding up in drinking water, and that wastewater resulting from fracking operations was contaminating water sources.”

When extracting oil and gas using fracking, acidizing and high-pressure cyclic steam, it is only prudent to apply an environmental review process that protects our community’s water supply.

The campaign messages from the oil and gas industry are misleading. Read former County Planning Commissioner Phil White’s April 28 guest column in The Star. Existing wells will not be shut down. Measures A & B apply to applications for new drilling projects. Let’s ensure our air, soil and water supply are safe, vote yes on Measures A & B.

David Gilbertson, Camarillo

Measures A & B will cost local jobs

I am a proud energy worker in Ventura County, and I will be voting no on Measures A and B. If these measures pass, it will shut down our local oil and gas industry, which would jeopardize 2,000 local jobs, including mine.

I can speak from first-hand experience that our industry is highly regulated and prides itself on being careful stewards of the environment. A local energy shutdown would force us to import even more oil from foreign sources that do not share our strong regulations and commitment to environmental stewardship. Local job losses and more imported oil isn’t progress.

Join me in voting no on A and B.

Christopher Jones, Ventura

This article originally appeared on Ventura County Star: Letters: Thoughts on county seal and Measures & B