Measure V and Measure W were discussed at Tuesday night’s election forum in Ukiah, allowing proponents and opponents of each initiative to voice their opinions before voters make a decision on June 7. For Measure V, proponents in attendance were Ted Williams, fire chief of the Albion-Little River Fire Protection District, and Kirk Van Patten, a retired Cal Fire air attack captain. Opponents were George Hollister, small forest land owner and manager, and Sarah Billig, stewardship director for Mendocino Redwood Co. Measure V would declare the practice of killing trees and leaving them standing for more than 90 days near critical infrastructure, including roadways, water sources, or telecommunications wires, for example, a public nuisance. Though the dead trees are left standing as a result of timber operators using hack-and-squirt, which entails making a cut into the tree and spraying it with herbicide, the initiative itself doesn’t address hack-and-squirt, just the dead standing trees. Proponents said the initiative in part is about making it safer for firefighters who may have to fight a fire within the dead standing tree areas, which some firefighters believe could result in a dead tree falling down. “This is not a forest health issue, it’s a public safety issue, and it’s a public safety issue for you the homeowners, and we the firefighters,” Van Patten told those in attendance Tuesday night. Why do timber operators hack-and-squirt? Billig said it’s a necessary method in managing commercial timber lands. Likewise, Hollister said hack-and-squirt is an essential part of sustainable forestry. “What we’re faced with today, why we do the hack-and-squirt process, is that in 1998 when MRC acquired these forest lands, 40 to 50 percent of what was once redwood and Douglas fir forests were overrun by tanoak,” Billig said. The most effective way to treat the tanoak situation, Billig said, and ultimately restore the conifer forests, is to directly inject tanoaks with an herbicide, killing the tree, and then allowing the company to come in and plant redwood and Douglas firs underneath. “We are moving this forest to a more fire safe forest, towards a more healthy forest, and that’s our goal,” Billig said. Hollister said snags, which are standing dead trees in forestry terms, in the forest, do not constitute an increase in fire risk in themselves. Billig said in 2008 during the lightning fires in Mendocino County, MRC property was heavily impacted, but the fire behavior was no different between snags that were treated and left standing, and ones that weren’t treated. Williams said dead standing trees create a different risk than if they were laying on the ground. “Dead trees do burn, they do increase fire behavior,” Williams said.

MEASURE W: CHARTER COUNTY

Proponents in attendance were Lynda McClure and Doug McKenty, candidates for the Measure W charter commission. The opponent was Jon Kennedy, executive director of the Employers Council of Mendocino County. “Becoming a charter county is a process that occurs in stages,” McKenty said. “First, we must pass Measure W, which merely allows for a charter commission to write a draft charter for voters to consider in a future election.” McKenty said any specific issues that may or may not be in the draft charter are only hypothetical and shouldn’t have anything to do with voting yes or no on Measure W on June 7. “While some charter commission candidates have advocated for certain specific issues, there is no way of knowing if their issues will end up in the final draft,” McKenty said. Currently, the charter is like an empty box, he said, since it’s unknown who will be on the commission or what a final draft will look like until it has been completed. McKenty said Mendocino County being a charter county is about “participatory democracy,” which would bring all the benefits of having home rule power under the state constitution and added to the draft charter. “All we are asking with Measure W is an opportunity to write a draft charter,” he said, adding that one would only be written after much deliberation and public input is sought. Proponents contend a charter commission would be without cost to the county except for the commissioners possibly using conference rooms at the county administration building, or having the ability to post meeting information on the county website. Though charter commission candidates are promising voters more say in local government, Kennedy said there will be nothing gained from forming a charter county in Mendocino County. “Because there’s little to no benefit to forming a charter county, then forming a commission isn’t worth the time and energy and money that the county is going to have to spend to do it,” Kennedy said. For example, Kennedy said, forming a charter does not mean any unfunded pension liabilities would be addressed, it would not expand access to mental health resources, wouldn’t address homelessness, adequately fund local volunteer fire departments, and would not preserve or enhance any other essential services the county already provides. Kennedy also said the message of what a charter county would look like has changed since the group began gathering signatures to put it on the ballot, when he said promises were made of starting a public bank and investing locally, stopping illegal foreclosures, taking control of the government and making Mendocino County a “sovereign” county. “There are absolute indeed costs,” Kennedy said. “If the charter commission gets approved, and then the charter gets established, if you ever want to amend the charter without a regular election, you will have to have a special election which would cost well over $100,000.”