I've been covering Lakeport's city government for close to eight years, and as a careful observer of the city's business I feel able to offer a few suggestions of my own on how the city can close a $400,000 budget gap.

Going back to last week's special budget meeting, despite the concerns voiced by some council members that the actual mismatch between spending and revenue wasn't really addressed, I actually think it was. Staff has curtailed spending by $200,000 so far this budget year, so that's at least half of the problem addressed right there.

But, let's say that there still would be a $400,000 gap going forward, accounting for reduced revenues in the form of sales and, eventually, property tax due to reassessments.

And let's say that city staff is able to further cut down expenses by $100,000 a year, and that several staffers take a “golden handshake” early retirement that saves about $71,000 in the first year and $96,000 in the second.

In addition, the city could shift payments for county and chamber of commerce marketing services to the redevelopment agency, which could successfully argue that those services benefit the redevelopment area.

The city's redevelopment attorney thinks they should pay no more than $5,000 for each event or service, so that might mean curtailing contracts with the county and chamber significantly, or otherwise using redevelopment to supplement general fund payments. Still, that could mean about $20,000 in savings to the general fund.

So, let's say we're now down to a $200,000 budget gap. Where to go next?

My basic philosophy about budgets is this: Balancing a budget and keeping spending plans sustainable are impacted not just by actual bottom line decisions, but by smart management that approaches critical resources with an eye to the future.

Luxury items that have to go

First off, it's time to look at getting rid of City Council salaries and benefits.

Do they deserve to be compensated? Absolutely. But sometimes what you deserve and what you get are two vastly different things. The more important question is, can the city of Lakeport currently afford it? Maybe not. I'd go so far as to suggest this is a luxury item in the current economic climate.

Council members currently receive $300 a month each, which comes out to $18,000 annually. In light of the fact that city employees are now having to take furloughs, essentially cutting their salaries, I think it's only right the council give their own salaries back until the city's financial condition improves.

The bigger issue is the full health benefits package – including health, dental and vision – council members receive for themselves and their spouses, which is budgeted to cost the city $58,503 in this budget year. Those costs can expect to grow in the years ahead; those costs have risen more than $3,000 since the 2005-06 budget year.

Salaries and benefits together are costing the city $76,503 this year, or $1,275.05 per month, per council member.

For the budget years 2005-06 up through the current fiscal year, council salary and benefits packages have cost the city approximately $300,492. That's not a drop in the budget for a small city like Lakeport.

It's interesting to note that the city of Clearlake's annual expenses for council members are actually much higher. While they pay the same $300 per month salary, health insurance for the fiscal year 2008-09 is budgeted at $94,200, plus $2,970 for redevelopment agency stipends, for a grand total of $115,170. That's up by approximately $69,768 since fiscal year 2006, when two council members waived coverage. In 2005, the city administrator had suspended council health insurance temporarily.

Compare what the two cities offer to the benefits the county Board of Supervisors' members receive.

This year's county budget includes $42,000 for all five supervisors. That number is the county's share of the premium, not the supervisors' individual share, which they pay out of pocket. The county doesn't pay 100 percent of the premium for dependent coverage for any county employee, including its supervisors.

Keep in mind that the supervisors are considered full-time employees.

If things begin to look up for Lakeport in the future, maybe it would be reasonable to consider reestablishing a generous salary and benefits package for council members.

But when they're asking employees to give up pay, and looking at curtailing the benefits of both current employee and retirees, it's hardly reasonable that the council members themselves shouldn't also participate in the sacrifice.

In fact, I believe self-sacrifice is an essential ingredient in effective leadership. It basically says, “We're all in this together.”

This, I'm sure, will be unpopular with the council. The benefits were mentioned by Burke briefly in the special Feb. 24 budget meeting. The reaction from the council on that point was silence.

My feeling is, if you're on the council to get the benefits, you're there for the wrong reason.

The big ticket item

OK, so we're now down in the range of a budget gap of $123,000.

What to cut next?

In my estimation, it's the big ticket item that the city can't really afford right now: The city manager job.

The city established a city manager position in 2001. The current salary and benefits package for the position totals roughly $110,000, according to previous statements by city officials. That's a salary level pretty comparable to much larger cities, and it's beyond what Lakeport can afford.

So I'd suggest one of two options.

First, indefinitely suspend the city manager position. Appoint one of the city's department heads to be a “first among peers,” essentially a position of senior rank; that person would then be the point of contact between city staff and the council. Give them $20,000 a year extra for that duty – think of it as hazard pay. The city last year went through an expensive reorganization process to create new titles and rearrange the place. That has nicely set the stage for this transition.

My second suggestion is better.

The redevelopment manager position goes hand in hand with that of the city manager. Combine the responsibilities of those two jobs into one. Then the council can do what it should have done nearly two years ago: Hire Richard Knoll to lead the city and give him a raise, which will still save the city money.

I want to make clear here that I think Kevin Burke is doing a fantastic and effective job as interim city manager. But he's made clear numerous times that he doesn't want the job permanently.

If the average city staffer has intellectual capital, Knoll is a literal bank of it. He's been with the city for years, is calm in the face of challenges, understands the city's responsibility to its citizens, has extensive knowledge and contacts, and is ultimately a very decent person, a trait that's often in short supply in any field these days.

He's no yes man, and that's also what the city needs – someone who isn't afraid to tell the council the truth when they need to hear it. To simply hire someone to say yes to you, even when they really shouldn't, is like hiring someone to watch your kids who won't hesitate to give them beer and your car keys. (Apologies to PJ O'Rourke for a wild paraphrase of one of his quips.)

In either scenario, the city stands to save as much as $90,000.

So, we're now down to about $50,000, which can be recovered with a nip here and a tuck there, including modest reductions in professional services budgets and training, without completely gutting those items altogether.

A better approach to city staff

The proposals I've offered above are made with an eye toward protecting one of the city's most valuable resources: its staff.

The city of Lakeport has an eminently qualified group of employees who, despite the recent tough times and enormous normal workloads, have stuck by the city and continue to try to serve it and the public the best way they can.

So it's been especially hard to see them have to take a 5-percent pay cut in the form of furloughs – which the city's employee bargaining units agreed to do – in order to help the city's bottom line.

You can bet that 5-percent pay cut was no small sacrifice for many of those employees.

So the suggestion that the city consider an additional furlough, raising the cut amount to 10 percent in the coming fiscal year is, to me, patently unacceptable.

Further, I believe the city should have no pay cut at all in the year ahead.

What about saving money, you ask? Aren't furloughs better than layoffs?

Yes, in the short term, they are vastly preferable to layoffs.

However, I think that the furlough is an emergency measure that simply shouldn't be repeated, and that if it's used again it will do quite the reverse of its intended use, and end up costing the city money.

That cost to the city will come in the form of experienced employees walking out the door, taking their intellectual capital – an often hard-to-quantify value that includes a person's experience, knowledge and training – with them elsewhere. In the current job market, they may not leave right away, but they will leave eventually. The cost to replace those employees could easily exceed any savings.

Just as costly will be the damage to the city's reputation if it begins layoffs, a point Burke has made numerous times.

The specter of layoffs has been hanging about the city like an unwelcome guest over the last year, and the council needs to dispel it immediately, for the sake of the city's reputation and employee morale.

Some of the council appear to want to say the word “layoff,” but are weighing the political ramifications. Let me remove any doubt for them: The fallout will be severe.

And why take that step if it may not be necessary? I think there are better ways to address the city's budget problems and they don't involve making cuts at the expense of employees or the much-needed services they provide to the public.

It's crucial to point out that this isn't just about employees, but the work they do for the public.

If you don't like the fact that you can't get your street paved now, just wait until there's no one to run the pavement grinder. Want the parks kept up? What if you suddenly have two or three less people to do that work? How will that make the city look to the rest of the world? And what about when you need a police officer and can't get one?

These are questions everyone in Lakeport – from council members to the citizens paying the taxes – must weigh carefully in the months ahead.

E-mail Elizabeth Larson at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

{mos_sb_discuss:4}

Columnist and contributor Mandy Feder.

Regardless of how old I get, I am simply juvenile about my birthday. I shamelessly announce it and absorb the well wishes.

Maybe it’s because in order to enter the world I battled an IUD victoriously. My brother Steve, 13 months my senior, was a diaphragm baby.

I woke up Thursday morning to my friend Carol singing happy birthday in two languages. My boy, Rex, now more than 6 feet tall, grinned and sang to me as he was on his way out to school and punched his friend Payton in the arm, who ran back to say, “Hey, Mandy, happy birthday.”

I saw my daughter Nicole’s grocery list on the counter, which consisted of ingredients for my favorite soup, hot and sour, and at the bottom of the list it said, “cake mix.” Next to the list was a bottle of my favorite red wine accompanied by a card from my housemate Dave.

I cannot recall anything, at any age that got in the way of enjoying my day. Some people don’t like getting older. They deny it, fight it, ignore it or reject it.

My friend Charlette from high school greeted me on Facebook with this: “Happy birthday. 43 huh? Who would have thunk it? I remember being 17 and thinking 30 was ancient. When I have cocktails this weekend, I will dedicate a lemon drop to you :) I just got back into town. Do you have any plans for a birthday celebration? I am letting birthdays pass quietly these last few years. No need for all the hoopla. Mahalo.”

She’s at least as beautiful as she was in school and the years certainly lend wisdom to us all.

I am celebrating this year quietly at home, but happily with friends and family. I am writing this as a respite or departure from political, social and economic issues of the time, because this is my day.

Though others share the same date of birth, some even the same year, like my accountant Christine, nobody shares the same experiences as I do. That indeed makes me an individual.

Each year my dad points out my age, “Boy you’re getting old he says.” I tell him that must make him super-old; after all, I am the youngest of his three children.

On a more mature note, my birthday is a time when I can assess what I have contributed to the world thus far and what I would like to, or intend to, contribute in the year ahead. I think about the places I’ve lived, people I’ve known and memories created. This year I’m grateful that I saw my favorite Uncle Mark and got to know my cousins and aunt. I was surprised at how much we mean to each other even after many years.

I made a list of aspirations and a list of resolutions. I thank my parents as if I were accepting an Academy Award, “I would just like to thank you for making this all possible,” type of thing.

This year I wish that everyone find a day for themselves, a day to set humility aside and celebrate life shamelessly and joyfully.

“In life we need three things, a wishbone, a backbone and a funny bone.”

Mandy Feder is a contributing writer and columnist for Lake County News.

{mos_sb_discuss:4}

Columnist and contributor Mandy Feder.

Singing resumes, group suicides and closing doors mark the desperation of a new year.

State workers face pink slips to the tune of 20,000 more jobless.

In Florida, an unemployed executive assistant in her late 50s entered a karaoke for work contest –something that seems as surreal as the movie “Rollerball.” She sang about her plight to obtain employment to the tune of “Summer Lovin’,” from “Grease.”

Men in suits walk circles on the sidewalk holding their resumes pasted on cardboard signs in Los Angeles.

A few months back a Southern California couple took their lives and the lives of their children after the man and woman were concurrently laid off.

Small business owners are reporting as few as one customer a day, all over the place.

Taxpayers will receive an IOU from the State of California if taxes are owed to them.

During National Recovery Month, recovery programs are closing up shop for lack of funds to provide services.

The pebble in the pond theory cited by Virginia Satir describes the impact that one pebble dropped in a pond creates, causing reverberations that hit the shore, getting larger with each wave and returning the waves from the shore back into the pond – still moving until the waves eventually lose steam after many cycles and calm waters ensue, until the next pebble hits.

So this boulder in the ocean is causing crazy tidal waves – the kind that cause panic and hopelessness.

In Denver President Barack Obama raced to reverse the economic spiral by signing a monster stimulus package into law Tuesday. He’s preparing a new $50 billion foreclosure rescue for scads of people facing the loss of their homes.

Automakers headed to Washington seeking bailout billions.

General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC are getting rid of thousands more jobs.

Obama hopes a $787 billion stimulus plan package of federal spending and tax cuts will revive the economy and save some millions of jobs. Some individuals will soon receive $400 and $800 will go to couples.

“None of this will be easy. The road to recovery will not be straight. We will make progress, and there may be some slippage along the way. We have begun the essential work of keeping the American dream alive in our time,” Obama said Tuesday.

The package might restore order to the financial system to some degree. But housing prices continue to plummet, household wealth diminishes and millions suffocate with the weight of unmanageable debt.

The deteriorating job market eliminates paychecks from the economy.

Widgets, gadgets, knick knacks and curios are out. Water bills, mortgages and power bills must be paid.

The recession caused slews of families to examine spending habits and adjust accordingly for the sake of survival. Perhaps, if there’s any benefit to the economic crisis, it is that Americans were forced to face an epiphany that gluttony must cease.

However, with that said, college students are dropping out, some to eliminate the financial burden

A large majority of the nation's unemployed are educated. Essential programs are hacked from public school budgets daily. Overachievers are losing advanced placement courses in high schools, remedial students losing the courses that insure success, sports, extracurricular and arts disappearing from the fabric of curriculum.

The medical field is an active employment market, unfortunately only a fraction of Americans can afford to see a doctor. When jobs are lost, benefits are lost. In California a great number of doctors are awaiting pay for services that are covered by Medi-Cal. The unsigned state budget stalls the process.

I saw a man standing in the pouring rain Tuesday. He held a cardboard sign that simply said “HUNGRY.” I believed it. He was shaking and appeared emaciated.

The country and the world are pained with this paradox and hoping against hope for a solution.

Mandy Feder is an award-winning writer and editor who is a Lake County News columnist and contributor.

{mos_sb_discuss:4}

The crash of salmon in California affects us all. This once-abundant fish, famed for huge king salmon in numbers so great they crowded our rivers, is now teetering on the edge of extinction. While some specific populations are not listed under the Endangered Species Act, several king salmon and coho salmon runs are listed as “threatened” or “endangered.”

These are not just trophy and sport fish. They form the backbone of California ecosystems, tribal cultures, local economies, a commercial fishing industry and a once-plentiful, wonderful food. Most Californians would mourn the loss of salmon, and rightly so – it would be a resource squandered.

This will likely be the second year in a row with no commercial or sport ocean salmon season. This is not an anomaly – it is the sad result of a long-term trend that government and the public have been unable to stop. And, as last year’s no-catch season demonstrates, a blanket ban on fishing will not, by itself, reverse that trend.

Salmon have borne the brunt of development in California. With every major dam, they lose habitat. With every ounce of polluted runoff from farm or city, they lose water quality. With every quart pumped from once free-flowing rivers, they lose water.

In-stream pumps trap juveniles against screens; invasive species steal habitat and eat young fish; wildland roads dump sediment into streams; and hatchery management practices are incapable of replacing natural spawning. Add to this the natural – and human-induced – changes wrought on climate, the ocean and streambeds, and the salmon face one tough uphill swim.

One particularly pernicious practice affecting water quality and the beds of streams is motorized in-stream motorized gold mining. Gasoline-powered engines on suction dredges on pontoons or rafts are used by people to scoop up riverbeds in order to find grains of gold in Northern California streams. Sediment from suction mining covers emerging salmon in stream gravels, and the suction alone, in the deep, cool parts of wild streams, entrains and kills young fish.

Statewide, there are about 3,000 miners operating in places like the Klamath, Scott and Shasta watersheds who buy permits from the California Department of Fish and Game (DFG). Resident permits cost about $50. Combined with non-resident permit sales, they generate from $150,000 to $200,000 annually – for a program which costs DFG over $1.25 million each year to enforce.

In contrast, California fishermen buy 2.4 million fishing licenses each year. The sport-fishing industry supports a total of 43,000 jobs paying $1.3 billion in wages and salaries annually. Fishing equipment sales total over $2.4 billion per year. And salmon, fish highly susceptible to the impacts from suction dredges, are traditionally the most important fish to Northern California commercial fishermen and native tribes.

Yet, late last month, the DFG rejected a petition to restrict mining in areas most important to fish. The department director seemed more swayed by a partisan letter from the Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors in support of the miners than ecological realities. In sharp contrast to overwhelming evidence, the board stated that there is no emergency.

DFG’s action – or rather, the department’s shameful lack of action – is unconscionable. Environmental choices should be based on fact, as well as on fair evaluation of economic realities. Gold mining is a minor, recreational activity. Many commercial fishermen, along with sellers of fishing equipment and others in a multi-million-dollar industry, deserve equal if not greater consideration. DFG has already admitted publicly that the regulatory status quo is harming fish like the coho salmon.

DFG officials have a responsibility to protect our state’s fishery resources, the livelihoods of our fishermen and women, and the supply of local seafood for our tables. And if they don’t fulfill that responsibility, the state legislature, along with other concerned individuals and organizations, must hold them accountable.

Accordingly, I plan to introduce legislation to ban suction-dredge mining in California. While some miners will denounce a ban as infringing upon their “freedom,” no human beings should be “free” to hasten the elimination of these magnificent fish. And millions of other Californians – including fishing families, recreational fishermen and salmon consumers – have an interest to protect, as well.

And on Feb. 5, attorneys for the Karuk Indian Tribe and the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations filed suit, seeking a temporary restraining order seeking to prevent DFG from issuing additional mining permits and to halt all suction dredge mining operations.

We are, hopefully, at a turning point on the path of survival for California’s salmon. There is an agreement in principle to remove dams on the Klamath River. There is reconsideration of Delta pumping and water management. There are broad efforts to bring back the coho, with many people gritting their teeth to cooperate with a broad range of restrictions, starting with fishermen.

It is time for miners to give up their self-interest, too, to give these fish a moment to recover. And it’s high time for the Department of Fish and Game to go from protecting miners to protecting fish … for all Californians.

State Sen. Patricia Wiggins (D-Santa Rosa) chairs the Joint Legislative Committee on Fisheries & Aquaculture. She represents California’s 2nd District, which includes Lake County.

{mos_sb_discuss:4}

I recently saw an article describing the negative effects of corporal punishment on children – likening it to child abuse. It said that it teaches violence, destroys self esteem, and generally demeans both parent and child.

This is just another example of the twisted values of today’s generation of misled theoreticians. To support this point of view I’d like to quote an article written by a psychologist and 40-year veteran of our educational system, Mr. Don Henthorn, entitled, “There’s Research And Then There’s Research.”

“I’ve been a psychologist for almost 40 years, also a teacher, guidance counselor, and administrator. In my opinion, the research (relied upon today) is patently false. The research designs are seriously flawed. Using similar methods I could produce studies proving that corporal punishment inflicted by loving parents takes far less time and is far more effective. In social studies today, little valid information comes from research because examination of all the variables is politically incorrect. Many present day researchers have never passed Methods of Research 101, let alone advanced classes. They start with the flawed presumption that children have an advanced capacity to understand the need to behave similar to adults. Children see it quite differently. They view these methods as a sign of weakness. They feel in control with no fear of consequences. Today, drugs are often used as last-resort correctives.

“The phrases 'authoritative discipline' and 'positive behavior intervention' are too fuzzy and nebulous to get hold of. Parents and principals will tell you they get zero results with children who need discipline the most. With both parent(s) working, time outs, withholding of rewards, serious talks, etc., can not be utilized consistently because parents simply aren’t there when they need to be!

“Proponents of these 'theories' fail to make a distinction between abuse and loving punishment because they have a skewed perspective as to what constitutes violence. When spanking was common, experiential data shows there was far less abuse of children and women. Communities took an active role in disciplining abusers, and physically corrected children had love and respect for their parents. We need town meetings to examine public opinion and historical perspective rather than relying on questionable experts. Also police and protective services should not give credence to theories based on dubious research.”

Many Indian tribes were able to enforce discipline through social pressure, but only because they shared similar values and lifestyles. Today, we don’t have any social pressures to speak of. There is no greater family and few of us care what our neighbors think.

Native peoples never struck their children. Our society did without such punishments because the tribal communities’ social pressures were significantly more powerful in controlling and directing acceptable behavior than the splintered and unsupported American family of today. Many native peoples did have warrior societies that occasionally disciplined adults corporally to insure their compliance, but the most dominant method of force was the threat of humiliation or ostracism.

Today, our citizens share so many different moral and ethical codes that, despite a certain nostalgia and belief in a moral majority, no common morality or value guidelines exist. Without powerful social pressure to encourage citizens to live by a common code, and without the threat or fear of corporal consequence to take its place, there remains only the weak and vacillating exhortation to “behave,” “grow up,” “come to task”, etc. These gobbledy-gook encouragements are part of the poorly theorized, improperly studied precepts of educators, sociologists and parents catering to the whims of undisciplined “experts.”

Looking to nature, every species has to discipline its youth as they push the envelope of willful behavior. This is a natural process toward maturity, but first attempts begin long before the individual has reached a level of intellectual maturity to find a motivation for correct behavior.

Animals are quick and decisive in dealing with this “testing” by their young. Fear of pain is their most effective teaching tool. The quickest way for a child to learn not to touch a hot stove is for them to burn their fingers. The consequences of one’s actions are learned behavior starting with a young child’s first attempts at self reliance.

From those early falls is born a sense of caution; from burned fingers comes a respect for fire. Obviously there is the potential for injury, even fatality, from experimentation – and parents are forced to take more drastic measures to insure children will not take unknown risks simply because they are not yet familiar with the consequences.

When it comes to survival, discipline is fairly easy to accomplish, but social discipline is more difficult. The reasons to “behave” and the benefits of appropriate behavior are not as clear-cut.

As children, most of the baby boom generation was subjected to the “rod” theory, and looking back now, it was pretty effective. We understood that this “discipline” was not from anger and knew that our parents and other adults had our best interests in mind. Since we were also shown sufficient affection, understanding and praise by these same individuals, it was neither demeaning or destructive to our self-esteem. We observed it in nature, and knew it to be a natural occurrence.

Fifty years ago, with corporal punishment a regular form of consequence for undesirable behavior in children and even young adults, it was safe to walk down any street, leave your car and house doors unlocked, and trust your children to do exactly as they were asked–most of the time. Though we had this closet type of violence in every home, society itself was relatively violence free and, if it occurred at all, it was dealt with immediately and harshly.

Today in our more “enlightened” society, where any kind of corporal punishment or spanking is deemed a first cousin of child abuse, and where even verbal correction can be termed a form of abuse, violence is at an all time high. Society demands it for entertainment and in many places the common citizen no longer feels safe in their own home.

Family temperament, volatility and atmosphere create different personalities and a need for different types of discipline. One solution does not fit every child. But the concept that one can appeal to a disturbed young person’s “good sense” to “behave” denies the basic nature of all species to indulge themselves in selfish behavior and test the limits of social control. Only a few species have the social constructs to successfully discipline without corporal adjustment and the only ones successful on this continent were determined to be ignorant savages!

What can be done with young people who, for whatever reason, are simply too willful to be controlled with words or threats that do not have physical pain lurking around to back them up? While their parent(s) may be abusive, disinterested or just afraid the neighbors will call protective services, these youths (usually male) are used to all the disciplinary measures currently in favor and are unfazed by their application. It only takes only one or two of these “fearless” children to infect a classroom or group with disruptive behavior.

Anyone who has children knows that the time line for effectively teaching discipline is short indeed. If we miss our opportunity during early development, we allow unbalanced children to develop an unnatural acceptance of misfortune in their lives. The result? They have little fear of consequences and even “fear of pain” becomes an ineffective technique. They have “formed” and there is no going back.

We think of today as the age of reason. Many people have the misguided expectation that children will respect and accept verbal direction if it is put to them in a quiet and instructively respectful manner. This is no more true for children than it is for adults.

Take the law for example. If the law did not have teeth in its consequences, even reasonable people would begin to take liberties with it, finding ways of rationalizing their actions to explain their disdain of its observance – like stopping at a stop sign. Everyone knows these signs are put there to direct traffic in a safe manner to protect all drivers. Everyone also knows that even when we can see that there is no clear and present danger, we are a still asked to obey – with the consequence of a punishment if we do not. If there were no consequence, individual drivers would begin to bend the law and rationalize their behavior to their own opinions regarding danger.

To find a balance between effective discipline and affection is the test of parenting. We would like to believe that the human animal is evolving into a more enlightened creature – but the state of the world suggests otherwise. Despite paying lip service to grander concepts, the spectacles of sex and death that were rampant in declining Roman society are beginning, once again, to dominate as forms of entertainment for the masses – a sure sign of civilization in decline.

The implication that previous generations disciplined with corporal punishment were somehow damaged, demeaned or improperly treated is ludicrous. Consider the statistics measuring the levels of violence and depression in youth and you will find increases since the advent of these new concepts of discipline.

Talk to anyone born before 1970 and you will find few who consider reasonable corporal punishment to have been damaging to their development, psyche or self-esteem. To say that corporal punishment has no place in the rearing of children in a dangerous world is, in itself, a dangerous theory. The only real argument against corporal punishment today is that today’s parents are so imbalanced themselves that they would not administer such punishments in prudent and reasonable ways. But that is a discussion for another day.

Fear forces us to learn many lessons related to facing the inherent dangers found in the natural world. Fear of consequence causes human adaptation. Much of this learned adaptation results directly from pain experienced when we make mistakes that threaten our balance or direction in that world. Corporal punishment, reasonably applied, is one of the more useful tools individuals have for insisting that their experience and wisdom is demonstrated to their children in a way that is certain to guarantee, if not their compliance, their attention and/or survival.

Today’s violence is gratuitous and self-serving. Its insidious acceptance into our mediums of entertainment and daily lives affects our children in a much more profound manner than any momentary pain and humiliation they might face enduring a five second spanking. Lack of guidance, self-discipline and success does a lot more to damage the self-esteem of our youth than corporal punishment ever would.

James BlueWolf is an artist and writer. He lives in Nice.

{mos_sb_discuss:4}

These financially difficult times have forced everyone to take a very close look at all of our programs. This is a very good thing. We must determine what is working well and should be preserved and even expanded. We also need to look at what is not working and should be modified or eliminated from our program.

You are our clients. We value your opinions and insights. In the upcoming days, there will be several opportunities for you to express your opinions. We have scheduled five special board meetings in February so that we can hear your opinions and insights. These meetings will take place from 6 p.m. to 7 p.m. on the following days and at the following locations:

• Feb. 17: In the Oak Hill Middle School multi-purpose room;

• Feb. 19: East Lake Elementary School cafeteria;

• Feb. 24: Lower Lake Elementary School cafeteria;

• Feb. 25: Burns Valley Elementary School cafeteria;

• Feb. 26: Pomo Elementary School cafeteria

The driving force behind our making these decisions is the current fiscal situation in California and our district.

We have been cutting costs in the district for several years now. Last year, KUSD cut a million dollars out of our $28 million budget. The majority of these cuts were made away from the classroom; for example, we eliminated the assistant superintendent and district curriculum and instruction positions.

Yet, the budget reductions keep coming. We are expecting to have to cut close to a million more dollars at mid-year when the state decides on this school year’s (2008-09) budget. Projections are that we will need to cut another $1 million next year.

In late October, we formed committees of district personnel, parents, and community members to investigate and recommend methods to increase our revenue and decrease our spending. These recommendations were presented to the KUSD Board of Trustees on Feb. 4. Copies of the recommendations can be obtained at the District Office or can be emailed.

Schools receive monies from the state and federal governments based upon student enrollment and attendance. The easiest way to increase revenue is for our students to attend school more regularly. If we increase our overall district attendance by 1 percent, then we will earn another $180,000. More importantly, when our students attend more, they learn more, and will be better prepared for life.

Lowering costs is a far more difficult problem because we have cut so much already that we are down to cutting personnel and consolidating our services. This is where we need your opinions and input. KUSD has been the leader in determining ways that the county, city of Clearlake and other school districts can join together to reduce our purchasing costs and prevent the duplication of services.

This will certainly save dollars, but not enough to balance our budget. We must do something that will significantly reduce our costs over a long period of time, while at the same time improving our overall services to the students.

The consolidation committee has recommended three plans to do this. They are ranked below in order of costs saved.

Plan No. 1: Close Oak Hill Middle School and make Burns Valley, Pomo and Lower Lake Elementary

Schools serve kindergarten through eighth grade (K-8). East Lake would remain a K-8, but with a higher enrollment.

Plan No. 2: Close Oak Hill Middle School and make Burns Valley a K-3 and Pomo a fourth through eighth grade school. Lower Lake Elementary becomes a K-8. East Lake would remain a K-8, but with a higher enrollment.

Plan No. 3: Close Burns Valley Elementary and have Pomo and Lower Lake both continue as K-6 schools with expanded enrollment including former Burns Valley students. Oak Hill continues as a 7-8 school and East Lake a K-8.

There are many pros and cons to each of these plans. The committee felt that the best way to judge a plan was by using the following criteria:

1. Is it beneficial for students by improving opportunities for learning?

2. Will it save money?

3. How does it affect the parents and community?

4. What is the impact on certificated and classified staff members?

5. Can it be done by the beginning of the 2009-2010 school year?

The pros and cons of each of these plans will be further discussed at the February board meetings at each site. In addition, all parents and staff will receive a Connect Ed phone survey on Friday, Feb. 27, at 7 p.m. We ask that you vote for the plan that you think best meets the above criteria at that time. If you are unavailable to answer the survey at that time, you will receive another call on Saturday morning (Feb. 28) at 10 a.m. Your opinion is important and valued.

The Konocti Board of Trustees, your elected representatives, has placed our students’ academic and personal growth until graduation as their Overriding Goal. To do this, their priorities are: safety, low class sizes and intervention programs. They want to reduce the number of combo classes (two grade levels in one classroom), make sure that the smallest class sizes are in the lower grade levels (K-3), and make the last personnel cuts those who directly work with students in the classroom.

The board also emphasized the importance of art, music, drama, career tech (vocational education) and athletics in grades K-12. In short, the board of trustees has mandated that we provide a full curriculum, in fully staffed, safe classrooms. These are superb goals that we can achieve and our children deserve.

Thanks so much for your willingness to help us make wise decisions that improve our educational services. Together, we will make sure that the Konocti Unified School District is known statewide for students who receive the education necessary for a happy, productive life.

William MacDougall, Ed.D, is superintendent of the Konocti Unified School District.

{mos_sb_discuss:4}