Mandy Feder — Managing Editor
LAKE COUNTY — A debate on Thursday night at the Board of Supervisors chambers in Lakeport for the office of District Attorney allowed candidates Doug Rhoades and Don Anderson to question each other, directly following a series of questions posed by moderator Elizabeth Larson, editor of LakeCoNews.
Approximately 30 people attended the debate.
Rhoades made an opening statement that included an apology to Anderson for accusations leveled against Anderson regarding a teaching credential at the previous night”s debate, which took place at the Soper-Reese Community Theatre.
“I said we would both make mistakes and that was one I made,” Rhoades said. “I ask Mr. Anderson to accept my public apology.” Rhoades followed by saying he was the most qualified for the position of District Attorney and he could efficiently lead.
Anderson agreed to accept the apology in his opening statement, but said, “I was upset last night. He challenged my honesty and that type of activity is one of the reasons why I am running for DA.”
He said Rhoades did not do a proper investigation. Anderson followed by saying he would be the toughest on crime and he”s never backed down from fighting for public justice.
The tone of the Thursday night debate mirrored the civility of the onset of Wednesday night”s debate, prior to the accusation. However both candidates took a decidedly more solid stand on the issues. Questions posed at both debates contained similar or replicate content.
Anderson said he has gotten to know people during the course of his career and dealt with a wide-variety of issues.
Rhoades said the primary focus for the DA”s office should be criminal law, because that is what is most important for the DA”s office.
Rhoades said the Lake County DA”s office should aim for about an 80 percent conviction rate, while Anderson said he thinks it should be about 90 percent.
Larson asked what the most difficult decision each had to make in the line of duty, since both candidates were sheriff”s deputies during their careers.
Anderson cited a case in which he had to make a decision about taking a life in the line of duty. He said in the end it was not actually a difficult decision though.
Rhoades said that a lot of the decisions made are not difficult because training tells you what to do and keeping core-values is paramount. He cited a story regarding a vigilante neighbor.
Both candidates discussed their interaction with and knowledge of county departments and familiarity with those they would be working with, if elected.
While Rhoades said he”s interacted with nearly everybody with the exception of the dispatchers, Anderson said he hasn”t made a great deal of contact on purpose because he doesn”t want to put the employees on the spot and he wants to start with a clean slate.
Questions between candidates were allotted a total of four minutes per question; two minutes to answer, one minute for rebuttal and one minute for follow-up.
Rhoades asked Anderson about fiscal difficulty and finances.
Anderson said the key was to ask for as much money as possible from the Board of Supervisors and to let them know “your purposes are more important than other agencies.” He said “We should try to get as much of that pie as we can.”
Anderson said he dealt with finances through his private practice and had experience.
Rhoades” rebuttal was, “How do you equate dealing with individual cases with a single-entity with a $3.4 million budget? Obviously it”s different with $3.4 million budget.”
Anderson said he would seek financial advise from Kelly Cox”s replacement, as Cox plans to retire.
At both Wednesday”s and Thursday”s debates the methamphetamine labs were a subject of discussion.
Anderson asked Rhoades about claiming there were a few in the county.
Rhoades said raw materials are harder to get than in the past, which limits the manufacture of meth.
He said the large amounts are coming from “South of the Border.”
Anderson said there are plenty of labs and cookers in the county and Rhoades” attitude is “like sticking your head in the sand.” Anderson also said that the “cookers” are smarter than most chemists.
Rhoades returned the jab with, “I”m not sticking my head in the sand. You”re living in the past.”
Rhoades said officers are doing a pretty good job in dealing with the issue, overall.
Rhoades then questioned Anderson about his proposed citizen”s advisory committee.
Anderson said it would be comprised of 15 people, plus him. He said he would choose these people from varied backgrounds and organizations. He said he would hold round-table meetings to “bounce issues off of each other.”
He said the members would not have access to the DA”s office. “They cannot come in and snoop around,” he said. “My advisory committee is to see what the community needs are.”
Rhoades asked if the meetings would be public. Anderson said, “no.”
Anderson asked Rhoades about the Dinius case and pointed out that Rhoades had not read the case.
Rhoades said more people had a need for vengeance rather than justice, but the vast majority of civil liability went to the speedboat operator. He said he received most of his information about the Dinius trial via the media.
Rhoades asked Anderson about his experience and involvement with civil leadership or groups.
Anderson said he didn”t belong to civil leadership groups on purpose, because that is not where his interest is.
He said his interest is with youth, such as Little League, basketball, helping indigent people and minorities. He said about 20 percent of his cases are pro bono.
A question addressed Thursday, that was not Wednesday, dealt with the death penalty. Anderson asked Rhoades how he would reconcile his personal beliefs about the death penalty, as he is opposed to it. Rhoades said he would follow the law and the will of the people.
Both candidates supported sentence bargaining as a vision for the DA”s office.
