Normally I would not give a person who has already been given the opportunity a second chance to respond to an article.
It is inherently unfair, because he or she has read the article and can target the other peoples’ remarks who responded in a timely manner before publication.
I relented this time only because Michael Lanford is running for sheriff and a chance to refute or explain the illegalities stated in Erica Baker’s lawsuit so close to the election was perhaps warranted.
He was given a week the first time and from early Friday morning to Tuesday, Sept. 6 the second time—five days. He confirmed by phone he would respond in writing by Tuesday. It is now Wednesday and he has not responded.
Now, if Lanford wants to respond, he may do so in the comment section of the previous article: https://sierracountycitizen.org/bakers-lawsuit-against-city-is-explosive-possibly-expensive/
He Can’t say he didn’t see it, because on the other page with Erika Baker,he had a bestie comment for him …He has no problem running for sheriff or talking in Facebook ,So why doesn’t he comment? clear the slate out ..
His silence says a lot. That whole episode sounds so sleazy and, sadly, what I’ve come to expect from the powers that be (or wanna be) in this town. His opponent, Joshua Baker stopped by my table a while back when we still had senior lunches. I told him what I thought of his present boss and the Republican attitude toward us queers, women and others not white or christian. He didn’t flinch. I liked him; he had answers that did not follow the Republican line and seemed very sincere in wanting to do a good job for everyone.