Dear Editor,
Ron Dubin recently wrote in a letter to the Mountain Mail and Ark Valley Voice regarding Hannah Hannah, candidate for County Commissioner saying, “I find it insulting that she is asking us to put her in charge of our future when she apparently has so little relevant experience”.
Turn-of-the century attack on women demanding the right to vote. Courtesy photo.
Mr. Dubin, you are entitled to your opinion, but your letter was a casebook study on why, 100 years after women got the right to vote, women still do not have equality, or even apparently the right to civility, when running for public office.
In your letter, you attacked Ms. Hannah’s style of dress, and “gasp” her choice to wear red laces, labeling her a White Supremacist for her fashion choice. As reported by the New York Times, for over a hundred years women fighting for the right to vote have been pilloried for their fashion choices, such as skirts that exposed ankles “scandalous”, or short pantaloons or bloomers which enabled “The New Woman and her Bicycle”.
Throughout the mid-to-late-nineteenth century, women cyclists wearing bloomers were severely harassed and some regions even prosecuted for violating sex-specific dress laws.
More than one hundred years later, when speaking at the Women’s Equality Day event in Salida this week with other women running for office, Ms. Hannah was again targeted for her fashion choice – red laces. These accessories were a fashion statement honoring the American iconic image of women’s power “Rosie the Riveter”. I for one will judge her as a candidate by what she says, rather than what she wears.
Mr. Dubin also failed to do his research correctly on Hannah Hannah’s background. While he is correct that she has never owned a business in Chaffee County, she is from a multi-generational ranching family and lived and worked on her family’s operating cattle ranch in Monte Vista, CO.
Like many other young people in the Arkansas and San Luis Valleys, she and her brother had to build their careers outside of this region due to our lack of professional opportunities in this region. She is currently the Social Media Manager for a major corporation founded by her brother, R Investments. You can see her professional work and more information on this company at their social media site.
Mr. Dubin continues in his letter to condemn Ms. Hannah as unqualified because she has not “spent hours and hours at no-pay volunteer positions”. It was this statement in particular that made me realize how out of touch Mr. Dubin is, with the reality of life for many young people in this County. Ms. Hannah is a single parent. Not only does she have to work as the sole breadwinner to take care of her family but she also has to juggle work hours with child care and raising her two boys. Yet according to Mr. Dubin, she is “not qualified” to represent Chaffee County citizens because she does not have the luxury of spending volunteer time with local boards and non-profits.
Mr. Dubin, I suggest you take the time to review the R Empowerment site to get a better appreciation of the wealth of experience she has obtained through her work that are relevant to address critical issues for our county such as housing, and homelessness. Not to mention the life-experiences that she has had that are so relevant to Chaffee citizens such as the challenges of being a single mom, and the first-hand experience of the challenges involved with running a large scale cattle and sheep ranch.
I for one am keeping an open mind on who to vote for and look forward to hearing from all three candidates for County Commissioner about their platforms and how they will represent all Chaffee County citizens if elected. I am also glad that we have two strong, qualified women running for this office who are not afraid to stand up and challenge the status quo and ask the hard questions to assure government transparency and protection of citizen’s rights.
While we are on the subject of fashion choices, I would like to point out that Ms. Hannah’s opponent Commissioner Keith Baker has during his four years in office, in my opinion, consistently voted to erode agricultural rights in Chaffee County that should have been protected under Colorado’s Right to Farm and Ranch laws*. My friends from ranching or farming backgrounds will know what I mean when I say – Commissioner Keith Baker is “all hat and no cattle”.
Alison Brown
Salida
Editor’s notes:
Brown is a primary investor in Ark Valley Voice. Per the contract, she has no editorial control over this digital news media.
Ark Valley Voice has not yet done any article about candidates for county office. Our coverage of the candidates has been limited to the list of candidates running for office and an article about the women candidates attending Women’s Equality Day.
*Claim substantiation of Right to Farm and Ranch (R2FR):
- Commissioners (BoCC) changed the definition of “ag” in their R2FR Board Operating procedures to limit who can apply for mediation. The definition is much narrower than State definition and eliminates small holdings such as horse farms and also 4-H activities.
- BoCC first agreed and then reversed course on forming a working group to amend the Animal Control ordinance to comply with the R2FR Act (it precedes this Act). This has forced ranchers to spend thousands of dollars in defense against nuisance charges that the Sheriff’s office filed because of the outdated ordinance.
- BoCC changed the definition of kennels to remove the exemption for dogs used in ag operations.
- Joint working sessions between the BoCC and Planning Commission (while the Comp Plan was being drafted), with intent to change the Land USe Code (LUC) to regulate horse facilities included proposed regulations would have even required 4H events at private property to get permits.
- https://arkvalleyvoice.com/joint-chaffee-commissioners-planning-commission-work-session-on-outfitting-facility-definition-and-marijuana-facilities/
- https://arkvalleyvoice.com/chaffee-planning-commission-to-take-up-outfitting-definition-marijuana-facility-setbacks/
- https://arkvalleyvoice.com/chaffee-joint-session-on-outfitting-yields-draft-use-table/
II don’t plan on voting for Hannah because 1: Keith Baker has done a great job and I fully support him. and 2: Hannah has done nothing that I can see to show she is particularly well qualified. That said, let’s stick to the issues. There are enough conspiracy theories floating around this country right now, We don’t need to be adding to them in regard to our local elections!. STICK TO THE ISSUES PLEASE. I don’t need to read about red shoelaces —
This is an incredible letter! What a great insight of what our girl is about! Hannah’s strengths, wisdom, and courage are so inspiring not only to me as a young adult in this community, but also to my daughters! Her knowledge and experience is going to be very reciprocated in this community! What Hannah has to offer is incredible, you need to meet her! Ask her all of your questions don’t just assume, be proactive and meet with her, she wants to hear EVERYONE’s voice, don’t listen to hear say, or rumors! She has a lot to offer Chaffee county and our needs, she is our hope for a brighter future❤️💪🏻❤️
Why is a primary investor getting so much coverage in the editorials? Seems like a conflict of interest to me.
In answer to your question, letters to the editor are NOT editorials; they are written letters from individual citizens speaking out on topics about which they hold an opinion. Alison Brown has as much right to submit a letter to the editor as any other citizen. As always, letters to the editor are required to provide substantiation for their claims. Claims are points made that purport to be fact. These differ from opinions, which is what someone thinks, versus that which is real.
Letters to the Editor must adhere to the standards of the First Amendment which rejects hate speech, libel and slander, obscenity, child pornography, or speech that constitutes what has become widely known as “fighting words.” https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/95-815.pdf
Brown is a primary investor in Ark Valley Voice, and she has absolutely no editorial control over AVV. By contract, that control rests with Managing Editor Jan Wondra, who leads a crew of reporters who are involved in coverage decisions.
Brown