Humboldt County Supervisors voted 4-0 for an immediate moratorium on recent code enforcement actions that have seen guns pointed at unarmed mothers and other warrantless bad cop behavior in the Southern and Northern parts of the county.
The vote came after a vigorous 5 hours of public testimony followed by a brief discussion by Supervisors, who agreed to separate the criminal drug enforcement issues from civil code enforcement.
The moratorium was passed along with the creation of a task force that will examine the code enforcement manual, interview residents and report back to the board in 45 days.
“We’re taking charge,” said Supervisor Jimmy Smith in answer to the oft-repeated question of who’s responsible for the recent raids.
The task force will include 3 members of the Civil liberties Monitoring Project, 1 from the County Administrative office, 1 from environmental health, 2 supervisors and 2 at large.
Jill Geist added that some of the issues complained about were personnel issues and that there would be an investigation. Presumably she meant officer John Desadier and the gun-pointing Officer Fulton will be investigated for their unconstitutional behavior.
Speakers stayed mostly on point of code enforcement. Of the 54 speakers, only a few mistakenly confused the phenomena of drug-cops-disguised-as-code-enforcement with last year’s TPZ issue.
Only one person seemed to deliberately muddy the lines between the two issues. HumCPR’s Lee Ulansey — whose group apparently benefits from the confusion — deliberately conflated code enforcement with TPZ in hopes of giving supes the impression that his issues were supported by the people in the room.
As a counter point, resident Jeff St. John offered an example of problems when there was no code enforcement (vs. the heavily armed). As a land owner he said he took proper steps to make his property code-compliant, but had neighbors encroach on his property. His administrative complaint to the county languished without enforcement. He eventually filed a lawsuit to regain his property.
The code enforcement item on today’s supervisors agenda was billed as a “time certain” set for 9:30am, but by 10 o’clock the overflow in the lobby was getting restless. The item was called at 10:30.
The meeting itself was slightly behind schedule because of the huge crowd. Additional audio adjustments were made to accommodate the overflow of people in the courthouse lobby and conference rooms A and B.
More details coming soon.
April 8, 2008 at 5:22 pm
Peace be with you
It never made it to the agenda as a time-set item – it was item “F.” If they had not had major panic attacks prior to the meeting it would of started about 9:30, but they didn’t even start the meeting by 9:30.
love eternal
tad
April 8, 2008 at 5:27 pm
Mr.H. Thank you for keeping us informed on this issue.I was not able to attend–I had spoke with Rodoni about this mess yesterday and he was very adament that something was would be done today. Let hope the action that the sups have taken will end in a result that are in the best interest of all.
April 8, 2008 at 5:30 pm
Rodoni made the motion early in the meeting, about 10:30, and it passed five hours later after lots of testimony and no lunch break.
April 8, 2008 at 5:37 pm
3 CLMP. 3 at large. 2 Supervisors, Geist and Rodoni. It’s the CAO (County Administrative Office), not the Assessor’s Office, and no Sheriff on the task force – the Sheriff was separated out, separating the civil from criminal….
April 8, 2008 at 5:40 pm
peace Rose
That’s the way I remember it too.
love
tad
April 8, 2008 at 5:44 pm
You’re right, rose, thanks.
April 8, 2008 at 5:46 pm
They replaced the sheriff with someone from Environmental Health, I believe.
April 8, 2008 at 5:54 pm
I guess Hofweber won’t be doing any bulldozing after all.
April 8, 2008 at 5:58 pm
Yes, you’re right heraldo. Maybe good things will come of this.
April 8, 2008 at 6:03 pm
on the earlier “rednecks and hippes unite” thread, i advocated three overarching “process” steps to dealing with the problems posed by these code raids. those three points were: (1) stop the violence. (2) hear the people. (3) find the solutions.
it looks like part (1) has been achieved, at least during the moratorium. we have made a good start on part (2) with last friday’s forum, today’s hearing, and the prospect of a more full hearing of concerns and ideas through the task force that was approved today. i am confident that now that the violence (and implied threat of violence against others) has been stopped, that it will be far easier to find those solutions. negotiating with someone with a (metaphorical) gun to their head doesn’t produce real agreement. it only produces, either fear-based compliance, or anger-based retaliation.
i look forward to adding my input to the upcoming task force, and i hope other folks posting here – even those who disagree with me – also make themselves heard as we move into this next phase of trying to actually find solutions that work for our rural residents, as well as meet the legitimate fire safety, environmental, and public health concerns of their fellow-citizens throughout the county.
there was a great deal of very moving testimony today, and whether it was that, or just the raw political momentum that was starting to build, the supervisors appear to have listened to the pleas and demands of the speakers.
this was just a first step, and we have a long way to go in terms of getting our building code to be more user-friendly for rural homeowners, and more accomodating to sensible alternatives such as greywater systems and composting toilets. it is reassuring to see that, at least here at the local level, people can still have a swift and decisive impact on their representatives by force of argument and organizing.
i love humboldt county.
April 8, 2008 at 6:21 pm
Me, too, Thorn.
April 8, 2008 at 6:25 pm
How did Ulansey muddy the lines? I just watched his testimony. It seemed to me his testimony regarding TPZ was just another example of the breach of trust in the planning department and county counsels office.
April 8, 2008 at 6:37 pm
I agree completely on Ullansey, Heraldo. He acted as though he was speaking for everyone there as one group, HumCPR.
April 8, 2008 at 6:39 pm
Exactly right. If I had a nickel for every time he said “we” I could go to the Avalon for drinks.
April 8, 2008 at 6:40 pm
His issues were supported by the people in the room, they are the same issues. County counsel and planning are out of control. Wake up.
April 8, 2008 at 6:41 pm
thatsallottanickels
April 8, 2008 at 6:41 pm
Ulansey was right on target with the issues facing everyone in So Hum and everywhere else. I am tired of seeing a guy who has been consistently out there for us being unfairly bashed. I heard him speak passionately today about the things that matter to us all. I am going to the HumCPR meeting in Ferndale tomorrow. Heraldo, you are just wrong on this one.
April 8, 2008 at 6:42 pm
We’ll have a better idea of who authorized what when the task force reports back.
April 8, 2008 at 6:45 pm
speaker at 3:47 talked about TPZ and planning to, heraldo
April 8, 2008 at 7:08 pm
the issue of the general plan update is certainly not one in the same with the issue of the code enforcement “raids” discussed at the hearing today.
most people at the hearing spoke directly to the issue of the code raids, though some also commented on permitting and planning issues. but clearly the supervisors knew what they were being asked to do immediately, and it had nothing to do with the planning department. notice that it is c.l.m.p., not c.p.r. that will be on that task force.
i agree that the c.p.r. folks would like to use the momentum from this code raid issue to help influence the debate on the general plan. but i don’t think this is necessarily a cynical, manipulative move, more like they just feel that a good portion of that crowd today is with them on that issue as well. they could well be correct about that.
April 8, 2008 at 7:25 pm
I thought the most eloquent speakers were Tad and Tracey Herron.
April 8, 2008 at 7:29 pm
Paraphrasing Tracy: Shame on the four speakers on Friday who blamed county counsel for this problem. My client (from Yee Haw) has no control over building permits. We’re in a housing crisis. All those people need a place to live. 19 families moved after the raid and are now homeless tapping homeless resources.
April 8, 2008 at 7:36 pm
Tracy was awesome in both content and delivery.
April 8, 2008 at 7:57 pm
I had to leave todays meeting early. Has anybody brought up the issue of the county collecting taxes on non permitted structures? Is it illegal to collect taxes on illegal buildings? It seems odd that they would collect taxes on the same building they threaten to rip down.
April 8, 2008 at 7:57 pm
I love you Tracy, Tad, and all the speakers who organized and helped our collective voice get heard! Thank you KMUD. Thank you to all who spoke and drove all the way to Eureka to stand together for our rights.
Power to the people!
April 8, 2008 at 8:12 pm
by the way, rodini’s original motion made no mention of any moratorium. but i think after the testimony at friday’s forum and today’s hearing, they had little choice but to freeze a program that has been so badly out of control.
anything less would have been a serious dereliction of duty. if they had allowed the raids to continue, and had there been another gun-waving incident, or an injury or a fatality caused by one of these raids after all this misconduct has been revealed, those supervisors would have had to move out of town, maybe out of state, to escape the infamy they would have earned.
they acted wisely to act today to stop the code raiders before things got even worse. we’ll see if they remain wise enough to decriminalize code enforcement permanently, and start looking at way to work WITH, not against, folks like charles garth up at yee-haw (who has been helping families house themselves in a safe and affordable, if modest, fashion for more than a decade now) instead of suing him for “unfair business practices” for charging “sub-market” rents.
amazing, isn’t it? in a county plagued with homelessness and a lack of affordable housing, someone who has taken the very practical step of inviting families to live on and work the land, rather than line up for section 8 housing, is targeted as a criminal and he and his tenants are sued for “conspiring” to exchange affordable rent for modest, but decent accomodations. certainly safer and a better environment for families with children than any public housing project i have ever seen or set foot in.
the county should declare the yee-haw an r.v. campground or some such thing, drop the idiotic lawsuit and the confiscatory fines, and get the hell out of the way of those who are actually using their own meager resources to try to help homeless and low-income families in this county. aside from the incident with the cops and code raiders, yee-haw has been a safe and secure place for these families and children to live for a while – far, far safer, and far, far healthier than life at the rescue mission or on the street.
yee-haw!
April 8, 2008 at 8:31 pm
He didn’t put that in until dozens of people insisted on it.
April 8, 2008 at 8:36 pm
same with having three members from c.l.m.p. and two from the public at large.
April 8, 2008 at 8:38 pm
Yes. Roger listened but only after things were repeated a few times. Great job to Bonnie Blackberry for really standing up and asking for what people wanted.
April 8, 2008 at 8:45 pm
Almost everyone was awesome.
A few points regarding the lengthy discussions:
First – some folks felt as if the Supes were their to help only. However, this problem was created by the Supes. They knew long before what is currently going on because they created it so that they could attempt to be the saviors. Go back a few years when Jill Geist recommended an unnecessary ordinance for unpermitted buildings when State Law and Local ordinances already had required certain procedures and the County had a way to force compliance peacefully. This whole issue was contrived.
Second – If the Supes want to act so oblivious to a CEU that they re-started with Richard Hendry, then in reality they are admitting in a deceitful way that they really have no clue about Planning, Building and Zoning. Further, I have copies of a procedure used by the CEU back in 1995-1996; therefore, all of this recent nonsense about procedure is a farse. Again, the Supes knew of 100% the reality we have today. They are very well versed in acting professionally stupid. Anna Sparks and Julie Fulkerson know the truths because they were Supervisors during the timeline that Richard Hendry re-started his career in a new position. The Times Standard did a huge article and follow-ups too.
Third – It is an election year and this, I believed, was a contrived situation to be the beast of burden and the savior of souls.
Fourth – Did you see how Bonnie stared with a cold white face eventually after people got on her nerves. Jill kept waddleing with asking people to not applaud by interupting speakers instead of addressing the concern prior to the first words of any speaker. She knew people weren’t going to quit, so why beat the drum by interupting certain speakers at key moments of their presentation but not every speaker. And why did Jill want to divert focus on Tad regarding the time-set? This showed a lack of leadership by trying to pass the blame onto a non-county employee. This was pathetic.
Fifth – a couple speakers actually nailed it when they said it was about the County being broke and the Supes, Planning and CEU were just trying to make this rural issue into a means for taking in revenue. Further, some people were upset that the Assessors were coming out every year. Well, what do you expect when the County is trying to illegally raise property values to force people out of ownership. Force the poor people out by over-inflating the taxes and penalties, fees, costs, so that wealthier people can buy the land, pull permits and build something which will fetch a higher tax revenue base return.
Sixth – the Supes, especially Neely, pulled yet another blame game, this time on Wendy Chaitlan. Now, who will we get next for lead Counsel. Musical Chairs again when the real culprits are the Supes. Respondet Superior!
Seventh – A gentlemen said your fired, all of you. Well, I am sure many people felt this way, but were still openly accommodating when they clapped at the end of the discussions. Too bad a Supervisor did not step up and say we do not deserve the recognition for creating this mess. People need to get a clue and call it how it is without panhandling for action that they should never have ever had to ask for in the first place if only the Supes were not playing their little games of fear on the people. The Supes have received plenty of reports as agenda items in the past from Richard Hendry and Jeff Connors. I am not wrong.
Eighth – There is no need for a review board consisting of 9 people when all that is needed is government officials do their job legally. If they did it 12-13 years ago, then why act as if everything is so new? Again, a contrived situation. Now, we get a larger government situation. Very unnecessary. Everything is already there in law; it just needs to be followed. If the people want a review board, it should be a firing review board.
Ninth – The moratorium is without question. Everything else was a waste. Just follow procedural law Supes. They have history to counteract their deceit.
Tenth – I admire the victims for speaking up. By speaking out, victims now understand how others before them have been treated. It takes the efforts of those folks today to invoke change for the people and community. It is never too late to be a part of something great which helps shape a positive community after such obliteration of procedural law by ALL involved government levels.
Power to the People! Good Job folks.
Jeffrey Lytle
McKinleyville – 5th District
April 8, 2008 at 8:54 pm
Many of the speakers from Titlow Hill addresses the issue of taxes on their now red tagged homes. Of course, as with most all of the other questions, it was taken as rhetorical. Not many answers were given, but at least we now know who is willing to “take charge”. Maybe the answers will come? It was an environmental health representative taking the place of sherriff on the task force.
April 8, 2008 at 9:06 pm
aside from the warrantless “open-field” pot searches facilitated by the code raids, and the potential to seize and auction off the land, there’s another very simple and very potent incentive that may be at work in this situation: the “code enforcement trust fund” set up in 2004 to allow increases in code fines to be retained by the code enforcement unit to increase its budget.
I got this from eric v. kirk’s blog (sohum parlance), he got it from c.l.m.p.
———————————————–
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Humboldt County SUMMARY OF PROCEEDINGS Tuesday, October 12, 2004 REGULAR SESSION Humboldt County Courthouse Supervisors’ Chamber, First Floor 825 Fifth Street, Eureka 9:10 AM
F. DEPARTMENT REPORTS County Counsel 1. Code Enforcement Trust Fund ACTION: Direct the Auditor-Controller to establish a trust a fund entitled “Code Enforcement Trust Fund” for the purposes of depositing administrative penalties received by the County as a result of the activities of the Code Enforcement Unit in enforcing violations of the County Code, for the continuation of the Code Enforcement Unit and other code enforcement activities, with the following provisions: a) The administrative penalties that are to be deposited into the newly-established Code Enforcement Trust Fund each fiscal year will be those administrative penalties which exceed the amount of administrative penalties which are budgeted each fiscal year in the County Counsel budget as anticipated revenue for the Code Enforcement Unit; and b) If there are funds in the Code Enforcement Trust Fund in excess of the amount necessary to cover revenues budgeted to offset the Code Enforcement Unit of the County Counsel Office, then with the Board of Supervisors’ approval, those excess funds can be used for the continuation of the Code Enforcement Unit, as well as other code enforcement activities.
———————————–
i just quoted the most relevant section here – you can see more on eric’s blog.
April 8, 2008 at 9:21 pm
Maybe Eureka and Garberville could become Sister Cities? I bet it would improve cultural understanding between those two diverse populations.
April 8, 2008 at 9:34 pm
Heraldo,
the “we” makes sense.
Kinda like Bonnie, Roger and Jimmy saying “my” District; rather than saying the District “I” represent.
The Supes can’t claim a District is theirs. I scoffed repeatedly on the idea of personal “ownership” of a District.
Jeffrey Lytle
McKinleyville – 5th District
April 8, 2008 at 10:11 pm
Yeah, because when I talk about “my hometown” I really do mean I own the town.
Jeez dude, get off your high horse.
April 8, 2008 at 10:41 pm
If he won’t get down off his high horse voluntarily, can we please pull him down off it?
April 9, 2008 at 12:39 am
By placing “McKinleyville – 5th District” as your signature on every blog post, you are claiming dominion over our lands. Please stop. You do not own my home. You are not our overlord.
April 9, 2008 at 7:56 am
I never claimed to owning your home; let alone “owning” Grant Deeds or titles to any land.
Where does the “District” for which is great have anything to do with a “high horse”?
It is nice to have the liberty to appreciate the 5th District and ALL of it’s non-deceptive manipulators. I shall continue my support for the 5th District.
Jeffrey Lytle
McKinleyville – 5th District
April 9, 2008 at 8:00 am
“My district” refers to the district in which one lives, Jeff, and in no way implies ownership of the district. Supervisors must live in the district which they represent so calling it “my district” is perfectly reasonable.
April 9, 2008 at 8:03 am
Hello Jane Doe (JK);
We will agree to disagree.
Jeffrey Lytle
McKinleyville – 5th District
April 9, 2008 at 8:11 am
What does (JK) mean?
April 9, 2008 at 8:15 am
“non-deceptive manipulators” ?
these would be people who are perfectly clear with you that they are trying to manipulate you?
hey i’m just poking fun – i knew what you meant, jeffrey.
and i couldn’t care less about whether ulansey or the supes use the word “we.” i knew what they meant, too, when they said “we” and “my” respectively.
“we” is a pretty nebulous term, which can mean all human beings, or just two, depending on the context.
let’s get off the nit-picking and back on topic.
April 9, 2008 at 8:27 am
toward that end, allow me to offer the following caution about where this issue is headed. we need to be vigilant against a scenario in which code enforcement is simply moved into the sherriff’s department (taking the heat off of the d.a., county counsel and the board of supes) and then the code raiders revert to business-as-usual under the sherriff’s authority.
at least in that scenario, the lines of accountability will be clearer – leading straight back to the sherriff. but there is also the possibility that this set-up would just make the use of code enforcement as a trojan horse to make searches of properties for other reasons even easier for them to carry out (at least until we un-elect the sherriff).
to put a stake through the heart of this monster, we need to decriminalize the building code entirely, and return the function of inspecting buildings back to the building department, where it belongs. also, adopt a reasonable “rural rustic” code that recognizes the norm out in our rural areas, and then start working cooperatively with property owners to bring any truly unsafe situations up to that standard.
April 9, 2008 at 8:35 am
Thorn,
I have up to this point received your comments with the highest respect because I understand your angles. To clarify:
My = possessive form of “I”.; of or belonging to me; that I have, hold, or possess: my house, in my opinion.
The point is that there is nothing possessory by elected officials over the people and for the Supervisors to “play dumb dumb” about this whole issue of the CEU is an insult to those folks who have history and documentation which shows that everything up to this point regarding “Civil Rights” and “Due Process” violations were intentional, even by the Supes who have a history going back over a decade with procedures for Code Enforcement. Bonnie knew well before this issue even started that the Supes could fall back on, ” we need to seperate civil from criminal.” She has the worst karma coming her way along with her husband (I believe still) Terry Farmer, the former District Attorney. Just think of all the bedtime discussions they had about politics and how to get away with things.It is about property taxes and generated fees.
It is about creating problems so that the Supes and Planning can be the saviors. Kinda like why certain corporations endorse choreographing power and control (reasons) for wars and battles; even here at home. The folks yesterday who deserve ALL the credit are the VICTIMS, not the Supes or Staff or any other instigator of the CEU situation. Again, Respondet Superior.
Jeffrey Lytle
McKinleyville – 5th District
April 9, 2008 at 8:50 am
Has anyone ever heard of the Code Enforcement Oversight Committee? This OVERSIGHT Committee has been in place for a number of years and meets regularly to help determine prioritization and focus of cases. It consists of the BOS, Gallegos (Mr. “I don’t know what they do”), Sheriff, etc., but rarely, if ever, do these people attend the meetings. THEY dropped the ball but they’re pointing fingers everywhere else. Code Enforcement has done a lot to clean up the county and it’s a shame to see this knee-jerk reaction. Jimmy says, “We’re taking charge.” Hey Jimmy – YOU HAVE BEEN IN CHARGE!!!
April 9, 2008 at 9:00 am
I want my supervisor referring to my district as “my district.” If he doesn’t feel personally responsible for it, he shouldn’t/couldn’t have gotten elected in the first place. Maybe there’s a lessen in that for you Jeff.
April 9, 2008 at 9:07 am
8:50 – good point about the “code enforcement oversight committee” and the supes failing in their oversight of the c.e.u. i bet we’ll hear more about their dereliction of duty as the new task force, including c.l.m.p. and several at-large members, gets underway. the truth will come out.
April 9, 2008 at 9:08 am
Again Jeff, what does (JK) mean?
April 9, 2008 at 9:11 am
One thing that has been generally missed in this whole mess is the effect on Jeff Conners. I do not know Jeff except to see him at some of these proceedings. He really seems to be a good guy trying to do an honest job. Did he get incredibly poor directions from his superiors, absolutely. Was he left out to dry by himself when others more responsible for these policies hid, absolutely. Does he have a little “law enforcement” mentality, yes but not nearly like your typical “cop” stereotype. He deserves a tremendous amount of credit for having the integrity (and guts) to show up and politely answer questions at the HumCPR meeting and every single opportunity thereafter. He has apologised when he was wrong and stood firm when he thought he was right. He should get a lot of our sympathy because to a great extent as he put it himself, he, “was in the wrong place at the wrong time”. He left the meeting yesterday understandably upset. If any of us see him we need to let him know that though he certainly bears some responsibility we understand that the overall situation was not his doing. I for one would be happy to have more individuals of his type in law enforcement. We need to hold those truly responsible for trampling or rights responsible and not allow others to be their scapegoat. Peace.
April 9, 2008 at 9:18 am
I believe that meeting was a CLMP meeting, not a CPR meeting.
April 9, 2008 at 9:23 am
jeffrey,
i agree with what you wrote about the supes being the creators of this problem, and not any kind of heroes. i respect your input and often find myself agreeing with you jeffrey, and i wasn’t trying to pick a fight over “my.”
as i said, i’m not really into debating the use of the word “my” any more than the word “we.” i understand that the use of this word by the supes to refer to the disricts they represent (i almost said “their districts”) signifies something to you about their attitude toward their subjects, oops i mean their constituents. and i agree with you about that attitude. i just think the use of the phrase “my district” is probably mostly a matter of the conventional, rather broad, use of the term “my” as in when i say “my colleauge jeffrey and i seem to agree on the more important points here.” in that case i am not claiming possession or ownership of you, no more than saying “i love my hometown” means that i grew up in bridgeville and then bought it on e-bay.
oh crap, there i go, getting bogged down in the discussion of the word “my” right after stating that i didn’t want to get bogged down in such a discussion!
look, we can agree to disagree on what is signified or intended by politicians as they use the term “my district.” to me, the most important thing is that we keep challenging them to serve us rather than the other way around.
April 9, 2008 at 9:24 am
Peace be with you
Unfortunately for Jeff is he knows of a crime committed and remains quiet. If maybe he became a whistler-blower and started testifying about the false premises the warrants we’re sworn on we could say Jeff is just a hapless victim.
AND:
Try telling that to a judge next time you get in trouble. Cops should be held to the same level of accountability as ordinary people. If Jeff was where a crime took place then again I say, Jeff should turn state’s evidence.
love eternal
tad
love eternal
tad
April 9, 2008 at 9:40 am
9:11 am,
re: jeff conner
yes, he’s better than desadier, and yes, he showed some character by showing up to take his lumps in garberville on friday, and showing up yesterday. some of us took the time to speak with him, at least briefly, to let him know that it was desadier and the gun-waving deputy that we were most upset with, and that we appreciated his being willing to take the heat.
but his hands aren’t exactly squeaky clean either, in all of this. first of all the “wrong place at the wrong time” comment that i heard him make in garberville was referring to a resident being in “the wrong place at the wrong time” – when she was in her own HOME! conner went along with plenty of these “open field” warrantless-pot-searches-in-the-facilitated-by-code-enforcement-raids. and it was jeff conner who made the “her hand was obscured” excuse at the garberville forum to explain why the gun-waving deputy/coward pointed a gun at a young mother with a baby on her hip and a 5-year-old at her side.
apparently that’s the cover story, and it certainly seems that conner, “nice guy” though he supposedly is, will still back up his pals in blue, pretty much matter what they do. kinda makes his apology at the garberville meeting sem a little hollow, doesn’t it? he’s real sorry what happened, but did he do anything about it for the last 9 months? not really. then he regurgitates the cop’s ass-covering “obscured hand” story.
the deputy who actually pointed the gun was not in that meeting. didn’t show his face at yesterday’s meeting either.
what a coward. same with desadier – didn’t bother to show up for either event. also a coward with badge and gun. these people need to get fired, if not prosecuted.
April 9, 2008 at 9:40 am
Wrong again Jane (JK). The first meeting he attended was the HumCPR meeting in Redway at the Healy Center. That was the first public meeting where the Code Enforcement was pushed and discussed. Whether you want to admit it or not HumCPR was at the forefront of this issue along with the rest of what is happening.
April 9, 2008 at 9:55 am
I thought you were referring to the CLMP meeting in Garberville last Friday, 9:40.
WTF does (JK) mean?
April 9, 2008 at 10:09 am
jane,
i think they are probably baiting you with the “(JK)” initials, implying that they know your true identity and that your initials are “JK.” this seems to be an occasional obsession of blog commentators – trying to guess who that other anonymous commentator is, based on their words. apparently they are barking up the wrong tree in this case.
April 9, 2008 at 10:16 am
Thanks Thorn. Of course, I could be being disengenuous about not recognizing JK. I do wish they would say who JK is so I will know if I should be insulted or complimented. LOL
April 9, 2008 at 11:50 am
jk = just kidding
April 9, 2008 at 12:00 pm
The (JK) makes no sense in that context, 11:50.
April 9, 2008 at 12:03 pm
Hi Jane,
With no offense meant to Jeff L, oftentimes his posts make no sense, in or out of context.
April 9, 2008 at 12:09 pm
well if that’s what the j.k meant, i apologize. but like jane, i don’t see how it makes any sense in the context it was posted.
you may disagree with jeffrey, as i sometimes do, but his comments are usually, if not always, quite thoughtful and coherent.
April 9, 2008 at 12:33 pm
We have a blog for Yee Haw, it’s still in production, but we have some photos, articles, videos, etc. This is also a good way to connect with your neighbors and friends in the north. Thank you to all who helped us and our rural neighbors all across Humboldt County. We feel the love!
April 9, 2008 at 12:49 pm
the county needs to drop their asinine suit against charles garth, the owner of yee-haw, and the former tenants who are being sued as “co-conspirators” in the horrible crime of exchanging reasonable rents for modest, but quite safe shelter.
they should be thanking and helping people lke mr. garth, who are taking pressure off of county social services, the homeless shelters and affordable housing projects.
the county owes mr. garth a debt of gratitude for his open-heartedness and generosity of spirit. treating people like him as a criminal and a nuisance is truly shameful.
drop that lawsuit today. start offering help tomorrow.
April 9, 2008 at 1:37 pm
Thorn @ 9:23am,
Hey, just got back inside for a late lunch from the outside labors and thought I would check your anticipated responses on this thread.
First, I am ok with your angles once again.
Second, just to let you know, I am a serious person who does not lie, manipulate, deceive, cheat, steal, etc… I tell it how it really is and obviously enjoy your straightforward remarks while able to decipher the meanings. If you were having some clean fun, no big deal; I did not take your comments as anything negative.
Just thought I would comment back to you as you deserve the respect because you have yet to undeservedly disrespect me. However, if I truely and honestly deserve any criticism, please do not refrain. Criticism builds a better character; no pun intended.
Jeffrey Lytle
McKinleyville – 5th District
April 9, 2008 at 1:42 pm
Anonymous @ 12:03,
And yet you still read my posts without asking direct questions, I suppose. Again, if you can’t understand something, then ask for clarification and I will do my best to better explain the remarks for your benefit of comprehension.
Jeffrey Lytle
McKinleyville – 5th District
April 9, 2008 at 1:45 pm
thanks for the response.
the only things that kinda hit my eyes wrong are “angles” and “decipher.”
i try to be as straightforward as possible, and i hate to think folks find a need to decipher my writing. slog through it, perhaps (i know i tend to be way to wordy for a blog).
i’m hoping that by “angles” you just mean “approach” not the somewhat negative connotation of “angling for something.” elaborate if you like, or i don’t mind just dropping it if you don’t.
i do enjoy and appreciate all of your posts here and elsewhere, and more often than not i find myself in agreement. peace.
thorn,
from the valley.
April 9, 2008 at 1:45 pm
Yet you still haven’t answered my question about what (JK) means, Jeff.
April 9, 2008 at 2:06 pm
Anonymous @ 9:00 am,
I figured the likelyhood that your comment was directed to me. An easier justification for “my” strong feelings about the possessory implications is that:
First = you have to understand Bonnie Neely and how she rubs off onto other Supes by training them to be power mongors of control and deceit over the people.
Second = I am not sure what lesson I could learn because of the fact that I believe in our U.S. Constitution (with some disagreements). To be more precise in response to your last sentence in your comment, I believe that I will always follow the 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
It says,
“Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.”
“Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.”
I just feel “my” is very possessive and I agree that many people say it without actually implying ownership; however, an entrenched bunch of officials eventually believe they actually “own” people through politics. This is based on my years of “keeping up with the information, truths, facts and realities”.
9th Amendment – “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
When a patrioit of inalienable rights and common human decency truly understands the 9th Amendment, it should bring tears for justice when ascertaining Yee Haw, Elk Ridge, Tooby Ranch, Rural property owners who have been victimized in this issue, any other persons, etc.
There is much more in the U.S. Constitution that can apply to what this CEU issue has opened up.
Jeffrey Lytle
McKinleyville – 5th District
April 9, 2008 at 2:21 pm
It seems odd for a person who posts anonymous notes to insult someone else as “a coward.”
April 9, 2008 at 2:24 pm
Jane Doe,
please tell me you have not spent the whole day watching this thread worrying about something that is neither an insult nor compliment. (Correlative Conjunction)
Jeffrey Lytle
McKinleyville – 5th District
April 9, 2008 at 2:42 pm
Thorn @ 1:45 pm,
yes on the angles = approach, point of view ; decipher = meaning, context
ditto your last paragraph.
In fact, your longer comments hold much information; and, since I like education, I enjoy your interactions.
No disrespect thus far from me toward you. You deserve credit for your ability to have an open minded viewpoint without curseing at me, beating me down, etc. We can agree to disagree and have differences of opinions. It is the idea of constructive dialect that will lead to understanding.
Back to work I go, I hoe, I hoe, I hoe.
Jeffrey Lytle
McKinleyville – 5th District
April 9, 2008 at 3:07 pm
Unfortunately I am tied to my computer today, Jeff, and laughing over your refusal to explain your use of (JK) at the same time you are claiming honesty and willingness to clarify anything that isn’t understood. For some reason your desire to be clear and up front isn’t working out too well.
April 9, 2008 at 3:11 pm
Jane (JK), a little fixated today, aren’t we? Hit too close to home? Maybe, just for fun we should all add the (JK) moniker to our posts.
April 9, 2008 at 3:18 pm
Just a little fixated, JK 3:11. Originally I was curious and then another poster used (JK) and I thought it must have a meaning I wasn’t aware of. There were a couple attempts to explain it but not by the people who used it, who just refuse to do so. Jeff is having too much fun not answering and we can’t have that so I’ll just drop it.
April 9, 2008 at 3:39 pm
Jane (JK), Jeff seems like a good guy and I often agree with him, at least when I can figure out what he is talking about, he can be a little confusing. In this case I can guess, as can many of us. Let us know what your guess is, we’ll let you know if your warm or cold.
April 9, 2008 at 3:58 pm
Huh? Do you mean 4th Amendment?
love eternal
tad
April 9, 2008 at 4:01 pm
Just kidding was a good guess but not in that context. Since it isn’t my initials, I would guess it is the initials of who he thinks I am, but can’t think of any gorgeous, sexy, intelligent women like myself with the initials JK.
April 9, 2008 at 4:04 pm
Jane (JK), Not too close, Think harder.
April 9, 2008 at 4:18 pm
Nah, I’ve lost interest in this game.
April 9, 2008 at 6:15 pm
to try to bring things back to the subject at hand (again), i was wondering if anyone following this thread has the full text of the resolution that was finally passed at the end of the supes meeting yesterday (the moratorium / task force. etc) ?
April 9, 2008 at 6:19 pm
tad,
i don’t always agree wih you 100% on everything, and sometimes i think you may be too quick to ascribe sinister motives to thoughtless or wrong-headed actions or inactions on the part of public officials (of course i’ve been accused of the same at times, and probably rightly so).
but there is no doubt in my mind that you MORE than pull your weight in this community with your relentless activism on behalf of the homeless and the environment. i hope you are taking enough time to take good care of yourself, too, you deserve shelter and the basic amenities of life just as much as anyone else. i hope you are getting what you need on a daily basis.
your testimony yesterday was eloquent and moving. no wonder there are so many anonymous commentators who seem to hate you. hatred grows out of fear – they fear the truths you speak and therefore they act out of hatred.
remember what ghandi said: “first they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they attack you…and then you win.”
if we all keep at it in our own ways, and can welcome others who don’t agree with us all the time to work with us when they do agree with us, and use our powers of peaceful persuasion to their utmost, we can make a lot of change.
thanks again for your inspiring words yesterday, and so many other times. don’t let anyone tell you that you’re not making a difference – you are.
April 9, 2008 at 7:08 pm
Yes Tad,
my mistake IV not IX.
Good Job.
Jeffrey Lytle
McKinleyville – 5th District
April 9, 2008 at 7:21 pm
Well Jane,
actually, your disrespect toward me and cursing on another thread kinda put you in a different class, especially since H likes to pick and choose who gets the upper hand in attacks. Hey, how about we trade your real name for the (JK), unless there is more than one Jane Doe? (TP or JC) Heck, you could even be a man. Anyhow, I said I would do my best.
When you decide to come out of your shell, then maybe we can exchange foreign language text.
Jeffrey Lytle
McKinleyville – 5th District
April 9, 2008 at 7:38 pm
Are you referring to when you were offering a bribe to out bloggers’ real identities, Jeff? Its very odd that someone who is so vociferous about private property would have such an attitude about our most basic property, our PRIVACY.
April 9, 2008 at 7:53 pm
JK+TP+JC= WTF?
April 9, 2008 at 7:58 pm
has anyone heard about when the new code enforcement task force will meet, will they hold public hearings, etc.?
in my opinion we need to keep the pressure on, while the issue is still front-and-center in the minds of our elected officials.
April 9, 2008 at 8:16 pm
the name of the young mom from yee-haw who had the gun pointed at her and her baby and young son is marie. i don’t mind sharing that at this point because she has now come out publicly at two meetings and has been on tv and youtube.
sadly, this family had been concerned that they might be targeted for retaliation by the county, law enforcement, or even child services (imagine: you’re living in a bus on a beautiful piece of land with your two kids – but its an “unpermitted dwelling,” perhaps “neglect” could be alleged and their kids would be taken away? that’s what they feared, anyway. notice how the power of the police state in one area begins to reinforce its power in another area – a vicious cycle of fear).
but now she’s out in public, the people are behind her, and if any county official or cop tries to retaliate against her for speaking the truth about this shameful incident i can promise you all that i will not rest until that person has lost their job and been made to feel the shame of their actions. is suspect many would join me if such retaliation were offered.
fair warning.
peace.
from the valley,
thorn
April 9, 2008 at 8:21 pm
Just so you know Thorn, “CPR” has stood for “coalition for police review” for SEVERAL YEARS before the term was applied to the right-wingers complaining about their property rights. It’s kinda funny though, in terms of privacy rights the two groups are in total agreement. I hope Thorn and all his friends will be there at the police review forum tomorrow (Thursday) night at the Courthouse…I hear Gary Philp himself will be there to answer for his department’s opposition to civilian oversight!
April 9, 2008 at 8:22 pm
LOL 7:53. Is that a new algebraic formula?
April 9, 2008 at 8:36 pm
How does “H” choose who gets the upper hand here? It sounds like Jeffey has a bit of a persecution complex.
April 9, 2008 at 8:44 pm
I’m with you.
April 9, 2008 at 8:55 pm
thanks, h.
April 9, 2008 at 9:00 pm
Thank you, Thorn. I know that young family didn’t deserve the way they were treated and Officer Fulton was way out of line. It was clear from yesterday’s meeting that Humboldt County will not stand for this.
April 9, 2008 at 9:10 pm
8:21,
what time is that meeting tomorrow (thurs) night about the potential civilian review board? i would like to go. i know i’ve got a flier around here somewhere, but i can’t lay my hands on it at the moment.
by the way, a lot of the cpr(2) people i’ve met aren’t “right wing” at all – more of a left/libertarian bent to them, if we have to apply a label. a lot of these folks could welll be your ally on the police review issue – but not if you’ve already dismissed them all as right-wing tools. (i’ve never met any of the “leaders,” though, and i am always cautious of motivations of those at the top. not cynical, but a healthy skepticism – or so i like to think).
April 9, 2008 at 9:21 pm
Peace be with you
And: the next court date for yeehaw folks is April 28th at 8:30am in court room 7. Court room 7 is Judge Cissna’s and he just happens to be the Judge that both signed the warrants and denied the counties temporary injunction against the people of yeehaw. Come one come all.
love eternal
tad
April 9, 2008 at 9:30 pm
The Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement forum is tomorrow, April10 from 7-9pm at the BOS Chambers.
April 9, 2008 at 9:57 pm
Thorn, Your right, the HumCPR crowd are generally left leaning with a very independent streak. It is amazing that they are so spitefully attacked from their fellow left. The urban greens going after the back to the land greens, it’s absurd. If you want to learn more call Ulansey, I have spoken to him and found him to be very approachable if a little on the passionate side. He seems willing to speak his mind to anyone. He also really makes sense. It is pretty bizarre that everyone has such strong opinions about someone that they haven’t even spoken to. Closed minds solve few problems.
April 9, 2008 at 9:58 pm
Ulansey may be the public leader of HumCPR, but he isn’t the one making the decisions.
April 9, 2008 at 10:02 pm
Funny how that independent streak is being manipulated by HELP.
April 9, 2008 at 10:23 pm
Anyone who has spoken to Ulansey for more than thirty seconds knows that he is impossible for anyone to control. Listen to the guy, that entire premise is laughable. It could be argued that he is so committed that he barely controls himself. If your agenda and position is so dire that you need to stab someone in the back perhaps you should examine your own position.
April 9, 2008 at 10:56 pm
Ironically, most of the “central planning” we see emanating from the state and county pays lip service to conservation and energy efficiency, but really does not try to anticipate the likely effects of the looming petrocollapse.
I think that frankly the perceived “problem” of having “too many” people wanting to live way out in our rural areas will disappear when gasoline hits $7 or $8 a gallon. Most people will want to cluster near towns anyway. But for our local food security and self-sufficiency we will need as many folks as possible who have learned to live on the land and grow food sustainably and are willing to spend most of their time in the rural areas and small village centers and only occassionally make a foray into the bigger cities.
The back-to-the-landers and small family farmers and ranchers in our rural areas are our “seed bank” of knowledge and skills about small-scale agriculture. This is a culture of self-sufficiency that is beginning to really take hold in some of the rural areas of our county (though still quite fossil-fuel dependent at this point). Or another way to put it is that this culture never completely died out.
I predict that even some of the “McMansions” out in these hills will one day be converted to use by large, extended families, or chopped up into smaller apartments, just like so many of the big old victorian houses in cities around our country were split up into apartments. Why? Because maintaining and heating (and now cooling) so many thousands of square feet for one “nuclear family” is simply not sustainable anyplace other than in science fiction.
I think today’s “planning” will look like a joke in 20 years. Just like with the soviets – they were great with making 5-year plans…but where did those plans all end up? Just an ironic footnote of history.
April 9, 2008 at 11:06 pm
Maybe you should look at Cuba. They had to “plan” their way through the fuel embargo.
April 9, 2008 at 11:15 pm
And Cuba proved that saving classic American cars is the best investment of all.
April 9, 2008 at 11:50 pm
Yeah, 10:56. People who live further out just plan more efficient trips, and make fewer of them. It’s a more isolated existence, not for everyone, but beautiful and free, and in many ways more self sufficient and self sustaining. Many people who spoke yesterday spoke of that. A good plan would make allowances for all the different lifestyles, income levels, etc. Some people like apartment living, some like suburban tracts with manicured lawns and all the amenities. But others like room, fields, pastures. horses, trees, peace and quiet. They should not be forced into town. Or relegated out of existence in the name of infill and fear.
April 9, 2008 at 11:52 pm
Oh yeah, let’s make it just like Cuba. Who shall we appoint in Castro’s role?
Fuel embargo? Do you mean the tough transition that came after the sudden end of the massive subsidies that Cuba had been getting from the Soviet Union before its spectacular central-planning-caused economic implosion?
The American embargo doesn’t stop Cuba from getting fuel from pretty much any other country, they just don’t have any hard currency because their centrally-planned economy doesn’t produce much that other countries want at this point. (And don’t try to blame the American embargo, admittedly useless though it is, because it doesn’t stop other countries from buying Cuba’s exports, except that there hardly are any Cuban exports other than sugar and cigars, thus very little hard currency with which to buy fuel).
Cuba’s got a great basic health care system, but a very tenuous food situation for most of the populous, no democracy whatsoever, and a lovely little network of neighborhood spies reporting any disloyalty to the central planning authorities in Havana.
Do you really want to use Cuba as an example of the direction we want Humboldt County to go? Well there is one example that makes some sense: Shortly after the cut-off of Soviet subsidies, Castro sent huge numbers of people out into the countryside to practice small-scale, organic farming, since they could no longer afford the pesticides and mechanization. They most certainly did not act to increase their urban density or “cluster” near towns where they could not work the land.
So Cuba’s central planning in reaction to this fuel shortage was logical enough in that one case, but it also points to exactly the opposite of what the our county general plan updates seem to envision here in Humboldt County.
If we start now, voluntarily, and the government will just get the hell out of the way, then perhaps we won’t end up in the situation of some strongman ordering us out to work collective farms under the yoke of centrally-planned oppression.
Careful of the examples you pick. They may not quite back up the case you are trying to make.
April 10, 2008 at 12:06 am
we need a “rural rustic” code that makes safe greywater systems and composting toilets an affordable option in our rural areas. decriminalize, disarm, and reform the regulations to include a reasonable “rural rustic” code that covers fire safety and health issues with a minimum of red tape. is that asking too much?
April 10, 2008 at 12:08 am
And Again Jane,
you need dictionary help, no offense. Let me cull out one of the many manipulations you apparently shall continue to post. That is ok because I expect nothing less from you. In fact, the documentation will prove otherwise.
Anyhow, here is the literacy you need help with once again.
Bribe = 1. money or reward given or offered to a person to do something dishonest or unlawful for the benefit of the giver 2. a reward for doing something that a person does not want to do.
Note = There was nothing of the sort, bad karma again.
So, I guess your post @ 7:38 pm was your answer to not exchange. Did the correlative conjunction reference jog your memory about how you vehemently tried to prove your english skills and knowledge of conjunctions that took you three tries to figure out you knew nothing about conjunctions within legal language involved within the TPZ issue/code; and that an anonymous poster grilled you on it; and H erased (choosing the upper hand / moderation technique) the anonymous comment because of the personal attachment to yourself? Remember, H lets you curse at others but not be cursed at. This is proven. We will see if it changes now. By privacy, you must realise H is one of a select few for your benefit and not many others regarding foul language. This is the facts of life. It is H’s blog and he will do what he will do. It is understood. I still accept you and H’s moderating techniques even when we can agree to disagree.
Anyhow, if you want to play with matches, be prepared to put out the fire. If your going to continue to be disrespectful, be prepared to reap what you sow. If you want to get back to being respectful, then I will applaud you. Do continue your constructive criticism because we all need it from time to time. Liberty is great, isn’t it?
Questions : How is “literacy” loud and noisy (vociferous)? How is “privacy” in a public forum private? Anyhow, maybe we will see each other in a hardware store or a public meeting soon.
Your post @ 4:01 pm was a bit strange because it seemed to be disingenuous to other females in my opinion.
Jeffrey Lytle
McKinleyville – 5th District
April 10, 2008 at 12:17 am
Thanks “Tad” @ 9:21 pm for the information on Cissna and review date.
Thanks “waiting for change” @ 9:30 pm. This is property Tax delinquent date too. How ironic.
Jeffrey Lytle
McKinleyville – 5th District
April 10, 2008 at 12:52 am
A Civilian Police Review Commission?
About time. Better give it some teeth.
April 10, 2008 at 7:54 am
Jeff shouldn’t post when he is drunk. He is even more confused than usual.
April 10, 2008 at 7:56 am
Jeffrey, some of Jane’s more colorful comments have been deleted, too. Don’t take it personally.
April 10, 2008 at 8:36 am
Heraldo insists that I post in black and white just like everyone else and I have all these pretty crayons going to waste.
April 10, 2008 at 9:33 am
Anonymous @7:54 am,
Before I go outside to enjoy this beautiful day with NO WIND.
Nathan Rushton of the Eureka Reporter was the one drinking and posting on another thread last night. It was his birthday. Happy B-day Nathan.
On another note, I can understand Anonymous how you became confused with identities. Drunkardness is never a good thing. I will agree. Poison to the liver and brain too. Alcohol is also responsible for making people fatter and red in the face when they are better than poor. If poor, alcohol turns you into a smeagle, red in the eyes, red in the face, and black in the liver. Cops also get red mad having to deal with drunkards. I like to stay away from that confrontational relationship, especially while driving a vehicle. DUI is no joke. Neither is BUI.
Heraldo – personally or publicly?
Jane Doe – do not let your eclectic personality be compromised. We need more color to this often overly dark world. We also need to become more aware of the issue at hand regarding Civilian oversight of law enforcement and who is RESPONDET SUPERIOR for this issue, TPZ issue and CEU issue.
Jeffrey Lytle
McKinleyville -5th District
April 10, 2008 at 11:18 am
Jerfreoy Lytle has many opiniions, and mopst iof them are posted hear. Say that fast five times, spin, and do it agin.
April 10, 2008 at 11:18 am
Forget that last post. I am better than that.
April 12, 2008 at 10:03 am
From the ER comments on the Residents Speak Out on Code Enforcement article of 4/8:
“It is true that no “Pot” or guns were located on that parcel, but what I later learned by checking with the sheriff’s Department, is they found 6 to 7 gardens and armed people with stolen weapons on Charles Garth’s Bald Hills property.
You really should check the public records. Parcel quest shows that Charles Garth owns three parcels of property off Bald Hills Road, as well as the parcel off Quarry Road in Trinidad.”
Does anyone know if this is true?
April 12, 2008 at 10:27 am
If it were true the Sheriffs Department would be trumpeting it, like code enforcement did their lie that the probation department had beaten that dog, not their own rogue officer. We see again and again how they manipulate the press that doesn’t fact-check.
April 15, 2008 at 1:30 pm
“armed people with stolen weapons” and yet no one was arrested? i think not. just another fable concocted to retroactively justify their heavy-handed methods.