Eureka City Councilwoman Linda Atkins was appointed with a 4-1 vote to the North Coast Railroad Authority by the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors Tuesday. Supervisor Jill Duffy voted against the appointment.
Atkins replaces longtime railroadie Charles Ollivier whose term expires June 30th.
Duffy hotly contested the notion that adequate notice had been given even though it had been posted in January. She said neither the board or the public is aware of the priorities of Atkins or other applicants, and would have liked to hear from the candidates before the board took action.
But Supervisors Jimmy Smith and Mark Lovelace noted phone conversations and emails with the candidates, including Ollivier, who had stated interest in keeping the position, but refused to sit for an interview or send a letter of interest until yesterday.
Supervisor Mark Lovelace said the issue of rails and trails was one of the top two issues he heard on the campaign trail. He said it was important to find someone who can best represent a range of interests for the NCRA right-of-way that includes rail but doesn’t exclude other possibilities.
RSS - Posts
June 23, 2009 at 12:01 pm
Great news.
June 23, 2009 at 12:02 pm
Linda is a great choice. I hope Jill’s objections are honestly about notification and are not political.
June 23, 2009 at 12:27 pm
A total lack of transparency by the board on this. Linda may be great but it doesn’t make up for the obvious Brown Act violations of the board in making this decision outside the public forum. I would have liked to hear from all of the potential candidates and what they stood for. This is the only effective and legitimate way that a governing body governs.
If none of you are bothered by this solely because you like Linda (as do I) then something is very wrong here.
June 23, 2009 at 12:40 pm
As much as Jill objected she acknowledged it was legally noticed.
Why didn’t she make the effort to talk to the candidates the way the others clearly did.
Smith acknowledged there may be some reason Ollivier wouldn’t be as passionate about the job anymore based on an email he received from Ollivier’s wife.
June 23, 2009 at 12:51 pm
At least the various institutes of Humboldt County are sticking to their guns and appointing people strictly based on cronyism.
June 23, 2009 at 1:12 pm
You are missing the point on this Heraldo, the whole thing should have been public with the potential candidates speaking publicly about their philosophy and the county/board speaking about its philosophy. It is not a NCRA members right to inject their own philosophy in lieu of the county’s. This is why it all should have been public.
I am appauled at the lack of interest you have in what I see to be some bad Brown Act violations on this. The question now is, how many other Brown Act violations is this Board committing?
June 23, 2009 at 1:18 pm
Huh, so if Ollivier was appointed that would not have been cronyism?
Seems that that most of the supervisors actually took the time to interview people. That is a lot more than most appointees get.
I support Linda, but I think some of Jill’s objection was reasonable considering the controversial nature of the appointment.
Even so, appointments, even today, are often put on the consent calender, and Jill has had no objection in the past.
June 23, 2009 at 1:31 pm
12:27, where are the “obvious brown act violations”? I’m not challenging you, just want to understand what exactly was violated by conducting phone interviews with applicants. Or is it about something else?
It’s my understanding that there are many appointments made that do not require the chosen applicant (or candidates) to attend the meeting and address the public.
June 23, 2009 at 1:32 pm
1:18 is right on all counts.
And I don’t see any credible allegations of Brown Act violations.
June 23, 2009 at 1:35 pm
Linda Atkins attended the meeting but Jill did not ask her to speak to any of her concerns. Jill was only interested in hearing from Ollivier, who was candid about his love for all things port and rail, but said he would understand if it was time to move on. He did not seem angry or accusatory in the slightest. He did thank Jill for her comments, however.
June 23, 2009 at 1:51 pm
A total lack of transparency by the board on this. Linda may be great but it doesn’t make up for the obvious Brown Act violations of the board in making this decision outside the public forum.
You are missing the point on this Heraldo, the whole thing should have been public with the potential candidates speaking publicly about their philosophy and the county/board speaking about its philosophy.
Now! Now you all give a shit.
As always H, very entertaining. I am guessing had Ollivier’s term expired in December, the notice back in January would still not have been enough time.
June 23, 2009 at 2:03 pm
Hey, was philosophy discussed when Clif was appointed to the railroad authority? Did anyone ask about it? BTW, the other applicants were Michael Winkler and Dan Hauser. I think the board selected the best candidate.
These appointments are precisely within the Board’s discretion, as long as the opportunity to apply is available to all. And that’s what happened here. There’s no requirement for applicants to go through a public hearing. And no need IMHO.
FWIW they also approved Ann Lindsey to work part time, 3 1/2 days a week, for $115,000.
June 23, 2009 at 3:13 pm
There were NO Brown Act violations.
For whatever reason, Jill decided to grandstand, maybe because of her tough upcoming election battle?
People are appointed all the time to different positions in a similiar fashion. Just because you want to whine and pout and don’t like how the process legally works doesn’t mean anyone should pay the slightest attention to you. Go back and play in your sandbox.
June 23, 2009 at 5:06 pm
Linda’s 23(?) year career at Cal Trans and her commitment to planning our communities for an uncertain future is a fabulous resume.
Those calling this appointment “controversial” simply worship growth-as-usual in a rapidly changing world.
Go get ‘em Linda!
June 23, 2009 at 6:18 pm
Great news? Just what we need is another
Larry Glass puppet to shut down more business
in Humboldt Cty.
June 23, 2009 at 6:20 pm
The railroad is already shut down, fyi.
June 23, 2009 at 6:20 pm
I can’t believe that Linda Atkins has joined the NRA.
June 23, 2009 at 6:37 pm
Appointments seldom go through a public process. It doesn’t happen in city government very often either. In picking Linda Atkins, the county will have a very level headed person with transportation experience. What else could you ask for?
June 23, 2009 at 7:16 pm
Whereas the other council members are creating jobs 6:18? Ha!
June 23, 2009 at 7:56 pm
I can’t believe that Linda Atkins has joined the NRA.
My source totally blew it. I was told she was joining NWA
June 23, 2009 at 10:32 pm
This is good news!
June 23, 2009 at 10:49 pm
I have to wonder, who does Jill even listen to anymore? Anyone who disagrees with her gets on her blacklist, so I just wonder who her constituent-advisors are these days. And why the hell would anyone want Ollivier put in for another term? He loves trains and all, but he doesn’t seem to have a grasp on any other details about the NCRA, from what I’ve heard him say in meetings.
Bring on the Annie and Mary Rail-Trail! Didn’t Jill’s first campaign platform have an Annie and Mary plank in it?
June 24, 2009 at 6:55 am
Before we get into Linda Atkins planning and transportation background with Cal-Trans those who do not believe the hype that she was a trails and urban planner was she not just a soils analyst this is like making a nurse a surgeon a little honesty on credentials and experience would be nice.
June 24, 2009 at 8:18 am
Linda Atkins joining the NRA?! Next thing you hear, Estelle Fennell will head up a right-wing organization.
June 24, 2009 at 8:33 am
Jill = Scary!
June 24, 2009 at 8:38 am
A Cal-Trans background? Did she bring her shovel?
I wonder if she ever had to run a business? Balance
a real checkbook? Etc..just what we need, another
lifer at the public trough.
June 24, 2009 at 9:08 am
I agree with Jill about the process. Two Supervisors brought this forward with Linda as the person to be appointed. Usually the Clerk of the Board submits appointments to other boards with the various information attached to the agenda item and then the Board selects from that list much like the Williamson Act appointments where there were more applications than openings. This type of appointment is not done on a consent calendar unless there is only one applicant when it goes to the Board of Supervisors. It was improper for Bonnie and Clif to bring this appointment forward this way. Don’t think it was a Brown Act violation unless it was discussed between more than two Supervisors about the appointment which would then be a serial meeting. Usually if a Supervisor knows that two other Supervisors have spoken to the same people they will not talk to them and state that it will be an agenda item as obviously Mark and Jimmy both knew it would be on the agenda if they talked to some of the candidates previously. So that might be questionable.
June 24, 2009 at 9:22 am
Let’s put this tired old GOP talking point “Did you ever run a business?” to rest.
AIG is a business. GM is a business. Lehman Bros. was a business, so was Bear Stearns. OH how about Countrywide and Citigrouo?
It turns out that private business managers can be at least as stupid, lazy, greedy and corrupt as the worst of public servants.
have a peaceful day,
Bill
June 24, 2009 at 10:19 am
Read anon 9:08 very carefully. Think about who knew what and how it was done. Do you think that just perhaps there was some communication in the back ground. It is also a brown act violation if a member talks to a member of the general public who the carry’s info back and forth between members of the board greater than two, what are the odds. Could Jill’s attitude have anything to do with her perception of what went on behind her back.
Also, though I know you will have a hard time with this concept, running a business is not a GOP talking point, just a damn difficult thing to do. Of course you would not have a clue.
June 24, 2009 at 10:39 am
Has Dave Tyson ever run a business?
June 24, 2009 at 10:57 am
Tyson was the finance director in Arcata then in Eureka for many years prior to taking the job as city manager. That’s about as close as you can get to “running a business” in the government arena.
June 24, 2009 at 11:21 am
oh great, now we have Bill Wennerholm defending Jill! That should raise some eyebrows…it raises mine!
June 24, 2009 at 11:22 am
HumboldtPolitico – so you say that there were NO (your emphasis not mine) Brown act Violations? What makes you so adamant so quickly? To borrow a little Shakespear, “Methinks the lady doth protest too much,” Please stop the theatrical hysterics ok?
Now it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see this. It is really easy if you look and listen.
This matter pops up basically as a done deal with the one person to be voted upon without the others going before the board and the public. I could see it if there were only one applicant but the current seat holder wanted to stay and there was another much more qualified applicant. It was on the agenda placed there by Bonnie and Clif as a done deal.
Duffy takes it on saying there has been no discussion in public regarding the choice (Atkins), the philosophy of the “choice” or the philosophy of the board.
Next we hear that Lovelace had told the current seat holder (Olivier) that he would not be reappointed. Then it is revealed that Lovelace told Atkins that Oliver was not in consideration. Hello folks, how would he know unless either Clif or Bonnie or both were sharing. Next it seems that Lovelace was less than forthright about his phone conversation with Olivier.
Finally, you Heraldo have it posted within nanoseconds BUT you were absolutely silent about this until after the vote was in.
Now, I ask you, what is so very hard about this jigsaw puzzle?
It is not that I dislike Ms. Atkins. Far from that. But, I do not think that the ends justify the means and this utter lack of process stinks.
June 24, 2009 at 11:57 am
Citizens and groups talk to all five of the Supervisors on issues all the time – it’s called lobbying. It is ONLY when three Supervisors talk about a thing to each other that it is a Brown Act violation. Even if all five talked to potential candidates for this position, it is still not a violation. Read the Act don’t just parrot stupid.
IMHO, Jill was slapped upside the head by one of her few remaining supporters about Linda bring appointed, nothing more, nothing less, with the inference if she didn’t try to stop it, there would be a price she would pay in the upcoming election.
June 24, 2009 at 1:14 pm
Heraldo – I answered Humboldt Politico at 11:23 this morning. How come you didn’t post it and moderated it off the blog?
If you don’t want a discussion, then fine, but you were the one that blogged this and Humboldt Politico has chosen to write on it in two posts. Perhaps you may wish to reconsider censoring what is a meaningful response to Politico?
June 24, 2009 at 3:07 pm
….Estelle Fennell will head up a right-wing organization.
Estelle heads up a right/left wing organization made up of thousands of members called Humboldt Coalition for Property Rights.
June 24, 2009 at 3:44 pm
If a member of a board, like the sups, communicates with 2 other members of the board on something before the board, in any way, 3 at a time, one then the other one, through subordinates, e-mails, finger paints etc., it is a violation of the Brown Act. Communication is communication. You read the court cases and the Act.
June 24, 2009 at 3:49 pm
I fail to see what is left wing about the advocacy of “property rights” or laissez faire land use planning. But that is for another blog.
June 24, 2009 at 3:57 pm
You are correct HumRed at 3:44. They can not even give the info to a third party to be communicated to the 3rd Supe.
June 24, 2009 at 4:21 pm
Well, then, following the above logic, since so many of the votes are unanimous, they must be constantly violating the Brown Act…doing all sorts of secret stuff. Got ya.
Quit whining. Linda is on, Duffy got slapped down. Case closed.
June 24, 2009 at 7:58 pm
Right is right and wrong is wrong. The public lost. Democracy lost. Linda lost. Duffy did not get slapped down. Freedom did.
June 24, 2009 at 8:45 pm
You would not see logic if it bit you in the ass. That is the law SFB. Personally I could care less who is on that board. No, Linda was put on and there is a good chance that the process was violated. But as long as you got what you wanted its OK. An you feel that your somehow better than others who violate that process cause you, being a prog’y, are intellectually superior. Parrot stupid, intellectually and morally you are about equal to a fart.
June 24, 2009 at 9:43 pm
“…prog’y…”
It’s a goofy enough epithet without adding an errant apostrophe, but HumRed’s point would be better made without hoisting it on a petard.
June 24, 2009 at 9:45 pm
Seemed to me HumRed was hoisting his own petard. Can’t that get you arrested?
June 24, 2009 at 10:56 pm
Posted back in January?
Yeah, whenever ya get around to it!
I like prog’y
June 24, 2009 at 11:30 pm
Have to agree with 6-24-09 at 11:22 am. Some good questions here. This should not have been brought forward by two Supervisors but should have just been an agenda item for the BOS to discuss and vote on., What a mess this was and it did not need to be if they had followed regular process with an agenda item that did not recommend anyone.
Clif still owes Bonnie about 5,000 votes or maybe a little more for the $10,000 she got him from Blue Lake Casino. Could be a little less than that because she hung him out a week or two ago when he thought she would vote with him. He has not learned that Bonnie will never vote on the loosing end and will switch in a second to the other side instead of loosing. Maybe he should learn that lesson too. Then it would be a 5-0 vote again as it has been for years.
June 24, 2009 at 11:33 pm
How’s that? Because Jill will always vote with Bonnie? Yeah, right.
June 25, 2009 at 9:48 am
# Humboldt Politico Says:
June 23, 2009 at 3:13 pm
…
People are appointed all the time to different positions in a similiar fashion. Just because you want to whine and pout and don’t like how the process legally works doesn’t mean anyone should pay the slightest attention to you. Go back and play in your sandbox.
We could say the same to you Jim, but then again, you might eat the sand.
Did you impress the locals enough in Shelter Cove so much that they ran you off the road AGAIN?
Do yourself a favor — don’t work your political ‘magic’ on Bass again, it won’t fly this time around.
I despise Bonnie Neely and I’ve never voted for her…but in a runoff between Neely and Bass, I’d have to hold my nose to keep JF’s puppet out of office.
June 25, 2009 at 9:59 am
Wait just a cotton pickin’ minute here, Virginia said she was my puppet. Sure Jim used to think he was running her campaign, but we needed some cover at the time.
June 25, 2009 at 10:06 am
You know, when making a comment that is predicated on a guess of who some other anonymous commenter is, the guess is nearly always wrong. FYI.
June 25, 2009 at 10:12 am
Anon 11:30. Right you are, unfortunately I think we just saw a vision of how things are going to be done at the BOS for a period of time. Hump O’s attitude is a sign of the prog’y line. Quit whining we are in control.
” Meet the new boss, same as the old boss”, Who’s Next. Life is but a circle.
June 25, 2009 at 11:48 am
But you didn’t seem to mind the old boss so its not the same.
June 25, 2009 at 12:10 pm
Actually I’ve supported Bonnie for years, financially and otherwise, since she has ALWAYS been the strongest candidate, as she will be this time no matter who runs against her, whether Virginia, Richard, Jeff, etc. and I will be extremely surprised if she loses. IMHO, I don’t know anyone in Humboldt who could defeat her, even with unlimited funds.
June 25, 2009 at 2:34 pm
12:10pm-I guess you are part of the problem and not part of the solution then.
June 25, 2009 at 3:01 pm
What is the solution? Fantasy trains?
June 25, 2009 at 4:50 pm
Should it be “Pro-ghee” like that disgusting yak butter?
June 25, 2009 at 5:30 pm
Anon 11:48, you have no idea of what I mind and don’t mind. Read H’s 10:06 comment. By the way, some day Both Michael Jackson and Farrah Fawcett in the same day. RIP.
June 29, 2009 at 5:44 pm
Wish someone other than the T-S will look into allegations of major embezzlement at the HumCo. Superior Court Operations Department. $100,000 missing between Jan. and Oct. 2008 — possibly millions more over the course of several years — where’s the sense of outrage?
http://www.times-standard.com/ci_12678128?IADID
Rake some muck blogosphere!