Home > Uncategorized > Give it up, Andrea Arnot w/ Update

Give it up, Andrea Arnot w/ Update

CNN is reporting today that Pacific Lumber spokesperson Andrea Arnot doesn’t know what the heck she’s talking about.

Arnot, who moved to Oregon last July, continues to collect paychecks in exchange for waxing positive about PALCO, but even she’s got to admit that blindly repeating whatever the big lawyer tells her is embarrassing.

It’s hard not to snigger at her assurance that PALCO will submit a “fair and confirmable” reorganization plan to the US Bankruptcy Court in Texas. It sounds so Fox News-ish.

But it’s downright funny that she told the Associated Press that she didn’t know PALCO parent company Maxxam intends to contribute to the plan.

Guess that means she’s exchanged reading the Times-Standard and the Eureka Reporter for the Oregonian.

UPDATE: The Humboldt Herald has learned the source of Andrea Arnot’s confusion.

She was fired back in June by Pacific Lumber.

Not that you’d know. She falsely represented to the North Coast Journal in July that her employment would be preserved by a monthly telecommute.

But six weeks prior she’d filed a severance claim with the bankruptcy court for $67,500 because her “employment contract [had] been terminated.”

Yet as recently as September 17 she was quoted by the Associated Press as Pacific Lumber’s “spokeswoman.”

Confused? Us, too.

Why are national publications crediting Arnot with a position from which she’s been severed? And how does that severance package compare to the decades long workers who got nothing?

One upon a time Arnot said Humboldt County’s best asset was its people. Perhaps she only meant the ones who cut and run.

UPDATE 2: Arnot Proof of Claim

  1. blank
    September 17, 2007 at 5:32 pm

    She’s also a lawyer, ya know.

  2. September 17, 2007 at 5:36 pm

    Yes, but at least she only stretches the truth to the media rather than going on record for Palco.

  3. anonymous
    September 17, 2007 at 7:57 pm

    hmm not really blank. If you don’t pass the bar, you are not really a lawyer.

    Have either of you ever talked to Andrea Arnot? If she said she doesn’t know something…. trust me, it’s believable. Frankly I’d be surprised if she knows anything.

  4. September 17, 2007 at 8:04 pm

    Arnot told the NCJ she’s an “attorney by trade.” Was she lying?

  5. blank
    September 17, 2007 at 8:20 pm

    I dunno. I would never ask a person a question like “did you pass the bar?” It’s rude. That’s for prospective employers and the media, I suppose.

    I’ve been at dinner parties and other social gatherings with her, and she seems spunky.

  6. Anon
    September 18, 2007 at 4:18 am

    She doesn’t show up on the Ca bar roster.

  7. a-nap
    September 18, 2007 at 6:20 am

    I have a friend who was her former neighbor and she is greatly relieved that she has new neighbors now.

  8. anonymous
    September 18, 2007 at 8:52 am

    lol Heraldo. She obviously has obviously misrepresented some other things about her employment so what would stop her from representing herself as a laywer.

    Besides … “lawyer by trade” is a bit ambiguous is it not.

  9. September 18, 2007 at 9:00 am

    It is an odd turn of phrase, but it’s hard to hide one’s bar status. And as 4:18 discovered, her name is missing from the roster.

    After all these revelations it sounds like she’s got the right stuff to become a lawyer. Maybe Pacific Lumber would hire her.

  10. derchoadus
    September 18, 2007 at 9:19 am


  11. Oakie
    September 18, 2007 at 9:38 am

    Was Dennis Wood canned in June too?

  12. September 18, 2007 at 10:29 am
  13. Anonymous
    September 18, 2007 at 11:23 am

    Heraldo, what’s your source for the updated information?

  14. September 18, 2007 at 11:30 am

    My source is the $67,500 severance claim Arnot filed with the PL bankruptcy court in June. My attempt to upload it in the update failed. But I’ll try again so you can see for yourself.

  15. September 18, 2007 at 11:43 am

    Ok, it’s up there under UPDATE 2.

  16. Hank Sims
    September 18, 2007 at 11:45 am

    Yeah, I’ve seen the claim. It’s weird. I don’t know how to explain it — she’s still talking for PL, and yet she was fired.

    Some kind of financial arrangement behind the scenes, I’m sure.

  17. Hank Sims
    September 18, 2007 at 11:47 am

    Oh, you beat me!

    Well, looking at it again, I see that she says “her contract was terminated.” So maybe she wasn’t fired, really — maybe her contract was terminated, but they kept her on as freelance.

    Hell if I know. It’s a real head-scratcher.

  18. September 18, 2007 at 12:09 pm

    Yeah, it bizarre. And whatever the arrangement, PL is not keeping her abreast of the situation about which she represents them to the media.

  19. robash141
    September 18, 2007 at 1:33 pm

    Maybe she just believes in Maxxams mission to such an extent that she is willing to work for them without pay.. Just like Rose

  20. anonymous
    September 18, 2007 at 1:36 pm

    ha… no change there Heraldo. She never was abreast of the situation from what I’ve seen…
    It is unfortunate for her, but she took this job knowing that every other PR person there met an untimely demise (on the employment front that is.)

  21. Eric Kirk
    September 18, 2007 at 1:51 pm

    She doesn’t show up on the Ca bar roster.

    I could swear she’s an attorney. Maybe it’s under her pre-marriage name?

  22. September 18, 2007 at 2:20 pm

    Oh, geez, robash. I do not work for Palco in any way shape or form. Never have, never will. Nobody pays me to blog, period. And I don’t work for anybody. Period. Sorry to bust your bubble.

  23. Oakie
    September 18, 2007 at 4:15 pm

    Yep, your husband worked for Palco and is now Mayor of Fortucky!

  24. Anonymous
    September 18, 2007 at 4:37 pm

    Hey, Oakie, Don’t disrespeck Kaintuck!
    If you do, my Kaintucky aintcesters will Haint You!

  25. Not me
    September 18, 2007 at 4:51 pm

    Sure Rose.

  26. robash141
    September 18, 2007 at 6:30 pm

    Methinks Rose doth protest too much…

    If it wasn’t true why would Rose deny it so knee-jerkedly

  27. HAA-ha
    September 18, 2007 at 7:23 pm

    Andrea is HOT! and heraldo is NOT! end of story

  28. September 18, 2007 at 7:33 pm

    I’ll have to work on that blank stare.

  29. Yo...
    September 18, 2007 at 8:19 pm

    robash, you are a tired name-calling little troll with nothing of substance to add.

    try and do something for a change before making off base accusations…

  30. Yo...
    September 18, 2007 at 8:20 pm

    Robash, you a buffoon…so now someone disabusing you of the UNTRUTHS, (aka, lies) that you spread about them is a knee jerk reaction?

  31. robash141
    September 18, 2007 at 9:00 pm

    Yo is just jealous , because Rose won’t pay him any attention while she hangs on my every word.

    He can’t help himself when he thinks of those lips, as they curl up into a snarl, while she’s talking about the latest outrageous ignominy inflicted upon Humboldt county by Paul Gallegos.

  32. Yo...
    September 18, 2007 at 9:04 pm

    Ahh, there you go again….

    More reasoned analysis…LOL

  33. Yo...
    September 18, 2007 at 9:05 pm

    Dude, you got completely humiliated the last time we did this…

  34. Anonymous
    September 18, 2007 at 9:25 pm

    Facts, folks, facts. Anyone care to refute what Heraldo posted?

  35. Anonymous
    September 19, 2007 at 7:53 am

    Is it possible the severance package included a certain amount of work, or an independent contractor relationship?

  36. Anonymous
    September 19, 2007 at 7:58 am

    but who cares, anyway?

  37. blank
    September 19, 2007 at 8:11 am

    I don’t.

    Also, I agree with whoever said “termination” is not always “being fired”. I have been terminated, along with an entire
    “department” or “section” of a business, when they needed to cut. Then some of us were hired back for other departments.

    Also, a person who is not on the state bar list could be on a bar of some other state or under another name.

  38. Oakie
    September 19, 2007 at 8:49 am

    Sorry bout comparing Fortuna to Kentucky. I should have used a more backwards corrupt analogy… maybe eastern European or Russian country or city. Fortuna is a bad as you can get. Racist, Rigge has the City working on MLK Day), Corrupt (see the General Plan Update and PALCO bankruptcy files), Ignorant (check out what the City is doing to the Monday Club a local historic landmark).. the list goes on.

  39. robash141
    September 19, 2007 at 9:22 am

    Since Arnot has been shown the door I think Yo should apply for the job of Maxxam PR honk. he obviously has a penchant for preseting highly selective and subjective claims as “facts”

  40. Anonymous
    September 19, 2007 at 9:47 am

    Ah, but 45% of Fortuna voted for John Kerry…the city has a sweet, light underbelly.

  41. Anonymous
    September 19, 2007 at 9:48 am

    Hi Oakie
    I’d like to respond to a few of your complaints regarding the City of Fortuna:

    Regarding MLK day, yes, it’s true that the City is open to serve it’s citizens on MLK day; So is the Bayshore Mall and every retailer and restaurant I can think of. Are they all “racist” as well?

    I also believe the newspapers and other local media are open for business on MLK day.

    Heck when I went to Humboldt State, school was in session during Veterans day.

    As far as “checking out” what is being done to the Monday Club, a wheelchair lift is being added to help folks with disabilities is being added. That doesn’t add up to being “ignorant” in my book.

    As far as the General Plan update, please explain rationally how the process has been, in your words “corrupt”. The meetings have been open, and since the new system installed, televised. Just because you may not be getting what you want, does not make it “corrupt”. Besides, there are still many open, public meetings left before the plan is adopted; please attend if you have concerns, and let your voice be heard.

    With regards to your unfortunate accusation linking the City of Fortuna with the PALCO bankruptcy files and corruption, I think it was spelled out very clearly in the press that the City of Fortuna has made no deals with a developer or PALCO regarding any sales tax sharing or any added infrastructure. Any conversations revealed in the bankruptcy files were between PALCO and the developer.

    I look forward to your repsonse and a rational discussion.

  42. Anonymous
    September 19, 2007 at 9:50 am

    Please explain, Robash141. The only thing I have seen Yo do is ask you to substantiate your wild accusations.

  43. Oakie
    September 19, 2007 at 10:47 am

    Well, Ignorant is making a Craftsman Hall look like a Victorian Home for starters. I guess the official responsible for that mess missed the basic architecture classes that semester. Kiss that local landmark goodbye to ignorance

    Federal, State, and Local governments honor MLK by not working. Fortuna has chosen not to. The City’s explanation of “MLK would be working that day is BS.” The City is just fortunate that there are not more African Americans in the Community to make a bigger deal of this. RACIST to the bone! My close Black friends are insulted by Fortuna’s lack of respect for this American hero. The white heros get days off!

    Corrupt. I get a kick out of the every changing story the City manager and council comes-up with when it comes to the mil site/general plan. It is painful to watch on tv. Talk about chasing your tails. How do you know what I want anyway? Give me a huge break. The mayor, manager, and council have been planning this shopping center since 2003. I want honest government for starters. The City is going through the motions adjusting their story so that it appears they are listening to the public. The end product is still a Walmart no matter how much lipstick the city puts on that pig. The mayor even stands to get 400,000 dollars if PALCo can recover from this bankruptcy. The fact that he is even in the room when the general plan is being discussed is a huge conflict of interest. The general plan update is just a part of the “plan” no matter what any citizen or study concludes.

  44. Nappy
    September 19, 2007 at 11:00 am

    I agree with Oakie that the wheelchair ramp project at the Fortuna Monday Club totally ruined the architectural historical integrity. Isn’t there a design review board in Fortuna?

    Fortuna needs to honor MLK day, too.

    To consider even getting on board with FCC to try and even discuss development and clean-up of the mill site, ect. gives me hives even thinking about it! It is worse than a hornet’s nest!

  45. Anonymous
    September 19, 2007 at 11:47 am

    Well, first of all the project is not yet complete at the monday club. I prefer to withhold judgement.

    With respect, just because you don’t like it doesnt make it “ignorant”. Do you have any idea how many small business and local businesses here within Humboldt County have been sued because of ADA compliance issues? I just find it somewhat ironic that you would lable the City as Racist, yet they are bending over backwards to help those with physical disabilities.

    You did not answer my question regarding pretty much every retail business, media outlet and restaurant. Are they “Racist” as well? Again, with respect, your statement about Fortuna honoring “white heroes” is repellant.

    The City is also open on Columbus Day and Veteran’s day. Are they therefore anti-Veteran?

    Just how is the story “every changing” with regards to the millsite? Again, it is an open and transparent process, one that has yet to be completed. Of course there will be changes to the plan – it is not complete; by all means come to the meetings and give your public input.

    Oakie, you say that the City Council and City manager are just going through the motions as far as making it appear that the public is being heard and that a shopping center is going to happen.

    Did you ever stop to consider that the majority of the citizens of Fortuna want a shopping center? That they want retail?

    In the last election, the candidates supporting retail development won overwhelmingly, while an incumbent who was dead set against this proposed development was soundly defeated.

    I understand we can have differences of opinion, but it is unfortunate that you have to apply labels (which I believe are unfounded and untrue) such as racist to these differences.

  46. Oakie
    September 19, 2007 at 11:48 am

    By the way Rigge got it wrong, there are City Council minutes that record a formal action by the City Council to explore TIF financing with Katz. Keep chasin that tail!!!!!

  47. Anonymous
    September 19, 2007 at 11:50 am

    “exploring” something and coming to a formal tax sharing agreement are two different things, Oakie.

  48. Oakie
    September 19, 2007 at 12:25 pm

    I have heard that same BS arguement before regarding the last election. Just because one runs on a platform and wins, the general plan process is finished before it is started? It doesn’t work that way. And what is getting in the way of the end goal (Walmart) is a legal requirement to have public hearings on the matter. To bad they are obligatory in the City eyes. No real thought is going into this matter. No real alternatives besides plans that ultimatley benefit Palco and Katz are being discussed. It is not opinions at all, it is factually based decision making. The city is not backing-up this decision with anything but “I want retail shopping in Fortuna” and singning the praises of a past election.

    City records also indicate the need for a legally defensible general plan in order to accomplish the “plan” that was hatched as far back as 2003 before the mill was even closed. The City is going through the motions right now because they have to.

    What is hard to believe is that your own consultant economist has found this pipe dream of a regional shopping center will be harmful to the community. It seems the City puts more value on anecdotal “wants” than a paid consultant’s credible data. Many kids would like to live on ice-cream.. is it good for them???

    To place a shopping center there in the hope that it creates some sort of economic development for the city after it kills the existing businesses is not informed decision making. Just because the project pans out for the developer in terms of profitablity, it doesn’t mean the City or public is going to benefit.

    If taking MLK day off is that big of deal to you than we don’t need to discuss that matter further. I understand your position.

  49. Hank Sims
    September 19, 2007 at 12:28 pm

    FYI, Okie and Anon, this matter is the subject of the NCJ’s cover story this week.

  50. Oakie
    September 19, 2007 at 12:35 pm

    I’ll check it out. Thanks Hank

  51. Anonymous
    September 19, 2007 at 12:43 pm

    I will believe Oakie’s ridiculous claim of having close Black friends when he produces signed, notarized affidavits from them confirming his assertion is true.

  52. Oakie
    September 19, 2007 at 12:58 pm

    WE were also appauled when the Mayor reported this summer from a televised City Council meeting that “he met a smart black fellow in Sacramento at a league of City’s meeting.” Affidavits? you are one sick pup.

  53. Anonymous
    September 19, 2007 at 1:24 pm

    Hi Oakie,

    You made the comment about the city council “appearing to listen to the public”

    My response was with regards to the fact that it appears that the public actually wants retail develoment; not the machinations of the general plan process.

    BTW, you are cherry picking the numbers concerning the economist and even that economist said that the numbers would change using differing variables.

    I dont understand your point about MLK day and taking the day off and it being “that big of a deal”. You say you understand my point, but my point is that I regret that you call my City racist. It is an unfortunate characterization, and nothing could be further from the truth.

  54. Anonymous
    September 19, 2007 at 1:36 pm

    Hi Oakie

    (if this is a rehash of what may appear right before this post, I apologize, it doesnt look like my comment posted).

    First of all, I dont understand what you mean when you say with regards to MLK day –

    “If taking MLK day off is that big of deal to you than we dont need to discuss the matter further”

    Actually you are the one calling the City Manager and City Council and City of Fortuna racist.

    I only pointed out that the City also is open on Veterans day and Columbus day. I think that kind of refutes your unfortunate characterization of the city as racist.

    Secondly, you asserted that the City council and city manager were just going through the motions

    “so that appears they are listening to the public”.

    Well, they are listening to the public. The public wants retail development. Throughout all of the public workshops and meetings there have been plenty of people who asking for retail development.

  55. Oh, Fortuna...
    September 19, 2007 at 9:37 pm

    Interesting thread…I thought I’d add my two cents worth regarding the Fortuna General Plan Update and the Mill District Plan.

    Yes, the citizen’s voted overwhelmingly for candidates in the last election that would consider a big box development. They voted before they knew the likely economic reality of placing a big box, regional shopping center, in the community. What is interesting is looking at the public’s response to a regional shopping center proposal upon receiving the economic analysis in Community Workshop 5. The public said, wait a minute, we want more shopping but this much does not sound like a good idea.

    Also, Steven Hackett’s (the economic consultant for the city) analysis was done using authoritative sources (Franchise Tax Board data and Board of Equalization figures) and was built around an optimist, yet realistic assumptions about future growth, he admitted that he did his analysis before the layoff’s in December 2006 from PALCO, so he was being quite optimistic. I do not see anything here that sounds like cherry picking of data.

    The City even gave Mr. Katz an opportunity to refute the information presented by Steven Hackett. He blew it big time. MapInfo’s “data” and analysis was a waste of paper. They underestimated the number of large format retailers currently serving Humboldt County by over 50%, they gave no methodology and listed no authoritative sources for their data. Numbers pulled out of your butt is not reliable data!

    There has been no credible data what-so-ever presented during the General Plan Update process to support a land-use designation on the Mill District that would allow a Regional Shopping Center. In fact, all credible information points to, harm to the city’s economic health. Why then is this Council falling all over itself to pave the way for this type of development?

    I have heard the ridiculous argument that the developer would not do it if he couldn’t make money. Duh, but notice his concern is that HE makes money, not that the City makes money. The City has different costs then the developer and makes money in a different way then the developer does. It is a real possibility that Mr. Katz could walk a way making a killing and the City would need to raise taxes on us, Fortuna residents, to cover the cost of increase police and fire protection and other infrastructure costs.

    So, what else can any reasonable, logical thinking person believe? There definitely is something wrong with this picture and I think it has a lot to do with $400,000.

  56. Anonymous
    September 19, 2007 at 10:19 pm

    Git-er-done!!! The South and Fortuna will rise again…

  57. Anonymous
    September 20, 2007 at 9:25 am

    sure erin, whatever you say

  58. Anonymous
    September 20, 2007 at 9:49 am


    I am funny in my own mind only, mixing up the palco spokespeeps (there have been so many) as in erin d/andrea a, and many more.

    so let me amend my funny in my mind only quip to

    sure andrea, whatever you say.

  59. Anonymous
    September 20, 2007 at 10:50 am

    Informed decision making does not exist in Fortuna period! Data and studies mean nothing. Git-er-done!!!!!!!!!!!

  60. Anonymous
    September 20, 2007 at 9:46 pm

    FYI, if anyone is still checking this post – Andrea is an active member of the bar, listed under her maiden name.

  61. September 20, 2007 at 9:53 pm

    Andrea is an active member of the bar, listed under her maiden name.

    Which is?

    C’mon, friend. This is the internet. Cut and paste and give us links.

  62. Hank Sims
    September 20, 2007 at 9:57 pm
  63. She's listed under her maiden name
    September 20, 2007 at 10:02 pm

    She is listed, skeptics. You should learn not to bash people before you know the facts.

    Andrea Wilson – #183351
    Current Status: Active

    This member is active and may practice law in California.

    See below for more details.

    Profile Information

    Bar Number 183351
    Address 1161 Diamond Dr
    Arcata, CA 95521 Phone Number (707) 443-7780
    Fax Number (707) 443-8577
    e-mail Not Available
    District District 1 Undergraduate School Wheaton Coll; Norton MA
    County Humboldt Law School Gonzaga Univ SOL; Spokane WA
    Sections None

  64. anonymous
    September 21, 2007 at 9:35 am

    Ha Ha. That ended that conversation!

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s