Home > Uncategorized > Curless cash is in

Curless cash is in

In the race to keep a seat on the Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation and Conservation Commission, 16-year incumbent Roy Curless easily amassed a healthy carafe of coin. 

The major contributors:
Color Impressions $5,000+
Sequoia Gas $500
John Curless $500
Hansens Truck Stop $500
Eel River Disposal $500
Mercer-Fraser $500
Eureka Readymix $500

Donations between $100 – $300:
Bill Bertain
John Campbell
Bob Canevari
Harvey Harper
Humboldt Bay Oysters
Hal Hummel
IBEW Local 551
Ed Lewis Logging
Fred Moore
Jim Morrison
Fred Nunnemakers
Rock & Gadberry Gravel Co.
Roger Rodoni
David Somerville
UA Local 355
Whitchurch Trucking

The campaign’s $24,000 includes $8,500 of non-monetary donations (read: copies and grub). Curless has over $7000 left in the bank to flood the airwaves in the final week before the Nov. 6 election. 

The campaign to elect opponent Carlos Quilez scored impressive promotional mileage with fewer campaign bucks. Expect to hear much more from both candidates in the coming week. 

For a peek inside the contested 2nd district check out Eric Kirk’s observations from SoHum.

  1. Nerdcore
    October 29, 2007 at 1:11 am

    Carlos wins because he has the better web site. Roy’s not even optimizing his images. Who puts a 2304×2016 image on their front page, but displays it at 770×445? The aspect ratio isn’t even correct. It should be 770×674. Hahahahahahaha!

  2. Anonymous
    October 29, 2007 at 7:18 am

    Roy’s a Bidness Dem’crat and a nice man as well.

  3. anonymous
    October 29, 2007 at 7:21 am

    I agree with anonymous.

  4. Anonymous
    October 29, 2007 at 8:35 am

    I read the endorsement letters from Margaret Campbell. If the Campbell’s endorse him coupled with what I heard during the debates, Curless is just a blind faith good ole boy waiting for the free market to revive the railroad.

  5. gulo gordo
    October 29, 2007 at 9:15 am

    Some business as usual types must be pretty worried to throw that kind of scratch at a Harbor District race.

    Golly. I wonder why they’re so defensive?

  6. Anonymous
    October 29, 2007 at 9:29 am

    Hopefully, the good ole boys are feeling threatened, especailly after Pat’s impressive debate on KEET. If we could only have those caliber candidates in Fortuna! We wouldn’t have decision makers defining a Walmart as Economic Development! Carlos does come close and has my vote.

  7. mresquan
    October 29, 2007 at 9:33 am

    So that means Curliss is supported by Local Solutions or Salzman?I mean,big money spending for small campaigns didn’t start until they came around.
    That’s big news.As a progressive I’m concerned.

  8. Carol
    October 29, 2007 at 9:36 am

    I don’t think there is any business conspiracy with Curless. Remember the political phrase, “Politics makes strange bedfellows”. So Margaret Campbell (a republican) and me (a democrat) both like Roy Curless (a democrat). I have been friends with a nephew of Roy’s for years. Roy’s father-in-law Paul Mudgett was an upstanding Fortuna citizen, so much so that there is a bridge named after him south of Fortuna. Roy explained that it was his father-in-law that brought him to the Democratic party. He is a good person and is who he says he is.

  9. Anonymous
    October 29, 2007 at 9:40 am

    If the railroad is going to be revived for the benefit of a few private companies, then those few companies should shoulder the cost. Leave the taxpayer money out of this!

    My guess is that will never happen.

  10. Anonymous
    October 29, 2007 at 10:13 am

    It’s funny how anti-rail folks characterize restoring rail as “blind faith.” I’m itching to take commuter rail around the county and travel to SF every couple months. The only blind faith I see it the commitment to a trail that will be utilized by a tiny subset of the community… as evidenced by all other trails in our county, even the glorious Hammond Trail. 50 people showed up for the recent Golden Spike connection event? Give me a break. Unveail a railroad and wherever you hold the unveiling would be swamped. You guys put up a good show though. You have the local news media convinced rail is dead and trails are our salvation. You ignore that we can have both.

  11. anon
    October 29, 2007 at 10:18 am

    ‘Way to go, 10:13. You are correct in all respects.

  12. anon
    October 29, 2007 at 10:26 am

    Who or what is Color Impressions?

  13. itchy the coward
    October 29, 2007 at 10:32 am

    What if you were a gravel miner with an unlimited supply of gravel, but no economic way to deliver it without a railroad. Wouldn’t you want the taxpayers to fund your distribution system for you, in the guise of being part of the great container port economic panacea for humboldt county?

  14. itchy the coward
    October 29, 2007 at 10:50 am

    Why have the private sector railroads refused to keep the line open?. They have determined that there isn’t a profit there, that’s why. All you “don’t need to be taxed for anything” free marketers all of a sudden want to spend all that tax money on something that the private sector refuses to touch.

  15. October 29, 2007 at 11:00 am

    How do you come up with that, itchy? Seems to me support or opposition to the railroad comes from all sides.

  16. Jane Doe
    October 29, 2007 at 11:04 am

    There is NO plan for a commuter railroad in Humboldt County. Obviously another who doesn’t pay attention but makes assumptions based on their wishes.

    An industrial railroad should be paid for by the industries that use it. PERIOD.

  17. itchy the coward
    October 29, 2007 at 11:05 am

    Fred, I don’t get it. Why would a libertarian want to fund something with taxes that the private sector won’t?

  18. Carol
    October 29, 2007 at 11:26 am

    A commuter railroad is a joke. The rail stops at SF Bay. Would the “commuters” then take a ferry to SF? Even in its heyday, passenger rail service was minimal. It was freight that made the RR-line work. Just ask someone who once worked the railroad like Bill Pinches. Bill is a fountain of wisdom.

  19. October 29, 2007 at 11:58 am

    Itchy wrote, “Fred, I don’t get it. Why would a libertarian want to fund something with taxes that the private sector won’t?”.

    When did I say libertarians support subsidizing the railroad? Oh, I get it, I was saying support or opposition comes from all over and “all over” would include libertarians. Ok. I can see where you’d think that.

    I don’t know of any libertarians that support subsidizing the railroad, but there are some that would normally be considered fiscal conservatives that seem to support subsidizing, Rob Arkley being the first one that comes to mind.

    Then again, I’ve just heard reference to him being in favor of the railroad getting up and running again. He may just think it would be nice to have it up and running again, if it could pay its own way, which is pretty much how I feel.

  20. Jane Doe
    October 29, 2007 at 12:02 pm

    You changed the wording a bit Fred. Subsidizing is not quite the same as funding. Could you be a bit more specific? Do you favor the use of tax dollars IN ANY WAY for a railroad?

  21. October 29, 2007 at 12:02 pm

    Carol wrote, “A commuter railroad is a joke.”.

    I thought it might be a nice option to have: rail service all the way to at least Marin County, then take a bus to S.F., until that report Antrim mentioned said time to S.F. was 14 hours. Yipes! That’s almost three times longer than by car.

    They went on to say the average speed between Eureka and Willits was 10 to 25mph. The earliest trains went about 25mph at their fastest, I believe. Kind of surprising the local rails were stuck at that speed, but it’s the terrain.

  22. Reality Check
    October 29, 2007 at 12:10 pm

    Blind Faith— Pipe Dreams!!!!!! Rails to Trails! Vote out the old boy curmudgeons!

  23. October 29, 2007 at 12:16 pm

    We were flooded with Curless mailers last week. But there is enthusiasm behind the Quilez campaign. It’s hard to take out a machine with a complex issue though. Crossing my fingers.

  24. itchy the coward
    October 29, 2007 at 12:26 pm

    Fred, my point was who will benefit most from the millions of tax dollars it would take to get the railroad back up and the millions it would take to keep it going, since the private sector won’t. The only thing I can come up with is the gravel miners, some reduced shipping costs for lumber that would impact the trucking industry up here, and maybe a small amount of commuters if we want to spend the extra millions to bring the line up to passenger standards. The container port I just can’t see given the constraints on container ships posed by the bay itself. Do we want to fund these subsidies with our tax dollars? Doesn’t make sense to me. Apparently it doesn’t make sense to Caltrans either because so far they have refused to release the funds.

  25. October 29, 2007 at 12:30 pm

    By the way Heraldo, do you have Quilez’ info as well? It’d be great to compare and contrast. I know it’s probably much less, but I’m more interested in names than amounts.

  26. Carol
    October 29, 2007 at 12:31 pm

    Isn’t there a dude that wants to mine Island Mountain and is a player behind trying to get the line running again?

  27. Anonymous
    October 29, 2007 at 12:42 pm

    Actually it is 14 hours from Eureka to Willits according to the NCRA own study.

  28. Anonymous
    October 29, 2007 at 12:49 pm

    Hey Fred, you’re 52 years old. It’s time to stop living in Fantasyland.

  29. Anonymous
    October 29, 2007 at 12:52 pm

    Really, what has Curless done. What idea or policy has he promoted or come up with himself. What has he really done to bring his District anything at all? After 16 years it is time to end the stagnation on the Commission.

  30. Anonymous
    October 29, 2007 at 1:05 pm

    Hey, he’s been there 16 years and hasn’t hurt anything. That’s good enough for me!

  31. October 29, 2007 at 1:27 pm

    In the United States, the Federal Railroad Administration has developed a system of classification for track quality. The class a track is placed in determines speed limits and the ability to run passenger trains.
    The lowest class is referred to as excepted track. Only freight trains are allowed to operate on this type of trackage, and they may run at speeds up to 10 mph (16 km/h). Also, no more than five cars loaded with hazardous material may be operated within any single train. Passenger trains of any kind are prohibited, including chartered excursions or fantrips.

    Class 1 track is the lowest class allowing the operation of passenger trains. Freight train speeds are still limited to 10 mph (16 km/h, and passenger trains are restricted to 15 mph (24 km/h).

    Class 2 track limits freight trains to 25 mph (40 km/h) and passenger trains to 30 mph (48 km/h).

    Class 3 track limits freight trains to 40 mph (64 km/h) and passenger trains to 60 mph (96 km/h)

  32. dollar wise
    October 29, 2007 at 1:45 pm

    Good for them all. They know that economy and conservation must be supported. How much LS and baykeeper money,time and support went unreported to shut down the economy and real conservation?

  33. Auntie Mayme
    October 29, 2007 at 1:53 pm

    Do you think Color Impressions printed and donated the campaign signs?

  34. October 29, 2007 at 1:55 pm

    BTW – The NCRA has yet to find funding to open Willits north to Class 1.

  35. October 29, 2007 at 2:36 pm

    itchy asks, “who will benefit most from the millions of tax dollars it would take to get the railroad back up and the millions it would take to keep it going?”.

    Exactly. Who is going to benefit? Only a select few, I suspect. We don’t have enough exportables in Humboldt to make it worthwhile so only a gravel miner and people who actually work on the railroad would likely benefit. Maybe a few lumber mills will, but only if the rail is subsidized by government to keep rates low enough to beat other shipping methods.

    Jane Doe asks, “Do you favor the use of tax dollars IN ANY WAY for a railroad?”.

    I’m sure I wouldn’t oppose ANY tax dollars being used for the railroad, but I suspect my limit would be much lower than yours. Not when the rail costs will likely greatly exceed any benefits and/ or income generated.

  36. hcn
    October 29, 2007 at 3:43 pm

    OK, my interest is peaked! What is “Color Impressions” and who is the owner? That’s lots of cash for a minor election.

  37. Hank Sims
    October 29, 2007 at 3:57 pm

    It wasn’t cash, it was a non-monetary contribution for printing expenses. The signs, I suppose.

  38. October 29, 2007 at 4:01 pm

    Mitchell Cronk
    1010 Main Street

  39. Hank Sims
    October 29, 2007 at 4:08 pm

    Isn’t Cronk that new street hip-hop movement from East LA?

    “Cronk, clown, break it on down.”

  40. Anonymous
    October 29, 2007 at 6:17 pm

    That’s crunk. Cronk is the sound a goose makes.

  41. Anonymous
    October 29, 2007 at 6:20 pm

    I don’t care if commerce rail is viable or not. I want commuter rail, a cleaner alternative to mass transit than my car. And I want the government to subsidize it, or get off its ass and make companies produce clean, efficient vehicles. Sorry folks, but returning rail to the north coast is a far more likely scenario than changing the whole of American society.

  42. Anonymous
    October 29, 2007 at 7:19 pm

    An elected leader who doesn’t constantly run his mouth = Priceless.

  43. Anonymous
    October 29, 2007 at 7:22 pm

    Commuter rail? How does rail service to San Francisco (or a county short of SF) help with commuting, other than to SF?

    It would be great if we had light rail in town, but a community our size could never support such an project. The residential communities are too spread out. Face it, the automobile is the best solution, and the only solution outside of riding your bike.

    A better solution is to give more housing options closer to the city core. Balloon tract anyone?

  44. average Eurekan
    October 29, 2007 at 8:01 pm

    Hear, hear.

    How about some affordable housing on lower Sixth Street, say over by where Harvey Harper keeps and works on his old cars. Harvey’s lasting legacy (I recently heard he’s worth around $22 million, not counting the dealership) could be “The Eureka Westside.” That is to say, incorporating the priciples of “New Urbanism” into a hip mixed-income housing development downtown (piggybacking off the new Co-op down there) to jumpstart that area.

    Something the liberals and Old Guard could both get behind.

    That would be visionary leadership for the city.

  45. Jane Doe
    October 29, 2007 at 8:09 pm

    Good idea Eurekan

  46. Carol
    October 29, 2007 at 8:23 pm

    Why doesn’t someone just call Roy Curless and ask him?

  47. Carol
    October 29, 2007 at 8:24 pm

    Hello? Any reporters here?

  48. Ghost of Mabel
    October 29, 2007 at 9:52 pm

    Observations over the years…..
    1. People aren’t as nice as they used to be. Meaning bloggers of course!
    2. Eureka’s population of methamphetimine users is rising, dangerous and depressing.
    3. Mr. Arkley and his family need our sympathy. Substance abuse is a silent disease that can sometimes reek havoc on our personal lives.
    4.Passenger rail service AROUND HUMBOLDT BAY is intriguing……passenger rail service from anywhere else is NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.
    5.No growth=ignorance. Uncontrolled growth=ignorance.
    6. Planned growth = potential prosperity.
    7.My comments will be attacked.

  49. Anonymous
    October 29, 2007 at 9:54 pm

    “Sorry folks, but returning rail to the north coast is a far more likely scenario than changing the whole of American society.”

    At over $20 million a mile for commuter rail American society will have to change to want to give us the money to pay for it.

  50. Anonymous
    October 29, 2007 at 9:56 pm

    “Hey, he’s been there 16 years and hasn’t hurt anything. That’s good enough for me!”

    Wasted time is wasted money.

  51. gulo gordo
    October 29, 2007 at 11:15 pm

    …and time’s a-wasting!

    Someone told me the other day that the Chinese say the best time to plant a tree is always twenty years ago. The second best time is now.

  52. anonymous
    October 30, 2007 at 6:57 am

    Speaking of railroads. I believe they’ve been scrapping the
    old cars. For several months now, I’ve seen dump trucks
    and trailers loaded with scrap metal coming out of Fort Seward. I’ve never heard a thing about it in the news.

  53. Auntie Mayme
    October 30, 2007 at 7:07 am

    Mabel, how is it on the “other side”?

    R.I.P., my dear.

  54. Ghost of Bonnie G
    October 30, 2007 at 7:17 am

    I agree with everything Ghost of Mabel says, except #1. People are as nasty as ever, dear. Blogs just give ’em cover.

  55. anon
    October 30, 2007 at 8:26 am

    Aaron A is using worst-case scenarios. WHen we used to ride the train to San Rafael it took about 7 1/2 hours. Concur with 6:20.

  56. Anonymous
    October 30, 2007 at 9:22 am

    Those are not “worst-case scenarios”. Those are current reglitory conditions. 7 1/2 hours? When was that? And how many of those trains ended up in the river?

  57. October 30, 2007 at 10:56 am

    That would be impossible. Even if they could sustain 35mph they couldn’t make it in 7.5 hours.

  58. Been There - Done That
    October 30, 2007 at 2:46 pm

    I rode one of the last passenger trains on this route. No matter what they do this is going to take way more than 7.5 hours. Nice excursion route, but not practical for real travel. Wish it were otherwise, but that’s the way the cookie crumbles folks.

  59. paving
    October 30, 2007 at 5:57 pm

    Passenger rail from Humboldt to Marin would be a phenomenal tourist railroad. You people are thinking very small. Look up the Canadian Rockies rail or the Orient Express. That’s what is possible further down the road. There is a lot of tourism potential up and down that route in the long term.

    As for local rail, that is reasonably practical. I don’t know how far north the line goes but if you could achieve Mckinleyville – Fortuna and possibly down to Rio Dell/Scotia it would be worthwhile.

    This kind of infrastructure would enable the kind of planned development and growth that people are worried about. If you don’t think there will be demand for massive amounts of new housing in Humboldt over the next 20-50 years you are living in a fantasy land.

    All that said, information technology infrastructure is what is needed most immediately. Humboldt is an easy location for tech outsourcing if you throw in a couple of new T3’s that don’t go down twice a month.

    Google “Rural Outsourcing” and realize that people want to live in beautiful places. Far more people would live in Humboldt if there were jobs that could pay them a living wage. Competing with rural Kansas, South Dakota and the like should be easy for Coastal California. But if you bring jobs, you must find housing…

    Housing can put tremendous pressure on existing communities and their infrastructure. We can all agree that we don’t want to see out-of-control housing developments in poorly planned areas that cannot support it. Fixed transportation infrastructure such as rail is well proven to spur development. If you have a functioning commuter rail line running in areas that can support housing growth people will take it to-and-from work in Eureka and other places where the jobs are located.

    Your other option is the kind of in-fill that will dramatically alter the built environment and many of the things that make people enjoy living in this part of the world.

    As economic stimulus the railroad would have greater impact than most of you imagine. A port would be the same. Are these things possible? it is hard to say. Are they impossible? Certainly not.

  60. October 30, 2007 at 7:01 pm

    When and if there is commuter rail here it will run down the middle of 101.

  61. paving
    October 30, 2007 at 7:06 pm

    … and thus I would refer you to a map of the railroad right-of-way, which fairly neatly reflects the 101 corridor, without being restricted to medians.

  62. October 30, 2007 at 7:08 pm

    … and thus I would point you to the access provided to the center of 101 for the majority of riders. Most would be park and ride.

  63. Anonymous
    October 30, 2007 at 9:25 pm

    There is not enough people in Humboldt to justify commuter rail.


    Once a day tourist train from Marin to Eureka? Yeah, that would be great but it would never generate income. It would always operate at a loss. Not even including the huge initial investment to get the line up and running.

    The maintanence on the line will be huge. It will always be huge. Constant mudslides during the winter. During big storms, sections of track will always wash out.

    Give up the dream Humboldt. State tax funded or federal funded rail makes much more sense for the high speen rail line linking LA to the Bay Area. Now that would be well spent tax dollars.

  64. Anonymous
    October 30, 2007 at 11:30 pm

    Basiclly, this will be the additude of legislators from everywhere else in the state. This is at bigger challange than even the geology.

  65. Anonymous
    October 30, 2007 at 11:34 pm

    Has “Paving” read any of the reports that have looked at all this?

  66. anon
    October 31, 2007 at 9:12 am

    9:22, none of the trains I rode on “ended up in the river.” I wonder if you have ever ridden a train?.

  67. paving
    October 31, 2007 at 3:22 pm

    I do not feel it is likely in the near term future in any way to run commuter rail, finance maintenance of the line, etc.

    I do however feel that destruction of the right-of-way is short-sighted and a mistake in the long term (2-3 decades).

    There is no intelligent reason to destroy the rail line and parcel out the right of way that I have heard.

    As for “reports that have looked into this” they are not some kind of future-prediction gospel that you make them out to be. The fact does remain that there was a functioning railroad for a number of years. This “corridor” was maintainable in a less-advanced era with more severe obstacles and less population on the route to provide the line with usage options.

    In a future that appears to lack cheap liquid fuels air and trucking are less attractive shipping options than they used to be. This is just one of many possible future realities that illustrate my point: There is no reason to destroy a railroad just because it does not make “economic sense” in the immediate near-term. It is simply does not need to be destroyed and the costs of structural maintenance are not so great that we should return the route to nature.

    As for California High Speed Rail, that is a $50 billion dollar project by the time it is built which will be probably 25 years from now. As much as I like the idea I can’t help but think the costs are ridiculous, wasteful and entirely at the feet of bureaucracy. The French or Japanese could surely build such a line much quicker and for far less money. In the end it provides far less actual transit benefit than one could attain by spending that kind of money throughout the state on existing infrastructure and right of way maximization.

  68. October 31, 2007 at 3:47 pm

    You must look at the NCRA’s ROW as several distinct junks of track. South of Willits the ROW is very serviceable.

    The Eel River canyon is not. Even in 1998 FEMA estimated it would cost $645 million to create a permanent solution. Anything short of that would be subject to frequent interruptions in service and millions to maintain. On top that the line is only one track without opportunities for sidings much less a parallel track. These facts limit the potential for freight much less passenger rail. Every train south means a train north and sequencing numerous trains through the Eel is just not convenient.

    On the north end the ROW is serviceable but still impacted by the location adjacent to the Bay. Washouts are everywhere and will continue to be so. Rebuilding the ROW next to the Bay suffers the impact of numerous agencies and the the Bay itself.

    Railbanking the north end makes perfect sense given you comments as it provides for future rail use (especially if we are talking 20 years or so) as it holds the ROW in reserve should it ever be needed.

  69. Anonymous
    November 1, 2007 at 3:03 pm

    Color Impressions is a great new business on Main Street, Fortuna – and no, they did not print the Curless campaign signs. One blogger indicated they were inundated with Curless mailers – they have sent out two. One to Absentee Voters and one to the rest of the registered voters in the district. Finally, you ask what has Roy Curless done in 16 years…He negotiated the purchase of the Redwood Dock and the 53 acres that goes with it. The Harbor District now has it’s own dock. He has travelled to Washington DC at least 5 times to lobby and secure funding to keep the navigational channels safe and, he has worked closely with the Aquaculture Industry on improvements. Roy Curless is an honest man who truly understands the geography and people of the Second District. Roy has established long-term relationships with people and has worked hard. That’s why his campaign has collected more money than the others – people know and trust Roy, he’s earned it!

  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