Home > elections, Eureka California, Ron Kuhnel > Kuhnel can do the job

Kuhnel can do the job

Ron Kuhnel Meet & Greet at Old Town Coffee & Chocolates

Ron Kuhnel, Candidate for Eureka City Council, will hold a Meet & Greet from 4 to 6 pm on Wednesday, Oct. 27, at Old Town Coffee & Chocolates, 211 F Street in Eureka.

  1. Andrew Bird
    October 25, 2010 at 4:27 am

    Ron Kuhnel absolutely amazes me with the amount of energy he has and the number of civic activities he is involved in. Whether you vote for Ron or vote for one of his opponents in this election, or don’t vote at all, Ron deserves our respect and admiration for his involvement in the community. Whether he wins or loses next week, Ron won’t change. He will still continue to give to Eureka.

  2. Anonymous
    October 25, 2010 at 6:33 am

    “Can do the job.”

    High praise, indeed!

  3. Dont be fooled again
    October 25, 2010 at 7:20 am

    Right. I guess it is too much to ask for any degree of intelligence, integrity and accountability in our public servants these days. It really shouldn’t make any difference that Ron was performing unpermited construction on Indian Island while sitting as the chair of the planning commission. It is no matter that when issued a stop work order by the building department Ron pleaded ignorance of the law – that he didn’t realize he was doing anything wrong. If that is true, I wonder why he constructed blinds out of vegetation on the property before he started the illegal construction. He probably just wanted some privacy to sunbathe or whatever. Let’s look the other way on this one because Ron has a lot of energy to push our agenda forward.

  4. Anonymous
    October 25, 2010 at 8:01 am

    And the last time Nancy Flemming got a building permit?

  5. Anonymous
    October 25, 2010 at 8:01 am

    Is it worth explaining the factual truth to people like “don’t be fooled?”

    People like that don’t seem to care about the truth.

    They seem only interested in spreading false information and outright lies that fit their predetermined narrative. Like FOX News.

  6. insider
    October 25, 2010 at 8:08 am

    “Dont be fooled again” is straight up lying.
    The Planning department was trying to embarrass Ron. This was payback for votes Ron had cast as a planning commission member, that the head of the department was angry about.
    “I wonder why he constructed blinds out of vegetation on the property before he started”
    This never happened! Ron was making repairs on the existing structures, no attempt to do anything wrong or to hide it.
    They claimed he needed a permit for his dock! Its only been there for more than 70 years! this was and is harassment.

  7. Ron
    October 25, 2010 at 8:21 am

    Good old “Don’t be fooled” has been trying to make something out of this for months here on this blog.

    Fact. I was told by the Planning Department I could do repairs to my very small cabin like structure without a permit because it had no foundation. I began work and someone filed a protest and I was asked to stop which I did. Nothing more was ever done.

    “Fooled” is probably one of the most ill tempered, nasty people we have ever seen in Eureka, and makes Hi Fi look like a saint. She has no credibility outside this blog and should have none here.

  8. A-Nony-Mouse
    October 25, 2010 at 8:49 am

    Ron is educated, aware, and capable. Newman boasts that he was a C student at Eureka High School. I’ve heard that line before from the left side of the dias. (sorry, Mike) and it didn’t impress me then, either. Vote for someone who has the tools to do the job. Vote for Ron Kuhnel.

  9. Reader
    October 25, 2010 at 9:00 am

    “Fooled” is probably one of the most ill tempered, nasty people we have ever seen in Eureka, and makes Hi Fi look like a saint. She has no credibility outside this blog and should have none here.

    She? You have inside information that this anonymous poster is a woman? Or is that supposed to be an insult?

  10. Dont be fooled again
    October 25, 2010 at 9:08 am

    Wow! Struck a nerve I guess. Anyone who is interested in separating the bullshit from the ice cream can easily accomplish that with a small amount of research. Or, just like the people who watch fox news, you can read this blog to get the opinions that agree with your own. The fact is that there is no good candidate for this seat.

  11. Anonymous
    October 25, 2010 at 9:13 am

    So let’s here your analysis of Newman.

  12. Anonymous
    October 25, 2010 at 9:27 am

    “She? You have inside information that this anonymous poster is a woman? Or is that supposed to be an insult?”
    oh yes, being called ‘she’ is an insult for all those good ole boys firmly believe to be female is to be less.

  13. Ron
    October 25, 2010 at 9:55 am

    I said she because I believe I know who this is. So no insult was intended.

    As far as “striking a nerve” is concerned…yes it did. Lies tend to do that.

    I have run my campaign on the merits as to what I believe I can accomplish and what background and experience I can bring to the job since the beginning, and I find personal insults that suggest I do not have integrity annoying. I know that that this is not unusual in politics, but I do not have to like it.

  14. The Monitor
    October 25, 2010 at 10:04 am

    The bullshit belongs to “don’t be fooled”. There has to be a nay Sayer in every crowd. Ron is a good person and takes community involvement very seriously. He is the best informed on city issues of all candidates except Larry Glass. He will know exactly what every issue is on the council agenda ‘before’ the meeting, unlike some current council members who don’t read their packets. Informed, intelligent, and ready to do the job, that is Ron Kuhnel.

  15. Richard "Rick" Khamsi
    October 25, 2010 at 11:28 am

    “Don’t be fooled again” is a good name for a person who wants to steal the joy that Ron Kuhnel brings to our community.

    We will IN FACT have been “fooled again” if we let ourselves become ensnared in efforts to fight the Negative instead of feeding the Positive.

    Let us instead refuse to “rise to the bait” and continue our celebration as if the party pooper had never tried to poop on our parade?

  16. Richard "Rick" Khamsi
    October 25, 2010 at 11:28 am

    !

  17. Living In Eureka
    October 25, 2010 at 11:35 am

    I have already voted for Ron. I voted for Ron not because I have always agreed with him, but because he is the best person for the job. He is very informed on the issues & has always been very involved in our city.

    Don’t Be Fooled; You either don’t know what was truly going on with Ron’s dock situation-OR- you’re just stupid! Get your facts straight – all of them. Ron is not on City Hall’s “A” list & oh how they like to play games! With this election some of the games may end.

    This city is in serious trouble. We need someone who can roll up their sleeves & get the job done! I believe Ron can do this & more for our city.

    Tired of the 3-2 split on the council? Vote!

  18. A-Nony-Mouse
    October 25, 2010 at 2:04 pm

    It’s time to put the 3 Stooges in the can and usher in a new day. Vote for Ron.

  19. Richard "Rick" Khamsi
    October 25, 2010 at 3:28 pm

    What a terrific commercial! Think how different American politics would be if more candidates presented their credentials for office that way!

  20. 3rd Ward Voter
    October 25, 2010 at 3:54 pm

    My problem with Ron Kuhnel is that he doesn’t represent the interests of the 3rd Ward and the people who live here. I was there when he voted to erect an ugly cell tower on Dean Street that has changed the character of that neighborhood and when he voted for the cell tower on Harris right next to a row of houses. In both cases, the neighbors asked him to vote no. He didn’t listen. Instead, he gave us a lecture on the importance of business and cell towers. Then there was the vote on putting a 50 man treatment facility without a license in an old blighted church on Wabash. The neighbors asked him to vote no on that one too, but he had other plans.

    It is all very nice that the people in Arcata think we should be represented by Ron Kuhnel, but we need someone who listens to us and is concerned about the third ward and the people who actually live here.

  21. Harold h. Greene
    October 25, 2010 at 4:51 pm

    I live in the third ward, and Ron Kuhnel is who I’m voting for.

  22. A-Nony-Mouse
    October 25, 2010 at 4:56 pm

    I don’t know anything about Dean Street but I do know about the famous ‘bell tower’ on Harris. When that first came to a vote by the Planning Commission, almost no one showed up to protest. While that was probably the fault of the poor notification process, Ron was in a position that,with little opposition, there was no reason to vote against it. When it came back up later, with better neighborhood input and a decent notification, he listened and voted NO. There are laws the Commissioners sometimes have to follow even if it goes against their preference. There often must be legal justification to reject a project. It was a similar situation with the Teen Challenge project on Wabash. One of the things Ron wants to change is the notification process so that people’s concerns can be discussed BEFORE the commission has to vote, not after. The whole system works better that way.

    Before you pull the trigger, be sure you know what you’re shooting at!!!!!

  23. humboldturtle
    October 25, 2010 at 4:58 pm

    Ron is widely admired. And he didn’t have to move in to town to run for office.

  24. I will vote 4
    October 25, 2010 at 4:58 pm

    I will vote for the first person who suggests and wishes to work for removing all county entitlement programs from the county back into the county and out of the city. I want the City of Eureka back!

  25. Joel Mielke
    October 25, 2010 at 5:13 pm

    Ron is smart and knowledgeable. He’ll be a good resource for other council members.

  26. High Finance
    October 25, 2010 at 5:17 pm

    Of course Ron can “do the job”. He is not a dummy & despite the despicable post by Mouse, neither is Mike Newman.

    What the hell people, can’t you just say out loud that you want Kuhnel because he is a left-wing liberal without the personal slams & smears against his opponent?

    BTW, Heraldo once again forgot to mention the fun(d) raiser by the more conservative candidate. Mike Newman’s Meet & Greet will be Tuesday night 5-8pm at the Eureka Inn. Hope to see you there!

    And Mouse, Mike Newman is a great guy too. Shame on you.

  27. October 25, 2010 at 5:19 pm

    There was no forgetting involved.

  28. High Finance
    October 25, 2010 at 5:19 pm

    And Turtle, Mike Newman also did not have to “move into town” to run for his office. You must be thinking of Larry Glass.

  29. Anonymous
    October 25, 2010 at 5:53 pm

    I think what was meant was that Newman moved into an apartment in the 3rd ward a few days before the filing deadline.

  30. High Finance
    October 25, 2010 at 6:10 pm

    Yes I know, 5.53pm. But Mike did not “move into town” like Larry did, Mike was already in Eureka & simply moved two blocks.

  31. Anonymous
    October 25, 2010 at 6:31 pm

    “Yes I know, 5.53pm. But Mike did not “move into town” like Larry did, Mike was already in Eureka & simply moved two blocks.”

    Sometimes I respect HiFi and sometimes his hypocrisy floors me. In his own words – “just state you are voting for ____ because he is ___” In this case HiFi, you are voting for Newman because he is conservative. Again, in HiFi’s own words: “Can’t you do this without slams and smears”. So, HiFi, why go out of your way to slam Glass about moving in from out of town? Both Glass and Newman moved to run for a seat, and that is allowed by law. No need for the slam.

  32. Ron
    October 25, 2010 at 7:22 pm

    I have been taking pot shots from good old “3rd ward voter” for months, and I guess it is time to set the record straight on both the cell towers and the Team Challenge application.

    First Cell towers. As mentioned by someone above I did vote to approve the Verizon Cell tower (disguised to look like a bell tower) the first time it came before me (along with the other four commissioners I might add). Only one citizen showed up to provide testimony, and they were concerned only about the generator possibly spilling. However when it was remanded back to the Planning Commission a second time I voted against it.

    When the Dean Street tower came before us many months later I did vote to approve it. As also stated above Planning Commissioners must under their oath try uphold the law. The ordinances in place did not give us, in my opinion, sufficient grounds to deny this. I was not particularly happy about this but felt I had no choice under the zoning law in place at that time.

    Subsequently I chaired the committee that prepared the new Wireless ordinance and worked at the Planning Commission level to secure the necessary language to dramatically reduce the chances of wireless antennas being located in residential areas. This ordinance is now law.

    Decisions by the Planning Commission can at times be difficult and controversial. I always operated in good faith however, and sometimes I find it necessary to follow the law even when I do not agree with it.

    The Team Challenge application for a Conditional Use Permit followed a similar path. Again no one showed up at the planning commission meeting to provide any testimony. That combined with what I would later deem to be somewhat misleading information in the staff report caused me, and all of my fellow commissioners to vote in favor of the application. Later when this was appealed to city council and I was able to hear the citizen input that was missing from our meeting, I testified in front of council that had I the power to vote again with all this information I would have voted differently. I frankly voted the way I did based on a lack of input and what I feel was faulty information. I would like to never make a mistake, but admit in this case I did just that. This should never have been approved in the first place.

    On each and every issue that comes before the planning commission I very carefully study the staff report, visit the site if possible, and listen carefully and sensitively to public input. As chair I give the public every opportunity to speak and be heard.

    As a city councilperson I will do the same as always. Follow the law, and try to make the best decisions possible. And as a city councilperson I am in a position to try to change the law if it does not represent the public “good”,

  33. Anonymous
    October 25, 2010 at 7:29 pm

    It was stated above that Newman moved “two blocks”.

    Actually he moved from 1125 Searles Street to 1624 E ST.

    That is 1.4 miles.

    Why do people just make stuff up?

  34. Anonymous
    October 25, 2010 at 7:36 pm

    Thanks Ron. You know, this blog can be extremely frustrating, the people who write on it. I don’t blame you for checking it out and stating your feelings so it is clear.

    Thanks

  35. Mr. Nice
    October 25, 2010 at 7:47 pm

    Nah nah 14th counts as one big ass block. That’s like the freeway if no cops are beeping on your cop detector thing.

  36. tenth street dream
    October 25, 2010 at 7:54 pm

    In this case the person made it up to suit a personal bias. In the case of Larry Glass, he has lived in Eureka much of the 40 years he has had a business here. People move all the time for any number of reasons. Hilary moved to up state New York, and then ran for the Senate. Bob Dole did the same thing and so did his wife. What is the fuss all about.

  37. tenth street dream
    October 25, 2010 at 8:00 pm

    Despicabe HIFi, You have thrown enough slop on this blog to qualify as one of the best. You hold your tongue and I’ll hold my nose. The school of dirty tricks is not unknown to you.

  38. Mr. Nice
    October 25, 2010 at 8:06 pm

    I live about 150 blocks south of Eureka so anything I say is careless bullshit but gotta say y’all need more cell antennas. I got to watch streaming movies hella smooth. Not just porn either but clips of… I dunno, news or something.

    And this Newman dude do seem like he has some people convinced some local politician is really gonna create new jobs unless they are some kinna boss of some big business and set up short sea shipping and all that tired bullshit.

    Kuhnel’s website is hella janky though which makes me not trust him. Dude you got errything in blue italics right quick… which weed club do you spend with? I need some of that shit.

    Both candidates seem slightly bammer to me. Y’all should just write in Jerry Droz and see if that sticks.

  39. A-Nony-Mouse
    October 25, 2010 at 8:48 pm

    HiFi, what the F*** are you talking about now? I never slammed Newman. I slammed the 3 Stooges and you know perfectly well who I mean. Yes, I firmly believe that if Newman and Brady are elected, we’ll have four more years of the same short-sighted, corporation friendly (as opposed to local business) type of council we’ve had since the city began. Newman might be a ‘nice guy’ but he has nothing new to offer the city. He represents the ‘Chamber’ view which is that of the richest folks in town who’s interests may or may not be good for the rest of us.
    Brady just has a mean streak (there’s a slam for you, HiFi). No thanks. I’ll pass on the Rerun bunch.
    I’ve already voted for Ron, Larry, and Peter (oh yes, and Bonnie, too). Join me to get this city back on the right track.

  40. High Finance
    October 25, 2010 at 9:07 pm

    Too late. I already voted also & cancelled out all your votes.

    I’m sorry you feel the need to insult & smear the candidates you don’t agree with. That attitude represents the worst of politics today and does not speak well of you.

    The Chamber members employ most of the city of Eureka who doesn’t work for the government. You don’t understand their problems because you spent your working years working for the government & never tried to run a business.

  41. textwrapper
    October 25, 2010 at 9:30 pm

    I agree with HiFi that “personal slams & smears” against candidates do not reflect well upon the authors of abusive comments. I invite him to offer the same wisdom to the Humboldt Mirror.

  42. Neal Latt
    October 25, 2010 at 9:31 pm

    I served with Ron on the city cell tower committee for twelve months, and it was a pleasure to do so. We worked with both sides, industry representatives included (Tom McMurray, Jim Hoff), as well as Mike Jones (who I actually like quite a bit, now that I know the guy) to form a consensus that not only makes it much harder to put cell towers where they don’t belong in our fair city (i.e., residential), but goes a long way toward encouraging their siting in places they DO belong (industrial and commercially-zoned areas).

    Ron Kuhnel is the most eminently qualified candidate, bar none, to run for city council in a long time.

    I will cast my ballot with pleasure for Ron, Larry, Bonnie and Peter on November 2nd. Please join me and help to make our city the best place it can be.

  43. High Finance
    October 25, 2010 at 9:37 pm

    I read the Mirror about once a week Joel, I even posted there once or twice a few months ago.

    But their negativity is like Dreamer on steroids. Its not for me.

  44. Joel Mielke
    October 25, 2010 at 9:58 pm

    We’re in agreement on that one, HiFi. I don’t get the point of personal attacks in a political discussion. On the other hand, information that strengthens an argument can be persuasive.

  45. Crandall welfare pimp
    October 25, 2010 at 10:40 pm

    Newman wants to let John Shelter handle our homeless problem? Isn’t that the same old thing that has been done by the good old boy locals? Hand it off to some quasi-welfare outfit and watch it spin out of control? Newman doesn’t know that Shelter is the NCRC/Endeavor that nearly ruined Arcata and sued Arcata when they tried to get rid of them. Shelter has to be out or Arcata by 2011 and there is Newman waiting with open arms. He is a small minded local yocal that doesn’t know what is happening just 6 miles North in Arcata.

  46. Crandall welfare pimp
    October 25, 2010 at 10:52 pm

    Meant to say 6 miles North of Eureka.

  47. Walt
    October 26, 2010 at 6:30 am

    “Too late. I already voted also & cancelled out all your votes.” All our votes? Have you been voting early and often again? You dimpled chad, you.

  48. Anonymous
    October 26, 2010 at 7:59 am

    And then there are people like me to don’t vote a straight ticket. I bet there are more than you know.

  49. Anonymous
    October 26, 2010 at 8:04 am

    Hi Fi clearly understand who the three stooges are – too bad they aren’t as funny as the real thing!

    Marian Brady is not only a single-issue candidate, but one who didn’t even bother to become involved or informed about that one issue.

    Newman is proud of being a C student in high school and a J.C. drop out?

    Bass can recite talking points but can’t think more deeply than that.

    These people aren’t amusing, they’re frighteningly uninformed!!!

  50. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    October 26, 2010 at 8:41 am

    Good Luck to all candiates, for they are the ones running in an election. For those who attack, if they can’t prove that they are competition attacking, well then it must be too small of an individual person who is too ashamed of themself in their own right so much that they can’t even run for public office to show why they are better.

    Anyhow, “where’s the paper proof for the political trail of accusations, that’s all?” This is why I wish that every human being alive entertained a permit process through local CDS’s. Then, sanitariums would have to become re-organized for all those people who were too naive to believe that ALL past and current local public employees/elected officials are 100% honest and straightforward within any given process.

    Question: “How shallow is any community that won’t go after internal government abuses and frauds?”

    Answer: abysmal

    JL

  51. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    October 26, 2010 at 8:52 am

    For Ron K.,

    I don’t have a link off-hand for the Federal Supreme Court Cases that proves the constitutionality of not enforcing bad laws or unjust laws (jury only decisions???), but it would be wise to consider not always “following the law” when circumstances present themself. Sometimes, laws are just not “right”, and society has to either take it as it is or self-help change it. The catch is not creating reverse discrimination or reverse condemnations upon others regarding constitutionality issues. Generally though, especially with local zoning codes, following the law is commendable.

    JL

  52. Sylvia Scott
    October 26, 2010 at 10:12 am

    Ron, I have already voted for you, but I think the record needs to set straight. I was involved with the Teen Challenge neighborhood protest & I was involved with the Cell Tower protest.

    Both situations came down to, A LACK OF PROPER NOTIFICATION TO THE PUBLIC! Mayor Bass actually told the public that protested the cell tower, that over 70% of the public must of thrown out their notifications! The woman is an idiot & not intelligent enough to be a public toilet paper changer! This haphazard, notification process worked against the public & in the favor of the good old boy system for decades! Thankfully, Glass, Atkins, & Kuhnel worked to get this changed. Now our neighborhoods have a fighting chance.

    I voted for Ron not because he always got it right. But because he was man enough to admit when he got it wrong & worked hard to change it.

    If comes down to this; If you want the “yes master boss man” vote on your city council – vote for Newman. If you want change to this city – vote for Kuhnel.

  53. Sylvia Scott
    October 26, 2010 at 10:21 am

    oops…..sorry that one “If” should have been an “it”

  54. The Monitor
    October 26, 2010 at 10:52 am

    I second that, Sylvia. Ron is the man for the job, honest and not opposed to changing his mind if the facts are there. Oh, he is by far the most qualified.

  55. Plain Jane
    October 26, 2010 at 11:04 am

    Didn’t HiFi say he lived in Cutten? How is he voting for city council?

  56. 3rd Ward Voter
    October 26, 2010 at 11:17 am

    In response to Ron Kuhnel and his excuses for approving the cell towers on Harris and Dean St and Teen Challenge on Wabash, a member of the Planning Commission should be looking at the overall impact of any project that goes into a neighborhood. People living near those cell towers have lower property values, and must live near those monstrosities. I won’t even go into the health effects. Those projects could have been turned down because they are aesthetically incompatible with the neighborhood. There may have been a meeting before everyone realized what was happening that was not well attended, but a huge group of people from those neighborhoods came out for more than one meeting and asked the Planning Commission to vote against those projects. They were ignored. Mr. Kuhnel did not vote reluctantly for those projects. He gave us a long lecture on the importance of cell towers to business, etc. (The new cell tower ordinance is too little too late.) As far as Teen Challenge, he was just not paying attention.

    We need someone on City Council with vision who is not afraid to stand up for our neighborhoods. That is why I am voting for Xandra Manns who has 30 years of experience as a City Planner and who will represent the people of the third ward, not corporations and outside interests.

  57. High Finance
    October 26, 2010 at 11:25 am

    No Jane, you’re wrong again. I never said I lived in Cutten, why would I since I live in Eureka?

    But if I did live in Cutten I would have moved into Eureka just so I could proudly vote for Marian Brady, Jeff Newman, Frank Jaeger and vote against Bonnie Neely.

  58. insider
    October 26, 2010 at 8:53 pm

    No Jane, I believe he lives in Pine Hill and doesn’t get to legally vote for any of them. Maybe he’s illegally registered at his business.

  59. Anonymous
    October 26, 2010 at 9:19 pm

    Well then Insider, who is HiFi?

  60. Anonymous
    October 26, 2010 at 10:17 pm

    tom stewart

  61. Anonymous
    October 26, 2010 at 11:47 pm

    Is that the 50ish Tom Stewart (Republican) with property at 1925 2nd Street in Eureka? He appears to own a big chunk of land between T and U Streets. Is he one of Jack McDonald’s buddies?

  62. Anonymous
    October 27, 2010 at 8:46 am

    the one from every city council meeting

  63. Anonymous
    October 27, 2010 at 8:48 am

    ronald mcdonalds buddies

  64. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    October 27, 2010 at 9:03 am

    Ron,

    here is an interesting zoning read link. Something to think about infilling too!
    recrational equipment

    JL

  65. High Finance
    October 27, 2010 at 9:13 am

    We had a lot of fun at Mike Newman’s fund raiser last night at the Eureka Inn. At least 100 people attended. Good food, music & silent auction items.

  66. Reinventing The Wheel
    October 27, 2010 at 1:06 pm

    And no reporter ever asked the big box candidates to cite their source for the mantra about how big boxes benefit our rural economy…despite research to the contrary.

    It is discomforting to have the “trickle-down, free-market, faith-based” orthodoxy challenged by facts.

    What we need is a separation of church and Wall-Street.

  67. Anonymous
    October 27, 2010 at 8:18 pm

    That is just what Newman needs … more money for his freaking war chest.

    We will have to wait and see if money can buy an election.

  68. Dont be fooled again
    October 28, 2010 at 6:57 am

    Okay, for those interested in the truth…I went to City Hall and examined the contents of the two folders relating to Ron Kuhnel’s violation on Indian Island – one each from the building department and planning department respectively. These folders are a matter of public record and I encourage anyone who is interested in the truth to have a look for themselves. As a result of my investigation I am more firmly convinced than ever that Mr. Kuhnel has provided and continues to provide false and misleading statements with regard to what actually transpired. The instances of these statements are far too numerious to detail here, however I will give a few examples in the hope that others will continue the investigation to satisfy their own curiosity.

    Ron says:
    October 25, 2010 at 8:21 am
    Fact. I was told by the Planning Department I could do repairs to my very small cabin like structure without a permit because it had no foundation. I began work and someone filed a protest and I was asked to stop which I did. Nothing more was ever done.

    Fact: There is no record of the planning department or anyone else telling Mr. Kuhnel he could make repairs with or without a permit.
    Fact: Mr. Kuhnel was issued a stop work order on August 20, 2007
    Fact: The structure did have a foundation.
    Fact: The “repairs” consisted of a total demolition and replacement with all new materials.

    From a letter by Kevin Hamblin Director of Community Development to Mr. Kuhnel dated September 25th, 2007 Mr. Hamblin States:

    “Thank you for meeting with City staff on September 24, 2007 regarding your property on Indian Island, as well as your letter of the same date regarding your project. The information received during the meeting was new, and helped me understand the project and reconcile statements you’ve made regarding your project; that it is a boat, and at other times, that it is a cabin: that it is built on skids, yet the plans and the pictures clearly show a foundation. After your explanation during the meeting, I believe that I now better understand those statements.

    I understand better your position stated in your letter that you “did not raze the building”, and that you only partially deconstructed it. I viewed the razing of the building to mean taking it to the ground, which because of the pictures showing all new construction from the foundation up, I believed you did.”

    Fact: There were numerious meetings and correspondence between City staff and Mr. Kuhnel regarding his continued attempt to permit three structures including solar power generation, a kitchen and a flush toilet or outhouse after he received the complaint and resulting stop work order.

    Fact: The following year (2008) Mr. Kuhnel illegally constructed a dock at his property without permits and that dock was subsequently removed by order of the Harbor District.

    Incidentally, in case anyone suspects that I am somehow trying to smear Mr. Kuhnel to improve the odds for another candidate; I wish to emphatically state that I do not believe there are any good candidates for this seat. I will probably vote for Newman, but only because I believe him to be the least of the three evils. Mr. Kuhnel, who has graciously donated countless hours in an effort to better our community, has not been honest with regard to this project. Just sayin’.

  69. Ron
    October 28, 2010 at 11:44 am

    The only person not being honest here is the person who went to all the trouble to go to city hall, sift through some files, quote one early letter out of many, and then cite as “fact” a long list of things none of which are true.

    Fact. As stated above the only true fact is that a stop work order was issued, which is true.

    Everything else is a fabrication, including that amazing piece of fiction about my dock being illegal and removed.

    It is truly sad to see someone be so off balance and filled with hate they would spew such vile three days before an election in an attempt to smear someone. In spite of their protest to the contrary, that is exactly what this is…a feeble smear attempt.

  70. Dont be fooled again
    October 28, 2010 at 12:26 pm

    Ron,

    Unbelievable! Are you really denying the fact that there was a foundation on the building, that it was all new construction in the photographs, that there was a large amount of correspondence and several meetings between you and city staff over the matter, that the harbor commission ordered you to remove the unpermitted dock? You are either deluded or a liar. Either way I shutter to think what you will do if given the chance on city counsel.

  71. Dont be fooled again
    October 28, 2010 at 12:42 pm

    You stated on this very thread that there was a complaint filed, a stop work order issued and nothing more was ever done. In the city’s files there are plans submitted by you after the stop work order. There is also massive correspondence indicating your desire to permit three building as one. In one letter you request that Kevin Hamblin speak with you prior to committing anything to the public record. I know you have given much to this community Ron, but there is no denying, on this matter, you are not telling the truth. Plain and simple.

  72. Hammeraway
    October 28, 2010 at 12:52 pm

    Ron just got $2,000 from Pierson’s. What about the $500 limit? No wonder he has no stand on the Marina Center.

  73. High Finance
    October 28, 2010 at 12:57 pm

    Ron does have a stand on the Marina Center.

    It is, say nothing until after the election is over so the voters don’t know what I want.

    Since the MC is so popular with the people, that would indicate Ron is against it.

  74. Anonymous
    October 28, 2010 at 1:17 pm

    Newman is getting desperate.

  75. Plain Jane
    October 28, 2010 at 1:17 pm

    Newman is getting desperate.

  76. Dont be fooled again
    October 28, 2010 at 1:29 pm

    Quotes from a letter in the Planning Department’s file authored by Paul Brisso as the District Counsel for The Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation and Conservation District dated November 5, 2008;

    “Recently, it has come to the attention of the District that you have constructed a dock structure on or in what is commonly known or referred to as the middle channel on the south side of Indian Island.”

    “The District has not issued a permit for this structure or other activity related to it, nor has an application for such a permit been requested.”

    “The unpermitted dock in question constitutes an ongoing violation of law and also constitutes a continuing public nuisance. The District demands that you initiate steps to remove the illegal structure immediately.”

  77. Dont be fooled again
    October 28, 2010 at 1:38 pm

    The letter I referred to above was dated long after the stop work order was issued making it difficult for me to accept your statement the “nothing more was ever done” as being factual. If you want to continue this dialogue, I suggest we next talk about the note from the Harbor Master to the Assistant City Manager regarding the numerious midnight trips between your property on the island and the city marina in an unlit vessel.

  78. Sam Crow
    October 28, 2010 at 2:20 pm

    “Dont be fooled again” You are a liar.

  79. Dont be fooled again
    October 28, 2010 at 2:23 pm

    “Sam Crow” Because you say so? I read the files, did you?

  80. Anonymous
    October 28, 2010 at 3:26 pm

    Someone has their panties in a bunch. Anonymous attacks don’t have much credibility.

    Because I know something about the dock story I have to assume the rest of this is just lies as well. The Harbor District when confronted with evidence the dock have been there since the 1920’s dropped the issue. Nothing like quoting something out of context to try to mislead everyone.

  81. Sam Crow
    October 28, 2010 at 3:45 pm

    Yes, I know the whole story and your spinning it to the point of fabrication!

  82. tra
    October 28, 2010 at 3:54 pm

    “…spinning it to the point of fabrication!”

    Curiously, throwing a bunch of mud down, spinning it and manipulating it — one can fabricate quite a lovely crock-pot in this manner. This sort of crock-pot can be painted in imaginitive ways, and with the application of a lot of hot air, will yield a pretty, glazed appearance. Nevertheless, the item is ultimately rather fragile.

  83. Sam Crow
    October 28, 2010 at 3:56 pm

    crock pot, indeed!

  84. Hammeraway
    October 28, 2010 at 4:25 pm

    Maybe Pierson can send $$$$$Thousands$$$$$$ of more dollars to make this all go away.

  85. Dont be fooled again
    October 28, 2010 at 4:35 pm

    Okay, I will admit error and accept the latest comments regarding the dock at face value. I was not aware that the issue was resolved as I did not follow up with the Harbor District. Shame on me. Never-the-less a permit would have been required to replace an existing dock structure (which anyone on the planning commission would know or at least have the sense to inquire about.) If a permit was ever issued it would have been after the fact. That being said, no one has offered any evidence that discounts the other facts I have presented regarding Mr. Kuhnel’s numerious misleading statements. I understand that Ron is not a bad guy. I commend him for his countless hours of public service and can even believe that his heart is in the right place. The point here is that he has been less than honest regarding his actions on Indian Island. He continues to provide misleading statements and even goes so far as to accuse me of being hateful and dishonest. I had really hoped for something better in a potential candidate for city counsel.

  86. Reinventing The Wheel
    October 28, 2010 at 4:40 pm

    It’s been fun to read all the comments about following proper permitting procedures from individuals who, on any other day, are camped-out at the Planning Commission complaining about too much complexity, government regulations, and unhelpful staff holding up employment and progress.

    Anyone that’s lived here long enough understands that the hand that grants connected individuals their haphazard zone change, will equally obfuscate, deny, delay, or lie about the plans submitted by political outsiders.

    Case in point: A nearby, 75 year old retired school teacher went downtown for a routine occupancy permit for her remodeled home on the South end of J Street, Eureka. Instead, she was handed reams of Easement papers to sign as a quid-pro-quo to facilitate 6 homes across her narrow street planned by Ken Bareilles. Her requests for unsigned copies of the documents was refused.

    Now you know why a $500 per month city council seat is worth tens of thousands of dollars in contributions from the development community.

    Go Ron!

  87. Dont be fooled again
    October 28, 2010 at 4:55 pm

    RTW – I agree wholeheartedly with your last post; however that is no excuse for the Chairman of that very same planning commission to evade the law he has promised to uphold. It is no excuse to lie about his actions either. If Ron had made it a principled demonstration of the insanity and impossibility of current permitting requirements, my hat would have been off to him, however that was not the case. He simply attempted to skirt the law for his own benefit and when he got caught he chose to try and lie his way out of it. The hypocrisy is truely astounding. As for the implication that I represent any other candidate or developer…that is false. I don’t support any of these jokers.

  88. humboldturtle
    October 28, 2010 at 5:02 pm

    Sure, Don’t. Sure. And Ron’s the liar.

  89. humboldturtle
    October 28, 2010 at 5:14 pm

    Brown 52, Whitman 48
    Boxer 52, Fiorina 48
    Gallegos 55, Jackson 45
    Neely 52, Bass 48
    LaVallee 52, Jager 47, Spaulding 1
    Glass 60, Brady 40
    Kuhnel 47, Newman 40, Mann 3

  90. humboldturtle
    October 28, 2010 at 5:14 pm

    Cleary 60, Sundburg 40

  91. tra
    October 28, 2010 at 5:26 pm

    I think Brown’s going to take it by more like 10 points, 55-45.

    I suspect you’ve got Boxer-Fiorina about right.

    I would love to see Gallegos beat Jackson by 10 points, but I think it will be a bit closer, like 52-48 or something like that.

    I have my doubts abour Neeley.

    I don’t know enough about the situation in Eureka to comment much about those races exccept to say that I’m pretty sure Glass will win handily.

  92. tra
    October 28, 2010 at 5:27 pm

    Got a prediction on Prop 19?

  93. humboldturtle
    October 28, 2010 at 5:30 pm

    Nineteen will lose but it will bring out the vote.

  94. humboracle
    October 28, 2010 at 5:34 pm

    Win or lose, 19 will bring out the vote.

  95. High Finance
    October 29, 2010 at 8:49 am

    Revealed in the Times Standard today, is that right after the last financial filing date, Bill Pierson gave the Kuhnel campaign another $2,000.

    So much for Ron’s pledge to abide by the $500 campaign limit for donations. So, does that mean Ron is “bought” also?

  96. Anonymous
    October 29, 2010 at 9:10 am

    I suppose it is not inportant to HI FI that Ron made no such pledge, but Newman did and then violated it by accepting $1000 from two different doners. Which matters more…taking more than $500 or violating your pledge?

  97. Ronmoney
    October 29, 2010 at 9:14 am

    $2,000 from Pierson? Can you say conflict with Marina Center? He will have ro recuse himself! Just like Larry has to! And Linda! Oh, you mean they don’t? Our system has failed. Bought and paid for politicians one and all.

  98. Plain Jane
    October 29, 2010 at 9:31 am

    Too funny, Ronmoney. If elected officials had to recuse themselves from voting on a project in which their campaign donors had an interest, pro or con, they would all have to recuse themselves. Do you ever think before you spew?

  99. Anonymous
    October 29, 2010 at 9:35 am

    Will all the money Newman and Brady have taken from Realtors and developers they would never be able to cast a single vote if elected if campaign donations required you to recuse yourself.

  100. High Finance
    October 29, 2010 at 5:39 pm

    How about using your brains instead of your partisan rhetoric?

    How about forcing local office holders to recuse themselves on any issue that a contributor who gave more than $10,000 has an interest in?

    That would make more sense than the moronic statements by PJ & anon 9.35am made.

  101. tra
    October 29, 2010 at 5:54 pm

    “How about forcing local office holders to recuse themselves on any issue that a contributor who gave more than $10,000 has an interest in?”

    Problematic for Allison Jackson, if she were to win, since she’s received some $18,500 from law enforcement groups.

    But seriously, sure, I’m all for making politicians recuse themselves from matters affecting their donors…but while we’re at it, why not just bring that limit down to, let’s say, $400?

  102. A-Nony-Mouse
    October 29, 2010 at 10:02 pm

    DBFA you’re so full of it, you leak! The dock in question has been there since I started navigating the bay back in ’68. Ron wanted to repair it after some storm damage. That’s it. After a lot of discussion, the Harbor District and the city conceded that it would be OK. No issue.

    HiFi, sorry I took so long getting back to you. FYI I have spent most of my life being self-employed running my own business. I did work briefly for the Census in 1990 if that qualifies as ‘public employment’. It’s easy to throw stones if you don’t know what you’re talking about.

  103. A-Nony-Mouse
    October 29, 2010 at 10:07 pm

    Limits on contributions don’t mean a thing. I tried to explain this to Jeffy but he couldn’t hear me. This election cycle proves that anyone wanting to circumvent the limit simply gives under several family or employee names. Voila! Lots of money but no donation of over $500. The ONLY way to limit the influence of money is to lower the COST of elections. That was what we were trying to do with True Ward voting. A candidate could walk his/her entire Ward. He/she wouldn’t need big TV ads or extensive newspaper ads. It’s the only way money will be taken out of city politics. Even then I suspect someone will try to find a way to buy their way in. It’s worth a try, though.

  104. Plain Jane
    October 30, 2010 at 4:07 am

    Don’t be moronic, TRA. HiFi’s friends can’t be bought for less than $10,000.

  105. Walt
    October 30, 2010 at 5:31 am

    How about eliminating campaign spending altogether? Let ’em hoof it, door to door, and have three debates sponsored by the League of Women Voters. . .PERIOD. All advertising is about control, not information, and that control is increasingly effective. Of course, this discussion is all pipe dreams anyway: after Citizens United it’s anything goes. . .forever.

  106. 3rd Ward Voter
    October 30, 2010 at 10:58 am

    There is an alternative to candidates that receive money from corporations and other large contributors. Xandra Manns (third ward Eureka City Council) has run a virtually money free campaign. Everyone complains about big money in politics. Here is your chance to vote for someone who has had the courage to run an independent no money campaign and who will look at each issue on its own merits.

  107. Dont be fooled again
    October 30, 2010 at 6:19 pm

    A-Nony-Mouse says:
    October 29, 2010 at 10:02 pm
    “DBFA you’re so full of it, you leak! The dock in question has been there since I started navigating the bay back in ’68. Ron wanted to repair it after some storm damage. That’s it. After a lot of discussion, the Harbor District and the city conceded that it would be OK. No issue.”

    I repeat will myself sine you must be hard of reading:

    Dont be fooled again says:
    October 28, 2010 at 4:35 pm
    “Okay, I will admit error and accept the latest comments regarding the dock at face value. I was not aware that the issue was resolved as I did not follow up with the Harbor District. Shame on me. Never-the-less a permit would have been required to replace an existing dock structure (which anyone on the planning commission would know or at least have the sense to inquire about.) If a permit was ever issued it would have been after the fact. That being said, no one has offered any evidence that discounts the other facts I have presented regarding Mr. Kuhnel’s numerious misleading statements. I understand that Ron is not a bad guy. I commend him for his countless hours of public service and can even believe that his heart is in the right place. The point here is that he has been less than honest regarding his actions on Indian Island. He continues to provide misleading statements and even goes so far as to accuse me of being hateful and dishonest. I had really hoped for something better in a potential candidate for city counsel.”

  108. Another 3rd ward voter
    October 30, 2010 at 7:07 pm

    3rd Ward said
    “Xandra Manns will look at each issue on its own merits.”

    Now that is truly funny…there is no one more ideological and unable to look at an issue on its own merits than Xandra Manns.

    If you like her ideology fine, but in her world nothing else fits. She may be the most inflexible person I have every known.

  109. Hammeraway
    October 31, 2010 at 11:25 am

    Barb Leonard, on October 31, 2010 at 6:22 am Said:
    So you are surprised? Really? Now that IS surprising.

    In Ron’s own words,

    “In the grand scheme of things I fail to see why the Marina Center is so important to so many Eureka voters.” He goes on to talk about a Home Depot not being a good fit for “Old Town”. Kind of a stretch IMO because Home Depot would be at the end of the development and fit right in with the businesses down there. I don’t think you could consider it part of “the old town development”.

    Then (are you paying attention Heraldo) this brilliant remark that shows he does understand measure N is not “meaningless:

    “As I said the property is privately held. Any opportunity to suggest any different zoning that might result in a different outcome was lost when Measure N went on the ballot.”

    Ron is for closing the Zoo ( which he has publicly testified to), the true ward system and against the Marina center. If he wins, he will have won swimming against the current of majority views Eurekan’s hold.

    BTW, He actually has not been in favor of capping campaign contributions. He testified in front of the council that he thought Jeff’s proposal would limit the ability of political candidates.

    Just setting the record straight. The quotes are from an e-mail a friend of mine received from Ron last week after an inquiry.

    This election will be interesting. I don’t have a voice in the city or district 4 race, so will just be an interested bystander. However, I hope the pubic display of disrespect and rudeness of Larry and Linda toward their peers on the council and the city staff will not be compounded by allowing them to have the majority say on the council…..and yes, Larry is lying about his support of the Marina project. Interesting the TS hasn’t noticed something that important to report to the voting public.

    Oh, that’s right the Times Sub-standard has actually endorsed him. Well, that’s usually the kiss of death to any candidate. LOL

  110. Anonymous
    October 31, 2010 at 1:27 pm

    Ron’s comments make a lot of sense.

    Barb Leonard’s comments do not make sense and she repeats the lie that Ron spoke out in favor of closing the zoo.

    The spin machine is in full gear here.

  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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: