Home > Balloon Track, Marina Center > City Council to adopt Marina Center amendment

City Council to adopt Marina Center amendment

The Eureka City Council will vote tonight to amend the city’s Local Coastal Program land use plan to allow Rob Arkley’s big box mall, otherwise known as the Marina Center.  The amendment is based on the successful passage of Measure N last November, which promised “Marina Center Now!”

The amendment could have been adopted months ago by a vote of the City Council, but Councilmember Marian Brady needed a campaign issue.

Following Tuesday’s meeting the amendment will be forwarded to the California Coastal Commission for certification.  Good luck with that.

Download the agenda.

  1. Ponder z
    February 15, 2011 at 6:18 am

    The timing is right, the 101 widening project should be done about the same time the MC construction is started. Sweet. We should all thank the Arkleys for their generous contributions to the community. Some of you may even find jobs at the new stores. To bad the old town blocks of vacant building aren’t being used. Looks like the Arkleys next project may be an Old Town revitalization.

  2. humboldturtle
    February 15, 2011 at 7:17 am

    Gosh, I wonder how the vote will go…

  3. Barb Leonard
    February 15, 2011 at 7:19 am

    Really?….and if the progs had been elected and made up a majority of the council that issue wouldn’t have been re-visited by the new council a la the Jefferson school property and overturned?

    Puhleese, that bit of spin isn’t even slightly credible. The issue had to be put on the ballot in order to have some clout to change the zoning.

    Marion didn’t need an issue to beat Larry. He beat himself for four long years.

    February 15, 2011 at 7:20 am

    One foot first before the other prosthetic parts are sized and fitted.

    Jeffrey Lytle
    McKinleyville – 5th District

  5. humboldturtle
    February 15, 2011 at 7:21 am

    Barb, you are either a willful liar or stupid. Do you own rentals?

  6. A-Nony-Mouse
    February 15, 2011 at 7:27 am

    Maybe she has a “Rent-a-brain”?

    Marina Center when?

    Hoodwinked again!!!

    I’d almost bet money that we won’t see any dirt moved on the court ordered cleanup in at least the next two or three years. Even the stormwater abatement is sitting on its ***. Notice the rain outside. Where do you think its going? Rob fiddles while Eureka churns.

  7. February 15, 2011 at 7:49 am

    Barb get off of Jeff’s soapbox,he needs it to see over the steering wheel

  8. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 7:59 am

    Barb, as you know, liberals are mean and nasty. Especially now that Eureka has soundly rejected their agenda and tossed their candidates out.

    The great majority of Eurekans want the Marina Center as soon as possible.

  9. Julie Timmons
    February 15, 2011 at 8:03 am

    Four more stores were just closed at the Bayshore Mall but we NEED the Marina Canter?? I don’t think so.

  10. Julie Timmons
    February 15, 2011 at 8:05 am

    Freudian slip- Marina CENTER.

  11. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 8:05 am

    Short sighted way of thinking Julie. If everything went perfect the first stores and offices of the Marina Center won’t open until 2016 long after today’s recession is over.

  12. jovita
    February 15, 2011 at 8:07 am

    Barb- that’s funny?, I remember Larry beating up your son and Tyson for four years.
    When the clean up start Randy says you’ve move on to the building phase??? huh?

    February 15, 2011 at 8:07 am


    but the Marina Center will be brand spanking new eye candy……


  14. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 8:24 am

    Eye candy in the form of an orange warehouse in a sea of asphalt?

    Oh boy!

  15. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 8:31 am

    Oooooh. Acres of parking lot and big boxes. Can’t wait for that. Also can’t wait for the cluster**** of traffic.

  16. February 15, 2011 at 8:38 am

    Smokemonster’s moronic comment would be better suited for a thread at the Mirror, where comments about people’s physical attributes always earn a chuckle from the yokels.

  17. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 8:46 am

    Can’t wait for the MC traffic jams.

  18. Bolithio
    February 15, 2011 at 8:56 am

    Cant wait for the millions in traffic mitigation.

  19. February 15, 2011 at 9:25 am

    Personally, I’m not resident, so I don’t vote in Humboldt even though this is the township in which I work, study and shop. It’s a real eyeopener when one looks at the way the county boundaries are drawn up. We in the Western Trinity are people without a voice in either Humboldt or Trinity counties.
    Citizens United is just beginning. By the next election cycle it will be obvious even to the “Ostriches” among us that big business now owns US elections. Whatever their agenda is will be the the law of the land. Nuclear power, off-shore drilling, new tax-breaks for the rich. Debt-punishment polices for the “Dead-beats” who can’t make their usury payments to financial companies, who are already allowed to charge up to 37% interest. What’s on the chopping block now that Big-Business is without limitation? Minimum wage, Social Security, Welfare for children (in any form), Medical, Medicare. Any hint of consumer protection, the right to sue, the right to be educated, and finally any concept of public anything. All these things will disappear. There is only one social program for the unemployed and uneducated, prison.
    It’s natural that the collaborators in the corporate takeover would be jubilant. Through the corruption of the government they have won it all. Through the dumbing-down of the public through corporate media, their natural enemies are spending their time on non-issues like immigration and abortion.
    The pro-business candidates in Humboldt County raised ten times the money that opposing candidates raised.
    The election was decided by the rich. It was bought and paid for. Welcome to the “New American Century”

  20. Westsider
    February 15, 2011 at 9:26 am

    Any comments before this City Council are pointless as was any discussion before the last council. They do not represent us. They represent business and money interests. Our only hope is with the Coastal Commission or lawsuits.

    I should have known we were in trouble when I saw the Marina Center people walking around our neighborhood with their clipboards before the election. I hope they were paid well.

  21. Kale Estanoche
    February 15, 2011 at 9:47 am

    The new city council came in on the platform of moving forward on the Marina Center project. The Marina Center project proponents campaigned with the pledge of site clean-up, wetland restoration, and mixed-use development. All of those components of the project seem fitting in the Coastal Zone. And, indeed, it seems the Coastal Commission did not take issue with these aspects.

    What does pose a problem is the other half of the project that is comprised of “big box” retail stores and a vast amount of parking area. This portion of the project proposes filling existing wetlands and paving over land that serves to absorb stormwater and provide wildlife habitat. Large format retail (Big Box) is not dependent on a coastal location, nor is it complementary to our coastal resources (which is contrary to coastal zone requirements).

    I hope that the Marina Center folks move forward on clean-up now and rework the unfavored aspects of the project so that it reflects the beauty and values of our North Coast, complements the coastal environment and provides opportunities for all inhabitants of this region (present and future generations).

  22. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 9:47 am

    Cant wait for the millions in traffic “mitigation”. You really think a few more stoplights are going to “reduce” traffic. Add another 30 minutes to your commute through Eureka.

  23. Mel-z
    February 15, 2011 at 9:49 am

    It does seem ironic, Westsider, that you hope they were well-paid.

  24. February 15, 2011 at 10:02 am

    The person who came to our door was a volunteer.

  25. Mel-z
    February 15, 2011 at 10:07 am

    And just plain scary that they would be volunteers….

  26. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 11:29 am

    I know it’s hard to believe there are people who disagree with you. It seems the public has spoken on the Marina Center, and they are for it. At least it does have some wetlands preservation and some green space. I think anyone who wants to make a piece of land with a view of the ugliest part of the bay (with that mill in the background) should be able to work toward that, especially since the public seems to want it.

    The people who make offensive remarks to Barb and worse are so juvenile. Hard to believe.

    One more point, it is fascinating that the group going down to Richardson’s Grove to hold a protest say the media “isn’t welcome due to secrecy issues”. Can you imagine if the Marina people said something like that? This blog would have a field day with that, but as Barb mentioned, the double standard here is so obvious to some and so utilized by others.

  27. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 11:47 am

    Not everyone is against the Richardson Grove realignment 11:29

    Similar to the fact that not everyone is for the Marina Center big box mall

  28. February 15, 2011 at 11:49 am

    Joel,you seem to eel out a sub-standard living making fun of physical attributes in your little drawrings quite often. Try again,lame

  29. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 11:51 am

    The public “choice” was a false dichotomy. Arkley’s way or nothing. There are a range of zoning options and that could have been selected, if the public was given the chance. We “own” the zoning designation, not Arkley.

  30. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 11:56 am

    I am confused. The opponents of the Marina Center said it will only take away business from existing businesses. That it will not create any new sales or jobs.

    Then they turn around and say the traffic will be horrible & millions will be needed for mitagation.


  31. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 11:58 am

    They could have voted against the choice given. They didn’t. There are still many obstacles in its way. I have doubts this project will come to fruition but the public did choose what choice they were given, no doubt about it.

  32. Reinventing The Wheel
    February 15, 2011 at 12:02 pm

    The Movidad post nailed it.

    Every era and culture has some level of tyranny…with those who are willing to reveal it, and the apologists deceived that they are beneficiaries.

    It takes a lot of propaganda to convince voters that another big box development will benefit a rural economy already saturated in poverty wages and suffering the fallout: growth in predatory industries, record crime, drug abuse, rehab houses, and burdened social and welfare services….despite decades of warnings from virtually all local and national economic research.


    Only a “High-Liar” would argue that “the community has spoken” when the majority of eligible voters are either unregistered or they abstained.

  33. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 12:06 pm

    Only a sore loser would find a reason to diss the public’s voice after a legal vote.

  34. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 12:08 pm

    Ha! Great example of the double standard used in your favor again! The vote only counts as a valid measure of what the public wants when you like the results.

  35. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 12:18 pm

    Only a (fill in this blank space) would (blank) this (blankety-blank).

  36. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 12:22 pm

    Only a dictator wanna be would discount a vote of the people by saying it doesn’t count because a majority of the eligible voters are unregistered or abstained from voting.

    That has been the case in every single US election since 1789.

  37. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 12:24 pm

    “They could have voted against the choice given.”

    No they could not. The choice was “yes” or “no”. “None of the above” was not an option.

  38. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 12:25 pm

    What’s wrong with “no”?

  39. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 12:27 pm

    Myth 1: There was NO wetland restoration proposed in the Security National/CUE VI cleanup for the Balloon Track. They proposed to build fake “virtual” wetlands off in one corner that were lined with plastic underneath. Knowing that they would lose if Baykeeper’s federal suit against Union Pacific and Security National proceeded to trial, they settled last August. The consent decree they signed mandated the cleanup that Baykeeper and CREG wanted all along: a REAL cleanup, with comprehensive testing for toxins PRIOR to any soil grading, oversight by Baykeeper at every stage, and true wetland restoration in situ (that is, where the original wetlands were: dispersed around the site, some even in the middle of the proposed Home Depot parking lot). Arkley was furious but had no choice – UP and their army of lawyers leaned hard on SN to relent, intimating the giant precedent it could set if the case went to federal court and UP/SN lost. Now, SN is dragging its feet at implementing what they agreed to – and should we be surprised, given their six years of bad faith at every turn in this saga? The only cleanup Arkley wants is NO cleanup, just a grading of the site so that the pollutants can be mixed and never cleaned up.
    And the drama goes on.

  40. the Once-ler
    February 15, 2011 at 12:30 pm

    I, the Once-ler, felt sad as I watched them all go.
    BUT… business is business!
    And business must grow regardless of crummies in tummies, you know.

    I meant no harm. I most truly did not.
    But I had to grow bigger. So bigger I got.
    I biggered my factory. I biggered my roads.
    I biggered my wagons. I biggered the loads
    of the Thneeds I shipped out. I was shipping them forth
    to the South! To the East! To the West! To the North!
    I went right on biggering… selling more Thneeds.
    And I biggered by money, which everyone needs!!!

  41. Zumbo
    February 15, 2011 at 12:43 pm

    To Anon 12:06….that means that I can only assume that you accepted and supported the winning presidential candidates in both 2004 & 2008.

    Now tell the truth. Santa’s listening.

  42. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 12:45 pm

    No, I actually voted different tickets on those, and I am reasonable enough to notice people tramping all over the reasons for their stances. You can’t say one vote counts and another doesn’t, just because you don’t agree with one.

  43. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 12:53 pm

    Meaning I voted for the candidates who actually won.

  44. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 12:55 pm

    And I actually supported both of them, for a time… I still support Obama…

  45. A-Nony-Mouse
    February 15, 2011 at 1:24 pm

    Hey, I voted NO on Measure N along with about 1/3 of Eureka.
    Yeah, Arkley’s money and pie-in-the-sky promises fooled many people but NOT all of us. If you really want to see what another shopping center on the Balloon Track will do to Eureka, go walk through the Bayshore Maul. Note all the empty stores.If this huge demand existed, wouldn’t you think at least some of them would be full? The Marina Center was a bad idea then and it’s a bad idea now. Only people who have locked their minds to facts still think it’s the Holy Grail. Big Box stores HURT local businesses and take large amounts of money OUT of the community. What do you want for your town? Serfdom to large corporations is an ugly possibility. The Corporatocracy, I believe it has been called. Enjoy the cheap crap. You won’t be able to afford it at minimum wage.

  46. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 1:46 pm

    I like the traffic comparison. If hoards of people will be shopping at the new Marina Center, it will indeed be a success and cause a traffic problem. If it isn’t all that busy, neither will be the traffic. You can’t make that argument both ways.

    I think the mall and the Marina Center are different crowds. You’re talking about home improvement, where busy people go to improve their property, and Discovery Museum, where people bring their kids for enrichment. The mall is not that crowd.

  47. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 1:49 pm

    “What’s wrong with “no”?”

    No, meant it stays the same. No change. That is not good enough.
    Yes, meant a big box mall. Bad change. That also, is not good enough.

    How you would like to see your community developed does not have to be a binary question.

  48. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 1:52 pm

    “I think the mall and the Marina Center are different crowds. You’re talking about home improvement, where busy people go to improve their property, and Discovery Museum, where people bring their kids for enrichment. The mall is not that crowd.”

    Wow, now we have the elitist Marina Center crowd, so much better than the lazy uneducated mall crowd.

  49. the Once-ler
    February 15, 2011 at 1:56 pm

    And then I go mad.
    I got terribly mad.
    I yelled at the Lorax, “Now listen here, Dad!
    All you do is yap-yap and say, ‘Bad! Bad! Bad! Bad!’
    Well, I have my rights, sir, and I’m telling you
    I intend to go on doing just what I do!
    And, for your information, you Lorax, I’m figgering on biggering



    and BIGGERING,

    turning MORE Truffula Trees into Thneeds
    which everyone, EVERYONE, EVERYONE needs!!!!!!!!!!!”

  50. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 1:58 pm

    I see it as a shitload more commercial space, primarily dedicated to an already saturated home improvement sector.

    Why not simply locate at the Bayshore Mall? It could use another tenant of any shape or size, let along an anchor tenant.

  51. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 2:04 pm

    Every vote is a choice between this one or that one.

  52. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 2:11 pm

    Recessions come, recessions go. With recessions you have empty spaces at the mall. When the recession goes the mall fills up.

    Only an idiot is scared to make a 50 year committment because of a 3 year recession.

    I am sure that RA is touched by your concern whether the MC is a good investment. But I trust his judgement far more than I do A Nony Mouse or Anonymous 1.58pm or any other of you.

  53. Random Guy
    February 15, 2011 at 2:15 pm

    To what degree will they use their own proposed “wetlands” as waste drainage for their new cash register/shopping center? Dear Security National: thankyougoodbyeNEXT!

  54. the Once-ler
    February 15, 2011 at 2:17 pm

    Then, oh, baby, oh! How my business did grow! Now chopping trees one at a time was too slow! So I promptly invented my Super-Axe-Hacker, which whacked off four truffula trees in one smacker! We were making thneeds four times as fast as before! And my profits, incidentally, were soaring galore!

  55. hazey
    February 15, 2011 at 2:47 pm

    Let me know when this recession is over! Anyone notice the number of foreclosure notices everyday in the T-S? We are sinking into third world status while the very rich get richer.

  56. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 2:47 pm

    Read the EIR and you will find that the “wetland” is to be put on the area that is so mushy nothing can be built there.

  57. Random Guy
    February 15, 2011 at 2:53 pm

    2:47…so using it as a shopping center/apartment complex dump is a good thing, eh? Humboldt Bay not toxic enough for you yet?

  58. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 2:56 pm

    So many sad and angry ones here. Maybe an attitude change would help?

  59. Patrick Henry
    February 15, 2011 at 2:59 pm

    The top 1 percent of Americans control as much wealth as the bottom 90 percent! Indeed, as discussed in this paper by NYU economist Edward Wolff, the rough breakdown is that the top 1 percent, the next 9 percent, and the remaining 90 percent each have about the same combined wealth! In the table below the most recent figures are for 2004. In the wake of the housing bubble I’d expect that the relative share of the rich has gone up a bit, since for average Americans a big chunk of their net worth is in their homes. US levels of inequality exceed those of other developed countries, but are comparable to China and still below Mexico and Brazil.

  60. skippy
    February 15, 2011 at 3:02 pm

    “The Eureka City Council will vote tonight to amend the city’s Local Coastal Program land use plan to allow Rob Arkley’s big box mall, otherwise known as the Marina Center.”

    To note: The Eureka City Council meeting is tonight, Tuesday the 15th, 6-9 pm, at Eureka City Hall, 531 K street, Eureka (2nd floor).

    The program will be broadcast live starting at 6 pm by Access Humboldt on channel 10– and repeated Saturdays at 6 pm. (This link to Access Humboldt also serves as a guide to many of the scheduled council/commission meetings in Humboldt County.)

    The stalwart Allison White will be covering the Eureka City Council tonight for the Times-Standard article appearing tomorrow.

  61. Random Guy
    February 15, 2011 at 3:03 pm

    Questions not answered, 2:56…

  62. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 3:13 pm

    It sure will be better than it is now, a toxic wasteland, Random. I think RA will be having to clean it up to your standards now and the other improvements will be scrutinized for being clean enough.
    I don’t like big boxes but I see his plan as an improvement to the city of Eureka overall.

  63. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 4:51 pm

    I think we should leave that land alone. To sit empty and filled with the feces of the current and next generations of homeless that wander through our town. Of course the rest of us can’t enjoy it for fear of stepping on needles and garbage.

    Let our great grandchildren fight this battle in 2111.

  64. Random Guy
    February 15, 2011 at 5:47 pm

    Know why you can’t have a backyard pitfire/burn barrel in almost every city in the united states? Because commercial industry has a monopoly on pulluting every facet of that which can be polluted.

  65. Random Guy
    February 15, 2011 at 5:53 pm

    Didn’t a particular Marina Center sponsor who belongs to the board of supervisors just appoint somebody to the Planning Commission who openly lobbies for laxed social/environmental standards for shopping centers? Why yes, she did. Does Humboldt Bay need fewer standards to make its environmental grade?

  66. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 5:58 pm

    Private burn barrels and wood stoves ruin the air in many communities, though I have had both and enjoyed having them. Maybe the idea is it is easier to regular the mills, etc but not the private citizens all over.

  67. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 5:58 pm

    “regulate” not regular

  68. Random Guy
    February 15, 2011 at 6:07 pm

    Humboldt Bay needs to stop being our industry’s toilet. Secular interests prosper while everybody else succumbs to greater tides. How much more simply can that be stated?

  69. Random Guy
    February 15, 2011 at 6:20 pm

    Does anybody else remember the fact that about five years ago the county put up a big fight to protect our bay’s status as non-toxic, because state and national regulators tested our waters and made no doubt about it: Humboldt Bay is Toxic. Suppose this is one-single-hundredth of a greater truth, that doesn’t dispute the fact that celebrated events like the Oyster Fest and the Kinetic Sculpture Race are in immediate geopardy of being banned for health reasons. Countless events and festivals all over the US have disappeared for health and other reasons that could have been avoided if the precursors to those hazzards were addressed, as is now currently being advocated and dismissed as conspiracy theory and soap opera jive.

  70. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 7:24 pm

    Back to some earlier comments, I support the Richardson Grove project but not the Marina Center. These are not comparable in my mind, nor in the mind of many I assume. In addition to the fact that I feel the MC is not a well conceived project in terms of location and planning, I don’t believe it can really happen as proposed. Has anyone taken a good look lately at the state of the property visible from Broadway? I just drove by a couple of days ago and was again struck by how neglected it looks. Even the fencing is not being maintained and is plastered with all kinds of public announcements. SN is not currently in the financial position to move the Marina Center forward, especially with the clean-up constraints.

  71. Schwingerkönig
    February 15, 2011 at 8:40 pm

    Motion passes 5-0.

  72. Owltotem
    February 15, 2011 at 10:40 pm

    The whole meeting was a charade, the agenda did not appear to say they would be presenting a modified remedial action plan. The MLPA was a recycled presentation, although the young gentleman delivers it well and appears very knowledgeable. The meeting was a charade, a marionette show. (the circus music is playing in my head). We are not governed, they are lead. (and possibly too dumb to even realize it)

    But to open the meeting with the score keeper and the truth speaker, lets keep that coming. Thanks

  73. A-Nony-Mouse
    February 16, 2011 at 8:28 am

    Anonymous 2:11 I guess RA’s good judgement is why several of his banks FAILED? I guess his good judgement is why he’s locked in a battle with the people of Eureka when he could have used a public planning process to create a mutually acceptable project? I guess his good judgement led him to sue the Coastal Commission instead of working with it? I guess his good judgement led him to try to do a cheap shortcut cleanup instead of the real thing? Hmmmm…you be the judge.

  74. High Finance
    February 16, 2011 at 10:08 am

    You are questioning RA’s judgement Mouse ?

    Let’s take a look at that. Even with the depressed economy, RA is worth at least a hundred million or two. How much are YOU worth ?

  75. Anonymous
    February 16, 2011 at 10:41 am

    Really? We are only measured in how much money we have amassed? Must be nice to be born rich. How shallow.

  76. High Finance
    February 16, 2011 at 11:08 am

    Did you even bother to read before posting 10.41am ?

    Mouse was questioning RA’s financial judgement with his banks. Please try harder before posting an insult.

  77. Anonymous
    February 16, 2011 at 11:17 am

    Mouse’s first question was about banks. The others relate to his respect for the community and the environment, which are not all about money IMHO.

  78. Jeff
    February 16, 2011 at 12:06 pm

    If the people of Eureka want the Marina Center development, why shouldn’t it happen (assuming there is adequate environmental clean-up)?
    Those of you who do not like it, why not form a coalition and not shop at any of the stores. It seems as though a lot of the people who preach against big boxes and corporations still go shopping at CostCo and WinCo. Speak with your own dollar bills and let others do the same.

  79. skippy
    February 16, 2011 at 12:11 pm

    Hi-Fi! Good to see you back in the saddle. Welcome back.
    With that given, here’s my humble observation:

    After the council’s unanimous 5-0 vote, Eureka’s Measure N, the “Marina Center Local Coastal Program Amendment Ballot Measure,” altering the zoning of the Balloon Track– will now be sent to the California Coastal Commission for certification.

    Giving a brief powerpoint presentation, Mr. Mitchell of Cue VI and Mr. Gans of Security National fairly noted installation of a costly storm water pump and alarm system removing runoff water for infiltration. Looking to begin interim remedial cleanup plans and removing contaminated soil on 5 locations of the property, abandoned and rusting equipment, rail cars, brush and debris, the proposed plans represent a significantly realistic move forward of abatement, remediation, and improvement of the Balloon Track’s existing eyesore and problems.

    Speaking forthrightly to the Council, acquiring permits, submitting plans, monitoring conditions, and performing subsequent soil testing, one could gather there isn’t necessarily any cleanup stonewalling going on– but what reasonably should and can be done given the long and drawn out process, fiscal limitations, excruciatingly long period of time, and difference of opinions on the matter regarding the Track. No one from the general public spoke in favor of, or against, this LCP measure and presentation aside from Mr. Gans and Mitchell. It was remarkably mute.

    It has been a frustrating situation. Reporting stalwart Allison White details this measure and other city matters in her Times-Standard article, a href=”http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_17400699″>”Eureka’s Measure N to Head to Coastal Commission,” here.

    There seemed to be an unusually hushed pallor in the council chambers tonight. Yours truly hopes it wasn’t by one fine citizen commenting publically that– after her direct inquiry with an administrative representative of Eureka City Schools recently– our Dear City, after pulling out of Jefferson School’s escrow, is now being held fiscally liable for several hundred thousand dollars in penalties. Yours truly couldn’t find this to be true and probably a misunderstanding considering our informed council, proficient City Manager, and alert City Attorney were smartly present and apprised upon voting for escrow withdrawal. The Council didn’t comment on the matter; this isn’t unusual and often wise in such cases. They have a tough job to do– and doing it the best they can.

  80. Ben
    February 16, 2011 at 12:14 pm

    A Non A Mouse,
    You seem to forget:
    1. The vast majority support the project – election remember!
    2. Complete cleanup = no project because of the extreme cost.
    3. Mr. Arkley is a business person and we all take chances and win some and not others, no risk no gain.

  81. skippy
    February 16, 2011 at 12:19 pm

    Allison White’s article in today’s Times-Standard can be found here.

  82. Anonymous
    February 16, 2011 at 12:32 pm

    5942 voted yes. A vast majority? Of those voting in Eureka, maybe so.
    A complete cleanup, acceptable to CREG and Baykeeper, was won in court.
    You are at least correct about Mr. Arkley. He is a business person.

  83. Ben
    February 16, 2011 at 12:34 pm

    A vast majority of those who voted, we can assume that the ratio was the same for those who did not vote.

  84. Reality Check
    February 16, 2011 at 12:38 pm

    This town is a joke! How insanely stupid to believe that retail will be the savior of any town. Stand back and watch all the decisions being made that will bury this community in blight, meth addiction, and asshole elitists that dine at Avalon. What great diversity. Anyone that is claiming that we all deserve a choice in what businesses we support is right-I have the right to shop at small, independent businesses that help create the fiber of a community, but those businesses are wiped out when fat cats need to make money by bringing in big-box development. The power has been taken away from the people, and now rests with corporations and corporate managemnt.
    Is this what a healthy community supports?

  85. Jeff
    February 16, 2011 at 12:44 pm

    Reality Check-
    Big boxes don’t wipe out mom and pops. People choosing to shop at big boxes wipes out mom and pops. Organize! Get people on your bandwagon. Hey, I agree with you that shopping locally is good for a healthy community. Quit with the “big corporations killing our community” line. It’s tired. I know literally dozens of people who work for Arkley and he pays them well. He even paid their kids college tuition. In the world we live in, people need jobs. What do you suggest could be the “savior” for our “insanely stupid” town. Enlighten me as to what the secret is and I will put my efforts whole-heartedly behind it.

  86. Mitch
    February 16, 2011 at 12:50 pm


    I’d appreciate a bit of clarification. Are you saying that a citizen claims Eureka City School’s is holding the City financially liable for backing out of escrow on the Jefferson school site, but you do not believe that citizen? Or are you saying that you DO believe that citizen? Or what?


  87. Pink Floyd
    February 16, 2011 at 12:53 pm

    “Harmlessly passing your time in the grassland away;
    Only dimly aware of a certain unease in the air.
    You’d better watch out!
    There may be dogs about
    I looked over Jordan, and I’ve seen
    Things are not what they seem.

    That’s what you get for pretending the danger’s not real.
    Meek and obedient you follow the leader
    Down well trodden corridors into the valley of steel.
    What a surprise!
    A look of terminal shock in your eyes.
    Now things are really what they seem.
    No, this is not a bad dream.”

  88. Sam Spade
    February 16, 2011 at 12:59 pm

    Hig on Finance. How can you defend a scumbag like Rob Junior who ran a 100+ year old local bank into the ground?
    “You have done enough. Have you no sense of decency sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?” -Mr. Welch

    Covington-based Statewide Bank issued cease and desist order
    By Reports Publication: New Orleans CityBusiness
    Date: Friday, April 24 2009
    The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. has issued a cease and desist order to Covington-based Statewide Bank.
    The bank consented to the March 25 issuance of the order “solely for the purpose of this proceeding and without admitting or denying the alleged charges of unsafe or unsound banking practices and violations of law and/or regulations,” the order says. “The FDIC and the Louisiana Office of Financial Institutions considered the matter and determined that they had reason to believe that the bank had engaged in unsafe or unsound banking practices and had violated laws and/or regulations,” the order says.
    Calls were placed to Statewide for comment.
    The order says the bank is to cease and desist from the following:
    – Operating the bank with an inadequate level of capital protection for the kind and quality of assets held by the bank.
    – Engaging in speculative or hazardous investment practices.
    – Operating with an inadequate investment policy.
    – Operating the bank with an excessive level of adversely classified loans or assets.
    – Operating the bank with an excessive level of delinquent and nonaccrual loans.
    – Creating concentrations of credit.
    – Operating the bank with inadequate written loan policies and procedures.
    – Operating the bank with management whose policies and practices are detrimental to the bank and jeopardize the safety of its deposits.
    – Operating the bank in violation of applicable federal and state laws and regulations.
    – Operating the bank without a realistic or comprehensive strategic plan.
    – Operating the bank with inadequate earnings to fund growth, support dividend payments and augment capital.
    – Operating the bank without adequate liquidity or proper regard for funds management in light of the bank’s asset and liability mix.
    The bank has locations in Abita Springs, Mandeville, Folsom, Slidell and Covington . Credit: CityBusiness Staff Reports


  89. Anonymous
    February 16, 2011 at 1:06 pm

    I love the argument that Arkley deserves to be able to introduce big box superstores stores to the area simply because he is responsible for employing local citizens!

  90. Reinventing The Wheel
    February 16, 2011 at 1:25 pm

    To clarify: Those, like high-liar, who take every opportunity to confuse “the community” with “the voters” are liars who want you to believe that, “low voter registration and turnouts have persisted since 1789”!


    Typically, in high turn-outs, the Left wins more elections, this is why tyrants rarely welcome every citizen exercising their rights, and why their apologists purposely confuse the community with its voters. A tyranny familiar to Mark Twain:

    “There’s three freedoms in America, freedom of speech, assembly, and the wisdom to do neither”.

    Australia imposes a $50 fine for “failure to vote”…. another industrialized nation with universal health insurance, rushing to play catchup to Germany’s new-energy re-industrialization.

    Sure, the Marina Center would be great; if it were a natural extension of Old Town, a persistent and successful model of local-ownership development that other cities are rushing to rebuild, (what Europe, Asia, Central and South America have known for centuries); it would be great if Eureka were not already saturated in poverty wages; or if peak-oil was not going to, inevitably, make those crappy Chinese products too costly to ship.

    As 12:30 and 1:56 cleverly point out, the high-bidders are tooled-up for maximum profiteering from outdated industries, energies and unsustainable growth models that just looted the U.S. Treasury and wrecked much of the world economy. Their party is rapidly diminishing, taking the public’s wealth with it.

    Will the MC’s proposed housing units be affordable to average Home Depot employees?

    No, it’s the public’s responsibility to subsidize big box and sprawl developments that make a tiny minority richer…

  91. Jeff
    February 16, 2011 at 1:52 pm

    1:06- read a little closer. Arkley should be allowed to introduce a big box because we live in a democracy, and the people voted for the big box. The point about Arkley providing good jobs was to reference that a “healthy community” needs jobs. I am trying to show you a link between the evil Mr. Arkley and a healthy community. What I am asking and nobody responds to, is what is the alternative to employers providing jobs? Are people suggesting we go back to an agrarian society? Sounds romantic but I don’t see it working any time soon. So until you can figure out how to make it work, understand that we need employers. People like Arkley are good for the community. It’s really pretty simple. If you don’t like the services he provides, don’t use them. If enough people do not use them, they will cease to exist. If people use them, it’s the will of the people.

  92. Sam Spade
    February 16, 2011 at 2:00 pm

    Jeff. Rob Junior did not create jobs in New Orleans, he destroyed a local bank and more than 100 good paying jobs. How can “pro-business” people defend a guy who destroys banks and wants to destroy the economy in Old Town Eureka? You are not a true pro-business person Jeff, you are Robyn’s partisan hack.

  93. skippy
    February 16, 2011 at 2:19 pm

    Mitch, thank you. I should’ve been more precise.
    “I’d appreciate a bit of clarification. Are you saying that a citizen claims Eureka City School’s is holding the City financially liable for backing out of escrow on the Jefferson school site, but you do not believe that citizen? Or are you saying that you DO believe that citizen? Or what?”

    I do believe the citizen was right in their mind saying this during public comments; I find it hard to believe our intelligent city council, attorney, and manager in tandem would have allowed such an allegedly grievous error to begin with. It’s too boneheaded at face value incurring a large penalty without forethought. I suspect it’s more likely to be partial miscommunication by the citizen and their conversation with the ECS administrator.

  94. Plain Jane
    February 16, 2011 at 2:21 pm

    None of them responded to it, Skippy?

  95. Reinventing The Wheel
    February 16, 2011 at 3:36 pm

    If “Jeff 1:52″ represents the average voter, we’re doomed! How does anyone SERIOUSLY believe that” Eureka’s choice is Home Depot, Walmart, or planting potatoes”!


    For Pete’s sake, there’s books written on this subject! Even tiny Arcata set land aside and planned for industrial parks, manufacturing incubators and in-fill housing developments. Some of our famous and successful local industries began there!

    When a city plans for more than poverty-wage jobs….it gets more than poverty wage jobs!!

    Except for Eureka, where they deride planning as “social engineering” then proceed to socially engineer by the highest bidders into MASSIVE infrastructure liabilities we can’t afford, and still developers are crying for more: “It’s my land and this is America”!! THEN WE HEAR: “Why should I have to pay for roads, sidewalks, sewers, water systems and emergency services”!?

    “I want another big box”, then later we hear, “why do I have to pay more social services and welfare for all these poor people around here”? “Why is there so much more crime, drug abuse, and rehab houses in my community”??

    You can chose NOT to shop all you want, but Ray’s Market could give a damn, they’ve been near-empty since they arrived many years ago. All these “nationals” carry all the same crap for the same price, all gambling one will outlast the other after the independent businesses are gone.

    NONE of us are “free” as long as our public wealth remains in the service of allowing, protecting and bailing out multinationals that exploit this world’s children, avoiding taxes, environmental, worker safety, and social security laws overseas. Public wealth that used to be available to rebuild infrastructures, provide jobs, training and placement, free “public” universities, gov. business loans, public invests in manufacturing and light industries in our cities.

    Big boxes and sprawl are indeed “jobs” …just like digging a hole deeper and deeper…

  96. skippy
    February 16, 2011 at 3:39 pm

    PJ, not a single word. Perhaps due to the citizen being irritated and subtly accusatory, an allegation based on hearsay and without merit, or being a sensitive issue with some merit– and consequences. Not all public comments receive a direct response from Council so this is not necessarily unusual. There was, nonetheless, a hushed silence throughout the room for a few moments. In moments like these, yours truly does feel for our Council. At times they’re in a hard spot, often going unappreciated and unsupported. They have a tough job, low pay, and can’t help everyone. It can be like riding two horses at the same time.

  97. Anonymous
    February 16, 2011 at 11:32 pm

    Arkley’s motives are no longer to benefit the community, assuming they ever were. His business is not thriving, he owes large sums of money to the banks and is not paying his creditors. How is the Marina Center supposed to happen under these circumstances?

  98. Anonymous
    February 17, 2011 at 1:03 am

    If Jeff 1:52 represents the average “Yes on N” voter, no wonder it passed.

    He thinks Eureka has a choice between Home Depot and growing potatoes?


    Not only are their books written on this subject, right next door little Arcata, and many other cities, planned for industrial parks, manufacturing incubators and infill affordable housing.

    When you plan a community to facilitate and attract higher paying jobs…you get higher paying jobs!

    But in Eureka, the movers and shakers dismiss that as “social engineering”… while they socially engineer Eureka by the highest bidder. $30k got a ballot initiative that’s priceless for propaganda.

    Big boxes and sprawl provide employment alright, so does a shovel and a deep hole to dig your rural economy into.

  99. Reality Check
    February 17, 2011 at 10:43 am

    I think that jobs are essential to a healthy community. I think that living wage jobs are vital to a healthy community. We are no longer creating living wage jobs in Eureka, and instead, the only jobs that are being proposed are minimum-wage retail jobs. This is a set-up for failure. In a healthy community, we would diversify our efforts to include growth in retail jobs, industrial jobs, manufacturing jobs, and all sorts of professional jobs that pay a wage that folks can live on. Retail jobs are a concept of the past, of regression. Retail jobs pay little above minimum wage, and with all the commercial/retail/restaurant closings locally, it just doesn’t make sense to invest so much energy into retail building and growth.

    In no way do I believe that job creation is a simple task, but concentrating on growth in industry other than retail would help build community confidence. As it stands today, no new jobs have been created, and we are still dealing with 40 acres of polluted lands with no cleanup in sight.

  100. February 17, 2011 at 11:30 am

    RA = Charles Hurwitz,peas in a pod.

    Our local elected officials are just like the ones in Flint,MI in ‘Roger and Me’ with all of their gimmicks to try to save their town/area.FAIL

    Fishing,gone.Timber,gone.Nothing but pot to keep this area going,legalize that and the rich around here will have to hire blackwater armed guards for protection from all the drug addicted tweakers that will be everywhere

  101. tra
    February 17, 2011 at 12:09 pm

    Regarding the question about whether the City was going to have to
    pay several hundred thoudand dollars for pulling out of escrow on the Jefferson School deal:

    “Haulk also said the district was not planning to seek financial compensation from the city of Eureka for pulling out of the deal. ”


    So it sounds like the school district could have sought to collect those penalties from the City, but have decided not to do so. That’s probably a wise move on the part of the school district, because they have plenty of reason to want to maintain a positive relationship with the City.

    At any rate, this is good news for the City, and for the City Council members who voted to nix the deal at the last minute. I still think it was pretty irresponsible for the Council Members to have taken that risk, but perhaps they had already received assurances from the school district, privately, that those penalties would not be pursued? That might explain why the Council was seemingly unconcerned about the possibility of being penalized financially for pulling out of escrow…but if this IS the way it went down, with backroom deals and private assurances, that’s not exactly an ideal way for the City and the school district to interact.

  102. skippy
    February 17, 2011 at 12:42 pm

    Tra, thank you for your timely update. Well said, as usual. You’re an important contributor with welcoming insight and thought. Just to note, there’s been some recent posting activity on the Jefferson School thread. If you don’t want to to go back finding this earlier thread, you can find it here.

    To her credit, Plain Jane was up at 4:20am this morning keeping us up to speed along with Owl. Thank you everyone. (Owl, you’ll be enjoying time on the Eel in no time, no worries; PJ, enjoyed your link about Fox News that was almost missed buried deep between others that you posted 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 )

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