Yes, master

In puppet government news, the Eureka Arkleyville City Council will consider Tuesday sending a letter to the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors seeking a halt to the General Plan Update process.

Of course they are.  Developer overlord Rob Arkley wants the long-overdue GPU stopped until every elected seat is filled with a butt that will do his bidding — much like the City of Eureka.

The letter would express “the City’s concern about the County’s General Plan Update process and request the Update be placed on hold to allow for the creation of Citizen Advisory Committees, which will assist in making the update process more inclusive.”

Committee members would be chose from a list of Arkley supporters, no doubt.  But no worries — it ain’t gonna happen, to borrow a phrase. This is just another Arkley muscle flexing exercise.

However, the request may put Supervisor Virginia Bass in the difficult position of having to either go back on a campaign promise of completing the GPU quickly, or defying her supreme leader.

  1. Anonymous
    February 28, 2011 at 1:13 am

    There’s no question that this is one of the top censored stories in Humboldt County.

    The development community dominates political funding, as well as, every single one of the dozens of GPU hearings, workshops, Elements, Board and Commission meetings I’ve attended for the past 3 years.

    The housing industry harvested public-funded infrastructure for their high-profit subdivisions that are unaffordable to 75% of local families who subsidized it! Local cities have already had moratoriums imposed. Maybe Eureka’s citizens would have taken a second-look at their skyrocketing sewer bills, (and Measure N’s promise of more poverty-wage jobs), had their community newspapers covered this story.

    It’s as if the last two housing bubbles in 30 years never happened…and with history completely ignored, our developer/welfare queens rush downtown every week demanding their “principally permitted” right to begin the next bubble!!!

    The dust hasn’t even settled from the last bubble, they’re still looting the U.S. Treasury; U.S. states and foreign banks are still teetering!!

    AND YET, not one reporter is EVER in the room to ask what these speculator’s interests are, offer some historical context, or investigate the intractable costs of poor planning.

    No worries, working families that can’t afford to buy a home will ultimately bailout the next bubble…everything is the way it’s always been…

    It was amazing to watch Virginia Bass vote to delay the Rural Housing Needs Assessment, then bash Neely for taking “too long” on the GPU! Virginia ran against experience, while Jagger ran on it. Paid by the development community….again…


  2. Decline to State
    February 28, 2011 at 6:48 am

    It’s never enough is it?

  3. humboldturtle
    February 28, 2011 at 6:49 am

    This would speed the process up?

  4. Humboldt Politico
    February 28, 2011 at 6:54 am

    Bet she’ll do Arkley’s bidding once again.

  5. Anonymous
    February 28, 2011 at 6:55 am

    What a bunch of cry babies! The voters decided that they had enough of your left wing BS so they voted you out and someone else in that would get something done. TO BAD!

  6. Anonymous
    February 28, 2011 at 7:02 am

    never mind the fact that many people have called for the creation of advisory committees. we can’t actually involve the citizens in our planning, can we?

  7. humboldturtle
    February 28, 2011 at 7:04 am

    Planning commissioners are no longer citizens?

  8. Anonymous
    February 28, 2011 at 7:18 am

    they are not listening to the public. ok, mr. emad is. look at the housing element, people have been saying for years, “there isn’t enough lots” and they just kept moving the ball along until the state said, “hey, there isn’t enough lots”. now it is a “big problem”? if they would have got off their asses and actually went out to the communities, they would have known this. they have failed to deliver the product for the last 10 years and 12 million dollars. time to find a different way.

  9. Anonymous
    February 28, 2011 at 7:22 am

    let’s see, you have 3 commissioners living in bayside, where there is no development, and all of them on large parcels. does this represent the average humboldt citizen? any of them live in the towns where they want us commoners and poor people to live? i think not.

  10. humboldturtle
    February 28, 2011 at 7:23 am

    So, now that Eureka’s government has it together, they’ll tell the rest of us how it’s done?? No, thank you.

  11. Anonymous
    February 28, 2011 at 7:38 am

    Show the fuck up! Even if the council doesn’t listen, and they wont, be there to publicly represent your position. This city hall is owned and the decisions of the council orchestrated by the few through the city manager.

  12. Anonymous
    February 28, 2011 at 7:41 am

    The “average” Humboldt does live in “town”.

  13. Dont be fooled again
    February 28, 2011 at 7:41 am

    Sorry H, but the graphic is an insult to puppeteers everywhere!

  14. Anonymous
    February 28, 2011 at 7:49 am

    Rob Arkley is neither that tall nor svelte.

    February 28, 2011 at 7:50 am


    Who seered this GPU process?

    Jeffrey Lytle
    McKinleyville – 5th District

    February 28, 2011 at 8:06 am

    After reading more comments,

    I am still kinda half laughing, although, I just caught myself, sad. Very sad…… and to think as if people did not say it was going to be so about the future demise of this GPU process. So, here we are now waiting and waiting to ask the question,”Now, are we her?”

    EMAD – I trust his judgements as he has proven his trustworthiness by his actions abroad with respect to Planning Commissioner duties. Until he does something justifying another feeling, in my mind, he has been straightforward and to the point in a VERY CRITICAL tone, AND never yelling, BUT critical questioning and logic like Jedi Master Yoda but without the language irregularities – opposite of what majority voters vote for when voting for ELECTED officials.

    Can you imagine how the Planning Commission would de-materialize into muck if it were an elected position based soley on the results of the voting class??? :-)


  17. Anonymous
    February 28, 2011 at 8:53 am

    Most advisory committees are just another way for the left to slow down progress.

  18. anadromous
    February 28, 2011 at 9:01 am

    It is truly unfortunate that, after 13+ years of this update process, the Eureka City Council wants to stall it even further. Without stalling, there is at least another year of Planning Commission meetings, then many months for review of the Draft Environmental Impact Report, then it must pass through the Supervisors – we are still years (and countless public meetings) away from an updated General Plan.

    Citizen’s committees are a good idea, and could be formed at any time.(Heck, they could have been formed any point in the last decade!) The process does not need to be waylaid any more than it has for this to happen.

    Even without these formalized committees there have been and continue to be ample opportunities for community members to make their own associations to give voice to their concerns. There are also a number of organizations representing various viewpoints to join up with.

    The County’s General Plan update process may not be perfect, but has been going on for over a decade and we need to move forward.

  19. Random Guy
    February 28, 2011 at 9:01 am

    They want MORE beaurocracy. In straight, uncomplicated writing, they want more beaurocracy. “Citizen Advisory Committees”? Plural? They mean “our personal cheerleading squad”. It’s like saying door to door hoover salesmen belong to the Vacuum Cleaner Advisory Committee.

    Print 50,000 2-up black and white photocopies of a single-question questioneer to be cut in half and mailed to every resident that reads:

    Would you like to see more shopping malls and apartment complexes in humboldt?

    ___yes ____no

  20. The anonymous puppet audience
    February 28, 2011 at 9:14 am

    Anonymous at 6:55: “they voted you out and someone else in that would get something done.”

    (Yeah, like bringing the GPU process to a halt. Its all going so fast, 10 years isn’t enough time)

    Anonymous at 8:53: “Most advisory committees are just another way for the left to slow down progress.”

    (Is that why developers are asking for them?)

    February 28, 2011 at 9:42 am

    Anonymous says:
    February 28, 2011 at 8:53 am
    Most advisory committees are just another way for the left to slow down progress.

    Response: Is this why known conservative voters support CAC’s too?

    Seems if a Planning Commission is back-logged with assignments, why wouldn’t it be prudent and better and more efficient to have the more localized CAC’s haggle out the recommendations to THEN send up to the Planning Commission (if the recommendations don’t violate county ordinances or are wanting to change UNJUST ordinances, then that is the point that A PC begins to deliberate).

    Yet, on just a simple level of logic, more opportunities to be involved WILL increase workloads – it is just who that workload gets deferred upon and what takes a higher priority in so far as agendizing for PC discussions.

    Now, in the meantime, the PC can better organize its schedule to be quicker and more efficient because lower advisory committees have hopefully haggled out the nonsense and rubbish arguments so that the PC won’t have to listen (but will by law if people are making attempts) to repeated conjectures that won’t make it into the final decision due to lack of many things, mostly truth and fact though. This does not mean that a person can’t continue the process up the ladder, but it does give the PC members more focus and ability to weigh information that has become KNOWN.


  22. tra
    February 28, 2011 at 9:54 am

    Am I really the first commenter to note the fact that the County General Plan doesn’t even cover incorporated areas like Eureka, which has its own General Plan?

  23. Anonymous
    February 28, 2011 at 10:07 am

    Yup, everyone else realizes that while Cities have their own General Plans there is a huge interrelationship between what happens in the cities and what happens on their borders. Suprise, the County forcing massive growth in Cutten affects Eureka.

    Know how many times County Planners met with Eureka planners and officials to discuss these kind of interrelationships? Not once. Maybe now you can see why Eureka is pissed and it has nothing to do with Rob Arkley.

  24. tra
    February 28, 2011 at 10:24 am

    Yup, everyone else realizes that while Cities have their own General Plans there is a huge interrelationship between what happens in the cities and what happens on their borders. Suprise, the County forcing massive growth in Cutten affects Eureka.

    Good points.

    Know how many times County Planners met with Eureka planners and officials to discuss these kind of interrelationships? Not once.

    Assuming that’s true, did the City planners and the higher-ups in the City administration request meetings with the County planners and were denied? Or were both sides at fault in failing to coordinate?

  25. Anonymous
    February 28, 2011 at 10:24 am

    I think tra hits on an important point. The Eureka City Council is solidifying their role as a rogue entity serving the desires of their moneyed-masters rather than the public.

  26. Anonymous
    February 28, 2011 at 10:37 am

    “…Or were both sides at fault in failing to coordinate.”

    Who cares? I don’t think a meeting was held with MCSD in McKinleyville or the Redway services district either. That doesn’t mean they aren’t affected and that they, as representatives of their communities should be ignored. I don’t think the City’s goal is assign blame or fault. The point is that all cities in the County are affected by the General Plan and should be consulted. This is indicative of the way the entire “update” has been handled. The cities are mad, the voters are mad all because they haven’t been a true part of the process. It doesn’t count as public participation if you have five hundred meetings and stack them with your friends and ignore the folks you disagree with.

  27. skippy
    February 28, 2011 at 10:40 am

    Nice catch, Tra.

    The Times-Standard’s stalwart Allison White noted here today:

    The Eureka City Council will consider expressing its concerns over the proposed Ridgewood Village project and the county’s general plan on Tuesday… Formerly known as the Forster-Gill project, the proposal is for 1,400 residential housing units…City staff and council members said they were frustrated that they had not been included in much of the conversation with the Board of Supervisors or the project developers.

    Regarding the general plan update, (Councilman Lance Madsen) would like the council to send a letter requesting the update be put on hold to allow citizen advisory committees to be created…

    Allison White has been busy with today’s additional article here, “Future of Eureka’s Redevelopment Programs Unclear Under Brown’s Budget.”

  28. Anonymous
    February 28, 2011 at 10:42 am

    The County is not forcing “massive growth” in Cutten or anywhere else. Eureka’s own community plan designates the proposed Ridgewood Heights area and others for development. The County has also sought and received input from the City of Eureka on numerous occasions regarding the County GPU – go to the website to look through comment letters…

    The city, along with members of the public can, at any time submit public testimony on any portion of the General Plan Update.

  29. Anon
    February 28, 2011 at 10:45 am

    There are in fact many Citizens Advisory Committees on the GPU. We just form them–we don’t sit around waiting for the Board of Supervisors to anoint us.

    This is just another BS argument to slow down the GPU because the developers don’t like the way it’s going.

    Why doesn’t the City of Eureka mind their own mess? That place is a wreck, and I’m anxious to see how they are going to fix it.

  30. Anonymous
    February 28, 2011 at 10:45 am

    The HumCPR/HELP/HAR crowd has “stacked” so many meetings with their paid lobbyists it’s not even funny. This does not preclude members of the public from expressing their own opinion. In fact, it makes it that much more crucial.

  31. Plain Jane
    February 28, 2011 at 10:47 am

    “Eureka’s own community plan designates the proposed Ridgewood Heights area and others for development.”

    But the local developers think they bought the right (with campaign contributions) to be the ones who profit from such developments, not those who actually own the property.

  32. Not an Expert
    February 28, 2011 at 10:47 am

    It is 100% BS that the County has not consulted with MCSD, Humboldt Community Services District, and the City of Eureka. But keep saying it and that will make it true–to people who blindly believe nonsense.

  33. Anonymous
    February 28, 2011 at 10:49 am

    I call BS on 10:42. The county is on the verge of forcing zoning to create massive growth in McKinleyville, in direct opposition to overwhelmingly negative public comment and in direct conflict with the already established McKinleyville Area Plan. Open revolt is now being discussed, working to make the MCSD take over local planning decisions because Eureka doesn’t give a damn what it does to McKinleyville.

  34. tra
    February 28, 2011 at 10:58 am

    I think tra hits on an important point. The Eureka City Council is solidifying their role as a rogue entity serving the desires of their moneyed-masters rather than the public.

    Well, just to be clear, that second sentence does not reflect what I actually said at 9:54. All I said was that the County General Plan does not cover incorporated areas, including Eureka, which has its own general plan. I was surprised that no one had mentioned that fact up to this point in the discussion.

    10:07 pointed out that although the County General Plan does not directly cover the City, it certainly does affect the City, and I certainly agree with that. In fact I’d be surprised to hear anyone try to argue that the County’s General Plan does not have any effect the City.

    So, while I’m not a fan of the current Eureka City Council majority (I don’t think they should have pulled the plug on the Jefferson project, for example), I don’t see them as acting as a “rogue agency” just because they’re offering their recommendations on the County General Plan Update process. The County Board of Supervisors is, of course, under no obligation to act on Eureka City Council’s recommendations.

  35. Anonymous
    February 28, 2011 at 11:00 am

    Last week’s McKinleyville Press. Two headline stories:

    1. Should McKinleyville control its own destiny?

    2. Residents outraged over county plan to rezone McK for high-density development

    The Times-Standard will get around to fully covering the controversy after the zoning change is complete, no doubt. It managed to report on the public meeting *after* it had been held. People resorted to paying for advertisements in the Times-Standard to get the word out because the newspaper was doing squat. That’s quite a business model.

  36. Steve
    February 28, 2011 at 11:24 am

    to anon @10:49-900 units scattered over the entire county that may or may not ever be built is not “creating massive growth in McKinleyville”! More BS…get your facts straight.

  37. Anonymous
    February 28, 2011 at 11:25 am

    If Mack-town wants the privileges of an incorporated city, let it incorporate.

  38. Anonymous
    February 28, 2011 at 11:26 am

    HumCPR resorted to taking out a paid ad in the Times-Standard that exaggerated the multi-family proposal by 16 times! The rezone will only affect a handful of properties in the county in order to meet the state’s mandated housing needs (and to serve the needs of working families, students and seniors). It is appalling how selfish some people can be.

  39. Anonymous
    February 28, 2011 at 11:33 am

    11:25, FTFA. McKinleyville doesn’t have to incorporate in order to seize planning control away from the county. It’s going to happen. Eureka’s gravy train is coming to an end. You won’t have us to push around any longer.

  40. tra
    February 28, 2011 at 11:36 am

    There’s been a whole lot of posturing and maneuvering going on around the GPU process for the last several years. Especially when it comes to issues of process and public participation, and the timeframe for completion, there’s been a good deal of apparent inconsistency and contradiction (or at least repositioning) on both sides.

    Members of the “Option C or D” faction have complained about how long the GPU process has taken, while also calling for it to be slowed down even more, or even stopped altogher and started over from the beginning.

    Meanwhile, members of the “Option A or at least B+” faction, who just a few years ago were calling for more public involvement, more hearings, and so on, have shifted gears and backed the Board of Supervisors’ attempt, just last summer, to set an accelerated Planning Commission schedule that would have brought the GPU to a vote by the end of 2010.

    In theory the Option A/B+ faction of Neeley, Lovelace, and Clendenan still had the votes to push through what they wanted before Neeley left office, but that didn’t happen.

    Now, with Neeley gone, and the votes for an Option-A-style GPU not at all assured, my question is: Are Lovelace and Clendenan and the Option A crowd even trying for a speedy vote any longer?

    Or have we now moved into a new phase of the game, where both sides will be more than happy to delay a few more years in the hopes of getting more of what they want in the long run, rather than compromising anytime soon?

  41. Anonymous
    February 28, 2011 at 11:45 am

    “There’s no lots to build on”…


    Eureka is slathered in vacant lots, buildings and businesses. An agreement could be worked out to have city property count toward the county’s requirement.

    But then Bass, Newman and Brady JUST attended their first Housing Element meeting last week, and before that, I NEVER saw a Eureka council member, the press, and only a few affordable infill housing advocates in attendance for the last three years of meetings.

    In fact, I can’t remember a Eureka council member or mayor EVER addressing the Planning Commission or Supervisors on any issue.

    If any dare stand in the way of the development community’s agenda…their toast.

  42. Random Guy
    February 28, 2011 at 11:59 am

    True that, 11am…the McKinleyville Press blows the other local rags out of the water when it comes to real journalistic integrity.

  43. skippy
    February 28, 2011 at 12:18 pm

    Here’s the Legal Notices (skip’s partial summary here) in the 2/24, page 44, issue of the North Coast Journal if interested or helpful:

    Notice Public Hearing Schedule, County Draft General Plan Update, Humboldt County Planning Commission Meeting:

    On Thursday, March 10, 2011 starting at 5pm the Planning Commission will hold a continued hearing on the General Plan update, Hearing Draft Plan, at the BOS Chamber, 825 5th Street, Eureka.

    The Hearing Draft, support, documents, and schedule of dates are available at:

    Ongoing discussion and Additional Draft General Plan Update hearing dates include: March 10 and 24; April 14, 21, 28; May 12, 19, and 26, 2011.

    Notice of these hearings will be provided by e-mail only, unless a written request is received by County staff. To be placed on the e-mail list to receive notices of the hearings please contact Martha Spencer at (707) 268-3704 or by e-mail at

    Any person may appear and present testimony at the meeting. The Planning Commission needs one original and 14 copies of any materials submitted either prior or at the meeting.

    …County of Humboldt Community Development Services, Planning Division

  44. Anonymous
    February 28, 2011 at 12:35 pm

    “Eureka is slathered in vacant lots, buildings and businesses. An agreement could be worked out to have city property count toward the county’s requirement.”

    A brilliant idea and one that could answer broader concerns about low income housing being nearer to services, transportation and jobs among other things. Unfortunately your idea is only possible if the City and County are are working together or in other words, exactly what the City seems to be asking for in their proposed letter. Good for them if they are trying to have better communication and cooperation with the county

  45. Random Guy
    February 28, 2011 at 12:46 pm

    Incorporating McKinleyville not necessary. Drive 300 miles south and stand on any part of the border betweed Brentwood and its neighbor, unincorporated Oakley…and tell me where you’d rather live. Keep in mind the Brentwood side looked just like the Oakley side 15 years ago, and that’s not an exaggeration. Literally, one side of the street looks like McKinleyville as far as you can see, the other looks like Sprawlville USA. Anywhere along that border, and again, not an exaggeration.

  46. Eric Kirk
    February 28, 2011 at 1:07 pm

    I’m not for putting the process on hold and I do agree that developers and GPU opponents have become pretty whiny, but I also agree that the omission of the Citizens Advisory Committees was an inappropriate breech of the process set up back in the 1980s with a a great deal of work put into that process to make certain of adequate community input. But I don’t know that they would have had a substantive impact. We have four proposed frameworks and we can pick and choose from each to create the final product. Basically you would have to balance the committees according to the various factions and they would just reproduce the same discussions which have taken place at all of the public hearings and on the blogs. Is anybody really expecting any new revelations?

  47. Anonymous
    February 28, 2011 at 1:35 pm

    “People resorted to paying for advertisements in the Times-Standard to get the word out because the newspaper was doing squat.”

    What “people”?

  48. Anonymous
    February 28, 2011 at 2:16 pm

    What “people”?

    Private citizens. If you’d read the McKinleyville Press, you would have seen them quoted. If you’d read the Times-Standard, you missed the meeting altogether.

    By the way, these “people” are not “robots,” so there’s no “need” to “place” them in “quotes.”

  49. Disgusted
    February 28, 2011 at 2:27 pm

    The same people dominating the GP hearings, local campaign funding, the deepest pockets, the one’s in charge of socially engineering the growth in your neighborhood; passing the bill to the 75% of the public who can’t afford the homes, but who suffer the full-costs of streets unsafe to walk, bike or drive, the sewage flowing into their nearby wooded wetlands and into Humboldt Bay during crab season…the blight of vacant lots, empty buildings and shuttered businesses from divestment in our downtown.

    You think they won’t bum-rush the “Citizen’s Advisory Committees” too?

  50. Anonymous
    February 28, 2011 at 2:41 pm

    “Private citizens.”

    So “private” that they don’t identify themselves when they pay for the ads?

  51. tra
    February 28, 2011 at 2:42 pm

    Does anybody know if the Planning Commission and/or the Board of Supervisors currently have any sort of timetable for bringing the GPU plan to a vote?

    It’s clear that some folks are trying to delay the vote, but it’s not clear (at least to me) whether there is still anyone on the other side trying to move forward with a vote soon.

    As I mentioned above, last year the Board of Supervisors had tried to set a timetable to get it done by the end of 2010, which of course didn’t happen.

    Since then, I haven’t heard anything about any new timetable. Which leaves me wondering whether we really have both sides in this debate favoring continued delay, one loudly, the other silently.

    Any thoughts, people?

  52. longwind
    February 28, 2011 at 2:57 pm

    tra, the Planning Commission voted last month on a timeline to present their draft GPU to the Supes in another year and change. Whatever urgency once existed is gone. The past urgency may have come from fear that two new Supes like Bass and Sundberg would get into office and ruin the railroad.

    You may be right that both sides are game to wait for the next round of elections, so the greens won’t have to rely on poor ‘Jimmy in the middle’ for their decisive vote. That would be my hunch.

  53. Peter
    February 28, 2011 at 3:42 pm

    Well. This is a complex issue and I have very mixed feelings about it. But I’m quite clear on one fact, and that is central. It’s called “democracy”.
    Thirty years ago a group of citizens (Citizens’ Participation Advisory Committee) worked diligently to come up with a process that could maximize public participation in the planning process “beginning at the outset and continuing throughout the planning process”. The results of our work were approved by the Board and the Commission (and the State) and became the 1500 section of the General Plan. PLEASE read it. If you haven’t done so you will be unlikely to understand what the Eureka City Council is considering.
    The central idea here was that “Citizens’ Advisory Committees” would be formed wherever in the county five or more people wanted one to represent their concerns. The Planning Department was supposed to encourage, “motivate”, and inform this process, telling folks what the PD knew needed to be considered and vice versa, with the people telling the planners what they were concerned about. That way, starting at the very capillaries of the grass roots, virtually every legitimate concern of the citizenry would be raised and hashed out between the different points of view at the most local level. Then their input would be the basis for whatever planning the PD went on to do.
    The simple truth is that the PD resisted this plan at every step. Then when they were ordered to implement it they just ignored it, which is why you still, after thirty years, don’t know about it and neither do the supes because the PD certainly never discussed it with them except to tell them (in the case of the Avenue Plan) that they planned to ignore it, and the supes went right along with them in spite of the fact that that was not only wildly improper but also illegal (they can’t do that without amending the General Plan and nobody even mentioned doing that). Now the PD has proposed the elimination of the entire 1500 section. Really. What does that tell you?
    “Democracy” is defined as “the political system in which government is DIRECTLY EXERCISED OR CONTROLLED BY THE PEOPLE COLLECTIVELY; government by the people, as distinguished from aristocracy”. What we have at present here is government by the planners, deliberately ignoring the fundamentals of democracy, together with an “aristocracy” the likes of Healthy Humboldt, who (in spite of the validity of most of what they’re trying to do) unwittingly support the PD in willfully ignoring the democratic process that we worked so hard to further in Humboldt County.
    Those of us who are pushing for the practice (in deeds, not just words) of true democracy are appalled by the current state of affairs. Sure, there are several interest groups involved here and almost all of them are primarily concerned with their own agenda rather than the common good. Nonetheless, all of them share a concern for the actual practice of democracy. Strange bedfellows for sure, but in a common interest. That does happen sometimes.
    So before we fly off the handle because Arkley appears to support following the 1500 section, let’s consider who else supports it and why (how about the League of Women Voters for one?). The issue here is how important we think it is to PRACTICE democracy; personally I think that trumps any special interest, and I wholly support the City Council’s sending a letter to the Board to that effect. BTW, the reason for the proposal to put the brakes on the GPU is that the whole thing has been done improperly (and illegally). How can you make it right without going back to the beginning (yeah, I know; how can you get pigs to fly?) It’s the principle of the thing. Either we insist on real democracy or we lose it, and right here in Humboldt County we happen to have (still) an outstanding system for protecting and practicing the democratic process. Methinks we’d better stick up for it.

  54. Walt
    February 28, 2011 at 3:49 pm

    “…their toast.” (quoth 11:45)
    “TO BAD!” (quoth 6:55 am)
    (raise glasses. . .)To Bad! Here here!

  55. tra
    February 28, 2011 at 3:52 pm

    Thanks for the info on the Planning Commission’s timeline, Longwind.

    As far as waiting until after the next round of elections, that seems to me like a pretty risky proposition for the Option A faction, given that Lovelace and Clendenan will also be up for re-election. My guess is that in the 3rd district Lovelace can probably get re-elected if he wants to, but it seems like Clendenan might be a lot more vulnerable in the 2nd. Meanwhile, if Jimmy Smith decides to run again in the 1st, the consensus seems to be that he’s likley to win re-election, which would leave the Option A faction no better off than they are now (and possibly worse off if Clendenan is defeated by a combination of folks who voted for Johanna Rodoni and Estelle Fennel last time around). Even if Smith doesn’t run, and it’s an open seat, it’s not like there’s any guarantee that the 1st district will elect someone in the mold of Lovelace or Clendenan.

    And beyond the next election, it’s two more years before the Option A fans will have a chance to try to win the 4th or 5th district seats. Meanwhile, until the GPU is done and voted on, the current General Plan stays in effect, which is probably fine with most of the folks in the Option C or D crowd, but not O.K. with the supporters of an Option A-style GPU. So Option A folks do have an incentive to try to push forward, the problem is they may not be able to get a third vote for a final version of the GPU that they are willing to live with.

    All in all it seems to me that the supporters of an Option A-style GPU are in rather weak position. The status quo is not at all to their liking, but if they push forward to change it anytime soon, they will probably have to compromise a quite a bit to get a plan passed, and they will then have to live with those compromises for many years. At the same time, their allies are up for re-election two full years before their (presumed) opponents are, so things aren’t likely to get better for them anytime soon, and could even get worse for them after the next election if one or more of their allies loses.

    So it seems like their only hope is to either persuade Jimmy Smith to vote for a final version of the GPU that Lovelace, Clendenan, and the Option A supporters can live with, and go ahead and hold the vote before the next election, or else roll the dice in the next election and hope that both Lovelace and Clendenan hold on while Smith is replaced by a candidate more closely aligned with Lovelace and Clendenan on GPU issues, and then hold the GPU vote after that new 1st District Supervisor takes office. That last one is a pretty tall order, but it seems like about the only scenario where a strongly Option A-like GPU could actually get passed.

  56. Fence
    February 28, 2011 at 4:07 pm

    The preferred option is normally the one approved which is B.
    Peter, our form of Government is a democratic republic. Where we elect official to make the decisions for us so we voters don’t have to vote on every issue. But we can show up to public meetings to have our voice heard before a vote on any issue.

  57. tra
    February 28, 2011 at 4:27 pm

    Of course it would be great if they could come up with a version of the GPU that all 5 Supervisors could agree to, but that does seem pretty unlikely.

    So the discussion often posits a 3-vote majority of Lovelace, Clendenan and Smith for a compromise plan that leans more toward Option A, or Smith, Sundberg and Bass for a compromise that leans more toward Option C.

    But I’d be interested in some discussion of what kind of compromise might be able to attract the votes of Clendenan, Smith, and Sundberg. Lovelace and Bass both strike me as more or less representing the two extremes in the GPU debate. Not that those voices shouldn’t be heard, but if the idea is to get a plan that the majority of Humboldt residents can live with, it might be the “middle three” of Clendenan, Smith, and Sundberg that can get us the closest to that goal.

  58. Anonymous
    February 28, 2011 at 4:31 pm

    hey heraldo, did you ever think that not every decision made in Eureka and the greater Humboldt area has to do with Arkley? your obsession is creepy and way over-stated.

  59. And furthermore
    February 28, 2011 at 5:05 pm

    Good history lesson Peter. I disagree that Healthy Humboldt is the aristocracy that tells the PD what to do. Methinks the ones with money to make and who shout the loudest are the ones who have the PD’s attention.

    The PD said a while ago “no way” to forming a MAC for McKinleyville. No funds for such, they said. Eureka and other municipalities have their own planning departments that are paid to coordinate and communicate with the county PD.

    McKinleyville has no PD of its own, so it needs a MAC to get some official voice in what the county proposes to do here. This is especially true, because of the extreme pressure the county is putting on McK to take the brunt of new development, and given the voracious opposition by McK citizens.

    Here is the language from the McK Plan. Notice it does not say “should”, it says “shall”


    1720 Policies
    1. Within one year of the adoption of this Plan, the Board of Supervisors shall appoint a Municipal Advisory Committee (MAC) for the McKinleyville Community Plan Area. Appointed members shall serve at the discretion of the Board of Supervisors as an advisory agency on general community issues.

    1730 Standards
    1. The Board of Supervisors shall appoint a Municipal Advisory Committee (MAC) to advise the Board of Supervisors on local community issues.

  60. And furthermore
    February 28, 2011 at 5:07 pm

    11:25, you wrote: “If Mack-town wants the privileges of an incorporated city, let it incorporate.”

    Humboldt County gets ALL the taxes from Mack-town – they owe us the services we pay for.

    It is not a privilege to have a voice in government – it is a right. We have as much right to an equal voice in our government, which is the county government, as citizens of incorporated cities.

    Your suggestion is ridiculous. Maybe citizens of incorporated areas should not have the privilege of participating in county government. Wadda think? DO you think?

  61. Anonymous
    February 28, 2011 at 5:16 pm

    Though I am doubtful that the GPU will be finalized prior to the next Supervisorial election, I can only hope that it will not be stalled in the meantime for whatever reason. It has gone on far too long and has fed the flames of polarity and disrespect.

    According to the new Planning Commission schedule, there is still at least a year of deliberations at that level. This seems a perfect time for Citizen’s Advisory Committees to be formed and will likely be perfect timing for the CAC’s to weigh in when it gets to the Board of Supervisors.

  62. February 28, 2011 at 5:20 pm

    hey heraldo, did you ever think that not every decision made in Eureka and the greater Humboldt area has to do with Arkley?

    I’m sure this particular issue (which Arkley continues to pour money into) is just a giant coincidence.

  63. Curious
    February 28, 2011 at 5:24 pm

    It is incredulous to go back to the beginning with the GPU process. Come on people, thirteen years of this stuff. Do we really want thirteen more?

  64. Anonymous
    February 28, 2011 at 5:35 pm

    Certain interest groups are trying to roadblock the entire General Plan Update from moving forward in any meaningful way. Listen to any of the hearings, read the letters from HumCPR, HELP and Humboldt Association of Realtors. Their primary concern is their bottom-line…forests, farms and future generations be damned.

  65. longwind
    February 28, 2011 at 5:40 pm

    Remember, citizen participation was poisoned at the well ten years ago, when people who came with suggestions were told that predeterminations had already been made against their desires. If you agreed with the predeterminations, you participated in the Update. If it struck you as an undemocratic railroad you didn’t ride it.

    Sure, much of the sniping is political, but no less inevitable for that. There would be much less cause for it if the rules of democratic participation had been followed. The same can be said of many county scandals–and is–with no great effect to date.

    February 28, 2011 at 6:08 pm

    America is really not a “full” democracy, but it is a Democratic Republic.

    Processes – Need to be done correctly, or be redone, period. That is why there is such a concept as “procedural due process”…… and to think about how many former elected officals failed that one. Some processes are rigged in Humboldt – it depends on who the victim is (are they gonna keep quiet or spill the coffee)?


  67. High Finance
    February 28, 2011 at 6:09 pm

    Can’t the city council, the planning commission or the bd of supervisors ever do anything you don’t like without it being some kind of giant conspiracy by the ultimate liberal bogeyman, Robin Arkley ?

    Instead of having a reasonable and civilized debate like grownups you sound like silly little children.

    February 28, 2011 at 6:13 pm


    FYI – Arkley has nothing to do with my comment, just so your at ease with my nippiness.


  69. Anonymous
    February 28, 2011 at 6:55 pm

    Is this like the housing element in the general plan for the city of Eureka? The citizens were ignored when they asked that no more low income housing be put in their neighborhoods? Public comment was ignored. We had more than met the %. It was all tied to grants and government funding. The MANDATE was driven by the want of grant $. Is this mandate tied to grant funding or is just a mandate by the state for no reason. Maybe this is talked about here but I don’t have time to read this blog in depth right now.

  70. Toohey
    February 28, 2011 at 7:56 pm

    The problem with socialism is that it takes up too many evenings.
    -Oscar Wilde

    I think this applies to the GP update too. Actually planning IS pretty much socialism.

  71. hazey
    February 28, 2011 at 9:13 pm

    Anyone else notice the spike in their (Eureka) water/sewer bill? I live alone, take a few showers a week, don’t water the lawn. My bill was $54 for february.

  72. Anonymous
    February 28, 2011 at 10:19 pm

    True, not every decision made in Eureka/Humboldt County has to do with Arkley, but the GPU is an issue that he remains very focused on.

  73. Anonymous
    February 28, 2011 at 11:01 pm

    “Sure, there are several interest groups involved here and almost all of them are primarily concerned with their own agenda rather than the common good. Nonetheless, all of them share a concern for the actual practice of democracy.”


  74. Not an Expert
    February 28, 2011 at 11:08 pm

    tra: there is a timeline for the GPU that was discussed at the last hearing. There will be numerous hearings for more input, both verbal and written. The Planning Commission will finish its review of all of the elements, then will take up the ordinances to implement the policies, then the Draft EIR, and THEN it will go to the Board of Supervisors for final approval. Then the developers will sue. So you see, there will be DOZENS if not hundreds of opportunities for input by anyone and everyone-you don’t have to be on a county-approved committee to have input.

    This is another red herring by people who just don’t want an update, because they want to continue the good ole boys’ method of “my project gets approved and yours doesn’t.”

  75. Anon
    February 28, 2011 at 11:13 pm

    It’s funny to me that the “Option C” crowd considers Jimmy Smith their ally when he TROUNCED Vevoda, the developers’ candidate, something like 70-30. How do you figure that Jimmy is pro-rampant-development?

  76. Voter
    February 28, 2011 at 11:16 pm

    Longwind: sure, if you don’t like the general consensus, you refuse to participate and than cry foul over the process. It’s pretty transparent. Oh the process, it’s the PROCESS we don’t like! Right.

  77. Walt
    March 1, 2011 at 6:28 am

    “[Low income development] was all tied to grants and government funding. The MANDATE was driven by the want of grant $. Is this mandate tied to grant funding or is just a mandate by the state for no reason.” So if the government stops funding redevelopment, etc, the mandate for low-income housing vanishes too: they’ve thrown away their “stick”.

  78. Anonymous
    March 1, 2011 at 7:10 am

    it wasn’t a consensus. that’s why people want the advisory committees. the planning department had a plan and all the public meetings were just to check the box to say they got public input. very little of the input was actually “put in” the plan. if you went along with what they were telling you, the planners took very detailed notes. if you disagreed, rather than detailing your concerns it would be paraphrased in a fashion that made it so vague as to be worthless. this is something i witnessed and it is not good government and discourages public input.

    at one of the workshops they laid out ground rules at the beginning and said our comments must be positive. the question was asked how to be positive if somebody did not agree with what was being said? this question seemed to confuse the staff and it became clear this was not so much a workshop as a dog and pony show.

    at several of the workshops the planners were borderline hostile to some of the members of public. this does not promote public input.

    go read the current plan, section 1500. not the update, the current law. here’s some parts:

    1. The Commission shall maintain clear, consistent and fair procedures for operation and relationships with the public, – see above

    6. Community preferences for urban and urbanizing areas, which otherwise are consistent with the overall county policies, shall be given preferential consideration. – just like they have done in mckinleyville and cutten

    1. The County shall provide for the education of the public to motivate them to participate in the planning process. – like circulating the EIR over christmas and having workshops on valentines day.

    4. The time period from public input to adoption of the plans shall be minimized. – 13 years?

    and the big one:

    1. It is essential to the function of the democratic society that public policy shall be reflective of the needs of the citizenry as expressed by the citizens themselves.

    check it out.

    March 1, 2011 at 8:23 am


    Good Job! There is much in the current GP that has not even been enforced. (also known as Plan Option “D”)


    Non-Enforcement allows for “willfully malicious blindnesses” by public officials and public employees based upon political agendas that insider connections want to come to fruition, even though LOCAL OFFICIALS are violating the equal protection clauses of the Federal and State Constitutions. Many of the conspiracies from local political insiders were “PLANNED AND FRAMED” years ago in a pre-meditated and choreographed “set-up” to manipulate PAST or CURRENT responsibilities in order to create more FUTURE responsibilities so as to EXPAND THE OVER-REACH OF GUBBAMINT and then come back to claim evidence to that political topic or issue – even though the evidence was a laundering of PAST liabilities. This is FRAUD…….and to think how many suckers participate or have participated in the political insiders’ LOCAL schemes.

    RESPECT, TRUST and HONOR ARE very shallow these days in our communities. This is not good for society overall.


  80. Anonymous
    March 1, 2011 at 8:24 am

    Jeeze, this thread didn’t work out as planned did it?

    March 1, 2011 at 8:29 am

    This is another red herring by people who just don’t want an update, because they want to continue the good ole boys’ method of “my project gets approved and yours doesn’t.”

    Response: Not an Expert got that right!!!!! Local officials play God between applicants. If you are not a threat to the inside politicos agendas, then your o.k., but you’ll have to pay a bit. If you are despised, threatened by, feared, etc… because you know about the politico insiders’ b-s, then they’ll frack you over, play games, invent lies to put onto gubbamint documents to frame you, etc….. Ya see, stupid citizens allow this stuff due to the frauds of Government Code Sections. Those who understand, can navigate; those who don’t…..

    well, let us just say THEY get navigated, and bot does that ship sail!


  82. A-Nony-Mouse
    March 1, 2011 at 8:38 am

    Watch tonight as the Clown Council marches in lock-step (except Linda, the only aware one in the bunch) to try to tell the county how to run the GPU. Eureka has its own GP which is no sterling document itself. It’s another effort to stall or kill the GPU by the developer/money crowd. They are amazingly good at stalling things for their benefit. Just ask Rob.

  83. anadromous
    March 1, 2011 at 8:43 am

    As far as I see it, the main problem has been the time period. 13 years is indeed far too long to stretch out a process such as this. Much of the input that people gave in the last decade has been incorporated. But so much time has gone by it is difficult to see how the information was integrated.

    But there is a record: take a look at the comment letters throughout the years, and look at the language being considered – it is clear that diverse views are accounted for.

    Regardless of ways the process could have been better, the County has done a good job of putting forward a range of alternatives that reflect a wide range of perspectives in the County. Now it is up to our elected representatives to wade through it all to adopt a final plan that is reflective of the needs of the citizenry.

    It is not too late to weigh in and have your voice heard! We don’t need to wait for anyone to form our own citizen’s committees, or join up with groups that are already expressing their views on what we want our future to look like. And we certainly don’t need to put the GPU on hold in order to do so.

  84. Anonymous
    March 1, 2011 at 9:03 am

    Hear! Hear!

  85. Down the Road
    March 1, 2011 at 9:06 am

    What is being experienced here in Eureka is not the
    left or right wing of politics. It is government
    by a oligarchy. Sounded out it is similar to the
    name of Arkley. What is frightening is that Newman
    and Brady aren’t just ignorant, they are mean. For
    the first time in their lives they have a little
    power. That fits nicely with Tyson. All that is ugly
    is floating on the top now and I do include V. Bass. All but Linda will vote the way they are told.

  86. High Finance
    March 1, 2011 at 11:25 am

    YOU call THEM mean ?

    Your post is the very definition of mean spirited.

    If you were more informed you would realize how silly your charge of one person controlling everything is.

  87. Anonymous
    March 1, 2011 at 1:03 pm

    Follow the money!

  88. Eureka Resident
    March 1, 2011 at 1:51 pm

    If the “Citizen Advisory Councils” are anything like the GP hearings, Elements, workshops, board, council, and commission meetings, they too will be dominated by development community lobbyists demanding their “principally permitted right” to harvest public infrastructure for their next bubble.

    If we had a “community media” citizens might have an opportunity to understand the relationship between the development community’s control of local politics, and why our cities are falling under moratoriums; the lack of affordable housing and the poverty, drug abuse, and crime that results, the skyrocketing sewer bills, streets unsafe for cyclists, pedestrians or motorists, waste water flowing into neighborhoods and the bay with each heavy rain.

    Hell, I would have joined HUMCPR in a second if they were also demanding to have those low-impact lifestyle techniques and water carrying-capacity studies that they advocate for, codified.


    There is no balance in a plutocracy.

  89. skippy
    March 2, 2011 at 12:12 am

    skippy’s take:

    Tonight the Eureka City Council heard citizens voicing complaints that the County Planning Department ignores their concerns regarding the General Plan Update. The County Planning Department’s Martha Spencer gave comments disagreeing; The Home Builders Association and many others countered.

    The City Council voted 4-1 (Councilmember Atkins dissenting) authorizing Mayor Jager signing a letter to the County Board of Supervisors expressing Eureka’s concern about the General Plan Update– and requesting the GPU be placed on hold allowing formation of Citizen’s Advisory Committees making the process more inclusive.

    Councilmember Atkins was reasonable and smart in her dissenting response: the City has not only little jurisdiction in this County matter but additional GPU monies shouldn’t be wasted further by interfering. Madsen, however, was clearly in the popular majority along with fellow council members, hitting a home run with his proposal and overall citizens agreement. Mr. Newman noted this was an opportune time for such a proposal given new members on the County Board, the Planning Commission, and being coupled with tonight’s comments that the process should be more inclusive. Ms. Brady and Ciarabellini agreed.

  90. Anonymous
    March 2, 2011 at 1:49 am

    I usually appreciate your updates but was wondering why you neglected to mention that the majority of folks who spoke in favor of a more “inclusive” process are representatives of groups that want NO general plan update. Furthermore, the greedy gang of four that is HELP/HumCPR/HAR/NCHB are already present at every single GPU hearing saying the same thing over and over again.

  91. Anonymous
    March 2, 2011 at 1:51 am

    Why are they crying to halt the process? I would guess it is not “for the good of the people”.

  92. Anonymous
    March 2, 2011 at 2:39 am

    Certainly not for the good of the fish or other creatures either.

  93. Anonymous
    March 2, 2011 at 5:17 am

    “Hell, I would have joined HUMCPR in a second if they were also demanding to have those low-impact lifestyle techniques and water carrying-capacity studies that they advocate for, codified.”

    I suggest you take a look at the HunCPR website and read their newsletters. Thats exactly what they advocate. Oh and a seconds up, welcome friend and newest HumCPR member!

  94. Pura Vida
    March 2, 2011 at 8:50 am

    HumCPR pays lip service to codifying low-impact living while blatantly demanding that the Update be stopped. The Update does propose sustainable water practices (such as greywater and rainwater catchment/storage) and it promotes mindful development through planning and incentives. Healthy Humboldt remains committed to an Update that reflects the needs of current AND future residents (human and wild).

  95. skippy
    March 2, 2011 at 9:19 am

    Anonymous @ 1:49, you are correct. HELP and HumCPR were attending. So was Healthy Humboldt. NCHB was previously noted. Thank you for this overisght observation and complementary addition. Duly noted.

    The reason representatives of special interest groups weren’t specified is they didn’t always identify affiliation speaking as private individuals. Try as he might, skippy isn’t yet psychic knowing the players. He’s working on that and learning his chops. To note, the Times-Standard wasn’t inclusive of this observation, either.

    What was suspiciously noticeable was Councilmember Newman’s unusual coalition and affable demeanor with HumCPR outside of the camera view.

    Stalwart reporter Allison White penned more in today’s article, “Eureka to Recommend Citizen’s Committees for County’s General Plan” that can be found here.

  96. March 2, 2011 at 11:33 am

    you don’t have to be formally affiliated with a group to speak out at a public function or a meeting.
    The Brown act forbids closed meetings which determine
    common future.But a city can determine it’s Present and
    Future if it is MacKinleyville without being dominated by Eureka,Both are part of the County of
    Humboldt–a very diverse County–it even has a college
    and a university and a good transportation system
    Humboldt–That is why I moved here ….Raging Granny

  97. Bill HiFi Barnum
    March 2, 2011 at 4:20 pm

    Anonymous says:
    March 2, 2011 at 5:17 am

    I suggest you take a look at the HunCPR website and read their newsletters. Thats exactly what they advocate. Oh and a seconds up, welcome friend and newest HumCPR member!


    Is that anything like claiming you support affordable housing, while fighting inclusionary zoning and in-lieu fees that help accomplish it?

    I’ve attended most of the GP hearings and workshops, NEVER ONCE have I heard one of the HUMcpr folks advancing an ordinance codifying low-impact technology or water carrying capacity requirements for development.


  98. Not A Native
    March 2, 2011 at 4:31 pm

    HumCPR is very pragmatic. They support sustainable clearcutting. But then gee, the land looks pretty nice now, so its just common sense to think about having human habitation on it. Whatever the landowner thinks is best is also best for everyone else.

    Only problem is increasing the number of people who want the land. Eliminating funding for planned parenthood is a good start.

  99. Now hear this...
    April 5, 2011 at 5:16 am

    To all of you avid readers out there, and the author of this junk, I know that it is fun to pretend that you know all that there is to know in the world. How you all can see the truth so clearly while no one else can see through the smoke and mirrors in front of the masses is amaizing. But I submit this to you. The folks running this site are show-men, they make money, likely lots of it by writing and posting this rubish that you so enjoy. They don’t do it because it’s the truth. They do it because it’s what you in your drug-induced haze want to hear. All because you wish it were so doesn’t make it so. Now most of you have probqably stopped reading this because you don’t like the WHOLE truth, it’s far to bitter for you to swallow. That is why you are uninformed. To those you you still with me, my hat is off to you. Here is one more piece for you, rather than just reading something like this and forming your opnion on some very biased writing, try finding facts on your own. I promise that they won’t agree with what is posted at this site. remember, there is a reason these articles are on a blog and not a legitimate news site. Not because they are “right” but because they are so far off the mark that the vast majority would never buy this stuff.

  100. Walt
    April 5, 2011 at 6:36 am

    Oopsie! Missed our meds, didn’t we?

  101. Plain Jane
    April 5, 2011 at 7:12 am

    Several doses at least.

  102. April 5, 2011 at 7:35 am

    Somebody owes me a whole lotta back pay.

  103. Big Al
    April 5, 2011 at 7:44 am

    where do I click on your ads? isn’t that how you bloggers get rich?
    ( funny… my spell check wants to correct bloggers to floggers )

  104. April 5, 2011 at 8:13 am

    Oh no, we get rich from skimming off the top of the piles of money made by environmentalists.

  105. You bit!
    April 5, 2011 at 8:16 am

    Nice side-stepping. And to Heraldo, don’t pretend that you aren’t working some angle to get paid. I admire your wit, but you aren’t doing this out of good will alone. Mr. Al, no ads I admit, but you would be using poor judgement to assume that there is not some plan to gain profit from this in some way. Everyone is, after all, human. Yet another thing to mention, only two people bothered to respond directly to something actually mentioned in what I wrote, and two just slung insults like children, %50. Oh, I am sorry for misspellings, but I am crunched for time. Have a good morning.

  106. April 5, 2011 at 8:25 am

    You wrote “they make money, likely lots of it” and then said you were writing the “WHOLE truth.”

    Wrong on both counts.

  107. Plain Jane
    April 5, 2011 at 8:29 am

    You bit! is obviously projecting his sociopathy. Only sociopaths are motivated solely by personal gain and believe everyone else is as well.

  108. wrong again
    April 5, 2011 at 9:15 am

    Hence likely, and I still don’t believe that you stand to gain nothing. And I wouldn’t expect you to admit to the WHOLE truth, it’s just not in your nature. You aren’t gaining fame by telling anything but biased slander. A point, might I add, that you have yet to contest. Plane Jane, grow up.

  109. Plain Jane
    April 5, 2011 at 9:40 am

    OUCH! Sociopaths can rarely recognize their own mental illness because they think everyone is just like they are. They are incapable of altruism or love of their community so they ascribe their own base motives to the actions of others.

  110. April 5, 2011 at 9:43 am

    Well I might as well admit it. The Humboldt Herald has made me rich beyond my wildest dreams. There. Now you know.

  111. Plain Jane
    April 5, 2011 at 9:47 am

    I knew there was something wildly attractive about you, H.

  112. April 5, 2011 at 9:48 am

    I’m rich and humble. It’s true.

  113. Mitch
    April 5, 2011 at 10:05 am

    Congratulations, Heraldo. Monetizing the site and hiding the ads was a stroke of genius.

    Let’s hope the advertisers never check.

  114. skippy
    April 5, 2011 at 10:29 am

    Yours truly was suspicious. This is more than a conspiracy. It’s an evil cabal with implanted RFD chips destroying the world using clones, money, advertising, and subliminally subversive thoughts. Cyborgs. H is the mothership. Thank you for bringing this to my attention.

  115. Wow
    April 5, 2011 at 11:42 am

    Stalling anyone? Nothing like some 5th grade sarcasm is your fall-back but nothing more can be expected from someone like you. Funny how you and your readers resort to it so much. So far, Mr. Herald (I call you that because I don’t know if that’s your first or last name, no offense)you are the only one to avoid slinging insults. It speaks more to the readers of this web site than I ever could. But of all the things I wrote about, you only contest being “rich”, a charge I never brought against you. Just that you likely stand something to gain from all of this. You never once said in this whole little discussion that you are doing this for the good of the masses. So what does a show-man like you stand to gain by writing this stuff?

  116. Wow
    April 5, 2011 at 11:44 am

    Oh, I am sorry but I must be off now. We may meet again sometime. Write your rebuttle, and may your fans call me all the names they want. I won’t be here to read them. I just like mixing things up a bit. Have a wonderful day.

  117. Library poster
    April 5, 2011 at 12:08 pm

    The whole H crew is either homeless or living on welfare and disability. The anonymous library posters. This is the only power they have, don’t try to take it away or they will steal everything out of your shopping cart. They know where you live….behind the Bayshore mall.

  118. Mitch
    April 5, 2011 at 12:41 pm

    To those wondering how the Herald supports itself, just go to the “Donate” button during pledge month.

    It does sadden me that such a large percentage of the donations is wasted on alcohol, wild parties, and vacations in sunny Cuba.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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