Home > Coastal Commission, Mark Lovelace > Petition to support Lovelace for Coastal Commission

Petition to support Lovelace for Coastal Commission

Supporters of the nomination of Humboldt County Supervisor Mark Lovelace to the California Coastal Commission can sign a petition that will be given to the Supervisors ahead of their March 22nd vote.

Governor Jerry Brown will make the final decision but Supervisors will forward their nominations to Brown by April 10th.

Petition text:

To the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors

Mark Lovelace is uniquely qualified to represent the North Coast Region on the Coastal Commission.

As County Supervisor Mark has established himself as a leader on important statewide issues. He serves on the CSAC Board of Directors and co-chairs CSAC’s Coastal Counties Regional Association and the Medical Marijuana Working Group, as well as being actively involved in CSAC’s State Budget Reform Taskforce and the CSAC/RCRC Williamson Act Working Group. Mark was recently chosen to serve on the West Coast task force for developing study and monitoring protocols for offshore wind, wave and tidal energy projects.

Prior to being elected, Mark worked for many years as an advocate on important local land use, development and environmental issues. He brings more than 10 years experience working with a long list of State and Federal agencies, and understands complex regulatory issues. He has the ability to work through mountains of documents and distill them down to their most significant points. He is objective and thorough in his research and consistently reaches well-thought-out conclusions based upon data.

I encourage you to nominate Mark Lovelace as the North Coast Region representative to the California Coastal Commission.

[Your name]

Sign here.

  1. Progressive Democrat
    March 19, 2011 at 9:46 am

    I like Mark but think he is still a little wet behind the ears. This advocacy work, who was it with, what did it produce?
    Is a first term supervisor experienced enough to serve on an important statewide committee? Is hubris no longer a flaw? This would apply to both supervisors seeking the position.
    Where is the no recommendation petition?

  2. March 19, 2011 at 10:00 am

    Is he still getting paid to support “Infill” ? This is the man who attended all those meetings pretending to be ‘just another concerned citizen’ – come to find out he was being paid to be there and to promote a particular agenda.

    He is willing to distort and lie to promote his agenda as he did during the TPZ debacle. he knows the facts and chooses to misrepresent them.

    That is NOT the kind of person you want on the Coastal Commission. He is not unbiased. He is distinctly biased and beholden, and makes his decisions based on the strings that bind him.

    It’s too bad – he has some good points – one of the few that reads his packet and groks the issues. But he cannot be trusted.

    The Coastal Commission is not supposed to be a private PAC/special interest group.

  3. Ed
    March 19, 2011 at 10:04 am

    Don’t worry Rose, Jerry ignored Paul too.

  4. Anonymous
    March 19, 2011 at 10:08 am

    “The Coastal Commission is not supposed to be a private PAC/special interest group.”

    Who in local politics has NO connection to any “private PAC or special interest group”?

  5. Anonymous
    March 19, 2011 at 10:12 am

    For that matter is there anyone, including Rose, even interested in local politics that has NO connection to any “private PAC or special interest group”?

  6. Plain Jane
    March 19, 2011 at 10:12 am

    The very idea that someone with a pro-coast protection bias would have the audacity to apply for appointment to a commission whose responsibility is protecting the coast should have everyone up in arms. The unmitigated gall of some people! How DARE he! Everyone has to know, if they are honest, that the only people capable of protecting the coast are developers’ and / or their puppets.

  7. Anonymous
    March 19, 2011 at 10:13 am

    I’m with progressive dem on this one. No is my recommendation. Mark is too huge of a disappointment.

  8. Plain Jane
    March 19, 2011 at 10:25 am

    So who would 10:13 or Prog Dem like to see get the appointment?

  9. Ponder z
    March 19, 2011 at 10:28 am

    PJ, you are so extreme. Of course we want protection of our coast, ocean, and fisheries. But we don’t need any more ecofreak ideas that penalize the citizen. It should not take five years to get an approval to build one home on a parcel. That is bureaucratic bullshit we are out to prevent. Of course all subdivisions should come under scrutiny. But the CCC imposing and collecting fines is unacceptable. Too much government control. Too much bureaucracy. Five years and $24000 is ridiculous. Do you even have a clue.

  10. Andrew Bird
    March 19, 2011 at 11:13 am

    I intend to sign the petition in support of Mark Lovelace’s appointment to the Coastal Commission.

  11. Plain Jane
    March 19, 2011 at 11:29 am

    If it’s extreme to think members of a commission should believe in the mission of the commission, color me an extremist. But then I don’t understand why people elect anti-government politicians to run government, and THEN express astonishment that things are only getting worse.

  12. Ponder more, Z
    March 19, 2011 at 12:42 pm

    Do you think the role of regulatory agencies is to approve every proposed action? Is it possible the proposed action is illegal?

  13. Not A Native
    March 19, 2011 at 12:46 pm

    I think Mark is qualified and since he’s interested, the supes should include him in their recommendation. Don’t know if I’d say he’s the best qualified, first gotta see who the other candidates are. Wheatley is also qualified IMO, but he’s not available.

  14. SNaFU
    March 19, 2011 at 1:13 pm

    Mark Got a PhD in tree hugging at UG
    (University of Garbervile)

  15. Anonymous
    March 19, 2011 at 1:17 pm

    I received my planning permit (including variance) and building permit in about 3 months after submitting. Am I the exception to the rule PonderZ?

    March 19, 2011 at 2:08 pm

    Anonymous says:
    March 19, 2011 at 10:12 am
    For that matter is there anyone, including Rose, even interested in local politics that has NO connection to any “private PAC or special interest group”?

    Response: Yes, following the money trail if you can find it seems to be the mantraesque obstacle. Hmmm, maybe doing background checks and research during the time to vote, etc….. Not everyone is untrustworthy, but the trustworthy seem to gt ripped alot and called a bunch of names too, so it is understandable at times the confusion voters have, but still, research is necessary. Too many people are naive and apathetic which shows the disinterest. So, it is equally troubling that all-of-a-sudden, people now want to “rise-up” and criticize. In this situation, better late than never though.

    Jeffrey Lytle
    McKinleyville – 5th District

  17. March 19, 2011 at 2:22 pm

    “He is willing to distort and lie to promote his agenda…”

    Rose knows a lot about distorting and lying, but she lacks credentials as a character witness.

  18. Goldie
    March 19, 2011 at 5:02 pm

    A few more signatures needed to reach 200… by the way, love the spinner here… I like Mark but I saw him talking nasty to a tree, he’s a good guy and all but his car is the wrong color and really he has not been in office that long to make a mess of his desk and he could not create hundred dollar fares to San Francisco from the air port. Progressive Dem in a Fox’s clothing. Nice tie.

  19. Andrew Bird
    March 19, 2011 at 5:42 pm

    Hilarious, Goldie. Thanks.

  20. March 19, 2011 at 7:23 pm

    That old ‘tree-hugger’ managed to EXPAND the Arcata Community Forest, a woking forest that produces sustainable logs and jobs. Imagine that! Mark is the best candidate by far. Now imagine Know Nothing Bass who did not have a clue about even the critical General Plan Update. Now that’s FUNNY!

  21. Steak n Eggs
    March 19, 2011 at 7:56 pm

    Bet this guy didn’t sign the petition. LOL


  22. Anonymous
    March 19, 2011 at 9:39 pm

    Are you kidding me? Give me a break, you want this
    tree hugger deciding coastal issues. Has he ever
    held a real job?

  23. March 19, 2011 at 10:16 pm

    Well, there’s a comment straight from 1990.

  24. Prog Dem
  25. Plain Jane
    March 20, 2011 at 7:21 am

    What exactly in those links do you think makes the case that she would make a good CCC appointee, Prog Dem? She sounds like a fine person, a Democrat who supports same sex marriage, husband a contractor, she pushed to partly privatize their garbage transfer, supported Thompson’s wilderness bill on the proviso that it didn’t significantly change anything; but I didn’t see a single mention of her having any experience with coastal issues. You seem to have a low bar for anyone but Mark. Funny.

  26. Anonymous
    March 20, 2011 at 8:17 am

    Do you know where crescent city is PJ?

  27. Plain Jane
    March 20, 2011 at 8:20 am

    Duh, no, Anonymous. WTF does that have to do with qualifications? Do you think everyone who lives in CC is qualified?

  28. Anonymous
    March 20, 2011 at 10:04 am

    Plain Jane: melting down in the same old rant. You need new material.

  29. Miss the Mark
    March 20, 2011 at 3:34 pm

    Lovelace is very short on work experience. Healthy Humboldt and the Watershed Council. Weak. He does his homework and is fairly good at holding his own against hostile forces. All in all, I’d rather see it go to Marsha. She is experienced and I don’t get the impression she’s in it for her ego. Mark should do the supervisor job he was elected to do and stop his ambitious climbing.

  30. March 20, 2011 at 4:30 pm

    Only elected officials are eligible for the Coastal Commission seat. Whoever gets the nod will have to “do the job they were elected to do” and the CCC.

  31. Miss the Mark
    March 20, 2011 at 4:43 pm

    Correct, Heraldo. Marsha is in her 3rd term. She isn’t wet behind the ears, which Prog Dem pointed out is one of Mark’s problems. She can handle the extra load. Mark has yet to prove he can carry the load he already has taken on.

  32. March 20, 2011 at 4:52 pm

    Give us an example. Don’t rely on empty terms like “wet behind the ears.”

  33. Miss the Mark
    March 20, 2011 at 5:07 pm

    surprised you need that term defined, Heraldo
    wet behind the ears means Inexperienced; not seasoned; new; just beginning. All apply to Mark. Like I said, he has yet to prove himself.

  34. March 20, 2011 at 6:28 pm

    I asked you to give an example, not define the term. Apparently you can’t.

    Mark has proven to be a capable Supervisor, always prepared and able to juggle the various boards and commissions he serves on. He would handle the Coastal Commission with equal proficiency.

  35. Mike Buettner
    March 20, 2011 at 6:30 pm

    “Mark has proven to be a capable Supervisor, always prepared and able to juggle the various boards and commissions he serves on. He would handle the Coastal Commission with equal proficiency.”


  36. anadromous
    March 20, 2011 at 6:39 pm

    “Indeed” agreed.

  37. Miss the Mark
    March 20, 2011 at 7:40 pm

    Heraldo(a) (or one of her stand-ins),
    “Give us an example” is a bad question. Give an example of how he is wet behind the ears? He has yet to serve half a term and has done little so far. Give an example of why he is not the best choice? Because he has yet to prove himself. Unlike you. Give yourself a break and don’t beat the dead horse anymore. Let Mark continue as supervisor, good or bad. Let him accumulate experience and and then we can judge. He might get appointed some other time, when his ears dry.

  38. March 20, 2011 at 7:44 pm

    He might get appointed this time. He certainly has support.

  39. Not A Native
    March 20, 2011 at 7:58 pm

    Experience is just one qualification. Clearly, no new appointee will have direct experience being a Commissioner. Still, I’d say experience is Mark’s weak suit. Knowledge and ability are his strong suits. IMO, Mark is qualified and should be considered by Brown.

  40. first-hand knowledge
    March 20, 2011 at 10:33 pm

    Mark is bright, hard working, and able to master remarkable volumes of detail around complex issues. He has an exceptional understanding of law as a layman, as a (former) advocate, and now as a representative of his constituency with legislative responsibilities.

    He will be prepared and well informed on the facts and issues that come before the Coastal Commission, and he will follow the law!

    Commissioner Lovelace will be a grreat asset to the state of California and the legacy we leave our kids.

  41. Thirdeye
    March 21, 2011 at 1:29 am

    On matters of law, Lovelace can regurgitate a lot of detailed information but seems to have a weak grasp of overall intent and thrust. It seems to be some combination of not seeing the forest for the trees and cherry picking law for preconceived ideas. His grasp of NEPA/CEQUA is weak for someone who seeks to administer it, and his perspective on such is that of someone mainly interested in using their process as an advocate’s blocking tool. Stillman shares some of that same trait.

    What makes anyone think the HCAOG City Selection Committee will have a change of heart on Lovelace?

    Zanzi still seems head and shoulders above anyone whose name has come up so far. If anyone thinks Fortuna should be ineligible, the CC claimed jurisdiction right through Fortuna with the 101 median project.

  42. Plain Jane
    March 21, 2011 at 8:07 am

    You should read more carefully before you post, Thirdeye. This petition has absolutely nothing to do with the city and their selection committee. This is about sending a petition to the Board of Supervisor and nothing to do with the city. Your comprehension problems make your opinions of Lovelace’s comprehension skills less than credible.

  43. Dave Kirby
    March 21, 2011 at 10:41 am

    It seems to me the only areas that have even considered “big box” development are the cities of Eureka and Fortuna. Mark has already shown his hand as anti big box or at least anti Arkley big box. Those of us in the outlying area who resent the north county elitists telling us what our shopping options should be would support a commission member with an open mind. We really don’t need Neely II. I think the voters have shown that. I would support a commission member who comes from either Fortuna or Eureka as they will represent ground zero for any significant commercial development.

  44. skippy
    March 21, 2011 at 11:22 am

    “… After a somewhat tumultuous process late last year, the board made efforts to make the process clear and open… Gov. Jerry Brown is requesting the nomination of at least one supervisor and at least one city council member from Del Norte, Humboldt or Mendocino counties for appointment… “

    Here is the link for today’s Times-Standard article by Donna Tam,
    “Supervisors to Consider Coastal Commission Nominees Again”

    The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors will be meeting on this Coastal Commission matter 9am Tuesday, March 22, in the Supervisors Chamber, first floor of the Humboldt County Courthouse, 825 5th Street.

    The complete meeting agenda and supporting documents of the BOS meeting and Coastal Commission nomination considerations is found at:

    What Skippy would like report to readers is this: The above Board link takes you to the meeting agenda and item F1, “Matters Initiated by Board Members: Consider Nominations for the CCC North Coast Regional Representative (Supervisor Clendenen).” Contained within are the documents to the official ‘Letters and Resumes’ of Mark Lovelace, Ken Zanzi, Supervisor Bass, and Supervisor Kendall Smith (Mendocino County) listing their specific detailed qualifications and experience for the position and your informative review and assessment.

    All candidates have put their best foot– and feats–forward.

    In other matters of this meeting, the Board of Supervisors will also discuss the 2010 Code Enforcement Unit Annual Report and hear a presentation on local ‘economic and statistical indicators.’ At the 1:30pm afternoon session, the Board and public will have an update on our post-tsunami information and activities.

  45. Random Guy
    March 21, 2011 at 12:15 pm

    “He is willing to distort and lie to promote his agenda as he did during the TPZ debacle. he knows the facts and chooses to misrepresent them.

    That is NOT the kind of person you want on the Coastal Commission. He is not unbiased. He is distinctly biased and beholden, and makes his decisions based on the strings that bind him.”

    …and which politicos do you support, again? Really Rose whatever your last name is…are you for real? How can you possibly write something like that without seeing your own glaring double standard? Will you reply sincerely? Sometimes I think 9 out of 10 posters are fake.

  46. Random Guy
    March 21, 2011 at 12:16 pm

    FYI I’ve read all this and still don’t know what to think of the guy. Abstaining.

  47. skippy
    March 21, 2011 at 1:45 pm

    Understandably given, RG.

    Yours truly encourages all to review each nominee’s direct and specific qualifications that my 11:22 post mentioned, found on the BOS agenda site for March 22, item F1, and clicking on the item for the supporting PDF/TIF ‘Letter and Resume’ documents.

    You can determine a knowledgable opinion above the chatter, noise, and favorite naysay or hearsay of others.

    These are the very same documents our Governor will be evaluating for the Coastal Commission nod.

    You can find these by clicking on on item F1 of the BOS agenda easily located here

    or here:

  48. Plain Jane
    March 21, 2011 at 2:01 pm

    Virginia gets a point for not actually claiming responsibility for the projects “brought to fruition” during her tenure on the council. But she failed to demonstrate that she met the one qualification mentioned in the letter from the governor’s office, “Candidates for consideration should be officials committed to and knowledgeable about coastal preservation and conservation.”

  49. Anonymous
    March 21, 2011 at 4:33 pm

    Virginia had been elected to office 4 times. Mark once. He will be gone in 2 years. Better to let Bass be in that seat now instead of having to do this over in two years.

  50. Not A Native
    March 21, 2011 at 5:02 pm

    Looking over those applications, I’d say that Lovelace and Zanzi are qualified, Bass and Kendall Smith are not.

    Since Brown has already rejected Zanzi’s apointment, ovelace is the sole person on that list both qualified and likely to be appointed.

  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