GPU live blog

Follow along with today’s battle for the Humboldt County General Plan Update (GPU) as we live blog the hearing at the Board of Supervisors. Notes and commentary will be posted in the comments section. The meeting starts at 1:30pm.

Briefly, the developer/Realtor sector wants to stop the decade-long process so that Community Advisory Committees (CACs) can be formed.

Others say such a drastic move is unnecessary because advisory committees already exist and have had substantial influence on the process.

Here’s the staff report.  The meeting can be watched on channel 10 or streamed here.

Hank Sims at the Lost Coast Outpost will also live blog the blessed event.

  1. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 1:18 pm

    Blog lingo always talks of the proverbial 800 lb. gorilla in the room…the weight of an issue that goes ignored because nobody’s bringing attention to it…or in this case distracting from it. What are the current codes, regulations, etc. in effect that developers are taking advantage of RIGHT NOW, and have been over the past decade? To suddenly want to stall the process even further and continue their business as usual? Committees for public input my ass…stall and commercialize. DO YOUR JOBS! Didn’t you know this before WE hired YOU?!?! Ridiculous! They should be laughed out of office!

  2. Dancing
    April 12, 2011 at 1:21 pm

    Check any concept of journalistic integrity at the door Heraldo?

    Let me guess, this will be a biased piece of crap like your usual live commentary? Those with opposing opinions will be “trolls” and your cronies will be righteous dudes.

  3. April 12, 2011 at 1:32 pm

    You seem very upset by this live blog business, Dancing.

  4. April 12, 2011 at 1:33 pm

    Ladies and Gents! The meeting has started! first up, the weekly public comment portion of the meeting.

    The house is packed.

  5. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 1:42 pm

    The obvious shills in the room should all be addressed with the title “Real Estate Commissioner” or something.

    “After a word from Real Estate Commissioner Sundberg, we’ll hear an opinion from Real Estate Commissioner Bass…”

  6. April 12, 2011 at 1:51 pm

    It’s still public comment for items not on the agenda but some speakers are talking about the upcoming agenda item. Also on display: anger.

  7. Eric Kirk
    April 12, 2011 at 1:53 pm

    Already speakers are violating the rules, presumably to get two spots on the batting order. These “off agenda” items are all about the GPU.

  8. April 12, 2011 at 1:56 pm

    Not only angry, but apparently too stupid to understand the difference between an agenda item and a non-agenda item.

  9. April 12, 2011 at 1:57 pm

    Ok, opening the hearing now.

  10. Eric Kirk
    April 12, 2011 at 1:58 pm

    Okay, why are people who are at the meeting to complain about violations of the process violating the process? Several of the speakers on the non-agenda item speaking list (ie., not about the GPU) are speaking about the GPU, presumably to get two spots in the batting order. One woman was asked to stop and would “change” the subject to something else about the GPU. Doesn’t reflect well.

  11. April 12, 2011 at 1:58 pm

    Kirk Girard: here with Martha Spencer, senior planner. We’re here in response to the letters from various groups and municipalities. Input is important, their views should be reflected in the GPU. They say public participation is inadequate, which is troubling since we set out to be inclusive.

  12. April 12, 2011 at 1:59 pm

    Will give presentation and then recommendations.

  13. April 12, 2011 at 2:03 pm

    Girard: we know there is controversy surrounding the GPU. Inevitable when there are so many different views.

    Conflict can strengthen the process. Want all viewpoints included in the discussion.

    Section 1500. Does it require us to uses CACs to update the General Plan?

    “The planning process…must provide for the education of the public. Armed with knowledge of the process, the citizen can have meaningful access to the decision makers, evaluate alt proposals, and make specific recommendations “

  14. April 12, 2011 at 2:04 pm

    Girard continuing to read through section 1500.

  15. April 12, 2011 at 2:08 pm

    There are 18 community plans. This GPU is not updating community plans.

  16. April 12, 2011 at 2:09 pm

    Girard: This GPU recognize that we have very unique communities.

  17. April 12, 2011 at 2:12 pm

    Girard: Have gone through great pains to catalog the input and staffs response to it.

  18. April 12, 2011 at 2:15 pm

    Martha Spencer: Multiple phases starting in 2000. Critical Choices phase, 2000-2001. Seven meetings in Trinidad, Eureka, Shelter Cove, elsewhere. Multiple diverse groups were met with. Established the website. Put out GPU newsletter (5,000 copies). Over 1200 participated in this phase.

  19. April 12, 2011 at 2:17 pm

    Spencer: Phase II: Technical Background studies. Held PC/BOS Multiple meetings with stakeholders/Agencies/Tribes, cities and Community Service Districts.

  20. April 12, 2011 at 2:19 pm

    Spencer: Phase III: Sketch Plans and draft policies. Visioning exercise, 5 community workshops, met with tribes, cities, service districts. Put out 2nd newsletter.

  21. April 12, 2011 at 2:21 pm

    Spencer: Land Use maps. Went to different communities for this phase. Met with Realtors, builders, farm bureau, tribes, cities and community service districts. Put them on the website. Photos of meeting in Petrolia. Big maps on the wall so people could see their properties and ask questions. Went through each one of the watersheds. Discussed infrastructure. Took that info and developed Administrative draft plan.

  22. April 12, 2011 at 2:22 pm

    Spencer: Administrative Hearing Draft released in 2007: continued PC/BOS hearings, community meetings. 14 meetings. Responded to every single verbal and written comment. Developed “Response to comments” on the website. 258 verbal and 216 written comments.

  23. Eric Kirk
    April 12, 2011 at 2:26 pm

    But no CAC’s which would generate reports Heraldo. It is a glaring omission, even though the wording only says “should be created.” These committees would have direct communication with the Commission. As much as I believe this is being exploited cynically, nothing Kirk or Martha has said so far mitigates this huge omission.

  24. April 12, 2011 at 2:26 pm

    Spencer: 800 people on email notice. in current phase have received 619 verbal and 322 written comments. No longer responding to every comment, giving it to PC so they can deliberate.

    Where we are: PC going through the review process. They get a report from staff, we say what we think are key issues. They id their key issues. Making good time.

  25. April 12, 2011 at 2:27 pm

    Hope to have review draft by the end of the year. Expanded PC meetings, which now start at 5pm rather than 6pm.

  26. April 12, 2011 at 2:28 pm

    Eric, some groups have generated reports. The Find Our Lots group certainly has. HumCPR is another.

  27. Eric Kirk
    April 12, 2011 at 2:29 pm

    I also don’t buy that it doesn’t apply to a GPU. That makes no sense to me, although I do agree that the wording is ambiguous.

  28. April 12, 2011 at 2:29 pm

    Girard: if you look at graph that shows what we’ve been doing it shows that cities and service districts have not been involved in recent years.

  29. April 12, 2011 at 2:31 pm

    Proposed Public Outreach Process. Send letters to all mayors and request agenda item for their Councils and Districts. Provide staff report on GPU. Share proposed map changes around their communities and explain how next step in GPU will go.

  30. Eric Kirk
    April 12, 2011 at 2:33 pm

    But Heraldo, those aren’t committees created from a cross-section of the community. Those are interest groups, and we can all predict what they generate ahead of time. What should have been done was to put representatives of each of these groups onto a committee with direct communication with the Commission. And it’s hard to avoid the suspicion that they did it so as to not muddy up waters so that a particular agenda could be shoved through. Mind you, I don’t believe that’s the case. I think they just wanted to streamline the process (which didn’t work so well in the long run), but it looks suspicious.

  31. April 12, 2011 at 2:33 pm

    The Second Outreach Program would allow public to speak directly to BOS about the Update. Then hold community mtgs. in August and October. We did map meetings in 2006, want to do it again.

    In Dec. 2011, publish and distribute PC recommendations.

  32. Eric Kirk
    April 12, 2011 at 2:35 pm

    Let me just add, that the planners do deserve credit for what they have done, and they have an impossible job given the polarization in this community. But they really should have read 1500 more closely. If it comes to a Court case, Peter Childs will be a valid witness as one of the drafters.

  33. April 12, 2011 at 2:36 pm

    Girard: Citizens can weigh in on every policy. the EIR will be built on PC recommended alternative. We think before you see that package that you should hear what people think about those alternatives. Hold a series of town hall style meetings so you can hear from those in your districts.

  34. Anonymous
    April 12, 2011 at 2:37 pm

    “if you look at graph that shows what we’ve been doing it shows that cities and service districts have not been involved in recent years.”

    Why can’t the city or district take some responsibility for themselves? They could be commenting at ant time like anyone else, and they have the staff to do it. Sounds like making excuses to me.

  35. April 12, 2011 at 2:38 pm

    Mark Lovelace: let’s have some initial BOS comments and then get into public comments.

    Jimmy Smith: Kirk said this item is in response to the letters. We have some Planning Commission members here, thanks for your work.

    Happy that we’re going to back out for outreach meetings. There’s been a lapse of time since we did that.

  36. Anonymous
    April 12, 2011 at 2:39 pm

    “If it comes to a Court case, Peter Childs will be a valid witness as one of the drafters.”

    What was the democratic process that drafted Section 1500?

  37. April 12, 2011 at 2:42 pm

    Smith: a lot of diverse individuals. I’ve received a lot of feedback from my constituents, many here today. Want to revisit the second unit standards to incorporate into multi-family needs.

    Also want commercial and multi-family overlap zoning to increase inventory range. Could accommodate more housing.

    Also we need to talk to the Tribes. Their employee housing is going to be a big part of this.

    Always essential to talk to cities and special districts, see how we can form partnerships.

    Want a select team to see where we can do better communication on elements or various issues. Happy with staff recommendation.

  38. April 12, 2011 at 2:44 pm

    Sundberg: Agree with Jimmy. Some plans can be completed without so much animosity and divisiveness.

  39. April 12, 2011 at 2:45 pm

    Bass: Totally agree on the communication. Smith is right that the city worked with the county, but our input wasn’t acted upon.

  40. April 12, 2011 at 2:47 pm

    Opening public comment.

  41. Eric Kirk
    April 12, 2011 at 2:48 pm

    Virginia – “I’m not interested in stopping the process.”

    Based on that and Jimmy’s comments, I don’t think the letters are going to manifest into a motion. Not one that passes anyway.

  42. April 12, 2011 at 2:48 pm

    Cities and CSDs invited to speak first.

  43. April 12, 2011 at 2:50 pm

    Eureka City Councilwoman Marian Brady: Eureka has submitted many letters on the GPU re infrastructure and land use. Many focused on Forster-Gill. County has not been responsive. Creating a parallel plan with the GPU by FG plan. The answer might not be committees. The city would like to work together with county. Halt the plan why we do this.

  44. Eric Kirk
    April 12, 2011 at 2:52 pm

    Brady – “We don’t like Forster-Gill.”

  45. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 2:53 pm

    HAHAHA!!! sundberg, agreeing that overlapping commercial and multi-family zones is a good thing? And that these plans can be completed “without so much animosity and divisiveness”? Noooo…not him, he cares about our comfort of living, not real estate and construction (and insurance) profits…

    In no uncertain terms, he’s saying “we want to pack ’em in, you should agree with us more and disagree with us less.”

  46. April 12, 2011 at 2:53 pm

    Ellen Edwards, MCSD: Have sent letters, met with our Supervisor. The Planning Dept. has made great effort to have meetings, but we were included with Trinidad. Had to request one be held in McKinleyville. Our alternatives are ignored. People have worked hard on the Mck plan. It’s hard for the MCSD to do long range planning when the plan is undecipherable or we haven’t been included. Please adhere to the Mck community Plan.

  47. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 2:54 pm

    “animosity and divisiveness” fuggin-a. That’s why I can’t go to these things, I wouldn’t be able to keep my cool. No tollerance for people throwing bullshit at everybody, no matter how well mannered they are about it.

  48. April 12, 2011 at 2:54 pm

    Greg Elleston, Redway. My place was redtagged. This is triple down force from the top. Have 4 acres and 1 acre I live on. 5 parcels within 1000 feet have been tagged. You want to add people and the water cant’ take it. too many people in one spot.

  49. April 12, 2011 at 2:58 pm

    Ronnie Pellegrini, Commissioner on HBHRCD, but speaking as individual. Communication between our boards could have been better, especially about shipping. Need long-term shoal mgt. and bay entrance maintenance. Humboldt Bay Management Plan should be referenced in the GPU. More outreach is important.

  50. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 2:59 pm

    Go Greg! Remind Sundberg he’s creating NEW s.ewer lines galore…”multi-family” zones, and unecessary commercial development despite the downward slope of what exists. Who’s in favor of that???

  51. April 12, 2011 at 3:01 pm

    Sue Long, City of Fortuna: Fortuna requested the GPU be put on hold. Need to get up to speed on county GPU. Dealt with our own GPU for last 5 years, were remiss to pay attention at county level. Our council is concerned and wants to get involved. Want to be part of CAC groups. Have a new council since the last time anyone from county came to Fortuna City council. Put it on hold.

  52. April 12, 2011 at 3:03 pm

    Mike Newman: to really have a listening ear, heard from our planners that we need to have an honest dialog. Forester-Gill is circumventing the Eureka General Plan. Many things need to be talked about, especially traffic. No mitigation has been implemented. The Eureka Community Plan is more aligned with Alt. C. Need open and honest and dialogue. We’re urging a hold on the GPU. Want compromise.

  53. April 12, 2011 at 3:05 pm

    ED of Garberville Chamber of Commerce: Put the update process on hold. Process long and confusing. Reading stock letter language submitted by various cities.

  54. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 3:06 pm

    uh…this chick doesn’t speak for anybody I know in Garberville. What’s with all these repeating buzzwords “inclusive” “compromise”…bla bla bla…politospeak, all referencing the same sources.

  55. April 12, 2011 at 3:09 pm

    Dennis Mayo: Lovelace said he was working in Sac on Governors plan and talked of the importance of having a seat at the table. MCSD has continually tried to get a working dialog going with the county. When I was on the PC I never got upset(!). Some people get frustrated, it happens to me, too. We have all this talent, the staff is the most talented people in the world.

  56. April 12, 2011 at 3:11 pm

    Al Bongio, Humboldt CSD: our input hasn’t been taken seriously. We need CACs. They must be independent of county staff.

  57. Mark Sailors
    April 12, 2011 at 3:11 pm

    Define “should” and define “shall”.

  58. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 3:12 pm

    FUckit…this whole thing is depressing. Not with a bang, but a long drawn out whimper with the rich getting richer and the poor being told to put up AND shut up…

  59. April 12, 2011 at 3:15 pm

    Mary Gearhardt, Humboldt Planning commission chairwoman: Commissoner for parks and rec in late 70’s, various other committees…. The idea that you are going to get a lot more input from CACs is unlikely. Been on he PC since 1994. Current GP is broken and outdated. Horribly outdated.

  60. April 12, 2011 at 3:18 pm

    David Elsebusch: Members of the public shouldn’t be given less importance than elected officials. thought we were here about CACs. Community or Citizen? They should be citizens. do NOT want anyone from the MCSD or it’s GM to be involved. They want to pretend they are a city rather than a CSD.

  61. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 3:20 pm

    David Elsebusch has been the most sensible speaker so far.

  62. April 12, 2011 at 3:22 pm

    Penny Elsebusch: It’s hard to track changes to the documents. Changes are not indicated on documents. What did it change from? Are we clarifying it or making it worse? This document should be very very clear. Shouldn’t need much interpretation.

  63. April 12, 2011 at 3:24 pm

    Joyce King: have a letter from my neighborhood group (reads). Want GPU to reflect high level of beauty, cultural heritage, etc. Do not further delay the process. Put long term health of land and people first. Support staff’s recommendation. Make improvements without stopping process.

  64. April 12, 2011 at 3:27 pm

    Housing for All: oppose CACs. Probably wouldn’t get a plan for 5 years if we do that. Must have the Housing Element certified. Every group agrees it’s important. HumCPR put out ads that lied about number of housing units to scare people. Humboldt had the highest percentage of people paying over 30% of annual income for rent.

  65. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 3:29 pm

    This guy’s talking about poor people THAT DON’T LIVE HERE ALREADY. This needs to be addressed when talking about NEW “affordable housing” and “low income multi-family”…”units”. Most people in the county ARE low income. Muddled bla.

  66. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 3:30 pm

    nothing “confusing” about what’s physically appearing on our landscape, guy.

  67. April 12, 2011 at 3:31 pm

    Pat Higgins: speaking individually, don’t agree with MCSD letter asking for delay of the GPU. Call on you to give Mck its advisory committee. to claim the GPU has not been inclusive is just not true. Fear based arguments. People are here for their self interest, but you need to look at public good. Since 1984 many tributaries have gone underground, dogs can’t swim in the Eel. Our status in the eyes of the state could be diminished.

  68. April 12, 2011 at 3:33 pm

    John LeBoyteaux from Redcrest. Haven’t kept exact count but certain I’ve participated in at least 40 meetings. have provided testimony at least 20 times for North Coast Growers Assoc. the only money we’ve spent is for copies, all other work is volunteer. the A, B, C and D alternatives are available on the website. Any other group or association could have done what we’ve done in this process. Thanks for the support of ag.

  69. April 12, 2011 at 3:37 pm

    Dave Varshock: Girard said he didn’t have time to notify the CSDs of the drastic rezoning. Makes 20 second phone call to display how easy it is to make a call saying “We’re going to dump 20,000 low and very low income housing units on your community” to MCSD. Was on Find Our Lots team checking Humboldt for develop-able land. We told county there wasn’t the land for housing. Government failure is an insult.

  70. April 12, 2011 at 3:39 pm

    Blake Lehman, HumCPR. General Plan not built on strong foundation. didn’t start with communities involved. Now were talking about CAC’s. Should’ve happened at beginning. Don’t want CAC appointed by BOS, PC. Want Citizens Advisory Committee. Girard said special interest groups are spreading misinformation How are landowners special interest?

  71. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 3:39 pm

    why doesn’t this guy kindly remind us who, specifically, the plan hasn’t worked for…over the past decade???

  72. April 12, 2011 at 3:42 pm

    Kelly Walsh, Bayside. County shall provide public participation. Handbook has never been distributed. Girard said handbook was “not implemented.” The Planning Dept. has its own agenda. Put a stop to it. Let the citizens be active participants. Dan Torranto’s interpretation of 1500 different than Girards.

  73. April 12, 2011 at 3:45 pm

    Shane Brinton, Arcata City Council, speaking individually. Here to urge you to move forward, the effort to stall this process is political posturing by developers, segment of Real Estate industry, segment of marijuana industry involved with far-right property rights activists. Greedy people have a way of coming together about their interests. Now they’ve recruited their buddies on city councils and service districts. I’ve had plenty of opportunities to speak, as have others, and don’t need to stall the process. Don’t oppose staff’s proposal, but let’s not stall, let’s expedite the process.

  74. April 12, 2011 at 3:45 pm

    15 minute break.

  75. Eric Kirk
    April 12, 2011 at 3:48 pm

    You forgot the phrase “unholy alliance” in reference to marijuana growers and developers. Mano!

  76. April 12, 2011 at 3:50 pm

    Yes, that was Shane’s term for the special interests trying to stop the GPU.

  77. Eric Kirk
    April 12, 2011 at 3:53 pm

    I have to say that’s a brave, if perhaps brash, frame to make for an elected official in Humboldt County, even in Arcata.

  78. April 12, 2011 at 3:57 pm

    He was brave to say it surrounded the “unholy alliance.”

  79. April 12, 2011 at 4:01 pm

    27 more just signed up on speakers list.

  80. April 12, 2011 at 4:01 pm

    Hoping to adjurn no later than 6:00.

  81. Eric Kirk
    April 12, 2011 at 4:03 pm

    Shane is young, but he does have a touch for political framing, and it’s a frame that both the developer side and the homesteader side would like to avoid. I wonder if they’ll respond to it today. I think that would be imprudent. They should stay focused on their task at hand. Not that they need my advice.

    Scott coming up? What’s the tally today? I assumed that the advocates for a process halt would outnumber the opposition.

  82. April 12, 2011 at 4:05 pm

    Scott Greacen: Director of Friends of the Eel River. support protection of salmon. the failure to plan to accommodate the needs of nature have threatened Humboldt’s future. Nearly all surviving runs have been listed on under Endangered Species Act. Restoration and recovery won’t happen purely by voluntary measures. Too many straws in already depleted streams. rivers and fish in real trouble. Must complete real update to comply with state law.

  83. April 12, 2011 at 4:07 pm

    Natalynn DeLapp, speaking for EPIC: support continuation of GPU. Process has provided many opportunities for participation. Stopping threatens ecological and economic development in county. Nearly all watersheds are listed as impaired. County carries burden of liability because of out of date GP.

  84. April 12, 2011 at 4:08 pm

    Beth Werner, Humboldt Baykeeper. Move forward with GPU. already taken too long. Removing water resources element would impact other elements. GPU needs to address changes in impaired watershed and salmon listings.

  85. Anonymous
    April 12, 2011 at 4:09 pm

    That “framing” is the truth and has been for years.

  86. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 4:11 pm

    I disagree, Erik. There’s very clear actions that are being made regarding the physical construct of our county. There’s very clear ways money is being spent. The real pool of people that live in Humboldt ARE composed of differences in lifestyle and opinion, but agree on the facts of what we like about Humboldt, and what we don’t want it to become thanks to the obvious self interested parties. You might find it offensive of me to say, but you like to think it’s a big complicated mess as well. Clear, consice action can be made sooner than later that will benefit far more people in the long run. Ten years ago sooner.

  87. April 12, 2011 at 4:12 pm

    Jennifer Kalt of Healthy Humboldt. Formed in response to GPU. Various people of expertise to look over the issues in the GPU. Numerous ad hoc committees have formed and participated. committees have been truly effective. Such committees should continue to be encouraged. Support CACs but update should not be put on hold. Should the board support CACs they should be formed in the communities and not dominated by special interests who have already been involved for many many years. MCSD asked for low income housing to be used as infill. Anger is about the Housing Element which is on its own timeline.

  88. April 12, 2011 at 4:14 pm

    Dale Maples, Home Builders Association. Vested interest in affordable homes. It comes from sufficient supply. Who has time for all these meetings? # of meetings doesn’t not automatically deliver the right result. It depends on who’s involved. Pause the process, establish a new forum of advisory groups and include their recommendations.

  89. Eric Kirk
    April 12, 2011 at 4:14 pm

    RG – I do think it’s complex, but I don’t disagree with the thrust of your post. And while I think Shane could have toned down the rhetoric a little, the irony of the coalition is not lost upon me. I’ve been writing about it for a couple of years now.

  90. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 4:16 pm

    Holy fuck…more call for stalling everything to commercialize and exploit it. Using the same dialog, nonetheless. Why is that no surprise? How much does it suck to say you’re against ‘citizens advisory committees’??? carefully selected tactics.

  91. April 12, 2011 at 4:17 pm

    Bill Barnum: I participated in the 2003 meetings at the Red Lion. Girard will remember the Christmas letter I wrote him saying I couldn’t participate because the moderator was Maggie Gainer. The fix was in. We formed the HELP group 7 years ago. I told them to wait and see what happens in the future, that Girard would say “we had 312 meetings.” the GPU is staff-driven. In Merced, they hired outside firm. We all have ideals and interests. It should have been contracted out. There is no sprawl.

  92. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 4:18 pm

    You’ve been writing about it for years, I know…boiling down to rhetoric in face of the actual actions being taken. I didn’t hear any rhetoric from him, rather the exact specific dialog developers and snoots want to avoid, like you say.

    Divert questions away from our movers and shakers themselves, make it seem like it’s all about the public. Like it’s our job, on top of our jobs.

  93. April 12, 2011 at 4:21 pm

    Lee Ulansey: speaking for HumCPR. Another meeting with outraged public, same as before. At every GPU meeting your staff proposes a solution to appease the outrage from the last meeting. HumCPR has collected over 700 names in the last week. Everyone says we need to work together. Are all these council people who oppose the process uninformed and ignorant? Staff is arrogant. Tactics of the past have utterly failed. Don’t need to stop Plan entirely.

  94. Eric Kirk
    April 12, 2011 at 4:21 pm

    RG – well, phrases like “unholy alliance” and words like “greed” do amount to rhetoric.

    But I agree with him. This isn’t about process. It’s about stalling.

  95. April 12, 2011 at 4:22 pm

    John Schaffer: anyone who claims to have not been included has not been paying attention. There is a vocal and well funded group that is dissatisfied. Scorched Earth policy. Can’t imagine a more comprehensive process than the one that has happened here. Please don’t halt the process.

  96. Eric Kirk
    April 12, 2011 at 4:23 pm

    John Schaefer is making the same point, perhaps a little less effectively, even if with a little less catharsis offered.

  97. April 12, 2011 at 4:25 pm

    Virginia Grazziani: No value in stopping the plan at this point. CACs are for community plans. Anyone can start forming CACs now.

  98. Eric Kirk
    April 12, 2011 at 4:25 pm

    I’m thinking that so far, the environmental/smart growth folk have spoken in superior numbers. Has anybody taken a count?

  99. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 4:27 pm

    Greed is what it is. Placing importance on how something is being said over what’s being said validates all the sleazy tactics being used to manipulate the public regarding…real estate development. It’s like the saying, etiquette is only important when you want it to be.

  100. April 12, 2011 at 4:27 pm

    Katherine Zeemer: Farm Bureau and Working Lands Working group. Our orgs have been active since the GPU started. Been to so many meetings “they blur.” Anytime we have a concern we’re able to sit down and work for a solution. We are one of the success groups, but we’re not involved in the Housing element. Staff has provided us with a matrix of alternatives. We’re pleased that the PC is listening. We speak for ag and timber and looking to protect long term viability and property rights. don’t want you to stop or put it on hold.

  101. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 4:28 pm

    I’ve got a very poor connection, but I don’t consider many of the people who have spoken to represent the core of humboldt’s environmental movement whatsoever…let alone on a state or national level.

  102. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 4:29 pm

    …been a bunch of fuddy duddies on all “sides”, quite frankly.

  103. April 12, 2011 at 4:29 pm

    Bill Rothstrom, RCAA: Most democratic process I’ve ever seen in Humboldt. Planning has been patient, lots of opportunities. Want the process to continue. The outreach campaign can help. Want to prevent homelessness, need to build more affordable housing. Support staff recommendations. CACs can be done at local level.

  104. April 12, 2011 at 4:31 pm

    Bill Thorington, Humboldt Watershed Council, part of Healthy Humboldt. Been involved for many years. Been involved in other processes in other counties and none of them are perfect. This one is very inclusive. You can lead a horse to water but you can’t force him to drink. Can’t force people to participate even though it’s open. Support staff recommendations. don’t stop or stall the process.

  105. April 12, 2011 at 4:34 pm

    Debbie Provolt: Section 1542 says meetins should be held in regional centers. Since these hearings have started there’s only been one in Garberville.

  106. April 12, 2011 at 4:37 pm

    Ben Shepherd: feel like I’m watching on Divorce court where one says I’m a perfect spouse and the other says this isn’t working. If I were you I would say you have a problem. What is happening is not working. there needs to be an independent look, what’s working and what is not. If you continue moving ahead doing exactly what you’re doing you will not satisfy the problem. We need to pause. Figure out where we are and how we got here. Seen the characterization of some people stirring up people. You can’t get people upset or excited unless there is a problem they perceive.

  107. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 4:38 pm

    Holy moly, see what I mean? That guy was a fuddy duddy. “YOU the elected officials must think WE the public are screwed up.” Yet the problem the public perceives is entirely contained within the electorate…on all levels of politics. Corruption and greed.

  108. April 12, 2011 at 4:40 pm

    Bonnie Blackberry, Civil Liberties Monitoring Process: We’re not the developers. People have not had opportunity to be involved. Navigating the website is not easy. Sponsored a town hall clarification meeting, were told county would come back and clarify the mapping but no one ever showed up. People feel like voices aren’t heard because comments aren’t noted in meeting minutes. Section 1500 should have been brought up 10 years ago. The first thing to be discussed should be how will the public be involved.

  109. April 12, 2011 at 4:43 pm

    Julie Williams: See this as as opportunity to put an end to divisiveness and save tax payers millions. Pause the GPU, removed the draft plan from Planning commission so they can focus on reviewing permits to provide much needed housing. establish citizens advisory committee. Direct the committee to begin from existing Plan (Alt D) so it will be an update and not a rewrite. That would be consistent with state law. All lands should be open for family residential for principle use. GPU should be limited to land use, circulation, housing, conservation, noise and safety. Telecommunications should be included.

  110. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 4:44 pm

    That lady’s an idiot.

  111. April 12, 2011 at 4:45 pm

    Fred Bower, United Stand. There is a level of failure here. Dealing almost exclusively with special interest and inside contacts. citizens have had almost no input into this. need a committee to determine the best way to establish section 1500. Need a pause.

  112. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 4:45 pm

    JESUS FUCKING GEORGE ORWELL. My next painting will be: jesus having sex wtih george orwell.

  113. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 4:46 pm

    Unless I’m mistaken, this guy’s giving us input right now.

  114. April 12, 2011 at 4:48 pm

    Peter Childs, United Stand. Can’t remember how many committees I’ve been on. Rewrote the county’s Housing Element. Citizenry must be involved. government by the people and all that. This is huge. the human race has a long future. Democracy has everything to do with successful movement in that future. (Hey Random Guy, he just mentioned Orwell!). Pay attention to what is going on in our communities. Casting no aspersions here. Planning has fought 1500 since the beginning. Martha said they decided not to do it.

  115. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 4:49 pm

    we need committees to tell the committee to form committees to advise the committees of commissioners committing to committments the actions and responsible responsibilities of all sub committees for duty and freedom and democracy for all of everybody all the time everywhere freedom democracy.

  116. April 12, 2011 at 4:51 pm

    Charlie Custer. Most of you have been here less than 2 years. 10 years ago Mark and I had our first involvement in the GPU process. Mark has a different memory of it than I do. Girard said the thing that most people wanted was off the table. That was the beginning of the public process. the thing we wanted was already unwantable. I didn’t come back to another meeting after that. The county doesn’t want to work with people who want something other than what they want. Need open discussion about pot.

  117. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 4:52 pm

    I’m going to indulge in some pot issues myself after all this bullshit.

  118. April 12, 2011 at 4:54 pm

    Tina Christensen: Been following this for several years. Part of Find Our Lots. Housing element — Mark, Clif and Jimmy have thrice voted to submit a Housing Element that ignored vigorous public participation. Three times it was rejected by the state. The advice you are receiving is deficient. Would you go to a doctor who did that? You can do better. No one has asked to stop GPU, just pause it.

  119. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 4:55 pm

    at least this lady’s not afraid to point fingers. Nobody’s asked to stop the general plan, the people she didn’t point at did all the stalling for us.

  120. April 12, 2011 at 4:57 pm

    Bob Morris: Here to talk about meaningful public comment. Brought examples. today I saw a real life example. Staff made report. Then there were comments by board. Then before a single comment by public was made, a supervisor said they support the staff recommendation. This 131 pages was given to the public 24 hours before a public meeting. We had 3 minutes to comment. then we got 300+ pages 24 hours before another meeting to to process and please keep your comments to 3 minutes. CACs are a wonderful way.

  121. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 4:58 pm

    His heart’s in the right place. All info is available long prior to 24 hours…dunno where he got htat.

  122. April 12, 2011 at 5:00 pm

    Dottie Russell: Property mgr. of over 40 residents in SoHum. 2nd dwellings can provide affordable housing. Offer my skills and knowledge to you. The houseless population as a result of poor planning… LOST THE FEED. DUDE WHERE’S MY MEETING?

  123. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 5:00 pm

    AAARRRGGHHH!!!! There’s TONS of vacant housing! None of the new shit they’ve built over the last ten years are any cheaper than any before it, and nothing that’s being built is going to be any more or less affordable, except they’re gonna be filled with people who don’t live here now, who clamor to get an application in to the strip mall and compete with the phone book sized stack of applications already at that mall and every other.

  124. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 5:03 pm

    Yes, real INDEPENDENT contractors and landowners aren’t able to do shit, whereas Ryan Sundberg’s friends and Virginia Bass’ friends are all making a very comfortable living.

  125. April 12, 2011 at 5:04 pm

    CONNIE STEWART: Some speak land use planning, many don’t. Some people are really dismayed. We need people in the community who can help others speak land use planning. Half of people in this county don’t have access to the web.

  126. April 12, 2011 at 5:08 pm

    Ralph Faust: Remind you that the Housing Element is on entirely different track than rest of the GPU. Many are upset with Housing element, but it’s separate from the GPU. If you can come up with a CAC that can help satisfy all these different groups, more power to you, that would be great. The PC is the CAC for this board. All members are appointed by you. The process we are engaged in was designed by the board. the so-called delay has been caused by receiving and reviewing public input. A wide variety of groups have come in and drafted significant revision to staff’s language. Have tried to find ways to bring it together. There are huge disagreements. We’ve followed a process we believe is mandated by law. No reason to throw it out. Waste of public resources. You have the power to take it if you want it.

  127. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 5:09 pm

    Yep, the people being addressed are the ones that need to be coughing up answers.

  128. April 12, 2011 at 5:11 pm

    Bill Spencer: Agree with Faust. People come with problems but no solutions. The language of the letters is vague. We need no more distractions. If we stop we are going backwards. CACs dont’ work.

  129. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 5:12 pm

    Again, how good does it look to say “community groups don’t work” to anybody who’s green to what lies beneath? Very well said by that guy.

  130. April 12, 2011 at 5:13 pm

    Chuck Harvey: To disrupt and delay to death the GPU which is the expression of orderly government would be outrageous. It’s intended to kill planning because they want unlimited development in resource land. the bottom line is cash.

  131. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 5:13 pm

    YEP! Bravo!

  132. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 5:15 pm

    Bravo again!

  133. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 5:16 pm

    This chick should be sitting behind the desk.

  134. April 12, 2011 at 5:16 pm

    Claire Paraselli. haven’t found any difficulty to public participation, but if I lived in South county I would find it more difficult. Staff has made heroic effort of include input. a request to stop the process is like stopping a baseball game in the 8th inning. CAC sounds like a new layer between me and you or the PC. I can form a group if I don’t like any of the groups here now. don’t think those calling for a stop have polled the entire county so their claims that they speak for 66% of the county is specious.

  135. Eric Kirk
    April 12, 2011 at 5:16 pm

    The problem with the baseball analogy – there can be extra innings!

  136. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 5:17 pm

    Claire rocks.

  137. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 5:18 pm

    Ya, the problem with any analogy is it’s an analogy, not the specific issue. You can’t spell analogy without the anal.

  138. April 12, 2011 at 5:20 pm

    Estelle Fennell: HumCPR. Appreciate you have convened this meeting. Now you must address concerns in a meaningful manner. 1984 plan was finalized in 4 years. This one has taken triple the time and still far from being done. director says anyone can have meaningful input by saying they support alternatives A, B, C or D. It’s not true. In some cases there are no alternatives, or lack the full range of alts. People who say nothing is wrong have been proven wrong by the planners themselves.

  139. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 5:21 pm

    Again with people just saying “do the right thing, it’s all complicated, bla bla bla”. To start with, it can be exactly as simple as choosing A B C or D. Who’s refusing to choose? Who wants more beaurocracy to stall?

    Claire should run for office.

  140. April 12, 2011 at 5:24 pm

    Dan Torranto: concern for the land use issues is the preservation of section 1500. New documents have been purged public participation. Went to the meeting at the Red Lion and was confronted with a red rope that I was not allowed to cross. Others were inside the red rope. In 2008 draft Housing Element lacked public participation. In 2009 submitted letter to BOS giving my critique re omission of public participation wording. didn’t get a response but League of Women voters submitted a letter asking the same thing. They offered to help put it back in. Now section 1500 is scheduled for consideration, but there’s a trail of prejudice in this process.

  141. Fire it off
    April 12, 2011 at 5:25 pm

    Fire Girard. The process has been SO polluted as to be worthless. Starting over is the only reasonable solution. New staff, new general plan.

  142. April 12, 2011 at 5:28 pm

    Denver Nelson: Been on PC for five years (???). In that time only missed one meeting. Most meetings have been about GPU. Read several thousand pages. Everybody doesn’t agree. No one has a lock on what is the correct solution. I have left and right wing friends. The people at the extremes think that those at the other end are being controlled by the evil greedy forces.

  143. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 5:28 pm

    Sure, a large part of the focus of some people on the board is to build stuff and make money from it. Part of my focus is to go to work tomorrow and do the same thing. No evil intent all around.

  144. Fire it off
    April 12, 2011 at 5:30 pm

    See, the current speaker from Oklahoma by the sea agrees with me. Fire Girard.

    April 12, 2011 at 5:30 pm

    Thank you Heraldo. You did a great job on this, enabling those of us who could not be there to know what was said. Thank you again.

  146. April 12, 2011 at 5:31 pm

    Louie DeMartin: Government must reflect the will of the people. We’re having trouble with the planning process. Mr. Girard Look me in the eye! I hope the county gives him a job doing something else. I’m not from the Arkley interests. I love the environment. I’m tired of being treated like a goddamn mushroom. Go out to Redwood Acres like I asked you to. Goddamn rah rah, bless the lord and save my soul.

  147. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 5:33 pm

    uh oh…what’s coming? “we need committees” maybe?

  148. April 12, 2011 at 5:34 pm

    Duane Ashback, Fortuna. How long does this process have to take? Something is flawed. The public is losing confidence in public officials, which is why some of you were elected in last election. Want more public representation. Have lost confidence in the staff. today’s proposal would give voice to the people you serve. Properly chosen CACs would provide valuable feedback. don’t expect you to throw 12 years of work away. But CACs could help you make decisions.

  149. April 12, 2011 at 5:36 pm

    Bob Higgons, Humboldt Association of Realtors: Quality not quantity make good GPU. Support creation and use of CAC.

  150. April 12, 2011 at 5:39 pm

    Gentleman from McKinleyville. co-chaired the 1985 McKinleyville Plan. Against the staff bringing in 900 units. Friend called and said staff wanted to rezone his Ag Exclusive land to high density residential. Can’t do it. Generated a lot of distrust toward the staff. Neighbors were never informed these things were being imposed. Not saying stop the GPU, go back to the districts and let them bring back recommendations.

  151. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 5:40 pm

    overall, they’re looking at WAAAYYY more than 900 units over a longer period of time. Address the rezoning, guy. Bingo! he just did. And very true, nobody was asked what they thought about what’s happening RIGHT NOW, and how we’re all being screwed already.

  152. April 12, 2011 at 5:42 pm

    Chuck Ciancio: you got a mess on your hands. No one can understand what is in this GP. the creating of his mess is because of too much information. You are trying to satisfy everyone and you can’t do it. People don’t understand what you are doing.

  153. April 12, 2011 at 5:46 pm

    Tom Grover: didn’t take part in this process in the early days because it was said to be an update but not it’s a total rewrite. This process is biased against the people in Southern Humboldt. 30% don’t have high speed internet. Most people have read little or none of the GPU. [Amazingly], these people have strong feelings against county staff.

  154. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 5:47 pm

    I won’t doubt that rural sohum is misrepresented, but the people I know aren’t trying to blow up their property with construction. It’s really easy to get the ball rolling on a basic home, etc. down there. I’ma bet that guy was talking about bigger constructs.

  155. April 12, 2011 at 5:49 pm

    Jan Turner, Housing for All: concerned about putting another layer of people between me and the decision makers. the idea of starting now at step 1 is pretty alarming. The county was sued over housing element. We were a party to that, willing to give county time to do the rezoning to bring county into compliance with state law. Rezoning has not been done on time which is why it was decertified by the state. Get the rezoning done or you risk further lawsuits and funding that would alleviate housing shortage.

  156. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 5:51 pm

    Just follow the money, it kicks the up the simplicity of the process several notches.

  157. April 12, 2011 at 5:51 pm

    Scott Menzies, staff for Healthy Humboldt but involvement started before that. haven’t felt like there have been barriers from participating. One reason it’s taken so long is because there has been there is so much public comment.

  158. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 5:53 pm

    uh oh…we need committees???

  159. April 12, 2011 at 5:55 pm

    Bill Bertain: Participated in the 1984 GPU. The work of United Stand is something we should be proud of. Dont’ think the county has complied with the ordinance governing the process. Section 1500 adopted for a reason. Bothers me to hear people telling you to ignore your ordnance. Staff has started out with predetermined result in mind. It was obvious to me in 2000-2001 that it was predetermined. Who was on that first committee? Somebody made a decision then to not comply with 1500. The citizens handbook was not made available says volumes about the problems you are faced with.

  160. April 12, 2011 at 5:56 pm

    Richard Marks: Congratulate the Sueps for surviving over 50 comments. 35 called for a pause, 17 wanted us to keep going.

  161. April 12, 2011 at 5:56 pm


  162. April 12, 2011 at 5:58 pm

    JIMMY SMITH: to clarify, I support getting out to the special districts so those jurisdictions are included in the comments. Glad Jan made her comments. We should be talking to the cities more. May not have the land we need to provide all the things we need. Still need to work with cities.

  163. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 5:59 pm

    Did I catch that right? Did Captain America just say that x amount of people were calling for a “pause” and that another bunch of people were just throwing lame ideas around?

  164. Jim Ferguson
    April 12, 2011 at 5:59 pm

    Thanks for all the hard work, H.

  165. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 6:01 pm

    I’m going to PUKE. “whoopsie!” says Ryan Sundberg. You’re also saying, Ryan, that YOU can’t be trusted RIGHT NOW. What??? Ryand Sundberg agreeing with Virginia Bass???

  166. April 12, 2011 at 6:02 pm

    Ryan Sundberg: We need to go back to the CSDs and the cities. it has to be done. It’s something we missed. It should have been on us to do that. Most of us recognize that now. Trust was lost along the way, we need to get it back. Kirk should go with Supervisors to their cities and districts. We should have a 3-week break and give staff time to go talk to CSDs and cities. That would be a good compromise. No one wants to hold this thing up. Fix it now before it’s held up later on.

  167. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 6:02 pm

    Ryan wants to make some insurance skrilla, and be invited to more of his construction buddies’ barbeques, is what he wants.

  168. April 12, 2011 at 6:04 pm

    Clif Clendenen: In the face of a challenge you work harder. We’ve substantially captured the series of section 1500. The number of mentions of 1500 does not make it better. Looking at the time line by staff we can do it, but I’m not in favor of a pause. But I want to reconnect with the cities, chambers and CSDs. Like the idea of supes accompanying staff, commit myself to that. Not in favor of deleting sections. Want our plans to dovetail with other jurisdictions. Move the staff recommendation.

  169. Eric Kirk
    April 12, 2011 at 6:05 pm

    A three week break? What does that mean? Nobody in the Planning Department can work on it?

  170. April 12, 2011 at 6:05 pm

    No second.

  171. Eric Kirk
    April 12, 2011 at 6:05 pm

    Did Ryan actually make a motion?

  172. April 12, 2011 at 6:05 pm

    Eric I guess it means no Planning Commission meeting on the GPU.

  173. Eric Kirk
    April 12, 2011 at 6:08 pm

    Mark’s kind of rambling. Where are they going to take this?

  174. April 12, 2011 at 6:10 pm

    Lovelace: it would be folly to assume we can get to a census with no conflict. The fact that we have division doesn’t indicate a flaw in the process. Land use is a touchy subject. but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t’ try to make the process as smooth as possible. I had more experience as a private citizen on the GPU than on the BOS. Every format imaginable. There has been every opportunity for input. Anyone could hold whatever kind of meeting, form whatever kind of advisory committed they wanted. Hard for me to think there could have been a magic bullet. No one anticipated this last round would take 3 years. Very good idea for us to do outreach to cities and districts and schools and tribes. Dont’ feel like we need to stop the process to do that. Either a parallel process with outreach or between PC and BOS doing the outreach.

  175. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 6:12 pm

    I don’t know anything about lovelace, but am glad he’s of his opinion about this. It’s a tactic. See who continues to stall the process immediately after the “citizen advisory committees” are rejected and that’s all you’d need to know.

  176. April 12, 2011 at 6:14 pm

    Virginia Bass: Bothers me when people vilify staff. they are not to be vilified. Most people were good about that. If I had a button to turn of the mic I would have done that during one comment today. There were a lot of really good comments. Recites some of the comments. Quotes the pro-pause side. Kirk and Martha said they didn’t talk to their neighbors, they agree there is a problem. Agree with Sundberg. If we do the outreach while we’re still marching on, we’re telling people “we want to hear what you think but we won’t consider it.” Maybe we can ask staff what they can accomplish in 3 weeks.

  177. Eric Kirk
    April 12, 2011 at 6:15 pm

    Ryan wants three weeks. Virginia doesn’t want to “march on.”

    The County turns its lonely eyes to Jimmy!

  178. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 6:15 pm

    The lady who’s speaking was a lifelong republican until the election that landed her the seat she’s sitting in right now. Her own campaign website stated NONE of her personal endorsements for other measures on the table, including the GPU. What??? Virginia Bass agreeing with Ryan SUndberg???? nooooo….who’da thought?!?!?!

  179. April 12, 2011 at 6:18 pm

    Jimmy Smith: had breakfast with former PC chair and talked about “how can we do this outreach.” a select group could do the trouble shooting. It could be beneficial. What would happen if there was a small group that came from the communities we described. Is it traffic, IZ, patent parcels? What’s the problem in those communities? People want more opportunity to speak. How do we do it without interfering with the PC’s work? Lets find out what the problems are. Let’s get answers from staff on how long it would take.

  180. Eric Kirk
    April 12, 2011 at 6:19 pm

    Sounds like Jimmy wants a committee, but no delay.

  181. April 12, 2011 at 6:19 pm

    Clif: As we approach the CSD’s, maybe that’s the venue to take another layer of input.

  182. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 6:20 pm

    Kinda contradicting yourself there, ryan. We know what to do, but we don’t know what to do.

  183. April 12, 2011 at 6:21 pm

    Sundberg: don’t know how we can keep it going down the Planning commission path but telling public we are going back to cities, CSDs, etc. Mark said people had the opportunity to get involved but it also says we are supposed to go aggressively seek input, so I think it’s the right thing to do.

  184. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 6:21 pm

    What about the input we had on all the development going on in your district right now, ryan? If you could explain a little bit more about what that’s all about???

  185. April 12, 2011 at 6:25 pm

    Lovelace: I share the same concern that input be meaningful. Uncomfortalbe with any discussion of taking a pause without an idea of when do we resume and why is that the right time to resume. If we’re taking a break with the PC, we’re saying it’s a break to inform the PC. They’ve already come to 90% of agreement on the draft. I see it as a parallel path. Good idea to do this round of outreach for this board, but if we are going to do it for the info to go back to the PC we are asking them to start over. Don’t see how we’re going to get agreement. Shouldn’t kid ourselves that this is anything other than a delay.

  186. April 12, 2011 at 6:25 pm

    Helen Edwards: We don’t have public authority.

  187. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 6:25 pm

    Exactly…how are these committees going to result in anything different than the same people at that desk doing what they’re doing right now, and why aren’t some of the people sitting at that desk saying they’re ready to make the decisions they’ve already been elected to make right now, based on decades of talk and input that’s already happened.

  188. April 12, 2011 at 6:30 pm

    Girard: One concern is about the rezoning effort. We can meet with those districts and get it to the PC and your board for meaningful consideration. The second issue is the PC deliberation The have a few elements left before them, right now looking at open space. Your board’s ultimate decision is the 3rd moving part. Smith asks do we have enough time, there are lots of opportunities available. Committees, not just town hall meetings. You can design that process. You can make different approaches to outreach. We think it’s good to go out to the districts immediately. can’t recommend a pause. Should design more comprehensive outreach.

  189. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 6:30 pm

    That guy just said a whole lot of nothing.

  190. Fifth analysist
    April 12, 2011 at 6:30 pm

    “Ryan Sundberg: We need to go back to the CSDs and the cities. it has to be done. It’s something we missed. It should have been on us to do that. Most of us recognize that now. Trust was lost along the way, we need to get it back. Kirk should go with Supervisors to their cities and districts. We should have a 3-week break and give staff time to go talk to CSDs and cities. That would be a good compromise. No one wants to hold this thing up. Fix it now before it’s held up later on.”

    The key to Sundberg’s statement is Fix it. Fix what and fix it how? By what process? Arm wrestling? Who shouts loudest? Spends the most on it?

    What does it mean to go back to the CSDs and the cities? Do they rewrite the Plan? I’m not saying this was Sundberg’s meaning. It does worry me a little.

    I appreciate Sundberg’s gestures to reconcile the county with the demands of the newly disenfranchised local governments. I hope the GPU process does not get hijacked or derailed in order to “get the trust back”.

  191. April 12, 2011 at 6:33 pm

    Smith: understand the necessity of keeping PC on track, and nervous because I see attorneys taking notes. Litigation is really expensive. A delay in the process is going to be expensive. People want their problems to be paramount. Can we do this without delays, Supervisor Sundberg? It’s a little frightening. People are really angry, they feel like they haven’t gotten a fair shake. We know we gotta go back. I apologized because we missed the mark.

  192. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 6:34 pm

    The CSD’s, like anybody, want more funding. For that, they need more infrastructure. That route of bs comes from state and federal business as usual. Of course there are “good people” working for the CSD’s, but let’s not kid about everybody grabbing for money.

  193. Plain Jane
    April 12, 2011 at 6:35 pm

    It’s interesting that virtually all of the speakers asking for a “pause” were those who were the most involved throughout the entire process.

  194. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 6:35 pm

    What are you saying you don’t already know, Ryan? There’s no urgency for more housing other than what your constituents tell us.

  195. April 12, 2011 at 6:36 pm

    Sundberg: there’s the housing element, and then there’s the GPU. One doesn’t have a time line, one does. If we go back and find a huge problem that we should have dealt with and it takes longer, then it takes longer. I understand the urgency for the Housing element. That probably doesn’t answer your questions. but it’s a good idea to get people together to trouble shoot this thing. It’s going to get dragged out forever if it comes to teh BOs. Knock it out now.

  196. Eric Kirk
    April 12, 2011 at 6:36 pm

    Jimmy wants Sundberg to compromise. Doesn’t sound like Sundberg’s game. Jimmy has to decide which side he’s on, unless he can get a committee from Clif.

  197. Eric Kirk
    April 12, 2011 at 6:37 pm

    Actually, it sounds like Ryan doesn’t have clear direction either.

  198. April 12, 2011 at 6:42 pm

    Lovelace: Talking about a select group to troubleshoot the issues, and we don’t know what the issues are, that’s the critical choices report from 2000. It doesnt put us closer to resolution. We can’t keep saying findings are out of date or we’ll never be done. Why will these select groups get through these issues with any less division then anyone else? If you talk to commissioners, it takes them so much time to feel fluent in the issues. dont’ believe we are doing anything other than stopping 10 years of pain-staking process if we delay. Not supportive of stopping the clock. Like the idea of outreach. It would have already happened if this round of the GPU hadn’t taken 3 years. Other community plans are being incorporated. There are a lot of options, do the outreach. Have to find out what form that should take. Have to develop a work plan. Can do it without stopping progress on this thing.

  199. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 6:42 pm

    This whole meeting has been a successful stall…whose idea was it? How many more just like this one, about this same thing? Twisted science fiction…

  200. Eric Kirk
    April 12, 2011 at 6:42 pm

    You know, I say give them the committee, with no delays. Put on people from HumCPR, Healthy Humboldt, HELP, EPIC, etc. Receive their reports and keep the process moving. What’s the big deal?

  201. April 12, 2011 at 6:45 pm

    Bass: this is the longest meeting of my life. the rezoning is a hot issue. It needs the quickest attention. The PC has done marvelous job. they have other things to do as well. I hear what Mark is saying, if we take a pause will we ever go back to it? Take a month and come back at a time certain. Some people feel like they need to get a grip on the GPU. I’ve had a hard time getting the stuff, I know it’s available but if I’m having trouble it’s got to be frustrating. Is there a way we can be comfortable but not abandon what the PC has done.

  202. Anonymous
    April 12, 2011 at 6:46 pm

    Sundberg doesn’t understand that every other element of the 1984 GPU is out of compliance with CEQA as well. It is all prone to lawsuit. Stop the process and you lose any good faith effort credit you may have. Can you say “building moratorium”?

  203. Anonymous
    April 12, 2011 at 6:46 pm

    Those groups were elected by nobody. CSD, VFD, School Board and city councils are elected. Reach out to them, not these profiteers.

  204. April 12, 2011 at 6:47 pm

    Smith asks county council waht’s the risk of a pause?

    Chaitin: a risk on existing litigation.

    Bass: don’t think that needs a pause.

    Clendenen: Looking at the schedule for finishing out this year. the amount of time we would be outreaching would be a couple months of this. We would be taking 20% of overall time.


  205. Eric Kirk
    April 12, 2011 at 6:48 pm

    Virginia wants a plan which can involve a pause without throwing out the baby. Can they craft a meaningful compromise at this hour? Sounds like Jimmy has to decide. Toss it all out, or move on.

  206. Plain Jane
    April 12, 2011 at 6:49 pm

    Which part of citizen advisory committee are you unclear about, 6:46?

  207. April 12, 2011 at 6:50 pm

    ACCESS HUMBOLDT shifting to channel 12

  208. April 12, 2011 at 6:51 pm

    Lovelace: The GPU is not a process that begins, ends and goes away. Additional work overtime.

  209. April 12, 2011 at 6:54 pm

    Smith: GPU process would be separate than Housing element.

    Lovelace: yes but it would be helping to inform each community. If there’s agreement on that kind of direction we need more discussion. Ask Girard if he has thoughts.

    Girard: the 2 cores sentiments are if there are going to be changes to community plans they get reviewed by mechanisms in those communities. the other is to convene a group of people that can help your board id key issues.

  210. April 12, 2011 at 6:54 pm

    Jesus Christ this meeting is never going to end.

  211. Eric Kirk
    April 12, 2011 at 6:55 pm

    They don’t know what to do.

  212. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 6:56 pm

    How is it that some of those supervisors are gung ho about rezoning…to accomodate more infrastructure, nonetheless, and a lot of which has already happened…without the GPU that they say is so important to make those kind of decisions?

  213. April 12, 2011 at 6:57 pm

    Mark: huge concern, someone is always going to characterize something as an “agenda.” HELP years ago wanted a committed that would include staff, Healthy Humboldt, chamber of commerce to hammer out GPU behind closed doors. As soon as we go down this road we will not do away with conflict. If we can reach 90% agreement as our planning commission has that would be a lofty goal.

    Girard: There are many skilled people in this process.

  214. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 6:58 pm

    STFU and adjourn this waste of time, already! Somebody say what you really think or kill it!

  215. Eric Kirk
    April 12, 2011 at 6:58 pm

    Jimmy specifically. He doesn’t know what to do. The others have made up their minds, except that Mark is trying to fashion some committee compromise.

    Nobody wants to even make a motion to table. I guess it has to be decided before the next commission meeting.

  216. Eric Kirk
    April 12, 2011 at 6:59 pm

    RG – an adjournment would be a loss for Ryan and Virginia’s side.

    Jimmy’s making a motion!

  217. April 12, 2011 at 6:59 pm

    Smith: move staff recommendations but include under item 3 “direct staff to outreach efforts due to letters and include discussions of zoning, 2nd units, voluntary rezoning/flexible rezoning” look for more definitive public participation through an advisory group.

    Clif: Second with a question. As part of that, ok with it, you’re not including a pause to the process?

    Smith: No.

  218. Eric Kirk
    April 12, 2011 at 7:01 pm

    No pause. Will either Ryan or Virginia accept anything without a pause?

  219. Eric Kirk
    April 12, 2011 at 7:03 pm

    Ryan and Virginia are dead silent. Looks like it’ll be 3-2 for a committee with no pause.

  220. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 7:03 pm

    Sure, virginia bass says expedite rezoning, but “pause” gpu.

  221. Eric Kirk
    April 12, 2011 at 7:04 pm

    Spoke too soon? Virginia’s engaging.

  222. April 12, 2011 at 7:04 pm

    Mark: ask for more specificity. Alt. recommendation #4, staff outreach plan, a work plan to implement.

    Smith: sure, that could be the model.

    clif: what’s the reaction of staff?

    Girard: we would come back with map changes to be reviewed within the community and more public participation incuding reviews of select committees and groups.

    Lovelace: thought maker of motion wanted committees to come back with working plans.

    Smith: it’s in addition to.

    Girard: we would do work plan re Alt. 4 and then come back with range of public participation options.

    Bass: Where is rezoning?

    Smith: restate, discussion with the tribes, zoning proposals which would include 2nd units, flexible zoning, commercial/residential, voluntary rezoning.

    Clif: Assistant council Ruth are you comfortable with this?

    Ruth: Yes, it’s clear. Not asking for a pause.

  223. April 12, 2011 at 7:05 pm

    vote: Unanimous approval.

  224. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 7:08 pm

    bleh! thank the herald for bringing this to my attention, or punch the blog’s operator in the stomach? Wish I were off the grid, wouldn’t get sucked into this in the first place….

  225. Goldie
    April 12, 2011 at 7:09 pm

    That was a long one!

  226. Jim Ferguson
    April 12, 2011 at 7:26 pm

    So, after all this confusion, can anyone do a recap of where we are going from here?

  227. Anonymous
    April 12, 2011 at 7:28 pm

    No hurry. Relax. Enjoy the glow. Good ol’ Jimmy.

  228. pluto
    April 12, 2011 at 7:30 pm

    Heraldo, I didn’t see you mention Kermit Thobaben. He is the main monger for the homeless housing gig. He is such a grant W H O R E. I hope he can shove more of that low income multi-family crap onto some place besides Eureka.

  229. Anonymous
    April 12, 2011 at 7:31 pm

    Let the slander begin.

  230. lurch
    April 12, 2011 at 7:40 pm

    thanks H, that was quite the little bout of public service there.

    for a break, maybe you can do the next one in a Rob Arkeley pirate voice.

  231. April 12, 2011 at 7:57 pm

    Maybe tomorrow I will recover enough to scream at Mark Lovelace that he should “walk the plank.”

  232. Plain Jane
    April 12, 2011 at 7:59 pm

    I couldn’t listen because I was working so your recaps were really appreciated. Thanks.

  233. Eric Kirk
    April 12, 2011 at 8:05 pm

    So, after all this confusion, can anyone do a recap of where we are going from here?

    Basically, the process goes on with the commission, but a committee will be formed of disparate interests to yell at each other and come up with something to read to the Board before they vote.

  234. Eric Kirk
    April 12, 2011 at 8:09 pm

    Hank reported something about CAC’s for Cutten and McKinleyville. I don’t remember that, but then my attention span had reached its limits.

  235. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 8:23 pm

    7:31, no slander in the obvious…it happened for all to see. Virginia Bass wanted to make sure rezoning to accomodate more building remains unaffected by the decision…as well as expressing the need to hurry that aspect along. Same thing with Ryan Sundberg…the district he’s supposed to be supervising is slated for major rezoning that NOBODY voted for, and that nobody but developers and members of the CSD are gung ho about (who happen to be his primary supporters), yet said the public isn’t being heard enough on such matters to make those kinds of decisions.

  236. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 8:35 pm

    …and I’m not saying there’s anything “evil” about it. In fact, bass and sundberg were admitting the whole time that they’re way out of touch with the general public.

  237. Anonymous
    April 12, 2011 at 8:50 pm

    rg, sundberg and the mcsd are against the rezones.

  238. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 8:57 pm


    April 12, 2011 at 8:59 pm

    Got a party on this thread.

    Anyhow, could it partly be that those who are reluctant to get CAC’s formed and implemented and operational are hesitant due to feeling that their viewpoints would be over-shadowed by those who would “make-up” the participations of what a CAC would entertain (the voices of any community) via agenda?

    Jeffrey Lytle
    McKinleyville – 5th District

  240. skippy
    April 12, 2011 at 9:15 pm

    Saw this marathon meeting in full. Heraldo covered it accurately and very well. Reading the impressive play-by-play accounts, this was an outstanding job covering the GPU meeting and reporting. A+

  241. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 9:18 pm

    I think that’s fair to say, JL. And it seems pointless. What’s noninclusive now? OR better put, why aren’t our voices being heard now? Letters to the editor, collective 3 minute alotments at meetings…blogs? Why aren’t sundberg and bass doing their research on their own? It’s their job, to pass the buck on “the public”. Why won’t ANY of these people just state what they’d like to see happen? I saw a magnanimous waste of time…way too much talk about nothing specific at all. Business as usual. Do you think anybody would change their minds about anything? If YOU were there, it’d be interesting…

    I’m not convinced sundberg isn’t for the rezoning. It’s a hot enough topic for our supervisor to at least address us. There’s multiple rezones on the table…probably doesn’t support them in tribal areas, but what’s already being dug in central mckinleyville is much to the chagrine of just about everybody in mckinleyville. The new “affordable housing” units we’ve already been blessed with aren’t any more affordable than the last, and plenty of vacancies. Ditto for the ones on guintoli. And the bayshore mall isn’t doing to hot, to suggest building more malls and what not. Really obvious stuff that isn’t addressed point blank.

    I don’t really know how the MCSD stands as a whole, or how they differ from the HCSD in these matters.

  242. Plain Jane
    April 12, 2011 at 9:19 pm

    It seems to me like the CAC’s would be the same people who have been involved all along, have already made up their minds and formed pro and anti groups. A more direct approach with PC members and the BOS holding individual town meetings might give them a clearer view of the people’s desires than CAC’s consisting of the usual suspects, preferably with all of the supervisors and PC members present to hear concerns and answer questions.

  243. Not A Native
    April 12, 2011 at 9:19 pm

    Good work, much appreciate the commentary, H., random guy, and popup Kirk. Didn’t watch it, but feel as if I was there. Almost like old days radio.

    In the end, seems to be a victory for sanity and a vote of confidence for the legislative deliberative process. For this time, the fear mongerers and insurrectionists were rebufffed.

  244. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 9:21 pm

    …the longer I allow my mind to circulate this stuff…the more…it…becomes a big mess…get my own facts confused…and it just SUCKS. got to think…can’t think….too….stupid….

  245. tra
    April 12, 2011 at 9:58 pm

    Ben Shepherd: feel like I’m watching on Divorce court where one says I’m a perfect spouse and the other says this isn’t working.

    I think that comment really captures the overall dynamic here.

  246. tra
    April 12, 2011 at 10:02 pm


    Thanks for the great coverage.

    – tra

  247. Goldie
    April 12, 2011 at 10:03 pm

    I am one of those who do not speak General Plan but I guess I better learn. Seems like a lot of different parts and concerns all going on at one time. I am late to this conversation.

    April 12, 2011 at 10:05 pm

    CAC’s – It is important to identify a fair and appropriate selection process for and committee members to be. Will a CAC be geographical, like districting; and, be up to the people to vote in or by apppointment from a higher superior body?

    All thoughts to get hammered out.


  249. April 12, 2011 at 10:17 pm

    Cheers, friends. I’m glad you found it useful.

  250. Random Guy
    April 12, 2011 at 10:36 pm

    Ya, JL…but like I said, what are our representative’s opinions on the matter TODAY? They each have one. It’s not only their job to have one, it’s their duty to stay on top of it. This whole citizen committee thing is like some crazy joke. Sundberg and bass can rally a townhall meeting together this weekend anywhere they want and get a FLOOD of immediate feedback…to bullshit us about needing some beurocratic committee process. It’s Bullshit, call it what it is.

    In the meantime, all things pro-“development” are having a field day walking all over everybody. And “development” definitely sponsers politics, locally and everywhere. It’s big money. Stuff is being built all over Humboldt. Sprawl is happening, the seeds of it are being planted here, too. It doesn’t happen overnight. Humboldt is virgin territory that desperately needs to be protected. You want to talk about an underrepresented group that gets pushed out of the picture immediately, it’s zero growth. I believe in zero growth…that’s my “agenda”…it’s not only possible, it’s necessary.

  251. Anonymous
    April 12, 2011 at 10:44 pm

    Why should Lovelace walk the plank?

  252. Anonymous
    April 12, 2011 at 10:44 pm

    Oh, and yes, the best coverage we could have hoped for. Thanks Heraldo.

  253. tra
    April 12, 2011 at 11:11 pm

    …a committee will be formed of disparate interests to yell at each other and come up with something to read to the Board before they vote.

    You may be right, and in the end this additional venue for public participation will amount to nothing but more of the same — people just talking past each other, preaching to their own choirs, and so on.

    On the other hand, it’s been my experience that when people sit down together and talk face to face, they are actually less prone to “yell at each other,” — and therefore more able to find actual solutions to problems.

    So, while obviously a committee is not going to magically reach some total consensus on the GPU, there may be some areas where the contending parties can reach agreement, which will help the Board of Supervisors in their deliberations.

  254. April 12, 2011 at 11:11 pm

    Why should Lovelace walk the plank?

    If Arkley were to speak in pirate this is what he would say.

  255. skippy
    April 13, 2011 at 7:13 am

    “After more than five hours of public comment and lengthy discussions concerning the general plan update process, the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors decided to move forward with public outreach without putting a pause on the process.”

    Donna Tam’s report,“General Plan Process to Continue Uninterrupted” in today’s Times-Standard,
    can be found here.

  256. Mitch
    April 13, 2011 at 7:37 am

    Thanks for the coverage, Heraldo.

    But you need to work on your pirate, matey.

    “Argh, me parrots failed me. Shiver me old growth, I shoulda bought deaf ones.”

    April 13, 2011 at 8:29 am

    Random Guy,

    as much as “development” is funding the politics, so too is the “non-development” crowd. The real losers in the community are all-of-us caught in between at the mercy of those whose selfishnesses (it does not matter what kinds) dictate their greed for power and control over other people. Part of the local political problem is the schmoozers – they care only about themself and looking good to the next higher level of political schmoozers. Developers may claim they are anti-rezoning, but in reality, deep in their profited thoughts, most are lying to the community because of the profits involved to “develop”. Now, I can see a developer complaining if the re-zone is near where they reside, near another asset, etc… Mostly though, don’t trust what comes out of the mouths of any groupee as groupees only seek manipulative gains.

    As far as CAC’s and elected officials. It is true that past elected officials did not want to cede the power away. It is also true that the newly elected and shorter termed supes from last election did not sales pitch CAC’s any more or less than any one else as a public official before them.

    It really is that the POWERS THAT BE are playing a dog and pony show with the mindset of the community. Ya see, “Developers” and the “Non-Developers” understand they both can have power so long as they make the appearance that they (competing groupees) dislike each other (or each others’ interests) in one shape or form or another. It is like Congress with the Liberal Left and Reich Wing right – always show like they are fighting – behind closed doors however, it is a bunch of butt raping swingers passing off their hubbies, wives and children to the other swinging politicos…..; and, when they are not doing the butt rape swinging thing, the kid’s will get offered $250K + income earning jobs as spokepersons or first timers in a company ONLY BECAUSE of the political connections – it works just like that here locally in little ole Humboldt County too!


  258. Eric Kirk
    April 13, 2011 at 8:57 am

    It’s very quiet all of the sudden. Did the decision make everyone happy, or are they still trying to process it? Wait and see? Did one side blink? Did both sides blink? Is Jimmy the de facto arbitrator for the next 2 to 4 years?

  259. Eric Kirk
    April 13, 2011 at 8:57 am

    Inquiring minds want to know.

  260. Eric Kirk
    April 13, 2011 at 9:11 am

    Shhhhh. Be vewy quiet. That wascally wabbit is around here somewhere.

    Okay, well, are you happy Mitch? Somebody say something.

  261. Eric Kirk
    April 13, 2011 at 9:12 am

    Awound here sorry.

    Okay, I’m bored. Back to work.

  262. 11:43
    April 13, 2011 at 9:33 am

    Mitch – 7:37 –
    Aye, me hearty. Ye be no squiffy tom.

  263. Random Guy
    April 13, 2011 at 9:57 am

    JL I don’t really understand your argument now. The CAC debacle I just witnessed with my own to eyes was the epitome of a dog and pony show. Anybody green to the issues who saw that on tv etc. saw intelligent people on the board of supervisors repeatedly have to shoot down the idea of “citizen advisory committees” for the purpose of “more public input”. It was all about making group A look bad and laying foundation for group B to say “we told you so, bla bla bla”. It was diarhea bullshit start to finish.

    What part needs to be repeated…are either Ryan Sundberg or Virginia Bass holding townhall meetings anywhere anytime soon? Anytime, anywhere they choose to do so, they can inform and be informed. If they’re doing their job and care about public input as much as much as they say, that’s what they’d have been doing last month, at NO cost to us, with NO beaurocratic business as usual nonsense.

    The CAC thing was PR buuuullllsssshhhhiiiiit. They talked about it before hand, they knew it, they’d lie through their teeth if they told you otherwise. In retrospect, I really can’t believe what I saw at that meeting.

  264. Eric Kirk
    April 13, 2011 at 10:43 am

    Wow! It’s been a hour and a half, and nobody has chimed in except RG, and I’m not even sure whether he views the compromise as victory or defeat.

    Heraldo, what’s your take?

    This is quite extraordinary. Any reporters out there contacting the players for comment?

  265. Plain Jane
    April 13, 2011 at 11:00 am

    I consider it a smart compromise which denied those who manufactured the outrage a victory, but didn’t completely humiliate them. I have to admit I was surprised by both Bass and Sundberg’s votes for Clendenen’s motion. I also appreciated Bass’ remarks about demonizing our public employees.

  266. Mitch
    April 13, 2011 at 11:02 am


    I simply don’t know enough about the issue to even pretend to offer an informed comment, except about pirate-talk. (I know, I know…)

  267. anadromous
    April 13, 2011 at 11:04 am

    I agree with Plain Jane on this one. And I was glad to see consensus can be achieved with this Board on a contentious GPU related issue.

  268. Eric Kirk
    April 13, 2011 at 11:04 am

    Well, I actually didn’t ask about the issue specifically Mitch. I just asked if you were happy.

  269. Mitch
    April 13, 2011 at 11:07 am

    Always, Eric, always.

  270. April 13, 2011 at 11:09 am

    Man! I took all those notes for nothing. Scooped by Heraldo again. Excellent thread I must admit.

  271. Fifth analysist
    April 13, 2011 at 11:12 am

    I agree with Plain Jane. Faced with a fired up mob demanding another chance to state their views, the BOS could not turn them down. There will be a round of meetings. The local government reps will say what the developers tell them to say. There will be note taking, nodding and mumbling of some kind.

    Meanwhile, the plan stays on track.

    Next Act: The mob reassembles and launches another attack.

    How will it end?

  272. April 13, 2011 at 11:17 am

    Eric, it’s impressive that the Supes managed a unanimous vote on what was promoted as a huge, big, furious ordeal, and they didn’t fall for the line that the update needed to be stopped. It was a reasonable move and one that will improve the process, but I doubt it will silence the pissed off faction of Angry McAngrypantses who are just, you know, angry.

  273. skippy
    April 13, 2011 at 11:22 am

    For the sake of brevity, ditto to PJ’s comments. The unanimous 5-0 vote speaks to that. To note, Supervisor Smith wisely asked, ‘to what effect will this have on existing litigation?’ to a hush in the room. Observing two (and probably more) attorneys furiously scribbling their notes, yours truly would like to know more what the ‘litigous matter’ is.

    Hank Sims curiously sidenoted: “Last year Humboldt County conservatives insisted that the general plan update was taking too long. This year they’re insisting that it’s moving too quickly.” He’s corect; there is a big difference there.

  274. Plain Jane
    April 13, 2011 at 11:34 am

    Simple answer, Skippy. Their statements that it was taking too long weren’t intended to be factual. Of course, neither were their more recent statements that public input was inadequate.

  275. tra
    April 13, 2011 at 11:38 am

    At least at first glance, it seems like a pretty reasonable compromise to me.

    While the Board did not agree to a pause in the Planning Commission process, they did heed the input from the municipalities and community services districts about the need for more significant engagement with those entities. According to the staff report, this includes direct engagement (by the BOS, not the PC) with the decision-making bodies of those entities, as well as a series of “town-hall-style meetings” (again, at the BOS level, not the PC level) in various parts of the county.

    I assume that those who were calling for a delay in the PC process aren’t happy that they didn’t get it, but, at least at first glance, it does look like they won significant additional opportunities for public participation, and participation by the municipalities and CSDs.

    Now we’ll see what takes place during those meetings with the municipalities and CSDs, and during the town hall meetings. Will the C/D crowd just use the opportunity to lodge a lot of additional complaints about the process and demands for it to be halted, or will they take the opportunity to address the policy issues? And will the A/B+ crowd mobilize their own supporters to attend and engage on the issues, or will they continue to focus their comments on complaining that any additional public participation is redundant and unnecessary, and bound to be “dominated by developers” (a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy, if you ask me).

    And, most importantly, will the Board seriously consider the input that they get during this “parallel process,” or just treat it as window dressing (as “Fifth Analyst” @ 11:12 seems to be hoping for), while pointing to the Planning Commission recommendations (which will not be informed by these new venues for public participation) as containing the only legitimate alternatives for discussion as the Board moves forward?

    We’ll see.

  276. Eric Kirk
    April 13, 2011 at 11:46 am

    And will the A/B+ crowd mobilize their own supporters to attend and engage on the issues, or will they continue to focus their comments on complaining that any additional public participation is redundant and unnecessary, and bound to be “dominated by developers”

    I’m assuming that the CAC will have representation from all sides, or attorneys will be taking even more notes.

  277. tra
    April 13, 2011 at 12:36 pm


    At 11:38, I was talking about the additional outreach to municipalities and CSDs and the “town hall-style meetings” that were included in the staff recommendations that were approved by the BOS last night.

    As far as the CAC, I’m really kinda unclear on what the (as Hank labeled it) “CAC-like thing” is going to look like, but I’m sure you’re right that they will have to take pains to balance the interests represented on the CAC. And probably one or both sides will complain that some important constituency (that just happens to be aligned with their side) has been excluded, or that the overall makeup of the committee is too A/B+ oriented or too C/D oriented. But the Supes will just have to do the best they can.

    The staff report included a “CAC alternative,” which the staff recommended against. That alternative assumed that the CAC(s) would take part in the Planning Commission process (therefore delaying that process), but that’s not what the BOS approved last night. They approved a “CAC-like thing” that will take place in a “parallel process” to the PC deliberations, and whose recommendations will be considered by the BOS alongside the PC’s final draft GPU, and along with input from the new outreach to municipalities and CSDs, input from the town hall meetings that will be held around the county, and, I would assume, input from hearings in front of the BOS.

    As far as the make-up and process for the CAC-like thing, the staff based it’s opposition to the formation of a CAC on the time and logistical challenges that would be involved in trying to make sure the CAC was, itself, a fair and open process. Of course they were assuming that this time and logistical effort would be causing a delay in the PC deliberations, which under last night’s decision, it will not. Whether it will cause a delay in the BOS process that follows the PC process, remains to be seen.

    Still, despite the fact that the “CAC-like thing” will be making its report to the BOS instead of the PC, I suppose the same time-constraint and process challenges related to the CAC will still exist given that the BOS is trying to keep to a schedule that would apparently yield a final vote on the GPU sometime in 2012.

  278. Random Guy
    April 13, 2011 at 12:58 pm

    It’s appropriately ironic that the current GP dates to 1984. All this pointless talk about more pointless talk, with business as usual shmooovin right along. All the talk in the world won’t undo what’s being done right now.

  279. Fence
    April 13, 2011 at 2:28 pm

    The funny thing is the Housing Element is already approved with a specific set of 14 parcels to be rezoned which met the state requirements under HIM 17, I don’t know why staff doesn’t forward those for final action because thats what the letter from HCD said to do finalize the rezones that the Housing Element said it was going to do. PROBLEM SOLVED.

  280. Eric Kirk
    April 13, 2011 at 2:28 pm

    And what is that RG?

  281. Random Guy
    April 13, 2011 at 2:30 pm

    If this big GPU thing is soooo important, than what I saw at that meeting was grown up third graders handling kindergarten politics. The “development” community so obviously owns dunce-a-plenty virginia bass, who repeatedly admitted to the world that she has a hard time grasping what’s going on, and even getting relevant info about it??? Bullshit! She’s being told EXACTLY what to do! Can somebody say it to her face? Would the breach of etiquette destroy her “opposition”??? and if so, WHY? There will be NO compromise on “developers” bottom line except what we saw last night…make sure development as-is remains unaffected and keep talking nonsense about how it’s all a big complicated mess until more hired goons fill the seats.

    If it really matters to them, announce tomorrow, every day after and until, that there will be drop in townhall meetings every week of the next three months for the public to decide A B C or D based on a simple majority, and then work from there, AT LEAST?!?! Was that SO HARD to think up just now? Is everything SO complicated that the basics can’t be whittled down IMMEDIATELY? Keep in mind the house was packed iwth people standing outside…for their 3 minutes of jack-shit, according to bass and sundberg. Why do they want bullshit formalities attatched to something so simple? It’s so fuggin obvious it really is twisted.

    The whole thing is a big show so the bulldozers can keep doing what they’re doing RIGHT NOW.

  282. Random Guy
    April 13, 2011 at 2:34 pm

    Sprawl, eric. The national plan via their local representatives…that top 1% of the wealth everybody knows exists.

  283. tra
    April 13, 2011 at 3:41 pm


    What most bulldozers are doing “RIGHT NOW!” is sitting idle somewhere, and rusting a wee bit over time. We’re in a bit of a recession right now, in case you hadn’t noticed.

    Now if you were to talk about the potential for development here once (if) the economy eventually improves, well, then those bulldozers could be idle a lot less of the time.

    But keep in mind, some of what people use bulldozers for are important tasks that are actually beneficial to the environment, like improving culverts and roads to decreasee runoff and sedimentation of our rivers.

    So, quit hatin’ on the bulldozers! Bulldozers don’t kill ecosystems — it’s people doing stupid and/or greedy things with bulldozers that does.

  284. Random Guy
    April 13, 2011 at 4:48 pm

    What I saw last night was, sadly, what I expected to see. At least an hour more of it, though. I thought this was Humboldt, not Orange county? I’ve never pretended to know all the details, but my fraction of understanding is enough in the case of our big picture. I spend a lot of time south of here. The parallels in stages of development speak for themselves. The physical landscape is what I’m talking about. The growing population and its infrastructure. That which affects everything. Sprawl bleeding out from the center. Subdivided and conquered, and on to the next.

    Time for my hiatus from all things internet. Have fun…be nice?

  285. Walt
    April 13, 2011 at 5:30 pm

    So the bottom line is the BOS can have their CAC and eat it too?

    April 13, 2011 at 7:04 pm

    Random Guy @ 9:57am,

    What I mean is that over the years up to this most recent point in timelines (not citing the meeting you witnessed as I did not witness it myself, just splaynin’ history up to this point), many people avoided the inevitable, and it just was not a one-sided guest list.

    CAC’s do not need to wait until the completion of the GPU process. They (CAC’s) can be implemented simultaneously with the GPU process, or not as history has proven. As I made it very clear years ago about the GPU process and CAC’s, MAC’s, etc….. the upper echelon of county political insiders did not want them (CAC’s) for reasons we can prove or speculate and it won’t make a difference. It is when “public pressure” is applied en masse that a difference is made because that is how the community identifies with its elected leadership when stuff ain’t gettin’ done (Yes, groupees add fuel to the fire and luv the naive puppies support too).

    The real quandry is the FACT that the current GP (1984) has been sabatoged over the years in order to allow groupees opportunities to manipulate non-groupees’ lifestyles for power, money, control, popularities, personalains for retirements, etc…. It has been more than just 2 sides or interests as well.

    The FACT that many areas of the current GP have gone unenforced due to a pre-meditated, coersive scheme to allow problems to fester so that later on, the PR stuff (as you say last night was) (like TPZ definately was) is used for political job security and retentions; AND, just as OLD PHART and others have said – so government could make new stuff up in their minds for demanding even though no such laws were on the books yet (the reverse of retroactive in a way).

    Now, talk about setting up and priming one’s political career and future by not enforcing laws which, btw, could be a revenue generator for funding departments (Yes, fines create department revenues). Yet, obviously allowing for problems to fester to create political job security was more important than receiving revenue funding sources that are actually good for going toward something benefitting the community (enforcing appropriate laws that yield revenues).


  287. April 13, 2011 at 8:03 pm

    Heraldo–Recreation/Reporting==Excellent.. Thank you!!!

    Raging Granny

  288. April 18, 2011 at 7:58 am

    Fence talks of 14 parcels to be rezoned.
    What and where are those 14 parcels already approved under HIM 17?

  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