Home > Lawsuits > County sued over Forster-Gil development

County sued over Forster-Gil development

Would-be developers of the Ridgewood Village project in Cutten are suing the County of Humboldt for stalling and flip-flopping on the project.

The lawsuit alleges the county included the property in a list of specific parcels approved for its affordable housing inventory as a part of its Housing Element in August 2010. But just last week the county denied the project a zoning clearance and therefore a building permit.

Forster-Gil also alleges the Environmental Impact Report has hit a brick wall in county offices where no movement has been made on it for months.

Full report in the Times-Standard.

  1. August 24, 2011 at 8:41 am

    Well, too bad the link is for the TS. I refuse to pay for that rag so…
    I guess I will have to find out whats going on somewhere else…

  2. August 24, 2011 at 9:36 am

    This is the quote I liked the best…

    “Community Development Director Kirk Girard said the county was originally hoping to rezone the property with the larger scope of the multifamily rezoning process, but soon realized the process was too cumbersome for the general public to understand…”

  3. 69er
    August 24, 2011 at 9:57 am

    Mark Sailors says:
    “Well, too bad the link is for the TS. I refuse to pay for that rag so…
    I guess I will have to find out whats going on somewhere else…”

    August 24, 2011 at 8:41 amThen I guess you don’t know about the combining of the papers in the SF bay area and the pending layoffs. all news papers are struggling to stay alive and are receiving nothing but criticism about the content, especially here locally. This person wants this and that person wants that, everyone is critical and know better than the ones that are trained to do the job. I put up with that for years of public service and am really glad to be out of it and would not recommend it to eany one. Dealing with the general public is the
    S – -t’s.

  4. 69er
    August 24, 2011 at 10:00 am

    And I’m not an expert on the computer either….

  5. August 24, 2011 at 10:18 am

    69’r,
    I work in journalism, part time. Trust me when I say I understand wanting to get paid for your work. I refuse to pay for online content that is not good. The TS website is not worth paying for. The ACTUAL paper is only worth buying for the coupons, and to support the merchants that advertise there.

    Make the paper better, and make the website look like it was created in 2011 and maybe someone would buy the content, and not cheat to get around the “pay wall.”

  6. Anonymous
    August 24, 2011 at 10:34 am

    You can read the article via the link at Lost Coast Outpost.

  7. 69er
    August 24, 2011 at 10:35 am

    I just viewed it and did not have to pay for it, If it comes down to that I will pay for what I want to view, you can do as you wish. I read what I want to read in the paper and pass over the rest. By the way I did not cheat to get around the “pay wall.”, all I did was click on it and found it to be interesting.

  8. 69er
    August 24, 2011 at 10:38 am

    Why not just click on the shortcut provided….http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_18745835

  9. cheap
    August 24, 2011 at 10:39 am

    If you have a smartphone or just type m.times-standard.com it goes to the mobile site and bypasses the paywall

  10. 69er
    August 24, 2011 at 10:48 am

    Didn’t have to do either and don’t know what the problem is, heraldo provided the link and it works fine for me. Just click on Times Standard at the end of the presentation and go there.

  11. August 24, 2011 at 10:55 am

    :|

    The point is they are starting to charge for the online content. They limit you to 5 article per month. Any work around, in my opinion, is theft. I am not a thief. Just because someone at their IT dept. can’t seem to get the “pay wall” right, doesn’t mean bypassing it is ethical.

    https://humboldtherald.wordpress.com/2011/08/15/times-standard-to-limit-free-access/

  12. 69er
    August 24, 2011 at 11:19 am

    Not advocating cheating, just saying use it if it is available and if you don’t want to use it that is ok too. Personally, I believe in using what is available and acessible free and also believe if there is a fee the user should pay.

  13. Random Guy
    August 24, 2011 at 12:59 pm

    Boo-hoo. Take your resource sucking, traffic droning, waste generating, open space destroying, minimum wage making McDonaldsville and shove it, Forster-Gil. Find a new way to rake in your fortunes, one that isn’t at the expense of everybody who already lives and works here.

    What nice drawings of their project they’ve provided, like the one above. You can see literally hundreds of thousands of acres of that kind of development everywhere but Humboldt, and for some reason we all like Humboldt better, rich and poor alike.

  14. Not A Native
    August 24, 2011 at 1:10 pm

    Mark, your writing reads like you’re a whining crybaby. More specifically it suggests you have a chip on your shoulder. Here’s an article about the FG development but you criticise it without even having read it.

    Being angry and boycotting the TS as a ‘rag’ won’t produce ‘better’ local journalism. Its simply petulance and immaturity.

    If you can do it better, I sugggest you do that. And if you want to be consumer, I suggest you offer incentives to attract other people to create a better local news medium.

  15. ellison
    August 24, 2011 at 1:25 pm

    Let us not lose sight of what most of us value here in Humboldt, that is wild land. I see all this green around me and that means trees, not money. The failing infrastructure and traffic congestion this project will cause as well as the unresolved question of how low income people will get to work 10 miles from town without a car, are all based on taxpayer subsidies. Ultimately the home prices near the new development will go down as well as the safety of their streets. With new traffic clogging already ridiculous intersections and yet another wildlife area going to dust for the profit of developers, a Wal-mart and the widening of our redwood gateway, we are just seeing the beginning of the end. Goodbye to country living.

  16. Anonymous
    August 24, 2011 at 2:06 pm

    I refuse to pay for that rag so…
    I guess I will have to find out whats going on somewhere else

    Firefox browser with NoScript. Problem solved.

  17. Anonymous
    August 24, 2011 at 2:12 pm

    Let us not lose sight of what most of us value here in Humboldt, that is wild land.

    BZZT. Try again. There’s nothing wild about this land. It’s already completely circled by neighborhoods. Anything wild on that land has to walk down paved residential roads or fly over neighborhoods to get there… and then be happy being around timber production activities, and hikers and bikers and so on. More than half the land is set to be preserved as a working community forest.

    Here we have a developer complaining the county is stopping the creation of low income (aka affordable) housing. Hmm, now why would that be?

  18. tra
    August 24, 2011 at 2:14 pm

    So the “Smart Growth” developer — darling of the GPU Option A crowd, large donor to Bonnie Neeley’s campaign, and recipient of gushing praise from Mark Lovelace when he was heading up Healthy Humboldt — is now suing the County in a bid to circumvent the environmental review? Looks like Trouble in Paradise.

  19. August 24, 2011 at 2:21 pm

    Hey 2:06,

    Would NoScript prevent the T-S from pushing pop-under ads and cluttering my screen? It’s annoying, especially when it means that my next browser session starts “ad-sized”.

  20. August 24, 2011 at 2:44 pm

    Mitch: Yes.

    recipient of gushing praise from Mark Lovelace

    And now we get to the subject where “The Reasonable Anonymous” forgoes reason for overly emotional talking points.

  21. Anonymous
    August 24, 2011 at 2:52 pm

    Mitch, Firefox has a built-in pop-up/pop-under blocker. I’ve never seen a pop-up or pop-under at the TS website, nor encountered the 5-article limit. But that might be because of NoScript or Adblock Plus. Whatever method the TS is using to limit access, it’s amateurish. It probably blocks most users though, and that’s the point.

  22. August 24, 2011 at 3:10 pm

    Thanks both. I use Chrome. If I don’t find a similar popup blocker for Chrome, perhaps I’ll switch to Firefox and NoScript.

  23. Local Guy
    August 24, 2011 at 3:41 pm

    Having attended most of the planning commission mtgs for F-G and having provided numerous (as of yet unaddressed comments) on the EIR it has become obvious to me that the developer is going to find a way to make money any way he acn on this project. Be it through sales of lawsuits, it don’t matter. Here’s a fact. If this gets built every homeowner will see increases in taxes/fees to pay for the impacts this project will costs. I’m for responsible development not this sham of a project.

  24. tra
    August 24, 2011 at 3:52 pm

    And now we get to the subject where “The Reasonable Anonymous” forgoes reason for overly emotional talking points.

    Is it “overly emotional” to be amused by the irony that the “Smart Growth” developer who is favored by Lovelace and many of his supporters, because of their supposedly environmentally superior style of development, is now suing the county in a bid to circumvent the environmental review process?

  25. Anonymous
    August 24, 2011 at 4:11 pm

    The whole “wild places” thing went away for me in the 1980’s when a boat load of folks starting moving up here. So cry me a river about Foster-Gill. Folks in the neighborhood used it in the 1970’s as a pot growing area. Water + sunlight made it so. There were no subdivion homes on Walnut at that time. And now those are the folks who are saying more development will ruin the area. They are in increase in traffic, noise, whatever. It is called population growth. Look it up.

  26. Anonymous
    August 24, 2011 at 4:11 pm

    is now suing the county in a bid to circumvent the environmental review process

    Didn’t they already do an EIR?

  27. Anonymous
    August 24, 2011 at 4:15 pm

    Here’s a fact. If this gets built every homeowner will see increases in taxes/fees to pay for the impacts this project will costs.

    Nah, that’s called NIMBY naysaying, aka fear-mongering. You have no evidence to support your claims. To the contrary, developers are legally required to pay for impacts up front and in the future. If you don’t like the financial terms developers now must agree to, that’s an issue to take up with your representative.

    Answer this: In what way have the impacts this developer is agreeing to pay for not meet your standard? Where are they not agreeing to pay enough? What’s your evidence it’s not enough? You claimed to have facts. Show us your facts. But please, look up the definitions of “fact” and “opinion” before responding.

  28. tra
    August 24, 2011 at 4:42 pm

    4:11,

    The Times Standard article says:

    …a draft environmental impact report has been under review for more than one year.

    John Belsher of the San Luis Obispo firm Belsher, Becker and Roberts, which is representing Forster-Gill in the case, said the county only has to complete the final environmental impact report with conditions of approval for the project, but there has been no movement for months.

    But I believe that’s referring to the overall project, whereas for this one particular part of the project — the construction of 16 units of multifamily housing (4 four-plexes) on a 66 acre parcel that the county has already included in it’s Housing Element as appropriate to be rezoned to mullti-family — Forster-Gill is claiming in this lawsuit that they should not have to go through the CEQA process that they and have a right to be given their building permit without discretionary review.

    From the Times-Standard:

    In the suit, Forster-Gill is asking a judge to order the county to rezone its property to multifamily to accommodate the 16-unit project…to declare that the county is required to issue a building permit for the 16-unit project without discretionary or CEQA review;

    Now I don’t know whether, as a legal matter, they’re right or wrong about whether they are entitled to get a pass on the environmental review process due to the county including that property in the Housing Element as one that was appropriate for rezoning to multifamily.

    The developer’s position seems to be that the inclusion on that Housing Element list amounted to an iron-clad, legally-binding promise by the county that it definitely will rezone the property to multi-family zoning.

    “The promise adopted in their housing element was that they would rezone this property.”

    http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_18745835

    Presumably county staff have a different interpretation of that.

    I guess we’ll see what happens.

  29. tra
    August 24, 2011 at 4:59 pm

    Here’s a fact. If this gets built every homeowner will see increases in taxes/fees to pay for the impacts this project will costs.

    The pro-Forster-Gill argument is that the parcels are already zoned for the development of 900 or so units, so major intrastructure impacts and costs would happen anyway.

    Further, they argue that if the overall “Ridgewood Village” project is approved, the developer has committed to paying a larger-than-normal share of infrastructure costs, and that even with the addition of 500 additional units to a total of 1,400+ residential units and 200,000 square feet of retail, the promised infrastructure funding from the developer would mean that other taxpayers would still pay less for infrastructure costs than they would if the 900 or so units that the land is already zoned for were built just built one by one.

    And in addition to that they argue that by concentrating those 1,440 units all in one place, this would make delivery of services and maintenance of infrastructure more efficient than if those units were built in lower-density developments, and/or one at a time, elsewhere in the county.

    Anyway, if I’m not mistaken, that’s their basic argument.

  30. Fence
    August 24, 2011 at 5:03 pm

    The housing element has a certified CEQA document that determined the rezone list parcels can be constructed with multifamily housing “By Right” no discretionary review required. This is State Housing Law.

  31. Fence
    August 24, 2011 at 5:05 pm

    Tra, a statement as in your first sentence at 4:59 is not a fact! Try again with some real facts.

  32. tra
    August 24, 2011 at 5:15 pm

    Fence,

    If you’re talking about the italicized sentence in my 4:59 post, please note that it’s just a quote of the claim that Anonymous 4:15 made. The rest of my 4:59 post is laying out the arguments against that claim.

  33. tra
    August 24, 2011 at 5:37 pm

    The housing element has a certified CEQA document that determined the rezone list parcels can be constructed with multifamily housing “By Right” no discretionary review required. This is State Housing Law.

    If it’s really that simple, then I guess the County will quickly lose this lawsuit (or be forced to settle it on terms favorable to Forster-Gill). But I haven’t really heard the other side of the argument beyond what was reported in the Times-Standard story:

    In denying Gill’s request for the zoning clearance, county staff said the property in question is going through a separate process and therefore can’t simply be rezoned to accommodate the multifamily development.

    ”The subject property is currently a part of a subdivision/rezoning/general plan amendment, which is being reviewed for conformance with (the California Environmental Quality Act),” the county stated in its written response to Forster-Gill’s application. “Since it involves an EIR, the separate review of a portion of the project as proposed is not allowed.”

    Perhaps this is a situation where one part of state law (the Housing Law you referred to) would indicates that the county is required to issue the permits without CEQA review, while another part of state law (dealing with rezoning, subdivision, and general plan amendment) says that they can’t issue the permits for this part of the project while the overall project is still being reviewed and has not yet been approved?

    If that’s the case and there is a truly a conflict between two laws passed by the same level of government (in this case the state legislature), then unless the text of the law makes it clear which law should take precedence in this sort of situation, then I guess it would be up to the courts to decide (at least until the legislature amended the laws to clarify the situation).

  34. Anonymous
    August 24, 2011 at 6:23 pm

    Much to the chagrin of traditional developers, I’m betting they win the lawsuit and smart growth comes to Humboldt County. NIMBY Republicans be damned.

  35. Not A Native
    August 24, 2011 at 7:44 pm

    Those local Republican developers have some company in the promoters of sprawl who cast themselves as stewards of the land while spiderwebbing the county with sediment bleeding dirt roads, fragmenting wildlife habitat with fences, domestic animals, and sucking rivers dry.

    They invent imaginary Forster Gill costs and forget their demanding much more expensive government services for far flung roads, security, medical emergencies, fire protection, communications, post offices, and schools. All the while driving long distances in gas guzzler trucks that add more global warming than future folks living in FG ever would. All of which they expect others will subsidize because they’re deserving ‘little people’.

  36. August 24, 2011 at 8:45 pm

    Have you driven S St/West Ave. lately? At 3 pm this afternoon it was backed up almost to 14th St. behind the Myrtle light. Now add the Super Safeway on Harris, feeding many more cars into that intersection (not to mention Harris and Harrison). On top of all that, add in the unknown but substantial number of cars using S St from Forster-Gill and Cutten in general to access Hiway 101. You have a recipe for congestion and gridlock unparalleled in Eureka (and we already have a few bad ones). Figure that into your cheerleading for the F-G project. The result is a much less liveable community and a Eureka few of us want.

  37. Capt. Truthiness
    August 24, 2011 at 9:46 pm

    Just who is Jack Belsher? Most attorneys in my opinion are good decent people, often having to twist truth on a client’s behalf to make a living off of a broken legal system. The truth about Jack Belsher is that he is an unprincipled bully who will hide the truth from good and decent people, promise anything, take advantage of anybody, and make a buck for the sake of fulfilling a transparent bloated ego. Jack Belsher knows that is the truth as do his clients. The integrity of anyone who would hire him should be questioned.

  38. Anonymous
    August 24, 2011 at 10:09 pm

    NIMBYs say the craziest things.

  39. tra
    August 24, 2011 at 11:03 pm

    The truth about Jack Belsher is that he is an unprincipled bully who will hide the truth from good and decent people, promise anything, take advantage of anybody…

    Well those of us reading this thread would have a hard time judging whether there is any truth to your accusations, since you’ve failed to provide any examples of Mr. Belsher’s alleged transgressions.

  40. Anonymous
    August 24, 2011 at 11:28 pm

    I smell a lawsuit being won.

  41. Anonymous
    August 25, 2011 at 6:25 am

    “They invent imaginary Forster Gill costs and forget their demanding much more expensive government services for far flung roads, security, medical emergencies, fire protection, communications, post offices, and schools. All the while driving long distances in gas guzzler trucks that add more global warming than future folks living in FG ever would. All of which they expect others will subsidize because they’re deserving ‘little people’.”

    once again Not A Native displays the odd combination of insight, ignorance, and arrogance.

  42. Anonymous
    August 25, 2011 at 7:16 am

    6:25, making stuff up and then being called out for it should embarrass you, not reinvigorate you to attack the people pointing out you’re making stuff up.

  43. August 25, 2011 at 7:52 am

    “Mark, your writing reads like you’re a whining crybaby. More specifically it suggests you have a chip on your shoulder. Here’s an article about the FG development but you criticise it without even having read it.”

    A chip? Whinning crybaby? Don’t you mean “whining”? I didn’t even talk about the FG project, my comment, tongue in cheek as it was, had to do with paying for the Sub Standard.

    Now I am petulant, but i never mentioned a boycott. You might want to look into a reading comprehension class.

    Just a thought.

  44. Anonymous
    August 25, 2011 at 8:03 am

    Funny how the potential traffic jam from FG is such a big deal and no one ever considers the traffic jam the Marina Center will make.

  45. Anonymous
    August 25, 2011 at 8:31 am

    10:09 – everyone is a NIMBY when it’s their back yard.

  46. Not A Native
    August 25, 2011 at 8:43 am

    So when you’re called out on a rant, you hide and say it was merely ‘tongue in cheek’. Kinda funny you’re being miffed at the TS’s journalistic standards when you demonstrate such low ones. Not much integrity there. Maybe its the medicine talking.

  47. Anonymous
    August 25, 2011 at 9:05 am

    Speaking of the Marina Center, which I don’t really have a problem with, I was driving around Eureka the other day and I noticed how poorly we have appreciate our beautiful waterfront. From Target to south Eureka, the views across the bay are marred by our city’s choice not to make the waterfront a beautiful place, and from places like the Warfinger, the view of Samoa is ugly old industry across the bay. We need to prioritize the waterfront as a resource like other cities have. Will the Marina Center be another ugly addition to that? It isn’t actually on the bay, but close. The new Shamus restaurant is not going to be directly on the water. Why not?? Why don’t we have more restaurants on the water, looking at the lovely views, why don’t we have walking trails, condos, homes, and access to the bay that is attractive? We have missed out there, and have taken an economic and aesthetic hit because of it.

  48. Anonymous
    August 25, 2011 at 9:35 am

    everyone is a NIMBY when it’s their back yard.

    Wrong 8:31. I have two developments happening near my home in McKinleyville right now. I’d love a town center built and open space preserved, but as long as we don’t have local representation (a city council), more houses are the result. I understood that when I bought my home, the fields near me would eventually be developed. I didn’t cry and moan at the public hearings. Cutten is no different. It’s land already surrounded by neighborhoods. Count yourself lucky half of it will be retained and public hiking trails built. There’s a degree of hypocrisy in NIMBYism… I got mine, but you can’t have yours. Yeah, right.

  49. Anonymous
    August 25, 2011 at 10:01 am

    It’s amazing just how poorly designed some of the newer developments are on the waterfront.

    Bayfront One? Wow, looks like a cheap spec home. The restaurant space couldn’t have been designed much worse. The Marina Center looks just as bad.

  50. CEQA 101
    August 25, 2011 at 10:02 am

    The County will win the lawsuit. The Forster Gill project is on its own permitting track which was started in 2007. Legally, a project or portion thereof, can not “jump track” and get approval within another process such as the multi-family rezone. The Forster-Gill project team is a confused bunch to say the least. When the County received its original certification of the 2009 Housing Element, they thought that automatically rezoned their property too. Sad, but Forster-Gill’s reps have absolutly no idea what they are doing and actually won’t even make it to court. The case will be thrown out based on basic legal process, of which they don’t seem to understand.

  51. Kale Estanoche
    August 25, 2011 at 10:13 am

    Much has been said about the existing traffic problems in Cutten. If the existing developments (particularly those built in the last 20 years) had been better conceived, we wouldn’t be in this mess. Low-density residential development far away from jobs results in more cars on the road. Why not work to address the existing traffic problems that are the result of poor planning? If folks are concerned by the amount of traffic right now, perhaps it is time to start looking at how to accommodate jobs closer to where people live.

  52. Anonymous
    August 25, 2011 at 10:36 am

    There are two naysayers here… developers who don’t want a smart growth developer paying more than required for impacts (setting a bad precedent), and NIMBYs who don’t realize what they’ll get if they win. The alternative is a bunch of individual subdivisions made one at a time (say, over 30 years just like the existing project would do, including affordable housing subdivisions) until one day you realize you’ve living in McKinleyville South because that’s all you have… subdivisions with no retail or business offices. Oh, that reminds me, the third group of naysayers are the good ol’ boys in Eureka who are quite happy with Cutten residents driving being forced to drive into Eureka to buy things. Look for any and all development just outside city limits to be vehemently opposed.

  53. August 25, 2011 at 12:49 pm

    “So when you’re called out on a rant, you hide and say it was merely ‘tongue in cheek’. Kinda funny you’re being miffed at the TS’s journalistic standards when you demonstrate such low ones. Not much integrity there. Maybe its the medicine talking.”

    “Well, too bad the link is for the TS. I refuse to pay for that rag so…
    I guess I will have to find out whats going on somewhere else…”

    How could anyone read that as not tongue in cheek?

    How could that be viewed as a rant?

    Now you attack me personally for my choice in “medicine”.

    You sir, are a troll.

  54. Random Guy
    August 25, 2011 at 1:07 pm

    “Here we have a developer complaining the county is stopping the creation of low income (aka affordable) housing. Hmm, now why would that be?”

    affordable for whom? Like everywhere else in the nation where those developments cover 90% of the landscape? Neither affordable nor comfortable. Not development aimed at quality of life and comfort of living, but profit motive.

    On one hand you’re upset about the “boatloads of people” that have already moved here, rightly argue that much of the “wild land” has disappeared and continues to disappear, only to ultimately say “fuck it, keep that failing formula going! Bring more of it to Humboldt, Humboldt needs more McDonaldsvilles!”

    Damn straight, I’m a NIMBY when it comes to the kind of development that’s already turned most of the state into urban blight. The older it gets, the more it degrades into what we see everywhere but here. Resources are diminishing, and the money’s not coming back.

    Maybe YOU need to recognize Humboldt as YOUR backyard as well.

  55. Random Guy
    August 25, 2011 at 1:39 pm

    …as I continue to read other comments, I may have confused a couple of Anonomi in my above reply…pretend my comment is addressed accordingly…or not…my points still stand.

  56. Not A Native
    August 25, 2011 at 6:09 pm

    I kinda like how Mark calls it a personal attack(a ‘bad thing’) when potential side effects of his medicine are pointed out. Then in the very next sentence he does the exact thing he says is abhorant, name calling. Just shows how out of it he is, or maybe its all ‘just kidding’.

    And yes Mark, your ‘rant’ would never be considered ‘tongue in cheek’ by anybody but someone with an addled mind. Calling a paper ‘a rag’ is obviously a joke. Isn’t that obvious???, NOT I’ll guess Mark finds Savage Henry seriously good journalism.

  57. Anonymous
    August 25, 2011 at 7:06 pm

    affordable for whom?

    Affordable to the average employed Humboldt County resident. Troll somewhere else NIMBY.

  58. August 25, 2011 at 9:16 pm

    Ummm, Whats wrong with Savage Henry? Its really really good for what it is.

    PS
    Calling you out as a troll isn’t name calling:
    In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory,extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.The noun troll may refer to the provocative message itself, as in: “That was an excellent troll you posted”. While the word troll and its associated verb trolling are associated with Internet discourse, media attention in recent years has made such labels subjective, with trolling describing intentionally provocative actions outside of an online context. For example, mass media uses troll to describe “a person who defaces Internet tribute sites with the aim of causing grief to families.”

    So if the shoe fits NAN…

  59. ShirleyValentine
    August 26, 2011 at 5:59 am

    In late 2009, at the end of Lumbar Hills, trees were clear cut for new homes. I haven’t been back since my Mum passed away and am curious if any homes have been built. Figas had the contract for logging and one of the drivers told me 60+ homes were going to be built and the Lumbar Hills would have another exit road.

  60. Not A Native
    August 26, 2011 at 8:35 am

    Mark, Savage Henry largely appeals to local young adult recreational pot users.

    Pointing out that your medicine has deleterious side effects is factual not a personal attack. You chose to make your use of pot part of your political campaign. If you believe it’s an attack, then you’ve attacked yourself.

    The scientifically proven short-term effects of marijuana include:
    •Distorted perception (sights, sounds, time, touch)
    •Problems with memory and learning
    •Loss of coordination
    •Trouble with thinking and problem-solving
    •Increased heart rate, reduced blood pressure
    Sometimes marijuana use can also produce anxiety, fear, distrust, or panic.

    Seems you react emotionally without insight, and then weasel(Gee, it was only tongue in cheek) and bluster(you’re a troll) out of accountability when called on it. That could be a side effect…

    Calling someone a ‘troll’ without specifics is a catch all judgement, derogatory name calling intended to intimidate them into silence. So if the shoe fits, Mark……

  61. August 26, 2011 at 8:49 am

    Nan,
    You are not citing facts, you are spewing FALSE propaganda. Pot, as you call it does NONE of the thing you describe, exept Increased heart rate and decreased blood pressure, and just so you know, those are not “bad” side effects.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11682259?dopt=Citation
    Neuropsychopharmacology.
    2001 Nov;25(5):757-65.

    Effects of acute smoked marijuana on complex cognitive performance.

    Hart CL, van Gorp W, Haney M, Foltin RW, Fischman MW.
    Source

    Division on Substance Abuse, New York State Psychiatric Institute, 1051 Riverside Drive, New York, NY 10032, USA.
    Abstract

    Although the ability to perform complex cognitive operations is assumed to be impaired following acute marijuana smoking, complex cognitive performance after acute marijuana use has not been adequately assessed under experimental conditions. In the present study, we used a within-participant double-blind design to evaluate the effects acute marijuana smoking on complex cognitive performance in experienced marijuana smokers. Eighteen healthy research volunteers (8 females, 10 males), averaging 24 marijuana cigarettes per week, completed this three-session outpatient study; sessions were separated by at least 72-hrs. During sessions, participants completed baseline computerized cognitive tasks, smoked a single marijuana cigarette (0%, 1.8%, or 3.9% Delta(9)-THC w/w), and completed additional cognitive tasks. Blood pressure, heart rate, and subjective effects were also assessed throughout sessions. Marijuana cigarettes were administered in a double-blind fashion and the sequence of Delta(9)-THC concentration order was balanced across participants. Although marijuana significantly increased the number of premature responses and the time participants required to complete several tasks, it had no effect on accuracy on measures of cognitive flexibility, mental calculation, and reasoning. Additionally, heart rate and several subjective-effect ratings (e.g., “Good Drug Effect,” “High,” “Mellow”) were significantly increased in a Delta(9)-THC concentration-dependent manner. These data demonstrate that acute marijuana smoking produced minimal effects on complex cognitive task performance in experienced marijuana users.

    Note:
    These data demonstrate that acute marijuana smoking produced minimal effects on complex cognitive task performance in experienced marijuana users.

  62. August 26, 2011 at 8:56 am

    Also, as a legitimate, legal patient for over 11 years, I find it offensive that you make the use of a legitimate medicine an issue of cognitive performance when the FACTS completely say the opposite.

    Do you deny trying to get an emotional response from me or others?
    That makes you a troll.
    I on the other hand am not going for people emotions, I cite FACT, you spew vile, incorrect propaganda under an assumed name and claim it is fact. It is not.

    Man up and use your real name.

    Also, it seems strange that you stigmatize an entire group ( young adults) as if they were still children. They are not. They are equal citizens with views that are every bit as relevant as yours. They are soon to become the voting majority, so I would watch out how i treated “young adults” if I were you.

  63. August 26, 2011 at 9:00 am

    Man up? Mark, are you originally from Texas?

  64. August 26, 2011 at 9:27 am

    No, I am from the Baltimore MD, Washington DC area.

  65. August 26, 2011 at 9:28 am

    I moved to the Arcata area after 9/11.

  66. August 26, 2011 at 9:37 am

    Where I taught Martial Arts to children,adults, and Law Enforcement.

  67. Auntie Arkley
    August 26, 2011 at 11:25 am

    Bottom line: There are empty homes for sale everywhere in Eureka and throughout the County. So who is going to buy these homes? They hope that people will move there from Eureka leaving it a ghost town that Arkley can develop into one large, polluted shopping mall! Why should we let more open space be developed when there is absolutely no need? Just to generate a huge profit for a greedy out-of-town developer?

  68. Random Guy
    August 26, 2011 at 12:38 pm

    NAN says: The scientifically proven short-term effects of marijuana include:
    •Distorted perception (sights, sounds, time, touch)
    •Problems with memory and learning
    •Loss of coordination
    •Trouble with thinking and problem-solving
    •Increased heart rate, reduced blood pressure
    Sometimes marijuana use can also produce anxiety, fear, distrust, or panic.

    …ONLY IF IT’S GOOD!

    auntie arkley @ 11:25 mentions a critical point that all proponents of mass development intentionally avoid…that there is no genuine shortage of homes and housing in Humboldt at all. There is, in fact, an abundance of places to buy and rent for all incomes. Anybody can casually find that out for themselves.

    The “shortage” is based ENTIRELY on the state and federal governments’ MANDATE to…as they put it…”accomodate growth”, and that mandate walks hand in hand with the increased takeover of corporate national franchise business.

    In other words: BAD.

    Our local leaders…Humboldt’s elected officials…owe it to us, their constituents, permanent residents, business owners, low income part-timers…EVERYBODY WHO ALREADY LIVES HERE….to work to improve OUR quality of life, today AND into the future. That doesn’t mean wasting our natural resources, destroying our open space, wasting our money, dilluting our local dollar value, by gettting themselves rich quick through building the infrastructure that already carpets most of the state, infrastructure whose population within has been failing since its creation.

    Follow the money, that’s all you gotta do. It becomes crystal clear. Who gets rich right away from all this?

  69. Anonymous
    August 26, 2011 at 2:53 pm

    Shirley, “Lumbar” Hills is actually named “Lundbar”, the combo of Lundblade and Barnum, the developers.

  70. Not A Native
    August 26, 2011 at 5:30 pm

    Random Guy, you know your stuff.

    But Mark would have you believe he’s never had the ‘good’ stuff. In fact, he believes the good stuff doesn’t even exist. Pot is purely medicine, it’s only effect is ameliorating medical maladies. To get good stuff, seems he smokes the TS ‘rag’, while keeping his tongue in his cheek.

  71. August 27, 2011 at 8:05 am

    NaN,
    … And you claim to NOT be a troll?

  72. Eric Kirk
    August 27, 2011 at 8:42 pm

    Great. Another lawsuit.

    I would like to know what percentage of the County budget is being dedicated to prosecuting or defending lawsuits these days.

  73. The Big Picture
    August 28, 2011 at 11:16 am

    Great, another citizen distracted by the costs of insured lawsuits while this community’s “Lund-Bar-Bareilles-Kluks” harvest the public’s infrastructure subsidies to turn granddaddy’s land into gold.

  74. Random Guy
    August 30, 2011 at 12:49 pm

    “Great, another citizen distracted by the costs of insured lawsuits while this community’s “Lund-Bar-Bareilles-Kluks” harvest the public’s infrastructure subsidies to turn granddaddy’s land into gold.”

    True. And and if the county doesn’t do what the state and federal governments say to “accomodate (their) growth”, the county’s real estate moguls and big developers won’t get free government money to build the infrastructure to….”accomodate growth”. That’s a WTF. Some of our county leaders refer to their loss of free government money as being a “penalty’ to the rest of us …who would insist on spending it in another department.

    It’s as plain as day.

  75. tra
    August 30, 2011 at 2:29 pm

    According to today’s Times-Standard, the Board of Supervisors approved the multi-family housing plan, and in order to reach their goal, they approved even more multi-family housing in Cutten:

    The two properties added to the inventory, units from the Samoa Master Plan and a Green Diamond parcel in Cutten, will require future action by the board or staff.

    http://www.times-standard.com/ci_18788753

    Now keep in mind that, according to Forster-Gill’s attorney, the act of placing parcels in the Housing Element as being “appropriate for zezoning as multi-family” constitutes a legally binding promise to do that re-zoning. If that line of reasoning holds up in court, then it looks like Green Diamond just got a guarantee that their Cutten development will be approved.

  76. tra
    August 30, 2011 at 2:30 pm

    That should read “rezoning,” not “zezoning.”

  77. Random Guy
    August 30, 2011 at 3:59 pm

    interesting and telling, tra. Road signs in the middle of nowhere…foundations being poured as we speak. Completely off the radar, as usual…then everybody rightfully complains 10 years later about how shitty things are getting.

    I’ve got a tourist mag from ’82…it shows lines of fisherman along the mouth of the Klamath hookin a river full of spawning salmon. Arials show grassy fields and huge areas of forest where there’s now “development” all over the bottoms between eureka and mckinleyville…with mckinleyville barely a ville at all…traffic trickling on single laned portions of 101…”the good ol’ days” that the old timers talk about. One has to wonder what goes on in the heads of 60+ year old “development” pushers. In 30 years they’ll be dead, and I’ll be their age now. And 30 years ago they were my age. At what point is that perspective lost to them regarding the present? They blame the likes of “hippies” “liberals” “growers” etc. for the downslope of this land, its economy and general attitude. Then expect people to cheerfully protest…not what they think is wrong, but how to make things right…”positivity”.

    “Hey, you dumb bitch, your house is on fire!”

    “HOW DARE YOU CALL ME THAT!”

    “You whorey slut, your house is on fire!”

    “THE NERVE OF YOU! If you don’t practice polite civility, nobody will ever listen to what you’re saying!”

    “…oh…pardon me, madame, but I just watched your house burn to the ground.”

    “WHY DIDN’T YOU SAY SOMETHING SOONER, ASSHOLE?!?”

  78. August 1, 2014 at 1:37 pm

    Hey there I am so happy I found your website, I really found you by error, while I was researching
    on Aol for something else, Anyhow I am here now and would just like to say many thanks for a marvelous post and
    a all round exciting blog (I also love the theme/design), I don’t have time to look over it
    all at the minute but I have saved it and also included your RSS feeds,
    so when I have time I will be back to read a lot more, Please do keep up the awesome work.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s