Home > Humboldt County, Rob Arkley > Girard stays despite the pitchforks

Girard stays despite the pitchforks

Community Development Services Director Kirk Girard survived his employee evaluation despite dire pleas and predictions from his longtime foes in the development sector.

Girard was directed to develop options for improving departmental performance, including possible staffing and/or structural changes, and work with County Administrative Officer Phil Smith-Hanes on improving communication and permitting.

Developer groups such as HELP and HumCPR have been gunning for Girard for years. Yesterday’s decision by Humboldt County Supervisors must come as a mighty blow.  Expect a blanket of angry newsletters soon.

  1. October 12, 2011 at 8:32 am

    Kirk moves like a turtle. Go boy!

  2. October 12, 2011 at 8:32 am

    Good Ol’ Boys Rule!

  3. Decline To State
    October 12, 2011 at 8:44 am

    I can’t believe the development crowd lost this battle. They tried so hard to get Girard removed. A win for Humboldt!

  4. Process Watcher
    October 12, 2011 at 8:49 am

    The good ol’ boys have been huddling to craft their tactics and strategy between now and the 2012 election as to how they can stop the General Plan Update from being completed. By any means necessary.

    Watch for them to lean on Virginia, Ryan Sundberg and Jimmy Smith to the maximum extent possible, to arm-twist, cajole and threaten, to get their goal accomplished.

    Virginia’s bought and paid for, Ryan’s not much better, though he’s still riding along pretending he’s a reasonable, thinking guy. Jimmy, to his credit, still isn’t owned by anybody.

  5. tra
    October 12, 2011 at 9:16 am

    How appropriate that the same day Girard received his feather-light slap on the wrist from the Supervisors, the “Housing for All”-initiated building-permit moratorium (a product of one of the Planning Department’s most recent failures) was scheduled to take effect.

    While Kirk “develops options for improving departmental performance, including possible staffing and/or structural changes,” local building trades workers, will have to “develop options” for surviving with less work and less pay, thanks to the county’s failure to meet its obligations under the settlement agreement and state law.

    Nevermind that these workers did nothing to cause the problems that the “Housing for All” moratorium is supposedly trying to address — as usual, it’s the workers and the public at large who are punished for the failures of public officials. Just more “collateral damage” I guess.

    Along with Girard and his “supervisors,” Humboldt’ out-of-work tradesmen can also thank Rob Arkley (whose front-group, “Sunshine for Humboldt,” originally filed the lawsuit that ultimately led us to the current situation).

  6. SYLVIA DE ROOY
    October 12, 2011 at 9:25 am

    It’s nonsense to think that Girards only opponents are the “development crowd”. He has created more anger and frustration than any other official in this county. Complaints about him pour in to the county and the Grand Jury. He deals with people with incredible arrogance and he does so because he can. It’s the most powerful job in the county and there are virtually no effective brakes on his actions. Few ever hear about his ugly actions. I was disgusted yesterday to hear Baykeepers begging that his job be saved. Aside from the questionable appropriateness of a non-profit taking sides on an issue of that sort it showed incredible ignorance of Girard and his actions. Clif Clendenon is Girards suck up buddy who has handled complaints against Girard by parroting anything Girard says, I’ve witnessed that happening and it’s not pretty. Yesterday I watched the 2 of them exchange conspiratorial grins.
    The BOS has, sadly, ignored the Grand Jury findings and suggestions about Girards role in the Headwaters Fund.
    Whoever wrote the article above does not know the reality of Girards actions in terms of how extensive his impacts are. He is not anti development, he is simply pro Girard and does what it takes to build his own power. Anyone who doesn’t get that (and clearly Baykeepers and Healthy Humboldt doen’t get it) are niave. Granted that his abusive behavior in regard to the average person is not publicized I expect people to try to get the whole picture before they print things like “despite dire pleas and predictions from his longtime foes in the development sector” . Only one person who testified yesterday could even remotely be associated with the “development sector”.
    The bottom line is that Girards job should have been cut to the nib and accountability should have been solidly built in to the system.

  7. SYLVIA DE ROOY
    October 12, 2011 at 9:26 am

    It’s nonsense to think that Girards only opponents are the “development crowd”. He has created more anger and frustration than any other official in this county. Complaints about him pour in to the county and the Grand Jury. He deals with people with incredible arrogance and he does so because he can. It’s the most powerful job in the county and there are virtually no effective brakes on his actions. Few ever hear about his ugly actions. I was disgusted yesterday to hear Baykeepers begging that his job be saved. Aside from the questionable appropriateness of a non-profit taking sides on an issue of that sort it showed incredible ignorance of Girard and his actions. Clif Clendenon is Girards suck up buddy who has handled complaints against Girard by parroting anything Girard says, I’ve witnessed that happening and it’s not pretty. Yesterday I watched the 2 of them exchange conspiratorial grins.
    The BOS has, sadly, ignored the Grand Jury findings and suggestions about Girards role in the Headwaters Fund.
    Whoever wrote the article above does not know the reality of Girards actions in terms of how extensive his impacts are. He is not anti development, he is simply pro Girard and does what it takes to build his own power. Anyone who doesn’t get that (and clearly Baykeepers and Healthy Humboldt doen’t get it) are naive. Granted that his abusive behavior in regard to the average person is not publicized I expect people to try to get the whole picture before they print things like “despite dire pleas and predictions from his longtime foes in the development sector” . Only one person who testified yesterday could even remotely be associated with the “development sector”.
    The bottom line is that Girards job should have been cut to the nib and accountability should have been solidly built in to the system.

  8. tra
    October 12, 2011 at 9:47 am

    Sylvia,

    Oh dear. You have committed the unforgiveable sin of being a progressive-minded, environmentally-concerned Humboldt resident who dares to question the Girard regime. Prepare to be ostracized and demonized, lumped in with Arkley and “greedy developers” (and of course part of an “unholy alliance” with pot growers).

    Remember, the True Believers of Humboldt’s Progressive Orthodoxy obey the axiom of Chicago machine politics that is captured in this joke:

    Question: What do you call 99% loyalty? Answer: Disloyalty!

  9. Plain Jane
    October 12, 2011 at 9:53 am

    So who are these non-developers who had such negative direct dealings with Kirk Giraud (as opposed to his staff) and why didn’t the T-S mention them? The only (semi) non-developer they quoted who opposes him is the pre-school developer whose claims just aren’t believable. Does he work the front counter at Planning these days?

  10. October 12, 2011 at 9:54 am

    Tra @ 9:47
    Exactly!

  11. grackle
    October 12, 2011 at 10:03 am

    I’m surprised at the support for Girard indicated by this post. If not the head of community development, just who is responsible for the decade long unfinished update to the general plan? Who is responsible for the limbo of “shaded parcels” ? Perhaps I don’t understand what I’ve been reading in the papers and blogs about local affairs over the last year or so but isn’t this director responsible for the general plan being rejected by the state numerous times? Maybe someone/ some entity other than this director and his department is/are responsible for the comedy of the disfunction of the planning/ development process here abouts?

  12. tra
    October 12, 2011 at 10:03 am

    “pre-school developer”

    LOL! Just goes to show how anyone who is critical of the Girard regime magically becomes a “developer,” even if all they’re trying to do is open a pre-school.

  13. whaaatusaaay
    October 12, 2011 at 10:23 am

    It’s unfortunately laughable to think that if it wasn’t mentioned in the Times-Standard that it can’t be true PJ…come on, that’s really grasping. You are more aware than that.

  14. Plain Jane
    October 12, 2011 at 10:23 am

    What a load of BS, Tra. You are playing the same games the right wing plays, ignoring parts of a sentence that don’t fit your spin. Shameful! She was a pre-school developer and no amount of your ridiculous spin will change that fact. Now let’s talk about your stake in this issue since it’s obvious you have one. Are you in the building trades, by any chance?

  15. Anon
    October 12, 2011 at 10:26 am

    You’re fundamentally misunderstanding the announcement if you think “Girard is staying.” That will prove to be incorrect.

  16. Plain Jane
    October 12, 2011 at 10:28 am

    Too bad you aren’t well aware enough to grasp the difference between a question as to who spoke and a claim (that I didn’t make) that it can’t be true. I don’t believe the pre-school developer because what she said she was told is too ridiculous and even she doesn’t claim that Giraud told her she didn’t need a permit.

  17. tra
    October 12, 2011 at 10:33 am

    grackle asks: “If not the head of community development, just who is responsible for the decade long unfinished update to the general plan?”

    Well, the Board of Supervisors is ultimately responsible for overseeing the update process and completing the job.

    So while Girard is an important actor/writer/director in that “comedy of dysfunction,” it’s our elected officials who are the executive producers.

  18. SYLVIA DE ROOY
    October 12, 2011 at 10:48 am

    Plain Jane, you are wrong. Girard was quoted in the paper, after Ms. Mosher, the pre-school owner, complained about Girard, as saying ,” this woman was told what zones she could open a preschool in and she chose not to open in these zones.” He admitted that he had told her about zones where she would not need a permit. He had lied to her, there is no such thing as a zone where she would not have needed a permit.
    Girard also told someone who protested a permit for a gravel mine in his neighborhood that, although the permit was granted based on lies it was “too late to do anything about it”. Since there is no such thing as a statute of limitations on something like that what Girard said was not true. He simply wasn’t going to take on a good old boy who had gotten the permit because he was a friend of Roger Rodoni. When the complainant protested Girard told him that if he didn’t like it, “Sue me”.

  19. Plain Jane
    October 12, 2011 at 10:52 am

    You’ll have to provide a direct quote because I don’t see that in the T-S article, Sylvia. Repeating unsupported rumors doesn’t further honest debate.

  20. tra
    October 12, 2011 at 10:54 am

    Plain Jane fumes: “What a load of BS, Tra. You are playing the same games the right wing plays, ignoring parts of a sentence that don’t fit your spin. Shameful! She was a pre-school developer and no amount of your ridiculous spin will change that fact.”

    I have never heard the term “pre-school developer” before. I guess if someone was a contractor with a specialty in building new pre-schools then that label might logically apply. But it was my impression that the woman in question just runs a pre-school and needed a new site. That qualifies her as a “pre-school developer?” Really?

    “Now let’s talk about your stake in this issue since it’s obvious you have one. Are you in the building trades, by any chance?”

    One does not have to be in the building trades to be disturbed by the fact that carpenters, plumbers, electricians, roofers, painters and so on may be put out of work by the building-permit moratorium — even though these tradesmen have done nothing wrong and had no control over the county’s failure to meet the terms of their settlement agreement with “Housing for All?”

    I have a “stake” in this the same way anyone with empathy for their fellow human beings has a “stake” in it: I don’t think we should be punishing workers for the failure of public officials. I know, it’s a radical concept.

  21. Not an Expert
    October 12, 2011 at 10:55 am

    @ tra, you must have not been watching recent GPU hearings. The environmentalist critics of current planning policies disagree with Kirk quite often, as does the Planning Commission. His recommendations for less stringent policies to protect water resources were rejected by the Planning Commission, which voted overwhelmingly to support much more protective policies for water and fish.

  22. Plain Jane
    October 12, 2011 at 11:00 am

    Would you like “pre-school builder” better,Tra? And you didn’t actually answer whether or not you are in the building trades, although I agree that it’s possible for people to care about the livelihoods of others and how it impacts our own livelihoods. Now are you or are you not employed in an industry directly involved in the building trades? I am not, but (like most people) my income requires people being able to afford my services regardless where they work.

  23. Not an Expert
    October 12, 2011 at 11:04 am

    @grackle: The Planning Commission voted in 2008 to hear testimony on the entire GPU without voting, and then started the hearings all over again at square one in 2010. That was not staff’s recommendation, and it delayed the process tremendously, though the final outcome has incorporated so much public input, it’s going to be better in the end for the 4 year delay.

    In other counties, GPUs take far less time, and consider far less public input. They also tend to have much less engaged citizenry on the whole.

    The Board of Supervisors and Planning Commission are the decisionmakers. Imagine having 12 bosses with different views, all trying to represent various contituencies. And those 12 bosses can’t discuss anything amongst themselves except in public meetings (except in pairs) according to the Brown Act.

  24. Anonymous
    October 12, 2011 at 11:04 am

    the construction industry suffered far worse in counties that lacked thoughtful planning than here, just as PL workers suffered by adherence to their bosses business plan

  25. grackle
    October 12, 2011 at 11:06 am

    Well, PJ, I I’m surprised to see the degree of your partiality. I found nothing in Ms. Mosher’s TS piece unbelievable; and I find it incerdible that you would refer to her as a developer, as if developing pre-schools were her business rather than just simply trying to open one. Whyever you are supporting Girard isn’t furthered by this line.

    re TRA: So while Girard is an important actor/writer/director in that “comedy of dysfunction,” it’s our elected officials who are the executive producers.

    It seems reasonable that the director would be held accountable- is he not making the decisions on which the supervisors must rely? Isn’t he the one who should be aware of the state requirements and pass that on to his employers? No one can object about ultimate responsibility lying with the supervisors but it seems to me they can only be faulted in so far as they have hired an incompetent.

    I am not fixed in this view, if someone can tell me with a straight face that Girard has done a good job in these various matters but so far the evidence points the other way.

  26. tra
    October 12, 2011 at 11:13 am

    P.J. No, I’m not employed in the building trades or any industry related to it, but I am certainly concerned about the impact this building-permit moratorium may have on working people. Aren’t you?

    The county’s failure to avoid this moratorium hasn’t cost Girard his job, but it may cost a lot of other folks their jobs.

    How many, and for how long? I don’t yet know. Still waiting for the details.

  27. Plain Jane
    October 12, 2011 at 11:22 am

    I already said I was concerned, TRA, but blaming Giraud for this fiasco is like blaming Obama for the recession. He follows the direction of the board which changes with changes to the board. Imagine that!

    You want to believe Mosher because it reinforces your view that Giraud is a liar and the cause of all our problems, Grackle. I’ve had only minimal experience with the Planning Dept. and not for years, but getting through the permitting maze has always been onerous and sometimes contradictory, but that was building inspectors’ different interpretations of code, not the Director’s fault. I know many people who have built homes without problems, some who even built the homes and later got their permits so it can’t be all that bad.

  28. tra
    October 12, 2011 at 11:22 am

    grackle said: “It seems reasonable that the director would be held accountable is he not making the decisions on which the supervisors must rely?”

    Well for major policy decisions, the way it’s supposed to work is that the staff present options and the supervisors make the decisions. But for more intra-departmental matters of policy and supervision, those matters delegated to the director. So both have a level of responsibility for the way the planning department (dys)functions.

    I’m certainly not arguing that Girard should not be held accountable by the Board of Supervisors (he should!) I’m just pointing out that the Board of Supervisors should also be held accountable — by us, the voters.

  29. dj
    October 12, 2011 at 11:26 am

    Tra @ 10:33am,
    Good point about our Supes being ultimately responsible for the General Plan Update. I also think anon has it right that the announcement does not mean Girard is staying on board as CDS Director. And while I am a supporter of many “Alternative A” policies in the GPU, I think it makes sense to restructure the Department in a manner that relieves Kirk of his oversight of the Department as a whole, while allowing him to focus on the completion of the GPU and other areas where he has proven to be an asset (such as his role in securing funding and participating in various programs that benefit the entire County). But, regardless of Kirk’s role, I do hope the Supes move forward on the GPU and complete the job without any more stalling. Lastly, I would also point to the fact that a major reason the GPU has taken so long is all of the public meetings and the oftentimes heated testimony – which I think have turned out to be invaluable for the inclusion of diverse perspectives in the draft GPU that will hopefully be appearing before the Supes within the next few months.

  30. tra
    October 12, 2011 at 11:36 am

    P.J.,

    As I’ve pointed out in several comments, the Board certainly has its share of the blame for this moratorium, as well as other recent fiascos. But that doesn’t mean Girard is blameless — he’s not just some low-level employee “just following orders,” he’s in an executive position and is supposed to provide leadership for his department.

    Somehow we got to the point where the county’s failure to get its act together on the multi-family housing portion of its Housing Element has now resulted in some kind of building-permit moratorium — a very substantial failure on the part of both Girard and the Board of Supervisors, and with some ugly real-world consequences for working families.

  31. tra
    October 12, 2011 at 11:41 am

    Gotta go now…thing to do, places to go, people to see…will check in here later.

    Maybe by then someone will have confirmation of just what the dimensions of the “Housing for All”-initiated building-permit are?

    What kinds of permits won’t be issued, how long will the moratorium last, and what (if anything) can the county do to resolve the situation and get the judge to lift the moratorium?

  32. Plain Jane
    October 12, 2011 at 11:41 am

    What can Giraud actually do about the housing element without the supes’ majority consensus and cooperation, TRA? Do you think he is stonewalling them on getting it done? If so, why didn’t they fire him? This is a different issue entirely from Giraud’s leadership or lack of it at the Planning Dept about which I have no knowledge or opinion.

  33. tra
    October 12, 2011 at 11:44 am

    Meant to say: Maybe by then someone will have confirmation of just what the dimensions of the “Housing for All”-initiated building-permit MORATORIUM are?

  34. Ben
    October 12, 2011 at 12:03 pm

    As folks expressed concerns about what being rezoned would mean and when asked if they could still build a single family residence on their land, they were told yes as long as you provide for the multi-family eventually. Unfortunately since the rezoned lands are now in a building moritorium and can not develop unless they meet the 16 unit per acre level, those people who agreed are now screwed since there is no way it is affordable without grant money to meet that requirement.

  35. Anonymous
    October 12, 2011 at 12:22 pm

    With all due respect to SYLVIA DE ROOY, the entire post is hearsay.

    Please explain your Headwaters post, a specific Grand Jury complaint…anything that actually reads”ugly”, as you claim.

  36. Anonymous
    October 12, 2011 at 12:23 pm

    And how many in the realtor/developer crowd said of the moratorium “bring it on”? The answer – quite a few. Now they are complaining about what they seemed to be asking for. Hmm. Seems to me they are only interested making the County look like it’s not doing it’s job. With such a vested interest in seeing projects move forward one would think that they could at least get it together to offer some thoughtful solutions. But nope. They only like playing the blame game.

  37. Anonymous
    October 12, 2011 at 1:27 pm

    PJ you B wrong again. As usual. Anyone who has had anything to do with planning from the front desk to the back room hates Kirk. He is worse than you can imagine. And! we all know what an imagination you have.

  38. Anonymous
    October 12, 2011 at 3:03 pm

    Girard may well have other faults but that does not change the fact that if he’s ousted, it’s a WIN for Rob Arkley, HELP and HumCPR.

    As to folks who’ve broken the law crying foul, I think they have very limited credibility (…but someone at the front desk told me I don’t need a business permit to operate my business in a residential district and now I’m shocked to learn they were wrong!? And don’t even start in with Ken, “what do you mean I need approval to subdivde?” Berallis)

  39. longwind
    October 12, 2011 at 3:09 pm

    PJ, here’s background perspective on your question: the commonest systemic critique of county government is that staff tells Supervisors what to think and do. That Supervisors shrink in horror from supervision, or even direction, except when quantities of public pitchforks or private donors are involved–and then they often just cover up the usual staff contempt for process and consequence. All this is bigger than Kirk Girard, he’s only the biggest and worst of them.

    A good recent example was the final resolution of the Code Enforcement controversy, when staff first proposed to just let the Sheriff run everything, without any review. Alas, that was too shameless even for the Supes, so they palmed impunity off on county counsel instead. Now, there is still no review, no process, no longer even an operations manual worthy of the name–and there’s no longer anyone to complain to, since the Supes don’t supervise and county counsel isn’t paid to return communications from the mere public. That’s typical staff reform.

    Girard in that instance contributed only pompous fatuities along the lines of “the public’s demand for decency” required Code Enforcement to make a dozen single mothers and their families homeless at Yee Haw. And the Times-Standard reported his statement without even making monkey faces, even after all charges were dropped.

    Come, let us make monkey faces together.

  40. Suck eggs
    October 12, 2011 at 3:17 pm

    In all fairness we should initiate a Plain Jane social justice program. We should confiscate or tax into forfeiture all homes and property owned by enviro-obstructionist, or government pensioners who have the attitude; “I got mine already, too bad for you.” We can then redistribute the properties to people who need homes and believe in treating people with the same regard and fairness as themselves.

  41. Anonymous
    October 12, 2011 at 4:09 pm

    If Kirk gets fired it’s a victory for Arkley. BULLSHIT! It’s a win for all of humboldt except for the hand out poverty pimps sue for profiet we know more than you do phonles like Jen,Beth,Ken,Pete,Scott,Elizebeth,Mark and the rest of the phonies that are worse than anything a sum bag like Herowitz did to our county. Just saying.

  42. Jimmy on the Fence
    October 12, 2011 at 5:05 pm

    Girard is a political survivor he switched to a more liberal view when it required to do so now he will switch back to a more conservative view as he tries to keep his job with the next board. His keystone for his job has been Jimmy sitting on the fence for the last 10 years. Remember it used to be Radoni & Giest Vs Neely & Wooley with Jimmy frozen like a deer in the headlights now it is Bass & Sundburg Vs Lovelace & Clendenen with Jimmy frozen like a deer in the headlights.
    Stay tuned as Jimmy no longer will be there I think that Girard will placate Sundburg as his new Jimmy.

  43. Joe Citizen
    October 12, 2011 at 5:24 pm

    GPU aside, he should be gone for directing a public office that has been arrogant, incompetent, unresponsive and unhelpful to the citizenry. I work throughout norcal, and visit many city and county planning depts. HumCo is the worst, although in fairness there has been some improvement in customer service over the last few years. Girard staying is not a loss for the ‘development crowd’ nor a ‘win for Humboldt’, its just more of the same.

  44. grouchy
    October 12, 2011 at 5:27 pm

    Whew!
    Well, first of all — who’s responsible for 10 years + with no GPU if not KG? How about all the obstructionists and propagandists demanding that the process be slowed down, throwing as many obstacles as possible in the path of the planning commission? Reiterating the same old scares — the merger ordinance! yikes! but the merger ordinance is OUT of the GPU — and so much more.
    Still not enough public input? Never enough public input until I get what I want!
    Interestingly, back in 2006, Roger Rodoni and Jill then-Duffy were calling for KG’s head, and the same people who today want the process slowed down were demanding it be speeded up then. I had an interesting email dialog with Duffy, who said her main complaint with KG was that he was dragging out the process. KG was told to give the Supes a more precise schedule, and he did — which, if it had been followed, would have the GPU completed by the end of 2008.
    I certainly have disagreed with KG on issues. I do think he’s a political operator and while I’ve never felt intimidated by him, I’ve sometimes found myself a bit swiveled when he turns on the charm. But it’s a political damn job; nobody could survive it without technique. From reading old newspapers I’ve learned that his predecessor and his predecessor and his predecessor were also reviled, for many of the same reasons. Face it, none of is likes to be told what we can build or not build on our property — although we like to retain some control of our neighbor, especially if he wants to build multi-family housing. Being planning director is like being chief inspector AND chief policy officer of the IRS.
    Restructuring the department, improving the process — those things are needed. Put planners in the rural areas so they can learn about the realities of rural life on the ground. THat will help a whole lot more than firing anybody.

  45. tra
    October 12, 2011 at 5:36 pm

    As Eric Kirk pointed out on the “lawsuit” thread, the Times-Standard did eventually post a story about the parameters that Judge Reinholtson set for the Housing For All-initiated building-permit moratorium that is now in effect.

    http://www.times-standard.com/breakingnews/ci_19097276

    It’s not at all what Housing For Now had wanted (a broad moratorium applying to almost any building permits), as approved by Judge Reinholtson the moratorium only applies to multi-family housing of less than 16 units per acre.

    So you can still get a permit to build single family housing, but you can’t get a permit to build a multi-family structure that will be, say, 14-units-per-acre. And this will increase the supply of “affordable housing” how, exactly?

    I guess people who are in need of affordable, multi-family housing units, and would have been happy with a unit in a 12 or 14 unit-per-acre situation can thank “Housing for All” for eliminating that option. Perhaps they should change their name to “Housing for Those Who Meet Our Inflexible Standards for Unit Density.”

  46. Jimmy on the Fence
    October 12, 2011 at 5:59 pm

    Review, currently the county is fighting 4 or 5 lawsuits in relation to the General Plan or Housing Element which is part of the General Plan. It seems both Conservatives and Liberals are unhappy as groups that are in litigation with the County come from both sides. So, I guess Kirk is doing a good job as everyone is unhappy, isn’t that a sign of good government. This will be taxpayer money well spent. Thanks Kirk, good luck with the promotion.

  47. October 12, 2011 at 6:02 pm

    “reasonable” is so subjective…

  48. Anonymous
    October 12, 2011 at 7:40 pm

    Arkley is not doing well in the victory department lately. That said, this may be the least of his worries.

  49. Bolithio
    October 12, 2011 at 7:53 pm

    No matter how much I want to believe in the county to provide a consistent framework to get permits or conduct projects requiring county discretion, I am always disappointed. And that is a very nice way of putting it. Girard in my experience advises planning staff and the board based on his personal views and bias that is often times at odds with the current laws and regs. But if you dont have the money to truly battle the county, there is nothing you can do about it.

    Go get a Certificate of Compliance on your rural parcel. Try to claim the patents your ancestors my have left behind for you. Split a lot with your friends or family, adjust a property line, let alone get a sub division – and I promise you will have a miserable time interacting with planning staff and the mysterious ‘management’. They simply don’t like you or your project. Or at least thats how they make you feel.

    It may not be all kirk. But the captain of the ship always bears the blame, so I blame him.

  50. anonymous
    October 12, 2011 at 9:00 pm

    PJ…why do you say Giraud and not Girard throughout? Is it a reference I missed in earlier postings? (I thought it was a typo until I saw it in multiple postings).

  51. Anonymous
    October 12, 2011 at 11:20 pm

    It concerns me that someone like SYLVIA DE ROOY is actually on the grand jury, and then writes about it here in this way.

  52. Not an Expert
    October 13, 2011 at 8:32 am

    @Ben: what’s interesting about your statement is that reps of the Northern Cal. Association of Homebuilders, Humboldt Association of Realtors, etc. clearly said “bring on the moratorium,” claiming that they had all their building permits for the year so it won’t affect them. Now you are so concerned about the property owners…

  53. Thorstein Veblen
    October 13, 2011 at 12:46 pm

    The moratorium doesn’t have much real affect when nobody’s building anything due to the economy.

  54. American turning commie
    October 13, 2011 at 4:38 pm

    Somebody please buy all my real estate I speculated in and accumulated during my lifetime. I promise to give 10% to the Occupy Wall-Street/Mart demonstrators.

    Pretty please, and pay my property taxes too.

  55. Anonymous
    October 14, 2011 at 7:56 am

    This is a great time to build if you have saved a little cash, Thorstein. Many good contractors are available and the prices are lower, more competitive. It feels good to put someone to work and keep the construction happening.

  56. tra
    October 14, 2011 at 9:59 am

    Thorstein,

    Another way of looking at it is that given the weak economy and the high level of unemployment, ANY unnecessary loss of employment that may occur due to this moratorium will hurt even more than it would have if the economy was stronger.

  57. Bolithio
    October 14, 2011 at 10:18 am

    But there is significant building occurring all across rural humboldt. Its just not permitted. Wont stop the assessor from taxing them, but thats another story.

  58. The Monitor
    October 14, 2011 at 6:33 pm

    boring!!! Have you folks nothing better to do than mental masturbation? Get out once in a while and enjoy the fall weather.

  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