Home > Uncategorized > Free Speech Radio News covers Occupy Eureka, “Urgency Ordinance”

Free Speech Radio News covers Occupy Eureka, “Urgency Ordinance”

Not in Eureka, just cute.

The story is here:

http://fsrn.org/audio/humboldt-county-activists-condemn-restrictions-protest/10136

Dave Meserve is among those quoted in the story on the grassroots network, carried on 114 radio stations (locally, KMUD; nearby, KPFA out of Berkeley and KBOO out of Portland) and on shortwave radio and the internet.

  1. 2 cents
    April 12, 2012 at 6:06 pm

    If you didn’t catch it – though the site is down for maintenance, you can still access the archives at kmud.org. 5:30 -6:00 is the FSRN time-slot.

  2. Anonymous
    April 12, 2012 at 8:56 pm

    Dave Merserve is a loser that loves to see or hear his name in the media

  3. Ponder z
    April 12, 2012 at 9:03 pm

    Here is some real news.

    on WheelsJobsPlace an AdClassifiedsGarage SalesBusiness & Service DirTri-City WeeklyPlace an AdToday’s AdsAll Top ListingsLegal & Public NoticesReal EstateOn the Market

    HumCPR files lawsuit against county for ‘shaded’ parcels
    Times-Standardtimes-standard.com/
    Posted: 04/12/2012 06:17:14 PM PDT

    The Humboldt Coalition for Property Rights — a private property rights organization — announced today that it has filed a lawsuit against Humboldt County, stating it needs to stop the practice of shading parcels, or marking properties with an uncertain legal status.

    Parcels are ultimately deemed shaded when the planning department discovers that a parcel has been recorded for taxes with the assessor’s office, but not for development with the planning department. Planners then “shade” the parcel on a map with a pencil to indicate its uncertain legal status. Parcel owners must record their property with both departments to have it considered a legal parcel that hasn’t been improperly subdivided.

    HumCPR President Lee Ulansey said the practice has declared more than 1,000 parcels of privately-owned land effectively illegal. He said the process to clarify a parcel’s status is extortion.

    ”This practice requires a landowner, once they become aware of their status, to pay money to the county and prove their land entitlements are in order,” Ulansey said in a statement. “Humboldt families have been declared guilty by the county in many cases, without the county having performed any research or analysis to justify the shading.”

    A press release from HumCPR states it believes the county must notify parcel owners that their property was illegally created and give them an opportunity to prove otherwise. The release states the county’s planning department only informs affected people when someone applies for a permit. It stated the county often doesn’t have a record of why or when the parcel was shaded.
    Community Development Services Director Kirk Girard said the county mailed out letters to every property owner that had a shaded parcel more than six months ago, and that the county’s been working to resolve the issue for more than one year.

    ”We have notified every person,” Girard said. “We hired a planner for this and we have made a lot of progress.”

    Girard said the county’s proactive approach is paying off and that the uncertain status of more than 350 properties is no longer an issue due to resolutions. He said the county is currently actively working with about 90 property owners to resolve the issue or determine the best way to resolve the legality of a parcel.

    HumCPR’s attorney Timothy Needham, from the law firm of Janssen, Malloy LLP, filed the lawsuit against the county with co-counsel William Barnum of the Barnum Law Office.

    ”We believe that hundreds of property owners have had the value of their property placed in jeopardy and potentially have been harmed through this illegal process,” Needham said in a statement.

  4. Jack Sherman
    April 12, 2012 at 11:21 pm

    Got that folks?

    The successful Reich-Wing movement to divest from public services leaves every municipality underfunded. The Planning Dept. found a desperate way to, at least, enable property filings to trigger discovery of illegal parcels….like stopping the registration of a car some schmuck sold you that’s illegal to own or drive…making our streets a little safer in the process.

    Unfortunately, these schmucks are our own local good old boys and girls…well-healed pedigree born-here’s…documented club and church members, with valid registrations at the Chamber, Ingomar and Rotary, quick to bid on a bottle of wine at the KEET auction, anxious to show you their picture with Betty Chin. After generations of wheeling and dealing, they’ve become wealthy, well-connected, respectable businessmen, land attorney’s, speculators, property managers, realtors and brokers, expecting a walk on their land shenanigans while the county collapses into a disgraceful 23% home affordability rate.

    The Eureka Planning Department was recently notified of another illegal subdivision within the city limits by its owner Ken Bareilles. Tiny Eureka can’t keep track of its parcels either?

    Imagine that.

    Maybe HumCPR will join me in calling for diverting CAMP $$$ to finally reign-in the thousands of illegal subdivisions and structures blanketing rural Humboldt. With a small task-force, the Planning Department can utilize Google Earth to identify these structures and compare them to existing county records, in effect, exactly what the 2010 Census headquarters did, amid overwhelming shock and disbelief at the numbers.

    That should avoid any perception of unequal application of the law.

  5. Jack Sherman
    April 12, 2012 at 11:23 pm

    Please move these comments to the proper thread above!

  6. April 12, 2012 at 11:29 pm

    Can’t do it, Jack. Please repost.

  7. Toohey
    April 13, 2012 at 7:35 am

    Just love the use of young children as political props.

  8. Anonymous
    April 17, 2012 at 1:09 pm

    I’m pretty clueless to the drama, but after reading this, here’s what I want to know:

    1,000 or so shaded parcels in humboldt. Who’s complaining, specifically? That is, how many of these parcel owners are complaining (and how many parcels do they individually own) and what are they attempting to develop on the land? Given such a relatively small nuber, it should be very easy to determine whether or not some bulk developers are looking to blow up a bunch of land all at once. Are there true to form back to the landers in the mix?

  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