District Attorney – Paul Hagen. I’m not going to be overly long-winded about this. I know I’m in the minority in Sohum, and I understand the loyalty. I am not voting against Paul Gallegos, whom I consider a friend and whom I’ll support in a run-off against Jackson if that’s how it falls. I’m simply voting for the candidate I believe has the best leadership qualities to run the District Attorney office in a manner which will mitigate the deep political/cultural divide in the county and the impact of that divide on the office’s function. Hagen has shown just as much courage in taking on the big boys as Gallegos, and he’s landed a few of them in jail and obtained fines against many more. The whole “he hasn’t tried felonies” meme is a canard – the standard of proof is the same for felonies and misdemeanors. I do sympathize with Gallegos in that many in what we term the “Old Guard” have undermined Gallegos from the start – pushing a recall before his office seat was warmed. He’s made some mistakes and he’s had some good successes, and maybe he’ll find his groove. But I think Hagen, every bit as progressive politically as Gallegos, is better suited for the office. I would like to see Gallegos run for Supervisor, or maybe even a higher office. He’s got the machine in place, and a legislative office is more suited for his vision.
Assessor – Jon Brooks for all the reasons I’ve stated on this blog and in my letter to the TS.
Auditory/Controller – Joseph Mellett
Sheriff – Mike
Senator – Barbara Boxer (though I love Mickey Kaus’ writing and I was tempted to vote for him on that basis, Boxer is actually a pretty good Senator)
Congress – Mike Thompson
Governor – Jerry Brown
Lt. Governor – it’s a springboard position, to preserve and groom candidates for a real office. Besides, Brown could die in office. In any case, for all his faults, Gavin Newsom is an excellent candidate who may be needed to take down some mad dog Republican for office some day. He’s got my vote.
Attorney General – Kamala Harris
Insurance Commissioner – David Jones. It’s time to get someone with consumer advocacy experience into the office. For some reason Californians keep insisting on electing foxes to watch the hen house.
Secretary of State – Debra Bowen – she’s actually done an excellent job, with one minor lapse of intelligence regarding her reading of the run-off election process. I forgive her.
Controller – John Chiang
Treasurer – Bill Lockyer
State School Superintendent – Gloria Romero
Board of Equalization – Betty Yee
State Senate – Noreen Evans
Did I forget anything?
56 comments
Comments feed for this article
June 7, 2010 at 5:51 pm
Fred Mangels
An Authoritarian plate, for sure!
As I would of expected.
June 7, 2010 at 6:04 pm
Matt
Sheriff?
June 7, 2010 at 6:07 pm
humboldturtle
Hagen? Pshaw.
June 7, 2010 at 6:14 pm
Eric Kirk
Sheriff?
Mike!
June 7, 2010 at 6:45 pm
Eric Kirk
An Authoritarian plate, for sure!
Huh? Oh, you mean Mike!
Honestly, I think “authoritarian” is to so-called libertarians as “negative products” are to circle-drawing Amway suckers. Such is the nature of an ideology which claims to embrace liberty while promoting a social relationship to wealth with requires, yes, authoritarianism.
June 7, 2010 at 6:56 pm
Anonymous
Do you ever vote for the white guy if he’s on a ballot opposite someone “of color?”
June 7, 2010 at 7:36 pm
the reasonable anonymous
Yeah, I kinda suspected that you were leaning toward Mr. Precious Bodily Fluids!
Hey that’s cool, he’s definitely way better than Jackson. As I’ve said before I’m sticking with Gallegos, but I’ll certainly vote for Hagen if it comes down to Hagen and Jackson in the runoff. I’m glad to hear you confirm that if it comes down to Gallegos vs. Jackson (which I still think is the most likely scenario), you’ll go for Gallegos.
I don’t buy the idea that Hagen is in any position to “bridge the deep political/cultural divide. Aside from his Purity of Essence policy on drinking only water (which is exactly the kind of emblem of cult-like eco-groovy hippy-dippyness that engages the gag reflex of many middle-of-the-road and right-of-center folks in our county), he seems to be running more or less from Gallegos’ left, certainly a good majority of Hagen’s supporters and endorsers are the usual suspects from Humnboldt’s organizational / ideological left. I don’t know what would make you think that the same powers who have tried to undermine Gallegos will be any less likely to go after Hagen once he is in there.
Sure, you hear Rose Welsh saying nice things about him right now (though she’s clear that she’s voting for Jackson), but that’s just because she’s smart enough to realize that Hagen is primarily competing for votes from part of Gallegos’ potential base of support on the left. Essentially the way I think this will shake out is that Hagen’s candidacy will have been Jackson’s ticket into the run-off, by holding Gallegos below 50% in the first round. In the second round, Gallegos will win, with help from voters like you who like Hagen better, but either don’t mind Gallegos, or are willing to vote for him because they realize what a step backward Jackson’s election would be. At least that’s both my hope and my prediction.
Anyway, I just don’t buy the idea that putting in Hagen, who is even MORE tied into and supported by the organizational / ideological left, a guy who believes that drinking anything but water is going to pollute your body, that somehow HIS election is going to “mitigate the deep political/cultural divide” in the county. Quite possibly just the opposite.
June 7, 2010 at 7:37 pm
the reasonable anonymous
By the way, while the standards of proof for a misdemeanor are the same as for a felony, the stakes just aren’t as high in a misdemeanor trial, nor are the trials anywhere near as intensely fought out (because the stakes aren’t as high). One Hagen claim that I found particularly unpersuasive was his claim that Gallegos just doesn’t know how to plea bargain effectively (a bit of Jackson-lite rhetoric that riffs on her idea that plea bargains are being mishandled, without going full tilt like her claim that Gallegos has been involved in many, many “illegal” plea bargains).
I would have to guess that if Hagen has only tried ONE felony case, then he has virtually NO experience in a felony-level plea bargain negotiation. So why the heck should we believe that he knows better how to do it? Gallegos has done tons of them, and from what I can tell there are very few cases where I would actually argue with the result.
And Gallegos handled plea bargains when he was in private practice as a defense lawyer, too. So he’s been involved in those negotiations from both sides and understands the strategy and position of both sides. Does Hagen? At least Jackson can claim to have handled similar cases to Gallegos’ cases, and can point to her own record of sentences obtained.
On the “I know better how to do plea bargains front,” Hagen is just completely spewing precious bodily fluids intead of believable claims.
June 7, 2010 at 7:50 pm
humboldturtle
At least Hagen could try spewing some believable fluids and hold onto his precious claims.
I’m for Gallegos, too! Hagen’s #2! Hagen’s #2!
June 7, 2010 at 7:51 pm
Eric Kirk
Thank you R.A., but really, the water thing is a forgivable idiosyncrasy. We all have them. I, for instance, do not like oatmeal.
June 7, 2010 at 8:20 pm
the reasonable anonymous
I agree that the water-only thing should be just a totally forgiveable quirk, and like I said, it certainly won’t stop me for voting for Hagen instead of Jackson if it comes to that.
But I do think that certain personal quirks are likely to be taken as emblematic of “who you are” in our culture. I know this is not fair or desirable, but it certainly is a fact. And saying that drinking anything other than water is “polluting” his body is going to locate him, in a lot of people’s minds, pretty far out on the loony fringe, probably somewhere past vegetarians and vegans, but at least somewhat short of the breathairians.
And given that Hagen’s credentials are mostly in the area of environmental enforcement, his rather strange reasoning about what constitutes “pollution” in his body raises the question of whether he may also be a bit of a dogmatic ideologue on the environmental front.
So, no, it ain’t no big thing in reality. But politics is often as much about symbolism than reality, and the NCJ profile of Hagen starting with the anecdote about his pure water fetish provides a symbolic suggestion that he’s just a bit too far “out there.” If there is already some truth to that sentiment (and I personally think there is) then that suggestion will ring true, as it has to me.
But, Be That As It May, I’d be more interested in your take on my main two points outlined above, (1) That Hagen could be just as much a target of the old guard culture warriors as Gallegos has been, maybe even more so, and (2) That one difference in experience is in the area of actually negotiating felony plea bargains, where Hagen has virtually no experience, yet claims he knows how to do them better than Gallegos, who has lots of experience.
June 7, 2010 at 8:28 pm
the reasonable anonymous
I’m with ya on the oatmeal. Never liked the stuff. Farina? Even worse. For me it’s the texture, too much like something that might be going the other way when you’re sick. I’m getting a twinge of nausea just imagining it, so I’ll have to stop. You can put as much honey or maple syrup and cinnamon and nuts and fresh blueberries in a bowl of warm oatmeal, but I STILL would trade it for a piece of dry toast, if need be.
Which is too bad, because oatmeal is cheap, easily stored, and supposedly pretty good for you. Oh well, I’ll just have to stick with granola (of course the granola admission could function as emblematic of my own hippy-dippy, crunchy-granola side, as opposed to the good god-fearin’ ‘murrikans who eat their oatmeal like grandma cooked it….soggy, and oversweetened).
June 7, 2010 at 9:13 pm
Eric Kirk
1) That Hagen could be just as much a target of the old guard culture warriors as Gallegos has been, maybe even more so,
Maybe, or maybe not. But I think Hagen may be able to play it a little cooler, and avoid some of Gallegos’ mistakes – hiring Jim Jones’ former attorney for instance. I also think the old guard is mellowing out a bit as the change sinks in. They’ve adapted well for instance in putting HumCPR together – one of the more brilliant moments of political judo I’ve ever seen. Gallegos will always symbolize the breaking point of their firm hold on county politics, and there are people who will always resent it.
Hagen isn’t the best election campaigner, but from what I and others have observed, he is very good at keeping focus and not letting himself become the issue. His measured and reasoned responses to accusations of over-zealousness in the Ira Granat prosecution were probably the deciding point for me, in keeping his cool on KMUD as he was berated, politely, by the hosts, and less politely by the callers, over the issue. He kept his composure and his focus. He didn’t dodge the issue. He didn’t get defensive. He persuaded, or tried to persuade – appealing to reason. He has a gift. It’s not that Gallegos has reacted irrationally. I just don’t think he can overcome the bad blood with certain sectors of the community. And I think Hagen has the kind of temperament Humboldt County needs in a D.A. job in a county as polarized as ours.
I’m game with Gallegos for pretty much any other office. I would like to see him run for Supervisor, or maybe even a state legislative position.
June 7, 2010 at 9:31 pm
Eric Kirk
Oh, and on negotiating plea bargains, I think it’s a non-issue – from both sides. It’s not a very mysterious process, and I think it’s unfair to criticize most plea-bargains made without the full knowledge of all of the facts and considerations known only to the D.A. or deputy D.A. involved. You may not think a particular witness will hold up well. You may be aware of facts which would come out if you pushed the issue, but which you are confidence bound to keep private – even when defending yourself in an election campaign.
I think both can negotiate pleas just fine. It’s not rocket science.
June 7, 2010 at 9:36 pm
the reasonable anonymous
Well I agree with you about Stoen. Gallegos may have been “totally stoked” to have that “stud,” but in both practical and PR terms, Stoen proved to be more dud than stud.
And I also agree that Gallegos would be a good candidate for Supervisor or state legislator. I even agree that it might be a better “fit” for him than the role of DA. But I hope that will might come somewhere down the line, if he decides not to run for re-election as D.A.
June 7, 2010 at 9:41 pm
Anonymous
“They’ve adapted well for instance in putting HumCPR together – one of the more brilliant moments of political judo I’ve ever seen.”
Please explain.
June 7, 2010 at 9:43 pm
Anonymous
And what is Gallegos’ “VISON” Eric ? You really had me going on that one.
You also mention how you understand SoHum’s loyalty to Gallegos. What do you mean by that?
June 7, 2010 at 9:43 pm
the reasonable anonymous
So would you agree that Hagen’s assertion that Gallegos is mishaddling plea deals and that he, Hagen, would do a better job, is a weak argument at best, and a cynical attempt to cash in on the Old Guard’s fabricated crime-wave / Gallegos soft-on-crime meme?
Do you think Hagen really believes that Gallegos (and all his assistant DAs and all the judges handling these case) are mishandling lots of plea bargains?
I’m not sure which is worse, Hagen actually believing those Jackson talking points, or Hagen cynically trying to tap into voter anger about non-existent plea bargaining problems amidst a non-existent crime wave. I’m not crazy about either option.
June 7, 2010 at 9:45 pm
the reasonable anonymous
After “Gallegos soft-on-crime meme” it should have said “at worst.”
June 7, 2010 at 9:47 pm
Anonymous
Your choices are great! Exactly the opposite of mine, but that really didn’t surpise me.
But really Eric Barbara Boxer?! Are you really that shallow?
June 7, 2010 at 9:53 pm
Eric Kirk
So would you agree that Hagen’s assertion that Gallegos is mishaddling plea deals and that he, Hagen, would do a better job, is a weak argument at best, and a cynical attempt to cash in on the Old Guard’s fabricated crime-wave / Gallegos soft-on-crime meme?
I think he sees it as an issue. I don’t. I don’t think he’s cynical about it. We simply disagree.
“They’ve adapted well for instance in putting HumCPR together – one of the more brilliant moments of political judo I’ve ever seen.”
Please explain.
The old guard has a wedge issue to promote an old guard lax land development policy, and they’ve using it to split the progressive community. And to a certain extent it’s worked. My hat’s off to them.
But really Eric Barbara Boxer?! Are you really that shallow?
Especially in light of what the Republicans are putting up? Yeah, I’m that shallow.
You also mention how you understand SoHum’s loyalty to Gallegos. What do you mean by that?
I mean that Sohum is going to loyally vote for Gallegos, and I understand that loyalty.
June 7, 2010 at 10:19 pm
Anonymous
Forget about felony vs. misdemeanor, he’s never tried any “violent crimes”. His one felony was for illegal dumping.
And as to him being a progressive, have you forgotten that he supported Worth Dikeman in the last election?
All Hagen will do is force a run off. He won’t break 20%. It’s a wasted vote.
June 7, 2010 at 10:21 pm
Concerned Anonymous
“’They’ve adapted well for instance in putting HumCPR together – one of the more brilliant moments of political judo I’ve ever seen.’
‘Please explain.’
The old guard has a wedge issue to promote an old guard lax land development policy, and they’ve using it to split the progressive community. And to a certain extent it’s worked. My hat’s off to them.”
Thanks for your response. I do agree about their effectiveness. It is not a position that is based on what’s best for the county, however, it is a position that best serves their pocketbooks. That says a lot about the So Hum progressives, AND, by extension, about Estelle.
June 7, 2010 at 10:22 pm
the reasonable anonymous
Re; CPR and the rural property-rights backlash in general.
I think you’re giving the Old Guard too much credit. The current rural property-rights backlash has a genuine grassroots base, not directed or controlled in any meaningful way by big developers. This groundswell has taken on a momentum of its own, and its origins are directly traceable to two major factors:
(1) The overbroad TPZ building moratorium, which Planning staff, in a nasty little bait-and-switch attempt, proposed to make permanent even after the MaxxSCAM danger was passed (and which it appears the Option A crowd wants to achieve by a different means with the proposal to require burdensome discretionary permit requirements on TPZ and other rural parcels), and
(2) The code enforcement fiasco, which gave rural property owners a preview of what might be coming their way if stricter regulations are passed, and then the county actually moves to enforce these new regulations, as well as currently unenforced existing codes, on a rural population that sees no good reason for many of these rules.
So, “progressive forces” may be divided by these issues, but as far as who is to blame for that, well, any fair assessment would have to assign a great deal of the blame to the leadership of the Planning Dept. (namely Kirk Girard and his staff), the Code Enforcement Unit and all the county staff and elected officials who were kinda-sorta supposed to be responsible for keeping an eye on that rogue force, the “Healthy Humboldt”/ Plan A crowd that has pushed for (what many rural residents see as) unnecessary and counterproductive changes to rural property rights, and most importantly, the majority on the Board of Supervisors, who were ultimately responsible for both the TPZ moratorium mess and the code enforcement fiasco.
One thing all these parties have in common, is they have sought to increase their power at the expense of individual rights, all with the best of intentions, no doubt. But, as is often the case in such situations, in the end, their reach may prove to exceed their grasp.
June 7, 2010 at 10:58 pm
Anonymous
think you’re giving the Old Guard too much credit. The current rural property-rights backlash has a genuine grassroots base, not directed or controlled in any meaningful way by big developers. This groundswell has taken on a momentum of its own, and its origins are directly traceable to two major factors:
Why did HumCPR remove the list of supporters from its website?
Three guesses.
June 7, 2010 at 11:10 pm
the reasonable anonymous
“It’s a wasted vote.”
Well, only if you’re wasted when you go to vote.
People should vote for whomever they feel is the best candidate for the office, from among the choices on the ballot (or write-in for that matter).
Thankfully we have a pretty good run-off system, so the issue of “spoilers” and “wasted votes” is not really relevant. The “spoiler” will be eliminated in the first round, and those who “wasted their vote” will get just as much say in the final round as everyone else.
I do agree with the prediction that Hagen won’t make it into the runoff, and that 20% is probably a pretty good guess as to what his showing will be, though I wouldn’t be surprised if he managed to get 25% or so. But we won’t have to guess much longer, it’s just gone past midnight, so we’ll probably know by this time tomorrow what the results are.
I hope there is a good turnout of voters, there are some pretty important things on the ballot this go-round, the DA race being one of them.
June 8, 2010 at 2:15 am
Matt
What about Coroner?
June 8, 2010 at 4:30 am
Anon
The only single thing that precipitated the creation of HumCPR was the total unwillingness of the extremist crowds (Arcata or otherwise) to even have a conversation. Clearly the prevailing thought was that an outright win was theirs for the taking. They perceived no reason to even have a discussion much less to compromise. Ooops. Had there been the slightest give, 90% of their dream would easily have been realized, there would have been no effort much less the broad based coatition that now exists. Now, of course they face well funded, formidable candidates on all fronts and a better informed and more motivated public. The single minded, hardheadedness of Lovelace, Miller, Cobb, Graeson and others was the biggest political blunder of the decade.
June 8, 2010 at 7:42 am
longwind
Paul Hagan, like Jon Brooks, is personable and bright, though unlike Jon is a zealot on a mission from God, or somebody.
Both are on missions from the same off-Green Machine that took an amiable non-entity like Clif and made him a party hack incapable of learning from anyone but his power brokers. We can expect more of same from that flailing machine’s latest spawn.
All they have created is insiders and schisms, remember? HumCPR came into existence when one hidden scheme came into the open, and SoHum split off off the Arcata left when another such scheme against us became apparent. They splintered us, Eric, and HumCPR had the good sense to console us. I feel better now.
I want representatives who will represent me, not their campaign funding deals. I don’t want to learn again, as I have with Clif, how marginal we really are to political wheeler-dealers running on resentments against us. Things are changing. They aren’t, except to escalate weaponry in obsolete feuds. I’m voting for reality, not divisive leftie humbuggery.
June 8, 2010 at 7:51 am
Eric Kirk
And there you have it.
June 8, 2010 at 8:06 am
longwind
Actually, I think Anon nailed it at 4:30 (in moderated time).
Eric, what’s the trick again to exist in real time? Thanks.
June 8, 2010 at 9:26 am
anon
Predictions:
Jackson 38
Gallegos 35
Hagen 27
and YOU?
June 8, 2010 at 10:25 am
longwind
Gallegos 42-52 percent. The interesting question to me is if he’ll win outright. I hope so.
June 8, 2010 at 11:23 am
anonymous
eric you and some of your so called progressive lefty “friends” have been asleep at the wheel or by intention not wanting to understand who HumCpr is and what they stand for. Contrary to your fantasy( or disinformation campaign), HumCpr is NOT a front for a bunch of developers. Why don’t you start talking with some of us??
We as land owners believe we should have a voice and a say on crafting a GPU that takes into account OUR practical rural experience living on the land. Plan A goes too far and cuts rural dwellers out of that equation much to the delight of “healthy humboldt” who want to turn HC into one gigantic preservation zone.
HumCpr is truly a Coalition made up of a very diverse membership that’s approaching 4,000 members. breakdown in party affiliation is this:
Democrat 35%
Republican 36%
NP 13%
Green 4%
Peace & Freedom;Libertarian; Am Independent; Natural etc…= 12%
(Some of the most ardent enviros are members.)
HumCpr as you read in the recent HumCpr newsletter did not endorse any candidate….but members would definitely be supporting ANY candidate that is Not for Plan A of the GPU because of it’s detrimental affects it has on rural families and rural living. And will support candidates that support a landowners right to build their home on their rural LEGAL parcel.
when I hear cobb,huber, supposy on kmud demonizing our group calling us “teabaggers trying to takeover”I laughed my buns off at how out of touch they are. Again this is a result of sheer ignorance or by intention, either way they are fast becoming obsolete.
cobb should ask himself , how was it that he singlehandedly wrecked the local green party into oblivion??
June 8, 2010 at 11:27 am
Mr. Nice
I second everything longwind said.
I hope next supervisor election cycle we have the sense to get rid of Clendenen. I still don’t quite understand how the hell he won.
June 8, 2010 at 12:32 pm
Anon
I too heard on kmud huber and cobb and his girlfriend demonizing HumCpr and it’s members as “teabaggers”.
As a progressive,enviro AND a member of humcpr I was aghast.
They are out of touch.
And if this is their newest tactic to drum up support for their Plan A by calling us rural landowners (who want our voices heard at the county level) “teabaggers”…..
well then, they will continue hemorraging support and funding. They don’t seem to want to look in the mirror and ask why is their support base dwindling and why are people withdrawing their monetary support??
June 8, 2010 at 12:37 pm
Eric Kirk
HumCpr is NOT a front for a bunch of developers.
Somebody in one of these threads asked why the list of supporters was taken down from the HumCPR website. Another blogger and many others have asked the same question. Some day we may get an answer.
Look, I know there are a lot of good people in HumCPR. Even the leadership is good people, and I’m not just talking about Estelle. Lee Ulansky is a good guy. I don’t agree with him much politically, and I do think the HumCPR stacking of the Grand Jury is bullshit politics, but I respect anyone who steps forward trying to make the community a better place, even if I think they would take us in the wrong direction.
The problem is that it WILL take us in the wrong direction. If HumCPR prevails and the GPU is watered down, it will bring about results that none of you wants. But that’s politics, and life. We all have to do our best.
Bear in mind that HumCPR started not with the GPU, but with the Board’s near unanimous decision to not allow Maxxam to liquidize resource lands into development parcels. That’s when the supporters’ list went up. It came down after Estelle became leader, and for good reason.
June 8, 2010 at 12:43 pm
Eric Kirk
As for predictions, I’m not getting a good read on any of the races, probably because I haven’t been phone banking this time around. I expect that Gallegos will win big in Sohum, and have a harder time in Arcata.
I don’t know if the DUI thing will impact Sundberg. The local media did an excellent job of downplaying the whole thing, even over the last few days.
Bass’ supporters are very confident in the 4th District.
Downy will win, probably 2 to 1.
June 8, 2010 at 12:48 pm
the reasonable anonymous
I agree, sadly I wouldn’t count out Sundberg yet. The near-total media blackout on this story (one page 2 article in the Times-Standard) means that most 5th district voters may not even have heard about the DUI yet.
June 8, 2010 at 12:53 pm
longwind
“Bear in mind that HumCPR started not with the GPU, but with the Board’s near unanimous decision to not allow Maxxam to liquidize resource lands into development parcels. That’s when the supporters’ list went up. It came down after Estelle became leader, and for good reason.”
What you just said? it’s what you just called ‘bullshit politics:’
HumCPR started, not with Maxxam anything, but with the Supervisors using the Maxxam bogeyman to try to end rural development rights, by declaring a permanent ‘emergency’ that was extended rather than lifted when the Maxxam bogeyman vaporized. Can you possibly have forgotten that? No one else has.
Bullshit two: The supporters list was growing like crazy for months after Estelle became ED, for obvious good reason. It took volunteers to collate and post every name. They may have got tired of it, I don’t know. But it sure as bullshit wasn’t Estelle’s job that caused the list to come down, for any reason. What’s the ‘good reason’ you imagine without stating is, as if you’re talking about the attributes of Beelzebub or Voldemort?
Finally, yeesh.
June 8, 2010 at 1:01 pm
the reasonable anonymous
“If HumCPR prevails and the GPU is watered down, it will bring about results that none of you wants. ”
Well, beyond the obvious point that ANY big changes of policy often come with unintended consequences, I just don’t agree with your prediction of the disaster that would supposedly befall us if some of CPR’s policy positions were adopted. As far as whether “watering down” something is a bad idea, it depends how much water, which parts are watered down, and whether those parts might, in fact, benefit from a little water.
Of course very few of CPR’s policy stands are likely to be adopted by the majority on the Board of Supes, either now or after the election, so most likely we’ll never get the chance to find out whether adopting large parts of the CPR agenda would result in such mayhem (so in that sense you are very safe in making your prediction).
If the Supes do end up passing something very much along the lines of the original Option A, then over the next several decades we WILL get to see whether the negative unintended consequences of those Option A policies will end up outweighing the benefits. I suspect that will prove to be the case, but as always, we’ll just have to see how it all evolves.
June 8, 2010 at 1:08 pm
Eric Kirk
Okay, so again, why was the supporter’s list ditched?
June 8, 2010 at 1:11 pm
longwind
Dunno. Do you think 4000 names makes an interesting graphic? Is it even absorbable information, like this list of Hagen or Jackson supporters?
June 8, 2010 at 1:21 pm
Eric Kirk
So that’s the reason? There are just too many to list them all, so let’s remove all the prominent names?
Just asking.
June 8, 2010 at 1:30 pm
the reasonable anonymous
It seemed pretty clear to me from longwind’s comment that he doesn’t know why they took the list of “supporters” off their website. I can think of a few reasons why they MIGHT do that, but I’m not a CPR member and have no idea what the actual reason was. You could probably e-mail or call them and get their answer to the question. (If you actually want the answer, rather than just the opportunity to raise the question over and over to insinuate a point).
Now I THINK what you are driving at is that CPR is trying to downplay the fact that they get strong support from people in the real estate and building trades industries, aka “developers.” I wouldn’t be surprised if that is the case.
If that IS the case, well I suppose you could view that as some nefarious attempt to “hide” their real “puppetmasters” and act as a “front for developers,” but another interpretation is that they have thousands of grassroots supporters, most of whom are just individual rural residents and/or property owners, and they were sick of people focusing on a relatively small number who could be fairly labeled as “developers.”
June 8, 2010 at 1:36 pm
Anon
can we see Bay Keepers full list of names? How about kmuds membership list? epic full list of names? demock.unlim list?nec’s names?
June 8, 2010 at 1:40 pm
Eric Kirk
I don’t know that it’s “nefarious.” It’s probably a good call politically. The point is, the initial list was a “who’s who” of developer/realtor interests. That’s who financed its creation.
“Property rights” has political meaning. I have no doubt that had Estelle been in charge from the beginning, those words would not be in the name. But in my practice I am in regular contact with the developer/realtor crowd – all good people in their own right. When we discuss HumCPR, some of them get a glint in their eye. Make no mistake, they are very happy with the evolution of the organization.
That doesn’t mean they own it, or even that their agendas are determinative, or that this makes the organization right wing, or tea party, or even a classic “property rights” organization. I’m just saying, developers are happy.
June 8, 2010 at 1:52 pm
the reasonable anonymous
Fair enough, Eric.
Now if you have a minute or two, could you respond to my last comment about Prop 14:
http://kunsoo1024.wordpress.com/2010/06/07/updates-on-my-endorsements/#comment-41906
I am genuinely interested in how you might answer those questions. I’ll be turning in my ballot shortly before polls close, so if you get a chance in the meantime to comment on that, I still haven’t decided on which way to go on Prop 14 (or whether I’ll just leave it blank, which is starting to look like a possible outcome). The thing is, you’ve got me worried that voting for 14 is a big mistake, but you don’t quite have me persuaded yet. Argh!
Anyway, thanks as always for your work in hosting this blog. Even when we end up disagreeing, at least the level of discussion is still miles ahead of most of the mindless internet flame-fests you see on comment thread in the T-S, etc.
June 8, 2010 at 2:50 pm
Anonymous
Wait — aren’t both the sheriff candidates named Mike? Which one are you voting for?
June 8, 2010 at 3:21 pm
Anon
erik said: If HumCPR prevails and the GPU is watered down, it will bring about results that none of you wants.
this is yet another stark example of complete ignorance in regard to who HumCpr is and a grasp on the GPU and the process of the GPU.
water what down, Plan A??
please explain if HumCpr prevails. prevails at what?? your assumptions?
it appears that you have false assumptions about HumCpr.
eric if you and your plan A devotees prevail, rural humboldt living will be a thing of the past. But that is lost on all of you because you live in town
June 8, 2010 at 3:49 pm
Anonymous
eric if you and your plan A devotees prevail, rural humboldt living will be a thing of the past. But that is lost on all of you because you live in town
HumCPR should change its name to “Melodrama, Inc.”
Gosh. Maybe you’ll actually have to get permits for your buildings like 99.9 percent of the population. Horrors!
June 8, 2010 at 4:10 pm
the reasonable anonymous
I think both “sides” in the GPU debate are a bit melodramatic about the supposedly dire consequences that will soon result if they don’t get their way. It’s:
If we don’t adopt Option A provisions, the whole county will be swallowed up in Santa-Rosa-like sprawl.
versus
If we do adopt Option A provisions, rural living in Humboldt will be “a thing of the past.”
Both propositions strike me as pretty big exaggerations.
June 8, 2010 at 4:15 pm
the reasonable anonymous
By the way, the GPU does nothing to increase compliance with permit requirements. It’s mostly a seperate issue, except in the following way:
Some existing residences that are currently unpermitted, may be impossible to get permits for in the future, if more restrictive Option A-type discretionary permits are required for TPZ, for example. So, if anything, it may be an impediment to getting people permitted as opposed to them continuing to live in unpermitted homes (or getting evicted from them, if the County was crazy enough to try that).
June 8, 2010 at 7:44 pm
Anonymous
e-you’ve lost your mojo and your groove.
June 9, 2010 at 1:47 am
Jason
Hagen defeats Bryson!
June 9, 2010 at 1:58 am
Anonymous
Hagen couldn’t break 20% (gee, too bad no one could have predicted that in advance).
A wasted vote, and now we have to use funds and energy that could have gone into the 4th and the 5th.
Thanks Eric and the Arcata elite. You had your say. You cast your vote, and the county’s worse off for it. A little pragmatism might be nice in the future.
It also showed that Lovelace has no political coattails.