Everything Southern Humboldt and more
 | Narration on For a Crisp Spring Saturday… |
| Narration on For a Crisp Spring Saturday… |
 | suzy blah blah on For a Crisp Spring Saturday… |
| suzy blah blah on Priorities |
| suzy blah blah on Priorities |
 | Forest Queen on Priorities |
| suzy blah blah on Priorities |
 | Anonymous on Priorities |
| Forest Queen on Priorities |
| suzy blah blah on For a Crisp Spring Saturday… |
| suzy blah blah on Priorities |
| Narration on How does vinegar mix with tin… |
 | Just Watchin on How does vinegar mix with tin… |
| Anonymous on How does vinegar mix with tin… |
| Narration on For a Crisp Spring Saturday… |
65 comments
Comments feed for this article
August 25, 2010 at 1:55 am
Matt
I am personally opposed to the advocation of “throw away paint brushes”
August 25, 2010 at 3:05 pm
Anonymous
It would be appropriate to post the agenda for the “public” board meeting before the meeting. Or do you just make it up as you go along?
August 25, 2010 at 4:30 pm
Anonymous
Guess vegetarian volunteers aren’t being accomodated. Will they be clearing an area for the stage and digging trenches for the sound system cables?
August 25, 2010 at 4:34 pm
Eric Kirk
Everybody’s grumpy. Must be the heat.
August 25, 2010 at 6:58 pm
Anonymous
it is interesting if the letter to the editor is true that tooby park was an endowment to the PUBLIC. seems a little weird 2 me to be using it for a private concert venue…
August 25, 2010 at 7:27 pm
Anonymous
Why is it weird? Public parks are often venues for concerts. In fact the vast majority of outdoor concerts take place in public parks.
August 25, 2010 at 7:48 pm
Eric Kirk
There are a number of misconceptions and misunderstandings in the letters which have been submitted thus far, but I’m not going to discuss them here. I’ve determined that a blog just isn’t the best format for certain debates, and this topic is one of them. I’ll be happy to answer questions by email, or in person. I will be submitting letters to the papers to clear up some of the misinformation.
August 25, 2010 at 8:08 pm
Anonymous
the park board should be replaced by a board of people voted on by the public who bought and paid for the park, not a bunch of dazey clones.
August 25, 2010 at 8:14 pm
Jane
Why, given this representative sampling of issues, would anyone ever… ever… ever… want to serve on a volunteer board of directors in SoHum.
August 25, 2010 at 9:51 pm
Anonymous
The meeting was very civil.
Democracy, when it occurs, is kind of messy, so sorry. Of course, there is nothing at all democratic about this Park Board or the structure they have adopted. The occasional meetings are window dressing.
And this is a Park the community has paid for! This GPA is a terribly controversial and expensive proposal. Controversial, that’s the problem.
August 25, 2010 at 11:21 pm
Anonymous
the park board should be replaced by a board of people voted on by the public who bought and paid for the park
So it can be just like the hospital board. Oh goody!
August 26, 2010 at 12:25 pm
Anonymous
I want to know if Tooby Park is public or private? I came up last nite at the CP meeting. Which is it?
The caretaker for Tooby Park said its private, but they tell people its public to allow the Sheriff to patrol the Park and deal with the problems of drinking and homeless people that come to Tooby Park. This makes no sense! If a land owner has a problem, be it private or public and the Sheriff is called, the Sheriff does his job. If Tooby Park is a public Park, you are not allowed to drink in public.
What is the rule for Tooby Park?
August 26, 2010 at 5:23 pm
Dave Kirby
I need to point out 11:21 that Darryl Cherney was not elected to anything. Had one more warm body wanted to be on the board Cherney would not be there.
August 26, 2010 at 5:35 pm
olmanriver
Kudos to Dave, the town clean-up dude, who contributed 5 hours labor, and to all the others who volunteered the time and labor.
August 26, 2010 at 5:49 pm
Eric Kirk
I want to know if Tooby Park is public or private? I came up last nite at the CP meeting. Which is it?
Both.
August 26, 2010 at 6:29 pm
heynow
re: “the vast majority of outdoor concerts take place in public parks”
oh ruheeally? and your source is what? have you statistical data to back that (wild) claim up??
my impression of a public park is generally an accessible ( ie no/low fee) space that is open for a variety of uses that don’t involve a private party benefiting financially. i guess u think a public park means something else….
August 26, 2010 at 6:38 pm
julie
I will be making the Kirk gerard aware of these things
August 26, 2010 at 8:53 pm
Anonymous
the park should be public 100%. this board has been nothing but controversial since it’s inception. why do you, e, think that you should be able to direct the course of the park when you were not elected by the public? this is not a “volunteer” board, it is self-selected for and by like minded concert tourism venue people. power hungry, arrogant, greedy, self-involved, the list goes on.
August 26, 2010 at 9:14 pm
Anonymous
re: “the vast majority of outdoor concerts take place in public parks”
oh ruheeally? and your source is what? have you statistical data to back that (wild) claim up??
my impression of a public park is generally an accessible ( ie no/low fee) space that is open for a variety of uses that don’t involve a private party benefiting financially. i guess u think a public park means something else….
Partial list of parks at which I have attended concerts in which someone benefited privately:
Benbow Park
Central Park (NY)
Kinear Park (Seattle)
Jackson Park (Chicago)
Halvorson Park (Eureka)
Golden Gate Park (SF)
Berkeley Community Park
Dolores Park (SF)
Oakland Coliseum
Parc Jean-Drapeau (Montreal)
Stern Grove
August 26, 2010 at 10:06 pm
Anonymous
It’s a big point that 314 plus people in this community don’t want amplified music events at the “COMMUNITY” Park and Tooby Park. The Park Board doesnot consider these people any part of this community and as Tim Metz Called them this past Monday Morning on KMUD “DETRACTORS”. It is nice to know who throws rocks and who throws stones in this community. And who in their right mind would allow thousands and thousands of people to drive down Spowel Creek Road for muisc events at the Park, knowing someone can get killed or hurt. After all, who would have thought anyone would be bitten by a dog at the Park. You just can’t plan for the unknown, only try to use commen sense. That is these Parks they way you found them.
August 26, 2010 at 11:09 pm
Anonymous
10,000 – 314 = 9,686
August 27, 2010 at 9:14 am
Anonymous
Are you talking 10,000 visitors? who don’t care about our neighborhoods, or the noise pollution or parking on good ag soils, the wildlife, or our river’s health? Just use up another beautiful place until it looks like a dust bowl? Fill it with cars, exhaust, garbage, lights, generators? Create a fire danger? Have traffic volunteers stop pedestrians on Sprowel Creek Road?, line up traffic down to Kimtu? park on the river bar next to the drinking water intake for the town of Garberville? Benbow is available. French’s Camp is available. Why tear up a new place that we treasure?
August 27, 2010 at 9:46 am
Eric Kirk
I have now blocked two posts which contained personal attacks. That will not be tolerated here.
August 27, 2010 at 10:47 am
Anonymous
Amended Blocked Post:
“10,000 – 314 = 9,686″ where are all of these 9,686 people in this community? I take it these 9,686 people want commercial amplified events at Tooby Park as well as the Community Park, with Parking on the river, Camping for 1000 people during events, Zoning for housing development on Park property? Maybe you can bus these 9,686 people down to the Park for the County Scoping meeting in September? Or fly them in as well?
Remember, the CP BOS is not just talking about one or two big amplified events a year, they want them all year long!
As to E’s comment about Tooby Memorial and SoHum Community Parks “both” being private and public i.e. DisneyLand is a private corporation on private property that charges an admission and parking fee to visit their Park. Is this what we want for Tooby Memorial and the SoHum Community Park? Because that is what the Park Board wants, a pay to play Park for this community and its visitors.
Yes, the SHCP is private property, not public lands and the SHCP Board allows the public to visit and use it with a price, but that is why people in this community donated over $700K in the first place, and I quote “to keep this land out of the hands of haphazard development”.
Just because you allow the public to set foot on private property, doesn’t make it anymore public than DisneyLand, Great America or Six Flags. Will everyone need to pass through a metal detector, empty their pockets, have their purse searched like at DisneyLand, Great America , Six Flags or even at some of the other Concert/Festival Venues right here in SoHum………..
Everyone talks about how wonderful and beautiful both Parks are now, if the CP BOD get their way, could you imagine what it would look like then?
August 27, 2010 at 12:27 pm
Morgan S.
I just want to thank the park board for excellent work. It’s obviously a thankless job at time what with a very loud but small NIMBY crowd. Most of us are appreciative and now is a very good time to donate to the park with some very sizable grants possibly in the pipeline. Read the GPA application for yourself instead of depending on the misinformation! It contains some very inspiring proposals.
I am especially interested in the possibilities for children who don’t have much to do around there these days. This is the time for positive input.
August 27, 2010 at 1:15 pm
edsvoice
dear Morgan S;
“It’s obviously a thankless job at time what with a very loud but small NIMBY crowd”
I would not call over 300 people from this community a “small NIMBY crowd”
Then knowing all the facts about what documented development plans the Park Board has submitted to the County, for the most part turning both of these Parks into loud concert and festival sites for the MCC. Not only should the public read the proposed project the Park Board is asking for, but ask for the studies and reports they use to make everything AOK.
I think all sides to this issue need to be heard, but the more people call the neighbors of both of these Parks “NIMBY” or “DETRACTORS” as we see and hear they still do, there will always be this wall between the people that want to use the Parks to party and people who have owned homes 20 to 40 years longer than this Park Board has been a neighbor.
What Part of the proposed projects at the Parks, do you feel have more “possibilities for childeren” than exist today?
August 27, 2010 at 1:26 pm
Anonymous
I would not call over 300 people from this community a “small NIMBY crowd”
I would.
August 27, 2010 at 2:29 pm
Anonymous
What are the possibilites for children in the Park Board’s proposal, or whatever it is?
The guy who is proposing the sports complex said that he wants it for adult leagues, lots of ‘em. Night games, big lights, the works. And the “fields house” was described as being three times as big as the Mateel! So you know whats that’s about. This was all presented at a park board meeting in the spring. The meeting that had to do with one of the public money grants.
I missed the stuff for kids in there. Let me know, please, I will go back and look at the document again.
Which proposals did you find inspiring?
August 27, 2010 at 3:03 pm
heynow
11 parks constitute “the vast majority of …..public parks?” That looks like fuzzy math to me.
August 27, 2010 at 3:54 pm
Anonymous
The guy who is proposing the sports complex said that he wants it for adult leagues, lots of ‘em. Night games, big lights, the works. And the “fields house” was described as being three times as big as the Mateel! So you know whats that’s about. This was all presented at a park board meeting in the spring. The meeting that had to do with one of the public money grants.
I missed the stuff for kids in there. Let me know, please, I will go back and look at the document again.
Yeah it would be adults only. No kids allowed.
What have you been smoking?
And notice the difference between my previous sentence and the sentence quoted.
“In fact the vast majority of outdoor concerts take place in public parks.”
And as quoted
“11 parks constitute “the vast majority of …..public parks?” That looks like fuzzy math to me.”
More like fuzzy grammar on your part. Did you think no one would notice?
August 27, 2010 at 4:28 pm
anon
love the park!
sure, lets have some events there!
i think there’s still more partiers around here than nay-sayers…
August 27, 2010 at 7:09 pm
edsvoice
Thanks anon,
Thanks for making my point, that this whole GPA to rezone and change the land use at both Parks is about making money off people who like to PARTY. Not about saving open space, Not about protecting wildlife or the river, or even protecting the Ag land, but to have BIG full tilt BOOGIE parties with thousands & thousands of people, loud as you want music all night long, all on private property behind the vale of the Community Park. I mean the Park Board has already proved my point, they can throw one hell of a party down at the Park with-out permits and thats why we are at this point.
For the first time, the Park Board is going through a public process to have Concerts & Festivals at the Park. From day one (January 2001) with help from the MCC, they tried to get a 5 year Use Permit to have SAMF at the Community Park and it fell flat on its face, then the public found out about the plan in April 2001 and all the donations dried up. This was before any community planning meeting first started in Aug 2001. 1st big mistake.
Same thing happened in Oct 2008, after the Park Board was told by the County to stop having concerts down at the Park. on Oct 1st 2008 the Park Board sumitted another application to have 20 to 30 concert, events and fundraisers down at the Park including SAMF, again with-out asking the community what they thought. And guess what, that application fell flat on its face as well. 2nd big mistake.
So here we are again, with the Park Board talking their tuchus off, using every trick in the book to justify having SAMF and other large commercial concerts at the Park, even if they have to have public meeting. We will see who gets what and why at the Scoping meeting.
August 27, 2010 at 7:15 pm
Anonymous
Yes Ed. God forbid that anyone should have any fun.
August 27, 2010 at 8:37 pm
edsvoice
If you want to have that kind of fun, go to the MCC and knock your socks off, all under one roof or go down to Benbow, but leave the open space and wildlife at Tooby Memorial and the Community Park alone, no amplified music!
August 27, 2010 at 8:52 pm
Anonymous
No concern for the wildlife at Benbow?
August 27, 2010 at 9:21 pm
edsvoice
I don’t know Eric, I’m confused, the MCC SAMF has been held down at Benbow for how many years or should I say decades? And now you are concerned for the Wildlife? Lets get you up to speed, shall we. Benbow has had the State Park Campground/Day use area, the Inn, the RV Park, Golf and Hwy 101 running through for decades. There use to be a Gas station, a Dam Lake and more than one restaurant, with a lot more salmon in the river. You do the math………
August 27, 2010 at 9:30 pm
Anonymous
Yeah, what about the wildlife at Benbow?
Maybe the wildlife at Benbow have already been chased up to the park. After all, we have seen bald eagle at the park, osprey, great egrets, herons. The park is really beautiful as it is. Kids don’t need a bunch of commercial development. I think it would be better for kids to see that we can protect habitat for birds, animals, amphibians, fish and can save a wild and scenic river. The topography of the park is a lovely transept of river, flood plain, open meadow and forested hillside. Let it stay the way it is.
What would be really helpful would be a park management plan. Too bad the Park Board never made one… or maybe it was about commercial development all along.
August 27, 2010 at 10:20 pm
Eric Kirk
Don’t drag me into this. I’m done with these threads.
August 28, 2010 at 12:05 am
Anonymous
Kids don’t need a bunch of commercial development. I think it would be better for kids to see that we can protect habitat for birds, animals, amphibians, fish and can save a wild and scenic river.
They can get that anywhere. There is plenty of open space. The kids need a park.
August 28, 2010 at 6:51 am
Anonymous
There is lots of wildlife at Benbow. Apparently you only care about wildlife when it can be used against the park.
August 28, 2010 at 6:59 am
Anonymous
So what is public about the Park? Because donations from the public paid for it? Because the Park Board is applying for state grants funded by taxpayers?
When it comes to making contracts, selling shale mining and gravel extraction rights, trading or selling (or giving away) pieces of the property, or decisions about what development occurs on the parkland, it’s private property.
Are grocery stores publicly owned just because the public can go there? No.
August 28, 2010 at 10:16 am
Anonymous
I just don’t see much for kids in the parkboard’s application.
The kids could have a beautiful park and wildlife habitat and the river could be preserved. It’s not like kids can wander around and play on private property around here, maybe have a chance to develop an imagination.
August 28, 2010 at 12:06 pm
Anonymous
The park is at this time a place of relative ecological integrity because it has not been hammered by amplified noise, vehicle traffic and parking, garbage, lighting, generators. It does not have a water supply that can maintain large green-grass areas like Benbow or like the soccer fields at Redway School. The So. Fork Eel next to Tooby is where Garberville draws its drinking water. Sunscreen, insect repellent, car oil, asbestos brake pad dust, sediment from grading and stripping vegetation from the river bar for vehicle parking, disturbances to green herons, kestrels, merlins, bald eagles, stress on the only genetically pure population of Coho (not polluted with hatchery fish) in the SFER, a population which is currently in a five county recovery program, are valid concerns for all of us, especially when there are enough concert venues already available that do not damage rare soils and the peaceful wildlife and human uses that the Park land uniquely offers to us. An acoustic park would be fun and coexist harmoniously with our still beautiful Park.
August 28, 2010 at 1:42 pm
edsvoive
“There is lots of wildlife at Benbow. Apparently you only care about wildlife when it can be used against the park”
Read the Parks web site, they talk about saving wildlife. And yes, I have always cared about wildlife. And yes, I will use it against the Park Board since they seem to think, their projects will not effect the wildlife.
So you are right and wrong. It is being used againt the Park Board, not the Park. In fact we have been called “Park Detractors”, that is not true, the correct name would be “Park Board Detractors”.
August 28, 2010 at 2:24 pm
Anonymous
If what kids need is a park, then why support turning the park into yet another concert venue? After all, we have plenty of those!
Will the park be closed to the non-paying public during events? How about Tooby Memorial Park, which will be used for Parking during events? (See the Park Boards application). Will it be safe for the little kids if it is a parking lot? How about the 85 acre gravel lease the Park Board has with Randalls? Will that be safe and wonderful for kids who might want to play in the river? Will it be safe for kids to play in the river when the streambed is being used as a parking lot for events on weekends? (See Park Board’s application)
Maybe the kids will get to use the sports complex when the adult leagues aren’t practicing or adult league games aren’t scheduled.
August 28, 2010 at 9:54 pm
edsvoice
“Don’t drag me into this. I’m done with these threads”
Eric:
1. What is so wrong with these threads, you said the Park Board has “overwhelming Community support” for your GPA aka MCC Concert & Festival Venue Site, South Fork Eel River Parking lots and Campgrounds.
2. “Don’t drag me into this” sounds like a Bloomberg responce after being asked about; cowboy hats, shotguns, white robes and a rope.
3. How can you not be dragged into this, you posted it on your blog and you are a Director on the Park Board. What, you didn’t think anyone would go there?
August 28, 2010 at 10:29 pm
Eric Kirk
The discussions here go nowhere Ed, except you getting your feelings hurt and wigging out about being “thrown under the bus” if I bring certain things up in response to your veiled and not so veiled accusations against good people. I don’t think this is the format for a discussion like this.
I’ll post newsworthy information, and you and others can post to your heart’s desire, but I’m not going to take part in the discussion. If others wish to respond to your posts, they are welcome to do so.
You’ve got a number of people opposed to the park who personally attack people who are guilty of nothing other than volunteering their time to develop an asset which can be of enormous use to the community. My energy is going to be spent raising money in this crucial time to obtain the rezoning which will allow us to keep everything on the opposite side of Tooby Park open and maybe put together some resources for families near and far, including, yes, the Summer Art Festival you voted for at the Redway School meeting, and a few medium sized music events. We are asking the county for the zoning and land use designation to allow us to make use of a small portion of the park for such events, and perhaps some sports fields for kids and adults.
I want to thank Paine for showing up to the last meeting on behalf of the growing youth soccer constituency, who had a fine day in Fortuna today. She represents a voice which has not been heard in this discussion, and you will be hearing additional voices in the future.
In the meantime, if anyone out there wants to make a real difference with donations, this is the time you will get the most bang for your buck in moving the park forward. Those who have legitimate reservations about certain proposals will have plenty of time to tell the county prior to rezoning and to help shape plans even after we receive the rezoning. We have grant funders who take us very seriously and are fascinated with the project, and the more we can move the process along so that we can do what is necessary with the park, the sooner we can receive many of these grants.
The rezoning process is in the County hands now. I will post news as it comes. I will not be commenting in the threads after this post unless I see serious misinformation in need of correction, and even those posts will be laconic as possible.
Feel free to carry on in any case.
August 29, 2010 at 12:03 pm
edsvoice
Thanks Eric,
So lets talk about a couple of points in your Post. Lets start with what I know is a “serious misinformation in need of correction”.
“including, yes, the Summer Art Festival you voted for at the Redway School meeting, and a few medium sized music events”
1. Since you didn’t attend that meeting, and you didn’t finish your sentence, let me finish your sentence for you; It was Yes with Conditions. At our table my conditions were; No Parking on AG soils, No parking on the Riverbed and No Amplified Music. At that point in the meeting the only two questions asked of us; Show of hands for SAMF and show of hands for SAMF with conditions. It was not until the very end of the meeting that three questions were raised about SAMF; 1. Yes 2. Yes w/conditions 3. NO. When that question was raised I voted NO!
2. As for your “Youth Soccer” comment, I am all for Youth Soccer, but there is no plan for Youth Soccer in this GPA EIR for the SHCP. The IS/Checklist only documents about Concerts & Festivals not organized Youth Sport activities i.e. where are you getting that new allocation of water to water these new Sport Fields, since the South Fork Eel River is tapped out as per DFG, RWQCB and GSD.
“the more we can move the process along so that we can do what is necessary with the park, the sooner we can receive many of these grants”
3. So let me get this straight, the only way you can get these grants is to rezone and change the land use for SHCP/Tooby Park? But yet you need the grant funding to complete the EIR costs and requirements to rezone and change land use at SHCP?
“You’ve got a number of people opposed to the park who personally attack people who are guilty of nothing other than volunteering their time to develop an asset which can be of enormous use to the community”
4. Tooby Memorial and the Community Park are already a “enormous use to this community”, NOT “can be”. What you and the Park Board fail to understand, it that Tooby Memorial Park has been there since 1967 and has always been used by thousands and thousands of people in this community every year, including visitors and guests long before the SHCP was a dream in anyone’s eye.
5. Bigger is not always better, in most cases it leads to greed and distrust. e.g. where the SHCP is now, in its quest to have a International Concert & Festival Venue Site.
August 29, 2010 at 12:09 pm
Anonymous
There’s also a number of people who attack the people who live around the Park, people who are guilty of nothing other than opposing an amplified event venue that will have enormous detriments to them, such as the enjoyment of peace in their homes, their neighborhoods, their town and roadways.The fallout effects from vehicle parking for an amplified Park will damage the South Fork Eel River and the Park itself. I believe the on-the-ground hubbub from setting-up, staging, and taking down frequent amplified events in the Park will drive out farming and wildlife.
August 29, 2010 at 12:57 pm
Anonymous
In what way have any Park Board Detractors made personal attacks on the hard working volunteers? Please be specific. I am opposed to many of the Park Board’s plans for the park, and opposed to the closed, private self-appointed structure, and I need to know in what way people have been personally attacked.
Please give some specific examples.
August 29, 2010 at 2:20 pm
gottapointthere
i agree w/ed’s point #4
August 29, 2010 at 4:26 pm
Anonymous
At the early “community”meetings, back in the beginning of the Park, there was a guy who was very motivated to have soccer fields at the Park. Even then, there were concerns from community members about water for sports fields.
I don’t know why the Park Board never allowed him to follow through on it.
The Park Board’s proposal for Public Facility as written is not about a “small portion” of the property. It is a huge area for concerts. Ten times as big as Benbow.
Nor does this “approximately 96 acres” that the Park Board calls a “small portion” include all the Parking Lots. It is hard to tell from the application how much acreage that will be. But it’s going to be all over the place, including the river streambed
Public Facility is identified in the General Plan as “Extensive Impact Civic Uses”.
It is a terrible designation to seek for a huge area of this parkland.
August 29, 2010 at 5:49 pm
anonymous
Well defense lawyer mode by Eric is on full display here. Its reasonable and appropriate to smear ordinary people as “detractors”(which carries heavy connotations in SoHum culture). But criticisms of people in authority and with responsibility is barred because they are “good people”(which also carries havey connotations in SoHum culture).
Kirk is using rhetoric to deflect and mislead away from the facts. Thats a way to represent a culpable client before a jury, hoping just one emotional juror can be made to forget the facts. And its most clearly demonstrated in Eric’s nonresponsive answer to the public/private question.
But finally, for the first time, Eric has acknowledged that its not just Ed and a few neighbors alone who feel the SHCP board’s plans are misguided, but theres also “a number of people” who feel likewise.
I think the tide is turning and the truth is being more widely understood: The SHCP board wants to intensively develop the land that the community voluntarilly contributed money to prevent being developed. And the big lie is that in order to preserve it, it must be developed to create additional income for the the preservers, above and beyond altruistic community contributions.
Its the same lie resource extractors use as justification. We can’t affford to conserve the environment unless first we exploit it. And of course, once exploited, the land becomes a sacrifice zone that is no longer “worth” restoring. Then, public monies must be anted up to do resoptration which was supposed to be done by the steward.
What is happening at SHCP is public contributions are being used to benefit a few at the expense of the many. I know one HumCo supervisor, not the 2nd district, is very leery of the process and decisions of the SHCP board.
August 29, 2010 at 6:16 pm
anon
i’m a park neighbor and i like hearing the amplified music
drifting over from the park…
lets have some lively events there…
SAMF doesn’t have to be there though…
it would be a sweet locale…
but what’s wrong with Benbow?
August 29, 2010 at 10:18 pm
Delphi
“Never, ever compromise when it comes to “right and wrong.” With the right attitude you shouldn’t care what people think, as long as you are standing up for what is right. Accept persecution gracefully.”
If you have attended SHCP meetings the link below may sound familiar.
http://www.citizenreviewonline.org/nov_2002/lets_stop.htm
August 30, 2010 at 11:01 am
Anonymous
If Terri Clemenotson is concerned about “lack of housing in our area” (as she said on Monday Morning Magazine), she can check out the county General Plan Update gis maps.
Click on “urban study areas” on the maps for Garberville and Redway. Urban study areas are where “densities greater than one unit per acre are appropriate to consider”.(Michael Richardson was on KMUD last week talking about 15 units per acre, for example, for multi-family housing). The whole area around the Park and for quite a ways is slated for uranization as urban study areas.
Exactly the reason that what is left of the Park should be preserved as a Park.
August 30, 2010 at 12:17 pm
Anonymous
Dennis Huber was right to liken the Ridgewood Development with the Community Park on Monday Morning Magazine. The whole Park Board’s scheme is much closer to a private development like Ridgewood than to a regional park or recreation district, for example, which Dennis seems never to have heard of. Read the article in the Northcoast Journal about Ridgewood, which they call Forester-Gill. Sounds just like the Park, but with more “open space”.
Course, the one difference is that this parkland was purchased with donations from the public.
It is hilarious to hear Dennis excuse the Park Board’s commercial privatization of the Park as not as bad as Ridgewood.
August 30, 2010 at 1:26 pm
edsvoice
After hearing Dennis Huber (KMUD MMM) and what he said he doesn’t know about the Park Board application to rezone and changing land use designations down at the SHCP, he might think twice before calling himself a Park Board member representing this community.
The sad part is, as a Park Board Director, Dennis should be up to speed about the whole basic SHCP GPA application. The same goes for all of the Park Board Directors, including its Executive Director. For the Park Board to tell the public & community they are not sure about the process and facts in this GPA application (as did the Executive Director on Aug 25 at the last Park Meeting) they need to all be on the same page. After all, they are the only ones in-trusted with oversight and operation of this property for the SoHum Community, right?
August 30, 2010 at 6:27 pm
edsvoice
anon said “but what’s wrong with Benbow?”
I’ll take this one Eric;
The MCC has stated in public that Benbow State Park costs too much ($15K), its too small and there is too much law enforcement present, i.e. Park Rangers, Sheriff and CHP.
For what the Park Board has laid out in their GPA EIR application, having the MCC SAMF at the Park, I have not seen or heard any public statements from the MCC announcing the move from Benbow to the SHCP. I have emailed the MCC Board and never heard a peep………….
At the SHCP Redway School meeting back in March of 2009, the Park Board said that SAMF means $20K to the SHCP instead of State Parks. I had asked Crow Gilman (who was sitting at my table) at that same meeting if that was true, he said no way. He went on to say, the MCC owned two acres at the SHCP, because they had been the first to donate $8000 to the SHCP in the beginning. If you can remember, the deal back in 2000 was, donate $4000 towards each acre at the Park. So I guess the MCC took that literally.
The one good thing for the MCC having their SAMF & ROTR at Benbow, is they don’t have to get County Permits and CEQA EIR’s, all of that is included since the Benbow State Park Recreation Area is already 100% Public land & property. The events and festivals are overseen and regulated by State Parks.
That’s all I know for fact, anything else would be speculation on my part.
August 30, 2010 at 6:47 pm
Anonymous
Sorry about misspelling Terri’s last name. Klemetson. My apologies.
And of course what I meant to say was that the whole area around the Park and for quite a ways is slated for urbanization (as an urban study area) in the General Plan Update. Check it out:
http://gis.co.humboldt.ca.us/Freeance/Client/PublicAccess1/index.html?appconfig=gpu
August 31, 2010 at 1:19 pm
edsvoice
Eric,
I wanted to know if you could comment about what was not re-butted in the Newspaper(s) today. At the Park Board meeting on Aug 25, the Park Board Ex Dir told everyone, Michael Richardson was going to re-butt the article in the Indie (that was so dead wrong), about how many events the Park Board was requesting over 5000 people (5). And I thought you talked about doing it yourself on this same thread? What happened?
And what about that Rotary Pavilion agenda item from the same meeting, have any comments? Has the Garberville Rotary approved that project at the SHCP?
September 1, 2010 at 8:23 am
Eric Kirk
There was no “rebuttal.” The correction was published in last week’s Redwood Times, and Michael Richardson has acknowledged the error. If only the reporter would acknowledge the error of writing an article on the application without reading the application. But the issue was cleared up last week.
September 1, 2010 at 9:52 am
edsvoice
Thanks,
“If only the reporter would acknowledge the error of writing an article on the application without reading the application. But the issue was cleared up last week”
Why would a reporter have to acknowledge not reading the Park Board application, when their infomation from the article came straight from the horses mouth, in this case Michael Richardson?
Even as of today, what the Park Board has requested in what you are calling an “application” has now changed, as per Michael Richardson. I think if a reporter wanted to know just the facts for a story, he should have talked with Richardson and if Richardson was giving him or her the wrong scoop (only as per the Park Board) why should the reporter have to acknowledge any of what you or the Park Board wants?
FYI, what you and the Park Board keep calling an “application” is called an:
“Notice of Preparation of a Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) For a General Plan Amendment, Zone Reclassification, Conditional Use Permit and Special Permit on the Southern Humboldt Community Park in the Garberville Area”
It goes on to state:
“This project involves three parts. First, a General Plan Amendment is proposed to change the General Plan designations on portions of the 430 acre property from Agricultural Lands (AL20) and Agricultural Rural (AR5-20) to allow recreation open to the public, multifamily housing, and community assembly uses. Most of the property (305 acres) is proposed for continued agricultural use. The 38 acres of the property currently used for a gravel mining operation would also continue with that use. The 3 – 5 acres proposed for multifamily housing will have an RM – Residential Multifamily Plan designation. The 96 acres proposed for public recreation, the agricultural areas, and the gravel mining areas are proposed to be assigned a PR-Public Recreation designation, a new Plan designation which allows agriculture, playing fields, special events and other recreational uses open to the public”
“The second part of this project is rezoning portions of the property consistent with the new Plan designations”
“The third part of the project is the proposed Conditional Use Permit and Special Permit to allow specific activities within the PR areas. Portions of the PR designated areas are proposed to be used for small picnics, day use parking, portable restrooms, public access, a labyrinth, nature study, outdoor education and staff access along existing dirt roads during large events”
“Portions of the PR areas are proposed to be used for small events of 200 persons or less, such as weddings, birthdays and memorials. Up to five (5) times per year, medium sized events for up to 500 persons would be allowed. These events would not have amplified music. And one time per year an event is proposed for up to 5,000 persons similar to the Benbow Summer Arts Fair. Amplified music would be allowed at these events”
“Other portions of the PR areas will be used as playing fields and accessory uses, such as bleachers, and concession stands, a disc golf course, camping areas, a skate park, a group picnic area, public restrooms, a playground, and multi use trails. The parcel is served by community water and on-site sewer”
Now that is what Michael Richardson states on a document in print, not a phone call, not an email but what the Scoping Session at the barn on Sept 9th will be about. The above is a lot different than what the Park Board has listed on what you are calling an “application”.
September 1, 2010 at 10:07 am
Eric Kirk
Yes, much different. You will have to ask Michael Richardson to account for the differences, which are probably just a misunderstanding. We are hoping to have that cleared up by the meeting.
September 1, 2010 at 11:40 am
edsvoice
Eric,
If this is all a “misunderstanding” and it will all be cleared up, is this the Park Boards “Plan B”?