You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Harbor District’ tag.
It’s Mike Wilson in the third and Richard Marks in the Fourth – my picks exactly, but I guess in local politics terms a split ticket.
Obviously I don’t disagree with the endorsements, but it dawns on me that I can’t recall an election where the TS didn’t seem to be deliberately splitting its endorsements among slates. It’s like they’re determined to sit on the fence.
Over at the Arcata Eye, Kevin Hoover posted a very good discussion of the Third District race. Does anybody besides me really miss Kevin’s Nohum Reports on KMUD Monday mornings?
Kevin is endorsing Wilson by the way, and the trail – but not some of his progressive support (including Heraldo).
I supported Carlos Quilez. I support Mike Wilson. So why am I supporting in the 4th District a candidate with support from the same coalition I’m opposing everywhere else? The same reason I endorsed Marks a couple of years ago for Supervisor – we need more working class progressives in office. We don’t often have an opportunity to put one there. And while I don’t want entrenched local and extra-county interests dictating local development policies, we need jobs. We need unions. We need union jobs. And I believe Marks will make an excellent swing vote; at least I have great hope he will.
Let me start with a little bit of history. As you know, much of my politics is conditioned by Bay Area experiences. I lived in San Francisco from 1989 to 1995. This was a major transition period from the “old San Francisco” of racial and economic diversity to a more affluent young white liberalism producing a new SF culture of what Harold Solomon called “homogenized arrogance” and what the SF Bay Guardian referred to as “the world’s first economically cleansed city.” I watched unbridled gentrification strip SF and the surrounding areas of their character, forcing the working classes into long commutes from the burgeoning sprawls in the Valley.
This was precipitated by a number of factors, some of them arguably inevitable. San Francisco is already the second most compact city in the country, and everybody and her grandmother wants to live there. Property values were bound to skyrocket, as the bohemians unwittingly aided in the gentrification by moving into the ethnic minority heavy neighborhoods thus diluting the yuppie fears of the swarthy masses. Even Hunter’s Point and the Tenderloin are out of range for the people who have lived there for decades.
And then there are the factors which weren’t inevitable – the short-sight of progressives who boldly took on and sometimes defeated the “downtown interests” but who paved the way for gentrification. (more under the fold) Read the rest of this entry »
I received the following message from the Marks campaign. You won’t find a local coalition more broad than this one.
California 1st District Assemblyman Wes Chesbro has endorsed Richard Marks for Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation and Conservation District Commissioner, Fourth Division.
“Richard recognizes the importance of connecting job creation with environmental stewardship,” Chesbro said. “I applaud his commitment to developing sustainable industries that strengthen our local economy while preserving the natural beauty of our bay. He’s definitely the right choice for Harbor Commissioner.”
Marks replied, “I am honored to have the endorsement of Assemblyman Chesbro, and will work hard to create living wage job opportunities along our bay.”
Richard Marks has also been endorsed by the following elected officials:
Virginia Bass — Eureka Mayor
Mark Wheatley – Arcata Mayor
Frank Jager — Eureka City Councilmember
Shane Brinton — Arcata City Councilman
Ronnie Pellegrini — Humboldt Bay Harbor Commissioner, Division 1
John Woolley – former Humboldt County Supervisor, Third District
Peter La Vallee – former Eureka Mayor
Along with most of the working unions in the North Coast that want to see more jobs in our community.
Matthew Owen, Campaign Chair
I also endorse Marks, for reasons I’ll make explain in a future post. I endorse Mike Wilson in the other race.
Humboldt Bay Harbor Recreation and Conservation District Candidates Forum
Save the date-October 7, 2009
6:30-8:30 at the Humboldt Area Foundation
373 Indianola Road, Bayside
The Humboldt Bay Stewards will host a candidates’ forum for the upcoming November election of Bay District Commissioners.
This is an opportunity for the public to meet the 3rd and 4th districts Commissioner Candidates and listen to them discuss the issues and their positions.
The League of Women Voters will conduct the forum. All candidates will have the opportunity to answer each of the questions submitted from the audience.
I’m not quite sure what makes the story timely. The story introduces nothing new. Hauser declared some weeks ago. But the Times Standard has a write-up about Hauser and his raison d’être. While incumbent Mike Wilson has the local Democratic Party committee endorsement, some comments attached to the article report that Hauser is winning the union endorsements – which is consistent with the pattern of recent Harbor Commission elections.
A quick review of Hauser’s endorsements confirms the union support and some other notables. The only mild surprise I find on the list is John Wooley. A bunch of ex-supervisors.
Wilson’s support list is equally predictable. Classic lines drawn.
It’s Arcata. Wilson will win.
Addendum: Apologies to the TS. I didn’t see that equal time was given to Wilson.
Found it on Richard Marks blog.
I’d heard a rumor that the committee would be endorsing Dan Hauser over Wilson, but I think that was premised on an assumption. The HCDCC hasn’t always gone with the establishment candidate, and maybe Hauser’s been out of it too long to be considered establishment anyway.
Wilson has a campaign website up.
Just a few items to catch up with.
Pat Wiggins will not be seeking re-election. That opens up a slew of possibilities for her replacement. Patty Berg? Bonnie Neeley? David Colfax?
As you may have heard or read, Richard Marks is running for the 4th District Harbor Commission position as the incumbent is not running for re-election. I’ve heard that he has an opponent, but I haven’t seen any media or blog posts on it.
The big contest is going to be in the third district where Dan Hauser is running against Mike Wilson. When Bruce Anderson catches wind that Hauser is back in politics, I expect he’ll blow a fuse! I’ve received an email from a Wilson supporter saying that Hauser has already raised $8000 for his campaign. It’s all about the trail proposal.
No word so far on any challenge to Paul Gallegos for D.A.
Addendum: Turns out that Richard has two opponents as reported by Heraldo in the thread. I just haven’t been paying attention. I’m usually a geek about these things. I guess I’m slipping.
I’ve intended to review the Redwood Terminal Business Plan which came out last week and draft up a post about it. I just haven’t had the time to do it justice and I just have too much on my plate right now to get something meaningful up. But there is a meeting taking place next week, notice of which I received by e-mail from individuals organizing around the issue.
Thursday June 26 is D-Day on the Bay Commission. They’ll be having their meeting at the Warfinger building at 7:00 pm.
1. The Plan for the Redwood Dock will take over ten years to come to fruition and is dependent on the rail through the Eel River line.
2. The Goldman Sachs deal is also a long term project, they are asking for 50 and 100 year leases at a time where most ports are balking at 25 year leases.
3. According to an analysis done by Commissioner Higgins, at the current rate of 500K deficit, the Bay District will be INSOLVENT in 5 to 7 years.
Heraldo posted on the issue a few days back.
Residents who want to weigh in with their comments on the pair of potential projects to expand container shipping in Humboldt Bay will have another three weeks to do so.
The Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation and Conservation District announced Wednesday that written and oral comments on the draft Redwood Marine Terminal Feasibility Study will be accepted by the district until 4 p.m. on Jan. 15.
The comments will be reviewed prior to the Harbor District’s Feb. 28 meeting, where the commissioners are scheduled to consider authorizing the transportation consulting firm TranSystems to proceed on the preparation of a business plan for a selected development option.
The two proposals on the table are in essence:
The first option in the study identifies a stand-alone multipurpose berth that would aid the port serving local barge, project cargo and bulk cargo shipments, and cruise shipping lines.
The second option envisions essentially the same berth integrated with long-term expansion for a new gateway for rail-serviced markets that is dependant on a revived rail line through the Eel River Canyon.
Harbor District Chief Executive Officer David Hull recommended Wednesday that comments be limited to the feasibility study as the financial information will be developed and discussed in the business plan phase of the project.
“Preferably in writing,” Hull said.
The feasibility study is available here.