COVER STORY | IN
THE NEWS | ART
BEAT
TALK OF THE TABLE | THE HUM | CALENDAR
June 15, 2006
WHERE'S THE DOT? The Journal went
to press last week without a winner's dot by the name of the
District Attorney Paul Gallegos, who fended off a feisty challenge
from Worth Dikeman, a deputy DA who had the backing of most of
the county's cops. Some precincts in Scotia, Rio Dell, Fortuna
and Hydesville had trouble transmitting their results to the
election headquarters by telephone, so they had to be driven
in by car for tallying.
"Gallegos held at 53 percent all night, so
[those rural precincts] really didn't change things," said
election chief Lindsey McWilliams. Voter turnout was so-so —
about 46 percent, down from a normal 52 percent for a local mid-year
election but still respectably above the statewide turnout of
34 percent. Measure T, banning corporate money contributions
to local campaigns, passed with 55 percent. Jill Geist handily
won re-election for 5th District supervisor. In the 4th District,
20-year incumbent Bonnie Neely (44 percent) must face a run-off
against former Eureka Mayor Nancy Flemming (31 percent). Both
are registered Republicans. Democrat Richard Marks, who pulled
25 percent of the vote in that race, is still being coy about
who he might endorse, but politicos are betting on Neely, with
her lengthy list of local Dem endorsers.
One other election tidbit from McWilliams: Keep
an eye on the growing trend of last-minute, issue-oriented gobs
of money. Eureka businessman/philanthropist Rob Arkley wrote
a $100,000 check to a committee that opposed Proposition 82,
the tax-the-rich-to-pay-for-preschool measure. It's called "527"
money, after the federal law that allows tax-exempt organizations
to engage in political activities, often through unlimited soft
money contributions and sometimes from a single individual. Get
used to it.
— Judy Hodgson
CITY TRUMPS STATE: You remember those four
wooden billboards of 50s and 60s vintage that blew down in that
big storm in 2001, on the stretch of 101 from the Bayside Cutoff
north to downtown Arcata? You know, the ones Viacom then started
to rebuild before the City of Arcata stomped its foot down, cited
its city sign code of 1999, and said, "Whoa, you gotta get
a permit from us before you do that, buddy." The billboards,
though not all on city-owned property, were within the city limits.
OK, so most of you forgot about it. Anyway, after
Arcata told Viacom it had to get a permit, Viacom sued the city,
accusing it of violating Viacom's civil rights under federal
law as well as elbowing in on state jurisdiction under the Outdoor
Advertising Act — in other words, its permit from Caltrans would
do quite nicely, thanks.
In late 2002, Humboldt County Superior Court Judge
J. Michael Brown ruled in favor of Viacom, and in 2003 the trial
court awarded Viacom $37,483.94 in damages (lost rent) and $39,104
in attorney fees, and told the city to butt out of Viacom's billboard
re-erection.
Arcata appealed. Last Thursday, June 8, in California's
First District Court of Appeal, a three-judge panel upheld Arcata's
appeal and reversed the ruling, saying, "[T]he inescapable
conclusion is that the State Act not only does not categorically
prohibit local legislation, it explicitly and repeatedly invites
augmentation from local authorities. ... As previously mentioned,
Viacom never applied for the permit required by the City. ...
Until this administrative process is completed, any claim Viacom
might have for damages is premature."
Because it appealed, Arcata never did pay those
damages and fees. So there's no refund to shout for. As for what
Viacom might do next — that's up in the air (Viacom's attorney,
Bill Barnum, was out of town Tuesday).
But the city's happy. "I'm just delighted
with the ruling," said City Attorney Nancy Diamond. And
the billboards? Well, the city exercised another form of local
control over at least one of them, on city property, during the
lawsuit-entangled years since the 2001 windstorms: When its lease
expired, the city didn't renew. "So that billboard went
away," said Diamond. Two others are on private property.
Another, a two-sided one, just north of the Bayside Cutoff, is
on city property. Viacom's two leases on that board will expire
in 2009. Current city sentiment? Bye-bye billboards.
— Heidi Walters
SOUND THE ALARM: It was quite a surprise,
back then, a couple of years ago. Two of Humboldt County's local
fire districts — all of which have been very hard-pressed for
cash in these lean times — asked property owners to tax themselves
just a little bit more, so that each district could provide more
than just a skeleton crew and busted-up equipment in service
of their communities. The two districts were the Arcata Fire
District, which serves liberal Arcata, McKinleyville and environs,
and the Humboldt Fire District No. 1, which serves the conservative
Cutten area and other Eureka outskirts. Which group of property
owners agreed to up their own taxes?
Maybe this time it will be different. Facing what
Arcata Fire Chief John McFarland is calling a "crisis-mode"
budget, the district is going back to the community with hat
in hand, asking property owners (the only citizens with a say
in the matter) to vote for a "benefit assessment" —
essentially, a hike on property taxes — that would keep the
district in the black, and maybe allow it to fix some of its
equipment if the need arises. Ballots, which are mailed out to
property owners, must be returned in the enclosed envelope by
July 20.
McFarland said Tuesday that he was hopeful that
this time, things would go the district's way. He said that after
the failure of the district's benefit assessment proposal in
2004, he met with opponents to see if their objections could
be met. This time around, he said, the district has removed an
"elevator clause" from the benefit assessment proposal,
meaning that there is no provision to automiatically increase
the tax to keep pace with inflation. Also, written into the law
is a clause that mandates citizen review of the assessment in
2012, which could lead to a reduction or elimination of the tax
hike if it is warranted. The additional funds generated by the
proposed assessment — some $1.2 million per year — would be
targeted at staffing and equipment.
The district will be taking its show on the road
in upcoming weeks, meeting with interested groups and explaining
the particulars of the current proposal to local organizations.
Citizens of the district who wish to attend one of these presentations
— or who may want to arrange one for their own service club,
neighborhood association, etc. — can call the AFD's headquarters
at 825-2000. You can find more information about the proposed
benefit assessment at arcatafire.org.
— Hank Sims
HORSE
WRECK: If there was ever any question, Roger Rodoni (left)
is now indisputably the John Wayne of Humboldt County's
elected officials — sorry, Jill. On Sunday, the Second District
Supervisor was branding cattle — as in searing cows on the butt
with a hot iron, people — when his horse fell and rolled around
on his right leg, breaking it. "He basically had a horse
wreck," surmised Kathy Hayes, administrative secretary for
the supes.
The injury required surgery Monday at Redwood Memorial
Hospital. Hayes reported Tuesday morning that Rodoni would remain
in the hospital a few more days, and that thus far the laid up
official has kept in "constant contact" with board
chair John Woolley concerning SoHum goings-on. She was unsure
when Rodoni is expected back at work, nor did she reveal whether
or not the accident caused him to cry. In the meantime, Alan
Bongio stepped up to fill in for Rodoni as guest speaker for
the Humboldt Taxpayers' League meeting at the Samoa Cookhouse,
where he was to discuss the county's proposed redevelopment agency
on Wednesday (June 14). Get well soon, Roger.
— Helen Sanderson
TOP
COVER STORY | IN
THE NEWS | ART
BEAT
TALK OF THE TABLE | THE HUM | CALENDAR
Comments? Write
a letter!
© Copyright 2006, North Coast Journal,
Inc.
|