Pin It
Favorite

Vote V! 


Editor:

Measure V opponents spent thousands on mailers refuting "Rent Control."

Lies of omission abound. They failed to mention "mobile home parks" in regular font regarding the measure because they want you to think it is about all rentals.

Statement: Counties are rejecting ordinances. Truth: More than 90 municipalities have such ordinances in effect successfully for decades, including the city and county of Sonoma. Statement: Carson must pay millions after losing a case. Truth: Carson is appealing, paying nothing. Statement: Humboldt doesn't know long-term impacts. Truth: The county report estimates $6,000, a paltry sum to preserve more than 1,000 affordable housing units! Statement: Studies point to ineffectiveness. Truth: Studies, including Arcata's, show that ordinances are effective.

Humboldt is losing discretionary spending in its local economy now as wealthy park owners suck it from the wallets of thousands of county residents and losing affordability in its mobile home parks. Yes on V!

Hilary Mosher, McKinleyville

Editor:

I am the treasurer of the "Yes on Measure V" committee. I was aghast when more than $165,000 came into the county to fight the few grandmothers who are trying to preserve their housing and, thus, live out their lives in dignity. But in the last week thousands of dollars came into the "No" side from park owners who don't even have a park in Humboldt.

Since I have gone public with my support, my landlord has retaliated and I fear what will happen if we lose. I also fear for other low income folks who stand to lose more than just dollars. I am dumbfounded by the amount of money parks must generate if the owners can throw so much at the few that have dared to stand up to protect the future of unsubsidized low-income housing in Humboldt. Please, vote yes on measure V.

Patti Rose, McKinleyville

Editor:

I love Arcata. It's the city that drew my husband and me to Humboldt.

When Arcata began looking into mobile home rents, I thought, "Great, a responsive government listening to its residents."

But now that I've started reading its consultant's draft report, I am mystified.

The report examines five possible responses to rising rents. Instead of describing the pros and cons of each, something actually helpful for a city's decision making, it singles out just one alternative for one description of any possible downside.

The summary of a different alternative was so glowing I followed the footnotes. It turns out the glow comes from a consulting firm that represents property owners and mobile home park owners. It guides them in maximizing returns and getting their "entitlements."

Now this oddly loaded report is being aimed at Measure V. A $160,000 out-of-area campaign is holding the propaganda gun.

Arcata ... huh?

Carrie Peyton Dahlberg, Trinidad

Editor:

I am the treasurer of the "Yes on Measure V" committee. I was aghast when more than $165,000 came into the county to fight the few grandmothers who are trying to preserve their housing and, thus, live out their lives in dignity. But in the last week thousands of dollars came into the "No" side from park owners who don't even have a park in Humboldt.

Since I have gone public with my support, my landlord has retaliated and I fear what will happen if we lose. I also fear for other low income folks who stand to lose more than just dollars. I am dumbfounded by the amount of money parks must generate if the owners can throw so much at the few that have dared to stand up to protect the future of unsubsidized low-income housing in Humboldt. Please, vote yes on measure V.

Patti Rose, McKinleyville

Editor:

I love Arcata. It's the city that drew my husband and me to Humboldt.

When Arcata began looking into mobile home rents, I thought, "Great, a responsive government listening to its residents."

But now that I've started reading its consultant's draft report, I am mystified.

The report examines five possible responses to rising rents. Instead of describing the pros and cons of each, something actually helpful for a city's decision making, it singles out just one alternative for one description of any possible downside.

The summary of a different alternative was so glowing I followed the footnotes. It turns out the glow comes from a consulting firm that represents property owners and mobile home park owners. It guides them in maximizing returns and getting their "entitlements."

Now this oddly loaded report is being aimed at Measure V. A $160,000 out-of-area campaign is holding the propaganda gun.

Arcata ... huh?

Carrie Peyton Dahlberg, Trinidad


Pin It
Favorite

Comments (2)

Showing 1-2 of 2

Add a comment

 
Subscribe to this thread:
Showing 1-2 of 2

Add a comment

Latest in Mailbox

Readers also liked…

© 2017 North Coast Journal

Website powered by Foundation

humboldt