[… or, “How to Win an Election.” Journal contributor John Osborn’s thoughts below. — Ed.]
The first reaction that came to mind after the initial absentee ballot results trickled in last night was this: It would suck to be Linda Atkins right now. That reaction didn’t change as the night rolled on.
The moderate-conservative sweep across Humboldt County last night was part predicted, but also part shock and awe. The extent in which progressive candidates would be trounced by their counterparts was grossly underestimated by media and local pundits. But why did it happen? What led to this virtually all-encompassing victory last night?
Last night, progressives were denied representation on the Eureka City Council, save for Atkins. Bonnie Neely, a prog candidate with a 24-year record on the Board of Supes, was delivered her pink slip in a the form of a landslide defeat by Virginia Bass. District Attorney Paul Gallegos nearly lost his re-election bid to Allison Jackson, and still may. Ryan Sundberg commands a narrow lead over Pat Cleary for the Fifth District Supe seat.
Progressives should bust out a notebook and scribble down a lesson or two on politics, because the conservative elements in the county not only did their homework, they executed an amazingly effective campaign which hinged on harnessing a key central issue to rally voters, flooding campaign coffers with cash and ensuring a strong turnout.
Progressives should be kicking themselves in the backside for not taking the opportunity to counter the Measure N (Marina Center) machine, even though they opposed it every step of the way, whether publicly or in private. Their candidates’ insistence on distancing themselves from the issue throughout the election, refusing to take a hard stand, only fed strength to the candidates who fully seized upon the issue to help shape their campaign. The tens of thousands of dollars doled out by Security National to launch a Get Out The Vote campaign for Measure N was also an indirect mobilization for the slate of candidates who rallied behind the issue: Bass, Marian Brady, Mike Newman and Frank Jager. They enjoyed, essentially, about a $30,000 campaign infusion of advertising each as a result.
This brings us to another major reason for the sweep this season: money. There is no doubt that a handful of business interests in Eureka colluded at some point in the election to pool their money together and financially prop up a slate of candidates that included the above-mentioned Jackson, Sundberg and Johanna Rodoni for Assessor. Much of the financial support came from allies of Rob McBeth, who has ownership interest in O&M Industries and the Humboldt Builder’s Exchange non-profit. The hundreds of thousands of dollars injected into these candidates campaigns secured their financial superiority, and an effective propaganda campaign distracting their eye-widening fundraising habits by attacking the candidates receiving large donations from Bill Pierson worked to shield their own activities.
The “Marina Center Slate” had message and financial dominance; the Progressives, on the other hand, had little in an organized resistance to that bloc and gave their base little reason to rally. They remained fractured and relatively weak in their responses to the advertising blitz made by their opponents, deceptive as some ads were. Neely’s response, perhaps miscalculated, was to launch a negative attack blitz on Bass which arguably backfired but might have worked if she targeted the Marina Center or Security National — the foundation. Lack of solid response and the absence of a coordinated message to rally the progressive vote ultimately showed in the polls, as the conservative base, rallied by the Marina Center and general national fervor, prevailed. But the progressives always suffer from their support base – youth, liberals, the poor, all demographics that are more likely to not turnout during an election unless there is a damn good reason to.
Over the next two years, conservatives will enjoy power in Eureka and on the Board of Supes, and as a result the spotlight will be shining bright on them. In Eureka, with Larry Glass gone, conservatives lose their scapegoat for all the city’s problems, and time will tell if Newman and Brady are more than Marina Center cheerleaders. And the unknown here is who Jager will appoint to take his seat. Sundberg and Bass will have to prove that they are truly independent politicians and not lackeys of the special interest money that filled their campaign coffers. These are tests that will shape the next election.
If they succeed, progressives should be equally worried in 2012 and be prepared to brace for more sweeping loses. Humboldt progressives can learn much from their massive defeat last night: Unifying under the flag of a divisive issue, tons of money, and turnout win the day. It should be a lesson remembered for 2012 and on; if you want to play the game, be prepared to get dirty.
This article appears in The Creepy Carson.
“if you want to play the game, be prepared to get dirty.”
So you don’t consider Larry’s defacto blog (the Humboldt Herald) at least as dirty and slimey?
Maybe people are tired of what they see as pandering from those who supported
“100 percent funding” for the police department, when that was fiscally impossible this past year, and a “priortized budget”, when the council was, in fact given a list of expenditures and departments to prioritize.
Perhaps the NCJ can take a valuable lesson away from this as well – the “most popular politician in Humboldt County” is most definitely not someone who can be voted on, over and over, and over again over the interwebs by a few people – that tends to skew the results, methinks.
Lastly John, as you are in fact a “Reporta”, it would be nice if you could remove the angst from your report and perhaps you could be a bit more…uhhh…independent.
No mention of the megabucks Bonnie Neely raised from out of the area developers.
I’m curious. Would I be “independent” if I never mentioned the conservative money in the elections and only the money behind Neely? I know when I was attacking her for that in the past, people like you “P” cheered and rejoiced, thanking me for being a “fair” reporter.
Now that I’m calling out the conservative money, I’m “biased.” You can’t have it both ways.
problem is, why didn’t prop19 vote help progressives in these races?
That’s a good question Cap. I’m curious to see the precinct breakdown on how Prop. 19 fended throughout the county. In Arcata, at least, there were a bunch of kids voting, more than anticipated. Meserve almost won. I wonder how Prop. 19 did there compared to the rest of the county.
John:
I think the question is fair, though snottily phrased. If “money” is a major reason for the sweep, you have to acknowledge that at least some prog candidates had more of it.
John, You have hit on a few bits and pieces but you really have no idea what happened in this election.
btw, With respect to your question. You would be truly independant if you clearly and fairly pointed out the money comming from all factions. Sometimes you do but mostly not. Keep trying, I think your’re getting better.
Hank:
True. Bonnie did have a good amount of cash under her belt, but not as much as Bass. She also didn’t have a strong message.
In this piece, I was just focusing on how the combined efforts of money, message, and turnout won the day for the moderates and conservatives.
Strawman alert.
You don’t know if those people are “people like me” or not, John.
The angst I sense from you is in your posts lamenting the death of the progressive movement in Eureka, as well as the last sentence of your post here that
“if you want to play the game, be prepared to get dirty.”
Are you trying to say that there was no getting dirty over on the progressive side?
That’s just weak.
As I mentioned earlier, perhaps a lot of the middle of the road people are tired of what they have seen as pandering from Larry Glass. I don’t know. Personally, I think that the local progressives supporting the Ron Kuhnels and Larry Glasses of this election thought they had this election in the bag, simply from the insular feedback from the local blogs like the H.Herald; Hell, I thought they had it in the bag.
So we still call liberals progressives? Locally they were “green” when that label was expedient-What will the next moniker be?
P:
I’m not saying the Progs didn’t play dirty, just not as dirty. I mentioned Neely’s negative attacks in this article, which appeared to be a staple tactic of her campaign after the Primary.
The Herald is balanced by the Mirror; both sides have their blog attack dogs. Am I didn’t say the Progressives are done, for good in Eureka, they’re just done on the council for the time being.
WR: I think “progressive” is the best term for the major left-of-center party up here in Humboldt County.
“Greens”? Too narrow.
“Liberals”? The local left would consider that term wishy-washy.
“Democrats”? See above.
Oh, and John: Bass had more money than Neely at the end? Are you sure about that?
And let’s be clear here. When I say you gotta get dirty, I’m not just talking about going negative, I’m also talking about taking a firm stand on an issue. When you take a stand, you’re going to get dirty, plain and simple, because some people are going to agree and some aren’t.
Hank:
Unless the end of year disclosures prove otherwise. Or, did I miss something with the last round of disclosures in mid-October?
John,
“I’m not saying the Progs didn’t play dirty, just not as dirty.” Are you kidding? Neely has been the Queen of dirty. Not just a little but as absolutely dirty as you can get in every respect. You are showing your bias again.
“The Herald is balanced by the Mirror; both sides have their blog attack dogs.” Come on John please be serious. While both blogs are a scourge on our community there is no comparison between the two. We would all be better off without both.
Objectivity takes work but it leads to credibility.
OK, so it looks like Neely made $4,000 more than Bass up to this last October period. I apologize for the error.
I also apologize for not doing a better job in this column of highlighting the funding of the other side. But my premise still stands, and you have to give credit where credit is due.
I will let you big brains that work part time sort this out, over analyze and continue to take pot shots at one another… I would however just mention its more about math than playing dirty.
Both sides have big mouths, one side just had the numbers to back the big talk.
Now.. can we finally get rid of that eyesore in Eureka and get a home depot so that we can have some actually competition up here? Probably not, sigh, just watch what happens next!
Progs? Greens? True, there are some in Eureka, but no movement. Young Obama voters failed to turn out nation wide. Without them Eureka’s Newcomers could not hold the Oldtimers off. That’s all.
This is all great news for the Zoo.
Just a few quick comments here.
There is no question that Measure N was a wedge issue, and a clever one at that. But I was not prepared to “get dirty” even if that is what it takes to win. If that is what the progressives needed in a candidate they will rally behind, then they were backing the wrong person. Even though Security National chose to frame my stand on Measure N (it was a poor way to do zoning, and it was on the ballot so the people can decide) in a negative manner, I spoke the truth. To do otherwise would violate my sense of ethics.To take a “firm stand” just for the sake of politics doesn’t seem right to me.
I easily would have won this election except for the presence of a third candidate, and while the odds are long and the hill ahead is steep, all the ballots have not yet been counted.
Finally I agree that “tons of money” plays a big part in this, and I am not sure what you do about that..For sure that phony campaign finance ordinance that was just passed is not going to provide any solution.
In the Third Ward we got a candidate without (proven) majority support.
Instant Runoff Voting for Eureka would be the democratic solution to this problem (and in this instance it would probably mean Ron would have been elected handily – but it cuts both ways as IRV would have probably meant that Cherie Arkley would have beat Peter LaVallee for Mayor in 2002).
Also, I don’t know about the numbers specifically but when ya’ll are adding them up (especially in the Bass/Neely race) are you counting the money in their treasuries before January 1? They both had money in the bank that they could spend but that didn’t need to count towards their reports filed this year.
Kaitlin
Ron, don’t be blaming a third candidate or “tons of money” for your loss.
You and Larry Glass talked the “third” candidate out of running last time around and as I recall you out-spent Jeff by about 2 or 3 to one and still you lost that election.
Elections are won or lost because of the candidate’s message. Your message is usually, “I am right and you are wrong”.
We heard it loud and clear when you publicly claimed the “issues” were way over Jeff’s head last time around.
We heard it loud and clear this time around when you took every opportunity to publicly advise the council and staff they got it wrong about oh so many things.
Once again you tied yourself to the HCDC Bonnie and Bill Pierson. You actually e-mailed a voter and said you didn’t understand why the Marina Center was so important to folks when it so clearly was not the right project.
Hello! Sometimes you have to open your mind and listen. I think your message has clearly been that you have all the answers and don’t need input to make decisions.
So the phony reason of having a third candidate in the race and tons of money against you is not where you should be looking. You lost because the majority of voters didn’t buy your message…..and yes, that’s why Jeff lost the primary. We did a poor job of getting our message out and “money” definitely was not a message that resonated with the voting public.
Ron, that’s like Bass saying she would would creamed Bonnie in June primaries, if not for that third candidate (Leonard).
Things are what they are.
Bass came back and finished off Bonnie in November.
You should have won your election outright, but you did not.
There’s no one to blame but yourself.
You’re also ignoring the Bill Pierson “money bombs” (John Osborn’s words) that you so willingly took.
How much was it… $3K in 2007 and $7K in 2010.
As a plurality election it is a matter of fact that third candidates split the vote, Barb. What a lady. And June was a primary with a runoff provision, not a pluarlity election.
Idiots. Eureka!
“Elections are won or lost because of the candidate’s message.”
So that’s why Jeff leonard lost. Could have fooled me.
I love you, Barb, but I think UNFB has a solid point, here. He or she has justified his/her handle.
Might be solid Hank, but a bit off topic.
The big money issue seems to cut both ways in this and many other elections. Cripes Hank, at what point do campaign donations transcend from broad support and confidence in the message to the wholesale purchase of the heart and soul of a candidate.
Seems like both sides of the ideological equation make the same arguments for a different set of reasons but, are similarly morally outraged when the other side engages in just about the same conduct.
As to John’s theory, I think it is mostly persuasive. Like it or not, legit or not, Measure N was a defining and compelling focal point and a place where some efforts and (alas) candidates went to die.
But, beyond all of the political sophistication and postmortem analysis, doesn’t it really come down to basic human levels of familiarity, comfort and confidence?
So John, I think your take is pretty close to right on. Maybe it would be more valid if it wasn’t such a primer for ‘progressive’ future success but rather, a straight up evaluation of what worked and, what didn’t.
I enjoy your writing here, before at the ER and on the Reporta blog. You have good insights. It’s just that your cheerleader’s pom poms don’t quite completely cover your stripes.
I was amazed to see the 4th Supervisor race determined by 5,907 votes. According to thereporta.com (Aug. 3, 2010) Neely and Bass had a combined total of $203,811 to spend. That’s $34.50 per voter. I never realized it was so valuable to be a Eureka voter. Neely and Bass could have given all the voters of Eureka gift certificates to a dinner at Stars for support and saved a lot of money (Ha-ha?). I am left to wonder how valuable all this spending was for 1 seat out of 5 on a Board of Supervisors, and kind of appalled at the seemingly apathetic Eureka votizenry (5,907 out of ~28,000 residents?). Really?
It was a real mystery to me why the Eureka lefties ran like hell from Measure N, when that was the issue of the day. Measure N is meaningless, but without a campaign against it, claims from the Arkley crowd were never disputed. I talked to a shop owner a few weeks ago who told me that it was an outrage the way the city council has blocked the Marina Center, and just looked confused when I told him that the council has voted yes on ever Marina Center issue that has come before them.
People deserve the government they get, I guess! I’m sure everything in Eureka will be just great from here on out! Good luck to ya! (sorry Linda).
John,
I think you generally bring a trenchant analysis to the table without overreaching your analysis or trying to fit it into too neat of a little box, but here I ‘d have to respectfully disagree with your point that Eureka progressives should have gone more on the attack against Measure N. Progressives in Eureka have been on a full-court press attack for the last five years against the way the Balloon Track development has been hijacked by Security National, and our support within the community has been steadily waning throughout that time. In my opinion, it is because we have been engaged in a pissing match with the Fire Dept. – Mr. Arkley and the $6 million he says he has spent during that time to convince the 12,000 registered Eureka voters that his way is the only way to develop the place. His message, shrewdly designed to peel away middle-of-the-road support from the progressive side, was both nimble and highly sophisticated. Witness his successive, well-produced mailers that went to every Eureka household, that featured a couple of hippie moms pushing strollers through the proposed quasi-wetlands-to-be of the Marina Center. And, the bevy of young, blonde interns that literally knocked on every door in Eureka, cooing Marina Center half-truths into the ears of anyone (and everyone) who would listen. Yes, in this way, Citizens United came home to roost in Eureka, many years before it was decided by the Supreme Court.
It is undeniable that progressives will be licking their wounds for years to come following this one. But, I would maintain that if the tables were turned and progressives were to spend the money that Arkley spent on getting their message – any message – out, you would have seen a radically different result.
HEY EBABUBBY I”M A BELONG TO THE PARTY PARTY!! PROGS PARTY WITH POGS AND USE LEFT AND RIGHT HANDS WHICH THEY USE TO DRINK TEA @ TEA PARTIES!!! PAAARTYYYY LIKE ANIMAL HOUSE!!! for real, FUCK party politics. You’re living in a manufactured reality. Type of crap that makes me want to hit up every blog I can in a day ranting nonsense until I get banned. What a bunch of infantile bullshit…”teams”…painfully stupid.
“What a bunch of infantile bullshit…”
Thanks for the trenchant analysis.
You’re all wrong, this is just Oborne being his usual 9th-grade-level mentality whiny self. He’s so bitter about being fired from the T-S and making the really stupid choice of running straight to the ER (which anyone with a brain could see was a rapidly sinking ship) that he can’t help but shove his uneducated, uninformed, overtly biased filth into the news scene in a sad, pathetic attempt create a new persona to hide his suckiness. No one really likes his work except for people like Ron who Osborne helped out by writing some spin stories about unpopular things Ron was doing. Mike Newman was right to call you out– you’re not even remotely ethical and we are all sick of your spin, lies, and bias. Go back to bongoing on the Arcata Plaza with a joint hanging out of your mouth.
“overtly biased filth”?
“”overtly biased filth”?”?
Everyone has some sort of bias, perhaps that is what made it possible for Reporta to type up his piece and send it to the printer without fact checking…
Jeff in my opinion didnt win the primary not because he was unpopular or off message, it was because voters could gauge they had to vote for someone who could (finally) beat Bonnie. Jeff’s ‘jokes’ about talking too much just drove the point home. If you want to minimize damage talk about something jazzier, sexier, more about what you can do-what you have done (Jeff started to at the end, but too late).
In Virginia we see someone with more experience and clout than Bonnie had when she first took office. The possibilities are endless. Virginia gave a sense that it was ok to hope for something better and in the right climate Greatness was possible. We also discarded the 100% financing of the EPD model, the unwillingness to even look at it, the scare tactics when we knew for a fact old town police officers had been on patrol way before all their raises.
Voters are smarter than we’re given credit for, Progs openly stating we’re Not that Smart was a very bad message-don’t make that mistake again.
What part of Middle of the Road don’t you understand? We have many more things in common than we differ-we all want a quality of life, jobs, great environment, decent shopping choices with good prices not cheap crap, safe neighborhoods that we are willing to work for, participate in and share.
Most if not all of us were horrified about how much money goes into campaigns but on the up side this community digs deep and it was good for the economy hopefully.
John, about blaming one another for how much campaigns cost you subliminally mention Measure T then on the flip side you prove the necessity for campaign spending; what were the stats? Marshall had less than 5% Zandra had about twice that with her 1000% more experience in government.
Its time to sit back and reflect for sure, I think its gonna turn out ok.
Mike Newman contradicted himself on several occasions, actually. He said he was in favor of getting rid of the ward system in favor of at-large elections in September — then he tells the Journal in October that the screwy present system is the ‘best of both worlds.’
But at least Mike isn’t so low-class as to blame some other candidate for his own performance at the polls (he could still lose, ya know). Ron, if you lose two elections in a row, maybe you should take a hint instead of beating up on Xandra.
I guess I missed the part where Ron was “beating up” on Xandra?
Or perhaps there really is a difference between “truthiness,” and “truth?”
Bonnie’s crash-and-burn in the primary gave us our election lesson today: Progressives, Greens, liberals–none of us have grassroots anymore. The great green groups of the ’80s and ’90s are no longer making friends, or even keeping old ones (just ask SoHum).
Bonnie thought she could swap her old constituency (which now hates her) for a new one (which no longer exists) by throwing in with professional greens who’s goals are defined and funded out of state by, ahem, outside elites.
Progressives have to assimilate this lesson from the last two election cycles, that our smugness and superiority really isn’t attractive to people much more comfortable with old-fashioned, traditional right-wing hypocrisy. It’s not as obnoxious on a daily basis, unless you feel superior to it, in which case you have to reason with unoffended people instead of snubbing and judging them. Chez Heraldo is no place to learn how Humboldt thinks, you might as well poll the California Native Plant Society.
I’m hopeful for the new crew, because they won by talking to people and representing real concerns that our tired old Populists created, then ignored. The arrogance behind the TPZ fraud, the Code Enforcement cover-up, the General Plan Update railroad and the Balloon Track Lawyers Gone Wild pile-on weren’t problems to our clutch of puffed-up Progressives; but the people they scorn saw much to scorn in return. Progressives created HumCPR’s grassroots, 95 percent of whom aren’t realtors no matter what Heraldo hyperventilates. They’re people who saw that they weren’t respected, and they fought back.
We had an opportunity to learn this last time. Without Bonnie, maybe we can learn it now.
“Bonnie thought she could swap her old constituency (which now hates her) for a new one (which no longer exists) …”
Bonnie DID get 43% of the vote. How do you equate 43% with zero? (Hint: your credibility suffers when you exaggerate.)
Longwind, I sense you are presenting your personal political agenda as (post-election), “the only one that any logical person could have.” Again, your credibility suffers when you present a polemic dressed up to look like an objective analysis.
You may have some good points in there, they’re just too wrapped up in your agenda, masquerading as objectivity, for us to find and chew on.
Please work on this and get back to us.
Sorry EVoter, but in election terms, only receiving 43% of the vote in a two person race is a MASSIVE defeat; no way to spin it any other way.
Actually I never worked for the TS; I was an intern.
Eureka voter, my lessons were premised on the primary where Bonnie got 30 percent, remember? Before she spent $100k to get it up to 43?
That said, I appreciate your critique. I’m a Progressive, and guilty as charged. That’s why I know our problems so well. (Shall we circle up and shoot each other?)
Incidentally, what is my agenda, anyway?
But remember, Longwind, according to the Lovelace/Neeley faction, you can’t be a “progressive” in Humboldt unless you fervently believe that rural living is inherently destructive and anti-social, and unless you agree that the indispensable solution to this terrible, urgent, menacing problem is an Option A-style General Plan Update and the Healthy Humboldt / Forster-Gill / SmartSprawl model of development, then you’re simply NOT a progressive, and in fact you must be either a “greedy developer” or at least a “tool of the developers.”
Our local progressive leadership has become ever more tight-knit and dogmatic in their Groupthink, and more strident in their insistence that anyone who doesn’t agree on 100% of their agenda is the “enemy.” And then they’re surprised when they fare poorly at the polls. Go figure.
If we had a true ward system of municipal govt., Glass would have won, and probably Kuhnel too. At some point, a better funded opposition will prevail, all other things being equal. Converting to a true ward system would level the playing field to a great degree.
Beyond that, a better organized and active campaign with the more appealing message can be expected to prevail. In my opinion, the opposition was more effective and energized.
And if the vote is split, and in Ron’s case it was, the going really gets tough. Ron and Xandra are oranges, people, neither is an apple. Add their two totals and you get a plurality and a majority. Once again, pride trumps pragmatism. Just a year ago we watched John Ash and Susan Penn split the Harbor District liberal vote. Until the liberals rise above their hubris and make the right fundamental moves and avoid making basic mistakes , they’ll keep losing. Count on it.
And if you can’t bring the necessary time and energy to run a pedal to the metal city-wide campaign, please, do us liberals a favor, stuff your ego and step aside for some younger, more fired up activist who’s been brought along by mentors, ala Newman and Brady. If we are going to win, those who are in leadership positions are going to have to do a more conscientious job of realistically appraising what they’re will to bring to a campaign and be more willing to pass the torch when they don’t have what it will take to compete. Winning should be more important than individual ambition. The Marina Center crowd sure figured this out.
Oh spare me the whining, N.Latt.
As OhSoplainJane would say, LMSAO!
You got so insulated in your silly little blogworld, surrounded by those who agreed with you, with only a couple token people who disagreed with you NOT blocked by Heraldo, that you forgot that the vast majority of Eurekans are not extreme left or right – they are middle of the road folks who are worried about making their rent or mortgage payments who do not even pay attention to the blogosphere.
BTW, I am going to call it as I see it – you are a fucking sexist pig with your “bevy of blondes…cooing” comment regarding the rather effective campaign to educate people regarding measure N.
So, its only real grassroots efforts if its an issue you support, Eh?
Half truths, my ass. If you want half truths, go back and read your screed about the settlement between SN and Paykeepers – that was a huge win for SN – paykeepers didnt get near what they were asking for, had lost the major claim of its suit, when it was dismissed back in August;
I could go on and on, but for now I will just revel in the fact that asshats like you were counting as fait accompli for the last two years that there would be a progressive majority on the council
after this election.
By Jud’s commentary, that means Peter and Ron should have stood aside for some up-and-coming community organizers.
Or maybe “liberals” should have gotten off their ass on true ward voting when they had the chance. Instead they were distracted by the Measure T delusion that accomplished nothing. Thanks, Democracy Unlimited.
“I do not belong to an organized political party. I am a Democrat” – Will Rogers.
True then, and true now. That’s the story behind progressive inability to find a message and stay on it.
In other news, I’m sorry to say that I have a split decision to register regarding making campaign contributions. I contributed to two candidates. Boxer won, Rodoni lost. Upshot: contributions may help, but they may not.
can someone define “progressive” for me? Because HumCPR does not embody “change” in my mind, so I’m wondering what you think the term progressive means.
John, you’ve turned into a decent reporter, but don’t take up commentary any time soon. This post overlooks several key issues, chief among them being the simple fact that Eureka voters want the Marina Center development. We really do. Those of us who, unlike you, have lived our lives here have spent 25 years watching the do-nothings say no to every land use idea that came along and watched the ridiculous games the progs and enviros have played to spite Rob Arkley. Over time it became clear that stopping Arkley was more important to them than representing the interests of their constituents. For a while it was kind of funny, but when you start cutting back on cops and fire trucks because we can’t generate enough tax revenue to pay for them, the games get old pretty quick. So you can sit there and say we were bought, and we were fooled, and we colluded and whatever other patronizing horseshit you can think of, but we weren’t and we didn’t. We voted the way we did because we are just plain fed up. And that’s something no marketing campaign can buy.
Eurekan:
Honest question here, not at all intended as snark, honestly.
When you talk about the “do-nothings saying no to every land use idea” in the last 25 years, what do you have in mind?
Spoken like a man who has never tried to pull a building permit, or subdivide a parcel, or even cut a tree on his own property. I once had a simple lot line adjustment held up eight years. Talk to builders in town and see what they have to say. You try to get a permit for anything and you end up in a fucking Kafka novel. Unless you’re Forster-Gill. Then you can come in and sail through approvals for more housing than we will ever need and more infrastructure than we will ever pay for, because of who you are and whose campaigns you support, while those of us who actually live here can’t get anyone to approve the simplest project. Throw in the TPZ deceit, the GPU debacle, and you almost don’t even need to remember that in 1999 Bonnie Neely, Patty Berg and Larry Glass promised us all those better alternatives for the Balloon Track, and all this time later not one has emerged. We’ll bring back the railroad. We’ll make a gazillion dollars on short-sea shipping. We’ll slap up a hostel and in no time have eco-tourists coming out our ass. But it turns out in all these years the only project for that property the Board of Supervisors ever seriously considered was a jail.
Then there’s the attitude toward business and landowners. Every one of us lucky enough to have put a little money aside and buy some property outside the city is demonized as some kind of fancy developer, while actual developers are given a green light and a butt load of exemptions to smooth their projects along.
It’s frustrating as hell. And the snobbery of the progs, who usually aren’t from here, telling us how we need to live our lives is actually infuriating. They’re smug, disingenuous, and elitest as can be. You can create these jobs but not those. You can shop here but not there. Regulation and environmental protection are important, but for years now they have been used in Humboldt County as weapons against real and imagined enemies of the left.
This election was about people like me saying we’ve got to do something different. From the looks of things, there are a lot of people like me out there.
Ms. Neely’s demise is, I believe, a result of the fact that boiled down to it’s essence, this is still a “people” position and she has increasingly developed an attitude of arrogance, and a dismissive personality that simply has lost the support of people who have traditionally supported her. Her treatment of the County administraive staff as indentured servants resulted in their predictable support for her opponent. As someone in the building summarized, ” When you can’t even get along with Jimmy Smith, you have a serious problem”. The answer to the question lies in the mirror.
“Lesson For Progressives”……..Salzman/Heraldo are not welcome in Eureka! Deceit and meanness do not bode well here. After 24 years in office, Bonnie should have known that……
Meanness? What is this, high school?
You all act like this is important.
“What is this, high school?”
No — more like junior high.
Eurekan @ 10:36…..Bingo.
Eurekan @ 10:36…..Bingo
ditto.
Eurekan, you’re mistaken in that people, most of us anyway, recognize the difference between individual land owners who want to develop their investment property and “big developers” who, as you correctly state, have much more clout. It’s important as a matter of growing from the county’s inside out one house at a time vs. throwing up several duplexes, several acres at a time.
Based on what you’re saying, for example, if you supported Measure N, you shot yourself in the foot. That wasn’t about you at all.
Eurekan @ 10:36…..Bingo.
It could not be better put. Thank you for putting our thoughts and feelings into words.
Ever though of running for political office? If not, Hank, you should hire him quick.
Eureka @ 10:36. Thank you for speaking my mind..perfectly.
Want to improve your garage?: “Nope, can’t do it” says Bonnie.
Want to add a mother in law unit?: “Nope, can’t do it” says Kirk Girard.
Want to open a business or hang a sign ON your business in Old Town?: “Nope, can’t do it” says the Coastal Commission.
The hemp clad Humboldt Lefties own nothing more than indignation and are living the life of the entitled, opinionated, ignorant.
“I want, I deserve, I demand” says the Eureka Proggy.
@ 2:15…let’s be honest, are you exaggerating? Just a little bit maybe? That if you just want to improve your garage, it won’t fly? I know several individuals who opened a business in old town, still going right now, with zero hassle whatsoever. They’re low income wage earners like me, even. I can name at least one mother in law unit added to a property hassle free. You’re talking out yer bloomin’ arses. Let’s see your specific cases, because everything isn’t being red inked to death, not by a longshot, let alone by the people being blamed in these replies.
J.M. @ 11:57am and TRA @ 12:15pm; Thank-you for proving my point…….. My Jr. High comments are on the ‘The Humboldt Mirror’. I have to be a good boy here on the NCJ Blog, are Hank gets mad at me………
We should all be a little carfull. I think it’s fine to pat ourselves on the back, even to gloat a little for a week or two but we should never forget that in the end we need to produce results. We need to actually be more responsible than those we resoundingly beat. Moreover, we need to recognize that one of the principal reasons for the progressive failure was their unwillingness to work together and to compromise. If we do the same we will be voted out in a few years as well. Yes, policies need to be substantially changed and a we need to move in a new direction but we need to include everyone in the discussion. Voters didn’t necessarily vote conservatives in they voted extremists out. We need to do better.
Progs are biting it hard! They threw out some of their best people (Richard Marks), they’re aristocracy has been thrown out (Neely, Glass, etc). Even prog journalists have been fired (terrence mcnally) as a result of being filmed while verbally and physically threatening political activist Nick Bravo who has been welcomed with open arms into the political sphere of Eureka. This is history in the making!!!
probably didn’t get permits
“Voters didn’t necessarily vote conservatives in they voted extremists out.”
Best analysis yet.
The other comment that resonates with me is from Eurekan @10:36. The worthy objectives of regulation and environmental protection have been hijacked by those who use them as weapons.
Bravo has been seen hanging around Eureka City Hall lately. Gotta wonder what he’s up to.
Who believes that Larry “Police State” Glass is progressive? Maybe be his six constituants…. Perhaps he lost because he is just a loser, and even we progressives can smell a loser. I would rather have a conservative council than a completely stupid council, which is what you would have with glass, atkins and kuhnel. Please! If progressives want Eureka, they had better give us some candidates we can feel good about voting for. Glass was nothing short of disasterous for Eureka, and that is why he is gone.
I’m puzzled by Dancing’s 2:15 screed blaming Bonnie Neely and Kirk Girard for building decisions/restrictions. You want to improve your garage? To add a mother-in-law unit? Well, READ THE BUILDING CODE. It, not Kirk or Bonnie, specifies what’s possible where, and how it has to be done.
I live in McKinleyville and a few years ago built a mother-in-law unit behind my house. I had no problems — all I had to do was see what the code specifies about setbacks, location, utilities, etc. and design accordingly. The biggest slowdown was scheduling building inspections.
Yes, more crocodile tears from the “I never met a building code that I liked”/”string-up Kirk Girard” crowd.
If Nick Bravo has been hanging around Eureka City Hall, then things are even more fucked up than I thought.
People: It’s called “sensible planning” and surprise! Arcata’s been doing it since the mid-seventies. And look at them now: by any objective, quality-of-life analysis, they are light years ahead of Eureka in sewage management, open space preservation, sensible affordable housing and land use, and the encouragement of industrial/small manufacturing jobs through business parks and incubators. What do you have to say about that, hmmm?
If building codes are so damn restrictive here, why have nearly all the industrial jobs that used to be in Eureka left for even more code-heavy Arcata in the last five years? (Hint: the same five years Virginia Bass has been a public servant running on the “jobs” platform). Please tell me: how do you answer this question? It flies in the face of – no, I’d say it literally destroys your analysis, Eurekan.
Hint:The same 24 YEARS Bonnie Neely has been a (so called) public servant running on the “experience” platform.
Speaking of Girard. Does anyone have a pool going on his last day? I’m down for a couple dates. Maybe the winner gets free use of the $250,000 shower he put into his office at taxpayer expense.
Anyway when will he be gone. Will he “quit” to pursue other interests or simply be fired? Hopefully most of the other planning staff will be unaffected though threre are clearly several senior planners and legal counsel who are very much part of the problem and should be shown the door. Mostly they just need better leadership.
If you want to know why the Proggies lost so bad this past Tuesday night, take a look at their so-called leadership.
Start with Bonnie losing so badly in the primaries she fired her “clipboard carrier” and hired Heraldo (AKA: Joshua Drayton) as her campaign manager.
Look no further than Andrew Bird’s election predictions:
Glass 61, Brady 39
Kuhnel 54, Manns 40, Newman 6
La Vallee 53, Jager 44, Spalding 3
Neely 51, Bass 49
Cleary 54, Sundberg 46
Look no further than the Humboldt County Democratic Central Committee (HCDCC) donating $5,000 to Bonnie Neely and $5,000 to Patrick Cleary without even asking their Democratic membership.
That’s $10,000 of my money they threw down the toilet with zero input.
Look no further than the leadership of the HCDCC, many whom are considered as joke in the local community (outside the confines of the HCDCC office).
Look no further than the Times Standard. How irrelevant has the paper become? Almost every one of their local endorsement lost.
Did the Times Standard even contact the various candidates to let them know the endorsement process for November?
Look no further than Heraldoville, where local Proggies think the average voter resides. Got some news for you. Maybe 20 people post on Heraldo as Joshua censors any comments that aren’t “drinking the kool-aid”.
When you’re posting rumors and lies on an anonymous blog, that doesn’t get mainstream media coverage.’
You have to have to basis of fact to make a public statement. Which is why Heraldoville exists for the anonymous prog trogs to make outlandish statements for their own amusement.
Look no further than Patti Berg. If that’s your local idea of a Proggie statesperson, you should really check with the average voter and not have someone who looks like the Crypt Keeper.
And finally, I’ll use Tom Peters own words, “We believe what we want. We don’t care about the truth.”
The average voter does care about the truth.
Maybe the codes in Arcata are impartially enforced. That’s the issue here, people. Not always the regulations, but the county’s capricious enforcement of them. Those of you who don’t build for a living might want to actually ask someone who does. Because there seem to be a lot of people on this thread who think they know everything who clearly don’t have any first-hand experience with the issues.
One would think that Happy Democrat, whoever he is, would also be happy in the company of those “posting rumors and lies on an anonymous blog.”
There’s just no pleasing some folks.
I built a spec home start-to-finish on a 1+ acre forested piece of raw land in rural Humboldt, permitted to the letter-of-the-law by gasp! evil Kirk Girard’s building department, also obtaining necessary permits from Fish and Game for the driveway, which went over a neighborhood drainage ditch deemed on the map to be a blue-line (year-round) creek . I conformed to all building codes, and by the end of the process, had new appreciation for how energy-efficient California’s climate-zone-based code structure was designed to be. Nope, no crying or gnashing of the teeth here, just a recognition that with quality of life comes a great deal personal responsibility and conformity to a high standard of expectation.
I apologize for bursting your “all progressives hate rural life nor can they possibly be handy or know how to build or fix anything” bubble. I know, contrariness really bugs you.
P.S. The house was sold to a sixth-generation young Humboldt couple with small children as affordable housing (i.e., at the time of sale, it conformed to the legal definition of affordable housing, a price equation that takes into account median annual income in the county). Again – my apologies for messin’ with your sacred paradigm.
Handier, Of course if your forested acre happened to be zoned TPZ then your affordable home would be exactly what those just voted out were trying to put an end to.
I don’t believe anyone has suggested that if you were building exactly what Lovelace and Co wanted you to build that there was ever a permitting problem. The issue was if you wanted to show a bit of independent thought.
I don’t know if they are “lies” or not Joel, but it always amuses me when someone comes into the blogosphere and says with authority that Heraldo is ……………..
The last go ’round it was most assuredly Andrew Bird. Now its Joshua someonelse?
That blog, (I believe) would be better if it did not censor posters who (for the most part) civililly disagree with Heraldo, and if Heralo(s) had the courage to go public with who they are.
Course, it would be a Salzmanesque scandal, should the flying heraldos turn out to be a group of employees of say, the NEC, baykeepers or some other non profit posting on company time.
My $$$ is on Baykeepers, or at least some of the time someone posting from baykeepers office near the works, simply from the time AnonRmous outing the ip address, as well as Larry Glass posting from the same ip address.
But, tis speculation.
Handier sounds like a more gifted suck-up than me. Those kind usually do well with the local permitting process. My experience is closer to Eurekan’s. The process is completely arbitrary. Part of the frustration is watching some projects sail through because of who the applicant is or knows or does.
Handier is more awesome than you think folks- He somehow failed to mention that he even had the blessings of a Tolowa tribal elder for his development. Is this guy golden or what?!
What progressives need to learn from the election is that if we want to win, we need to run worthy candidates. Progressives are too smart to keep bad leaders.
What progressives voters need to see in their candidates:
1. Vision
2. Leadership
3. Competence
Bonnie Neely had those qualities, but lost because she became tainted by the incompetence of other so called progressives. One clear example was to champion Larry Glass’s Jefferson School fiasco. Indeed, Glass is the poster child for “progressive” incompetence. Glass claimed that the ill-advised purchase of Jefferson school was a good use of redevelopment funds because the abandoned school was blight. As I recall, CR wanted to purchase Jefferson School, and under Glass’s direction the city threatened to sue CR if it proceeded. CR wanted to hold classes at that location, which would have cost the city of Eureka nothing, benefitted the community as a whole, and relieved blight as well. Instead the city of Eureka purchased an old run down building in need of maintenance and repair, with no real opportunity to benefit the community as a whole for a boat load of money. In short, they bought into a money pit. Such a poor decision in times of economic plenty can scarcely be supported, but in the current environment of extreme resource scarcity, the decision was nothing short of outrageous. Progressive voters were not impressed with Glass’s record of supporting the needs of a few citizens at the expense of the entire community, his constant shameless self-promotion, his ridiculous posturing as a martyr at City Hall, and his general lack of vision, leadership and competence. Kuhnel is smarter than Glass by far [not a high bar], but appears also to lack an interest in supporting the needs of the community, and is a shameless self-promoter as well. Kuhnel, Glass, and Atkins all suffer from the same general inability to play well with others, grasp the fundamentals of fiduciary responsibility, and articulate a vision for the City. It is all well and fine to disagree with the conservative vision, but they needed to propose a viable alternative, which they failed to do. It was abundantly clear that their vision did not extend beyond their own petty gripes and pet projects. We needed more than that. We insist on more than that.
Of all the progressive candidates that ran, only Neeley and LaValee had anything to offer, and they were both defeated, at least in part, because of their association with the jaw dropping, egregious incompetence of so called “progressive” incumbents.
Bonnie was also defeated because Virginia Bass seems “nice” and “likable”, and Bonnie seems neither of these. Voters respond to these perceptions, which have nothing to do with competence.
First off, I didn’t – and wouldn’t – build on or seek to convert land zoned TPZ. The big secret that HumCPRer’s don’t want you to know is that there are still thousands (seven thousand, I believe) sizeable parcels, many forested, zoned residential or rural/residential that are available to build on. Mine was one of them. This is a most inconvenient truth for them, because they are intent on building on, developing and (sometimes) subdividing their TPZ-zoned parcels “just ’cause they wanna.”
Mr. LargePoleinYourAss: Don’t know any Tolowas. Keep guessin’, clueless!
Heraldo is not that World Cup dude.
Bonnie and Virginia are both nice likable people. Virginia will have a lot to learn, and Bonnie’s experience is a loss, but to the extent that Bonnie supported Bill Pierson’s needs over the community’s wishes, she was punished. And rightfully so. The people don’t really care about protecting Bill Pierson’s fortune at their own expense. People don’t buy the “Arkleyville” envy fearmongering so reminiscent of the Bush administration. When progressive leaders take their lessons from the Bush Cheney playbook
they need to be brought up short and held to account.
Progressives divorce themselves from progress at their peril.
Sorry Neal, I meant Karuk.
HappyHappy wrote, “What progressives need to learn from the election is that if we want to win, we need to run worthy candidates. Progressives are too smart to keep bad leaders.
“What progressives voters need to see in their candidates: 1. Vision 2. Leadership 3. Competence”
I agree with you on that, but I would disagree with your characterization of Larry, Ron and their ilk as anything but visionary, knowledgable and courageous civic leaders. The problem isn’t with what they have proposed and supported, which in essence I think of as sensible, responsive, forward-thinking city planning. The problem has been with the ferocious opposition they have encountered from an utterly intransigent Eureka Old Guard completely unwilling to cop to its past mistakes and chart a new path forward. These are the same leaders who neglected our sewage infrastructure for decades (are you ready for the rate tripling soon to come?), watched as most of our light industrial jobs departed for Arcata, supported an oligarchic, gun-happy pre-Garr Nielsen police regime, and established as its de facto planning policy a “Look to our Sugar Daddy to Save Us” strategy of civic renewal. Hardly sensible or sustainable, in my book.
My perception is that your frustration is misplaced. Rather than blaming those who have stepped to the plate to propose a different, more common-sense way forward (and proven over 35 years in Arcata’s case, I might add), why not direct your anger toward those who have blocked it at every step? Without acknowledging this, you risk slipping into the same inchoate, befuddled analysis that marks the Tea Party’s take on national politics, an intriguing larger reflection of what has been happening in Eureka since Larry Glass emerged not long ago. I would implore you to kill not the message, nor the messenger, but to look deeper.
P.S. Good guess, Seth.
Handier, do you really not know that Rural Residential zoning (which doesn’t yet exist anyway) encompasses areas that already contain many rural residences? By definition those 7000 sites aren’t mostly available for you to build your organic cobb sweatlodge on. That’s why people build on TPZ, it’s where the unbuilt land is.
“By definition those 7000 sites aren’t mostly available for you to build your organic cobb sweatlodge on.”
Says who? That, my friends, is the Big Lie that HumCPR wants everyone to believe. So they can get their hooks into developing their TPZs. Sure, a small fraction of these forested residential-zoned parcels, perhaps at most a thousand? – might be too vertical to build on, but the vast majority are still out there, and they represent thousands and thousands of existing opportunities that one-by-one, will be built on by creative contractors over the next hundred years, I guarantee you.
Longwind: Get creative, man! Instead of crying about not getting to subdivide and build on your TPZ, consider finding one of the above parcels to do your thing on. With no disrespect intended, I would maintain that there’s still a ton of really nice buildable land to be had in Humboldt.
What part of “they’re already built on” can’t you understand? I understand what what RR is because I live on an RR parcel, in a built-out community of them. I’m not whining, I’m correcting you.
Work with me here. Eventually you may understand the election results too.
Our fundamental disagreement seems to be that you are maintaining that virtually all existing parcels zoned residential are already built out. I am contending, and I believe the evidence shows to the contrary, otherwise. As I said above, there are thousands and thousands of forested residential parcels, unbuilt on, waiting to be bought and developed (hopefully sensibly – that’s what the code is for). That was what I did, after having lived in rural Humboldt for twelve years. Yes, that community had many residential parcels already built on, but more still, vacant and available. Yeah, I had to do a bit of digging, but not much, and anyway, that’s part of the game. And, may I point out, I was a rookie developer. I still have a couple more vacant parcels that I discovered in my search that I’m hoping to perhaps do the same thing on, perhaps sometime in the future.
I recognize that Southern Humboldt is a bit different, with perhaps fewer of these overall still undeveloped, and a higher ratio of TPZs overall. But, nobody said it was gonna be a TPZ free-for-all forever. That’s what the limited nature of zoning is all about, and I say: God bless it.
Neal- no guessing involved, brother.
handier,
you need to get involved in the general plan. those parcels may be zoned residential but there are many, many restrictions if you want to build legally. so many that it makes for a de-facto moratorium. you can’t look to one place in the plan or another to discover these, they are everywhere, only the planners truly know where all these poison pills are. examples include – fire district inclusion, dual access, etc. think about that – 2 access points on RR properties?
Have any of you complainers maybe thought about not trying to be an investment developer in Humboldt County? That maybe your services aren’t so welcomed here, because most of us like the area’s natural beauty and would rather not see it swell like that? Ask yourself how it is that there are far more people who don’t care about these restrictions, and are getting along just lovingly? None of you are addressing the tradeoff.
Has it been said that maybe if you want to make money investing in real estate development and “improvement”, which always seems tied to somebody else’s living expenses going up, to do so somewhere else in California? Please?
Wonder how our local developers feel about the latest California Energy Code and Title 24, especially when it comes to the changes that became standard last January. And what about the Wildland Urban Interface fire codes, where you basically can’t use wood anymore on the exterior of buildings? Well, you guys love to throw up that cheap cement board crap, so maybe that isn’t such a big deal.
Maybe Virginia Bass will be able to change the codes to satisfy you guys?
Yay,
Ad hominem attacks on local builders – no wait, that’s not scary enough – DEVELOPERS from Arch!
Maybe you can find one of those cubicle homes Neal Latt builds and live in it.
The California Building Code, Energy Code, Fire Code, etc. are all there simply to screw the developers! It’s a conspiracy! Quick, let’s blame the liberals!
If Bass can’t help, maybe Palin can save the day?
Arch, you’d make a pretty good Tea-bagger.
Way back when freedom was another word for nothing left to lose, there was a significant and effective North Coast movement to back off building code enforcement for self-builders, because they were presumed to be interested in sheltering, rather than killing, themselves and their families. Building codes were recognized as existing to protect buyers from third-party builders, not from themselves.
How times change. Nowadays the main argument I hear against Alternative Owner-Builder code simplification is “Hey, I suffer through all that Mickey Mouse, so everyone has to. Waa!” Can you do any better than that?
Do all self-builders know how to properly wire an electrical system? How about install a leach field?
You may be an expert Longwind, but I betcha’ that’s rare among rural self builders. Believe it or not, code enforcement is in the public’s best interest.
When did insulting the public’s intelligence become Progressive?
Yes, people who build their own houses learn how to. Witness the fact that they don’t fall or burn down any more often than yours do. This isn’t a factual debate, the facts were overwhelming when the issue was decided more than 20 years ago–then sabotaged by illegal staff edits of the ordinance written to end this controversy. (Oddly enough, Bonnie wasn’t in office yet, but she was on staff. Hmm.)
All this said, of course we need code enforcement where we need it, in response to complaints. If it did what it was created to do it wouldn’t be controversial.
I can you tell that I’m a “progressive?”
Actually, I voted for most of the conservatives candidates in Eureka this time around. It’s moderates like me that helped these people win.
Sorry, Hot Air, I was still rolling along with Arch I guess. I hope the meat of my post makes sense to you, because when moderates understand who supervises whom in the Courthouse, we may start electing Supervisors who, you know, supervise. It’s decades overdue.
I’m sorry Longwind, but I don’t trust that rural home builders will all build the appropriate septic system, and that is very much in the public’s interest, especially where the runoff leads to the headwaters of rivers that provide our drinking water. There is many other polluters, many worse, but this one is just as important as the rest, especially when we look down the road at future development.
Shit, I remember when Eureka High was on the periphery of the city!
We must protect our natural resources, period.