… and the lawsuits keep coming! According to a just-issued press release Humboldt Baykeeper and the Environmental Protection Information Center have filed suit against the City of Eureka for sponsoring a ballot measure that would change the zoning of the Balloon Track — the old railyard where Security National wants to build its Marina Center development. The two groups argue that the environmental impact report approved by the city a few months ago is flawed, and therefore any ballot measure based on that report is likewise flawed.
EUREKA – Humboldt Baykeeper, a local Humboldt Bay advocacy organization, and the Environmental Protection Information Center (EPIC) have filed suit against the City of Eureka for failure to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) when it approved placing an initiative to change zoning on the Balloon Track, the site of the proposed Marina Center project, on November’s ballot.
Under California law, government-sponsored ballot measures are subject to environmental review under CEQA. Humboldt Baykeeper and EPIC assert that the environmental review that the City conducted for this project is seriously flawed and not in compliance with the requirements of CEQA. “The hasty decision by the City of Eureka to place this issue on the November ballot without considering the potential environmental impacts is a disservice to the citizens of Eureka,” said Pete Nichols, Executive Director of Humboldt Baykeeper. “The voters should know the ramifications of their decisions at the ballot box,” he continued.
The ballot measure, known as Measure N, would amend the City’s Local Coastal Plan (LCP) and change the zoning on the Balloon Track to a designation that would “ensure that uses at the site are restricted to development that causes no more or more intense environmental impacts than those already examined in the Marina Center Mixed Use Development Project Environmental Impact Report (EIR).” But the environmental impacts of the proposed development were never properly analyzed, so the public cannot really know what they are voting about. For example the EIR does not address the contamination on the property resulting from long years of use as a railroad maintenance yard, nor the impacts of development and contamination in the wetlands found onsite.
Scott Greacen, Executive Director of EPIC says that he questions the motives behind the Measure N ballot initiative. “It’s really important that the people of Eureka understand that this ballot initiative is a cynical hijack of the mechanisms of our democracy to serve a single narrow set of financial and political interests,” he said. “What’s really happening here is that once again, a large corporation is using his enormous wealth and the political power it creates to pump up the value of his property and punish those he sees as political enemies,” he continued.
The EIR being used by the City for the proposed ballot initiative was certified in November of 2009 and Humboldt Baykeeper and EPIC filed suit regarding its many inadequacies in December.
“This EIR was first used by the City of Eureka to approve a Coastal Development Permit for an inadequate cleanup plan for the property,” Michelle Smith, staff attorney for Humboldt Baykeeper, stated. “Now they are attempting to use the same defective document for another project. CEQA is clear that the potential impacts of a proposed project must be analyzed before it is approved by agency decision-makers, and sister agencies and the public must be given the opportunity to comment on the entirety of the project. This simply has not been done here,” she continued.
Nichols states that the failures of the environmental review are many and include lack of details on cleanup of the property, concerns regarding wastewater treatment, traffic impacts and compliance with the California Coastal Act. Additionally, according to Humboldt Baykeeper and EPIC, the environmental review lacks protections for biological resources at the site including threatened and endangered fish, plant, and other species.
This article appears in On the Covers.
Well-Since the lawyers sucked dry all the timber money they have to find some way to pay their mortgage…
What comes around, goes around Randy Gans
It’s comforting to know there’s people among the close-knit, small world of local politics who won’t let the rest of us be played for chumps.
The predatory litigious con men sue the deep pockets, alert the media. Color me surprised!
“Douglas said in a phone interview. “I think it’s a frivolous lawsuit, but it’s typical. It’s what we see all the time from the Pacific Legal Foundation.”
A quote from the Executive Director of the Coastal Commission, Peter Douglas, 2/12/10 Times Standard article, “Coastal Commission director says Marina Center lawsuits are frivolous
Security National hates Peter Douglas and the Coastal Commission. Even though their lawsuit again the CCC was thrown out of court, they still refuse to file the necessary paperwork to start the cleanup process.
Security National could care less about cleaning up this property. They just want to pave it over, build a big box superstore, and flip off the CCC along the way.
Maybe they are trying to skirt the law, or not, but how can allowing the people to vote on this be referred to as “a cynical hijack of the mechanisms of our democracy”. It kind of sounds like that is what the lawsuit by EPIC and baykeeper is doing
The ballot measure depends upon the ignorance of voters and the persuasive power of monied interests. This qualifies it as “a cynical hijack of the mechanisms of our democracy.”
the wisdom of the populace who care more about their pocket book, beaten down, or driven, whichever, cannot be trusted any longer, and maybe the bigger picture is that we’re all too busy to be informed; so very scarey, & so unfortunate not to trust our future with the people who trust our representatives who no longer we fear to trust
In other words, lets all let folks like Lynette think for us, cause all the rest of us poor saps who are unedumacated schmucks…
How totally fucking scary is that? “The wisdom of the population…cannot be trusted any longer”???
HOLY FUCKING SHIT BATMAN!
Instead of one side denigrating the other, (doesnt matter which side is doing it, they both do), why can’t we acknowledge there are people on both sides of this issue, as well as others, who have honest, informed differences opinion.
With respect, Lynette that is some scary shit you’re spouting; I hope you reconsider what you have written.
Wait, are they saying that Eureka is in the state of California?! And that state law applies here?! How dare they! This is an outrage!
$$$$$$$
What’s wrong with letting Rob Arkley develop that cyclone-fenced wasteland? Who cares about environmental impact when there are rotting abandoned buildings and mills on Samoa? You are kidding yourselves if you think the city of Eureka will ever come up with a dime to turn the balloon track into a public park or estruary! Let Arkley continue to beautify our town. I don’t like republicans either but thanks to him, our crap-hole community now has a boardwalk. He wants to turn a field of homeless people into a business park and this is how we repay him!?
Dirty Hippy said, “Security National wants to turn a field by the coast into a traffic clapped concrete slab piled with unecessary and outsourced retailers, and do so by manipulating public opinion about the intentions behind their cash cow, and this is how we repay them!?”
I corrected your grammar, Dirty Hippy.