Who says government isn’t efficient?

Peter Douglas, Bill Pierson and the now-infamous nooner. Smile, friends!!

Within 24 hours of the filing of the last of three appeals challenging the city of Eureka’s approval of the Balloon Track interim cleanup plan, the California Coastal Commission published a surprisingly thorough 82-page legal and environmental analysis of the plan, along with the expected recommendation that the appeals be heard.

Weird, huh?

You don’t think maybe the commission got some kind of head start on that, do you?

Hmm?

Couldn’t be.

Even if one appellant was the commission’s lawyer for 20 years.

Or if the commission’s chair previously gave the appellant a job.

Or the appellant’s daughter is a commission staffer.

Or another appellant employs the first appellant.

Or two other appellants are current commissioners.

Or the commission’s executive director is a personal friend of the man whose business would be most affected by the Marina Center development.

No, those factors just make their achievement that much more impressive: It’s amazing they get anything done with that massive circle jerk they’ve got going.

About these ads

52 Responses

  1. I wonder how long it would take for the Commission to process an appeal by Arkley.

  2. Government giveth much more slowly than government taketh away.

  3. That photo ought to be put up on billboards.

  4. If Randy or Rob run into any of these fucks in town, it’s going to get ugly. [Moderated]

  5. Maybe Rob & CUE IV can sue each one of these guys, which would send them all up to Alaska just like Kurt Kramer. Might just be the best way to clean up this town.

  6. If this happened on the other side of the equation all the wingnuts in town would be lining up to protest at a Eureka city Counsel meeting. Crying,foul-foul-foul.

  7. Sorry, friend, but that’s excessive and could get us in trouble. We understand the sentiment, but some thoughts aren’t meant to be posted to a blog.

  8. Well it has happened before Mirror! Why moderate? Rob isn’t a total pussy like the Glass man.

  9. How does violence solve or prove anything?

  10. We try to rein it in when we can, Admirer. If the discussion starts going south, lawyers can get involved, IP addresses can get pulled, blogs shut down, etc. It’s kind of a big deal. Work with us on this. Thanks.

  11. How do meaningless cliches contribute to a discussion of anything?

  12. definitely not a cut and paste job (except for appellants disclosure).

    an foia inquiry would reveal if report was preemptively prepared and by who and if in government under what authority. maybe faust wrote it.

  13. More likely that the CC staff report was pre-prepared, provided to Faust, NEC and commisioners so they could each tailor their appeals to the recommendation.

    This shit should be forwarded to the Attorney General for investigation based on a collusion and corruption complaint.

  14. as I was saying before, it’s already over. If you look at the makeup of the commission, you’ll see that one appeal or another will be granted. The question is, how long will it delay any forward motion? And is Rob willing to spend the additional $$ to do the kind of remediation they would approve?
    Come to think of it, a better question might be this – since Rob and Randy and co. knew in advance what they were facing with the Coastal Commish, why did they try to get away with a half-assed, cheapo clean-up plan? Sure their minions on the City Council would buy into it, but that’s ultimately meaningless if it can’t meet the more stringent requirements of the CC.

  15. As we said before, be proud that out-of-towners like yourself, from San Francisco and Santa Cruz and San Diego and San Whatever are wresting control of our local governance. That clearly makes you very happy, which tells us everything we need to know about you.

  16. What you call minions we call democratically elected council members, unlike Glass and Atkins who were both purchased with the money Pierson makes by overcharging his customers.

  17. It’s even already on their next agenda.

    http://www.coastal.ca.gov/mtgcurr.html

    Go all the way to the end and then back up three or four sections.

  18. this is funny, see author:

    http://www.coastal.ca.gov/legal/conflict-of-interest-workshop-6-2005.pdf

    also this would be appurtenant regarding ex parte communications:

    http://documents.coastal.ca.gov/reports/2008/12/Th3-12-2008.pdf

    CA Supreme Court (2006)
    Case emphasized fairness principles:
    “in adjudicative matters, one adversary should not
    be permitted to bend the ear of the ultimate
    decision maker or the decision maker’s advisors in
    private.”
    –Dep’t of Alcoholic Beverage Control v. Alcoholic Beverage
    Control Appeals Board (2006) 40 Cal.4th 1, 5.

  19. Wow.

    The bad news is, that no one who read that TS article this morning will have any clue what is really going on. It looks “normal.”

    The good news is – this Faust thing looks like their group is getting smaller. They couldn’t find another patsy to file the suit, Faust had to do it in the open. “Balls to the wall.”

    It exposes alot. I agree with 11:12, this has to be forwarded to the Attorney General, and it has to be pressed – they can’t sidestep this one.

    Essentially, the Coastal Commission, which was once a good idea perhaps, has become a personal tool, a personal weapon, and it should be disbanded.

    This is wrong on so many levels.

  20. Just followed that link above… WORKSHOP CONFLICT OF INTEREST, BIAS & RELATED ISSUES by Ralph Faust and Amy Roach

    Talk about the fox guarding the henhouse. What a cluster fuck.

  21. Let’s be real here- the only people that even care about the cleanup are the enviro-nuts. The rest of us just want our new shopping mall. Home Depot or Walmart, either would be great for our local economy.

    Dioxin, wetlands, waterfront, etc are all just bullshit excuses. Nobody gives a shit, just give us some real economic progress!

  22. same issue occurred with PALCO permits with north coast regional water quality control staff and local appointees. Staff was performing actions adversarial to public permitting applications at the direction of one or two board members outside of public meetings and board concurrence. It got so bad to the point of ridiculousness that the CA AG or someone had to ban conversations between staff and board members about any issue regarding permits without full board present. “where’s the file…..?”

    PL won that one but pissed off agency so much finally folded under pressure. this was a part of basis of suit against CA agencies transferred to HRC under banckruptcy decision and dropped as token of “good faith” with agencies.

    nothing new, unfair treatment of permit applicants by minority of oversight board political appointees using ex parte communications with allegedly objective agency staff (hiring approved by local board director) and selective use of adversarial permitting process.

  23. Brilliant! Teach the ‘normal’ folk where the legal boundaries are, and the dire consequences if they stray. Then manipulate the same process to further your agenda.

    What a f’n piece of work.

  24. Everybody knew this was going to happen. Why is anybody surprised?

  25. I know that it seems odd that the staff report was completed so quickly after the appeal was filed, but we all knew the appeal was going to be filed so no surprise there. I think (or at least I hope) we would all rather see this issue resolved sooner than later. Had the Commission staff person waited to begin writing the staff report until after the appeal was filed, it would not be heard by the Commission until (at least) January. Let’s give the poor guy at the bottom of the totem pole a break and say thank you for being so proactive – don’t get me wrong, I hate the recommendation, but I don’t blame the staffer, that blame belongs higher up the food chain.

  26. Friend, we’re not blaming the guy at the bottom of the food chain. We’re blaming the guy whose name is at the top of this memo.

  27. “As we said before, be proud that out-of-towners like yourself, from San Francisco and Santa Cruz and San Diego and San Whatever are wresting control of our local governance. That clearly makes you very happy, which tells us everything we need to know about you.”

    So were you equally offended when a Sacramento attorney ran a commercial attacking Chris Kerrigan,and another out of town based group took on locally and voter approved Measure T?

  28. locally and voter approved measure T – Strange that MarkyMark neglects to mention the little part about measure T being UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

    Must’ve slipped his mind.

  29. We would have been equally offended if the Sacramento attorney overruled decisions made by duly elected city councils. And voter-approved? Learn to let go. That was more voter-approved litigation amounting in nothing but a bunch of butt-hurt whiners going on about how the constitution is for other people.

  30. That is not remotely analogous, Mark. One was protected speech attempting to sway voters. The other is taking the express will of voters, through their elected representatives, and overturning it. I know you proggy types think the rest of us are stupid, but we’re not that stupid.

  31. Wasn’t James Baskin a Humboldt County Planner awhile back? I remember the name.

  32. Resquan….Resquan…….resquan…..there is no talking point so lame that you will abandon it.

    So what would you say about your man love affection with Cobb

    Ok…just a flirtation I suppose.

    The Kerrigan hit piece was self-imposed….brilliant political ploy but contemptible nonetheless. But you wouldn’t really know that would you?

    So how would you resolve this Konkler?

    You seem to have all the answers. Tell me just this once, what you, you yourself bring to the table. What have you done that adds to the
    community good other than some half-assed opinions on so many things that you cannot begin to comprehend?

    Sorry bugs….cranky tonight

  33. Government is efficient if what you mean is completely stifiling any and all development. It’s hard enough when you have the support of the local government. I had the great fortune to operate in a town and county that understood what benefits can come from private entrepeneurs taking risks, employing people and make positive impacts on a local economy. I have seen in this area that many people can destroy a project and few are willing to move one forward. It is, in my opinion, a consciousness of denial and envy. This project will never go forward and this area will wallow in self pity for years if not forever. Congratulations to those that feel so threatened.

  34. Group hug!!

  35. Your blog is silly.

  36. I know you hate the Herald, but some great points are made on this post

    http://humboldtherald.wordpress.com/2009/11/22/larry-glass-gets-his-cock-sucked-by-heraldo-yet-again/

  37. Here’s a great point for you. It is not a surprise to anyone that Bill Pierson’s friend Peter Douglas agrees with Bill Pierson’s friend Larry Glass. That doesn’t exactly knock me off my feet.

  38. At all.

  39. The only thing new about any of this is the transparency of the collusion.

  40. The funny thing here is that the California Coastal Commission does not have any jurisdiction on this matter. They should just step aside, but we know that they will not. The Water Quality Control Board has jurisdiction.
    Look for a lawsuit on this point.
    Also, look for a lawsuit against the Baykeepers for disclosure of their donor lists. Pierson is about ready to having his “coming out” party.

  41. You go get em’ Randy!

  42. Stock up on popcorn.

  43. Dog asked”So what would you say about your man love affection with Cobb”

    Well if that gets you off,then have at it!!

    Kerrigan hit piece was self-imposed?
    Then why were his opponents so willing to let it slide all the while knowing that?
    Did Rex’s supporters all of the sudden come to a conclusion that a Rex Bohn council term would have been a disaster?

    How would I have resloved it?Well if I did believe your claim to be true,then well,would have done what I could to find out all the lucid details of Chris’s self imposed plot.

  44. And I’ll add that when I spoke with Wayne Ordos about the matter he was certainly less than forthcoming about who he was working for.

  45. If you want a true understanding of “less than forthcoming about who he was working for” meet fucking Ralph Faust.

  46. You pulled out the big guns on that one, Anonymous. Alleging the remark was made by a party to the dispute? How did you even think of that? It’s a sharp and original piece of thinking on your part.

  47. seems to me some commissioners would have had to have some information prior to the others. from: http://www.coastal.ca.gov/roster.html#exparte

    EX PARTE COMMUNICATION REQUIREMENTS

    As of January 1, 1993, significant new ex parte requirements affecting communications with Commissioners went into effect. (Public Resources Code, sections 30319-30324.) These stringent new provisions of law may have serious consequences. Anyone wishing to communicate with a Commissioner about any matter pending before the Commission should read and abide by the guidelines below. The following guidance covers most of the new requirements.

    No written materials should be sent to Coastal Commissioners unless the Commission staff receives copies of all of the same materials at the same time.

    All materials transmitted to Commissioners should clearly indicate (e.g., on the cover page or envelope) that they have also been forwarded to the staff. Materials that do not show that copies have been provided to staff might not be accepted, opened or read by Commissioners. In these cases, no ex parte communication has occurred.

    Messages of a non-procedural nature (e.g., substantive) should not be left for a Commissioner. These include telephone, FAX, telegraphic or other forms of message.

    All oral or written communications of a non-procedural nature by an “interested person” that are not made according to the above procedures are ex parte communications which are prohibited unless publicly reported by the Commissioner. If the Commissioner does not report the communication, the Commission’s action that was the subject of the communication may be revoked and penalties may result.

    Coastal Commission decisions must be made on the basis of information available to all commissioners and the public. Therefore, copies of communications made to Commissioners that are forwarded to staff will be included in the public record. Public records are available for inspection at Commission meetings or in the Commission’s office.

    NOTE: The purpose of these legal requirements is to protect due process and fairness in the Commission’s decision-making process. Failure to follow them could lead to fines, revocation of permits and substantial costs. If you have any questions, you can contact Commission legal staff at (415) 904-5220.

  48. This looks like it was written to prevent a developer from influencing the Coastal Commission by feeding information to a specific Comissioner or Commissioners. Looks like this happend, only it was someone (gosh I wonder who?) wishing to prevent a development. Could come back and bite the Coastal Commission in the butt if this is pursued. Like Rose said, get some popcorn.

  49. Gonna need more popcorn. Hope the semi can get through Richardson’s grove.

  50. goes both ways, but was initially decided because of agency misconduct and failure to follow administrative procedures act in “regulating” a liquor store owner. see post above nov 21 11:37.

  51. It’s interesting what happens when people stand up and fight rather than caving. Palco fought Gallegos’/Ken Miller’s suit – and it was revealed to be worthless. They could have caved and paid the go-away money. Debi August fought back, and won. There are cases all over the place where people who stand up and fight back on principle have been winning. EPIC, et al are not pure, and it is shown when people fight back. It costs alot. Enough to bankrupt most people, which is why the activist orgs have had a free ride for too long.

    This one looks to be another case in point. I’m betting the “Baykeeper/ERF/activist con men are about to be fully exposed. I am guessing that even if Faust withdraws his action, it’s too late for him, and his buddies.

  52. Totally

What say you?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 54 other followers