Interesting looking back at Larry Glass' involvement and statements about the Marina Center... and look, there's Mark Lovelace in a prominent position... it's all the usual suspects, "Baykeeper" too...
From: "Mark Lovelace" mailto:mail@healthyhumboldt.org
Date: March 22, 2006 9:47:02 AM PST
To: "Healthy Humboldt Coalition" mail@healthyhumboldt.org
Subject: Home Depot poses economic, cleanup concerns
Reply-To: "Mark Lovelace" mail@healthyhumboldt.org
Development poses economic, cleanup concerns, group says
Thadeus Greenson
March 22, 2006
EUREKA -- Members of the newly formed Citizens for Real Economic Growth expressed concerns about the environmental and economic impacts of the proposed Balloon Tract development Tuesday night during a presentation at the Humboldt County Democratic Central Committee (HCDCC) headquarters.
About 45 people attended the presentation and the following question and answer period, both of which were rushed along due to the time constraints of a following HCDCC business meeting.
Citing an array of economic studies, as well as city and county planning documents, Citizens for Real Economic Growth members Larry Glass and Mark Lovelace argued that the proposed Balloon Tract development goes against city and county plans for development and would irrevocably harm the local economy.
Security National owners Rob and Cherie Arkley are proposing to build a 400,000-square-foot development on the Balloon Tract that will include shops, restaurants, office space, a Home Depot, the Discovery Museum and lofts on an adjacent parcel. The Arkleys will be asking the city to change the site's zoning from public to commercial and industrial to pave the way for the project.
”Why are we pursuing this?” Lovelace asked rhetorically. “It goes against everything that's on paper about economic development in Humboldt County and the use of this property and it goes directly against the will of the voters.”
The will of the voters to which Lovelace referred, was a 1999 ballot measure in which Wal-Mart tried to obtain a similar zoning change that was rejected by a 61 percent margin.
Lovelace cited a number of economic studies regarding the impact of Home Depot stores on competing hardware businesses. He said not only would a Home Depot take major amounts of business away from some 200 local retailers, but it would siphon that money directly out of the local economy.
”There's a wealth of information on the Web, and I would really encourage people to go out there and seek it out,” Lovelace said. “Don't just take my word for it, go out and do your homework.”
During his portion of the presentation, Glass said he feels like the public is being left out of the Balloon Tract decision-making process and lambasted the city of Eureka for not aggressively pursuing the clean-up of the site that was left contaminated by Union Pacific Railroads.
Pete Nichols, director of Humboldt Bay Keeper, was in attendance and said major issues remain surrounding the contamination of the site that will be addressed either during negotiations with Union Pacific in the coming weeks or ultimately with a lawsuit.
Security National Senior Vice President Brian Morrissey attended the presentation and said afterward that, while he didn't agree with everything being said, he thinks these types of public information meetings are important. He added that Security National is confident that the majority of Eureka supports this project.
Security National will hold an open house today focusing on environmental issues. Panelists who have worked on the site or have brownfield expertise will be available to answer questions at the open house, which will be held from 6 to 9 p.m. at the Red Lion in Eureka.
Showing posts with label Glass/Arkley. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Glass/Arkley. Show all posts
2.26.2008
2.14.2008
spokesman for Citizens for Real Economic Growth
CLEAN IT UP: Larry Glass, owner of The Works record store in Old Town Eureka and spokesman for Citizens for Real Economic Growth, on Tuesday released results from a poll he instigated showing that 61 percent of Eureka voters don't think a big-box retail complex, as proposed by Rob and Cherie Arkley, is the best use of the contaminant-soaked, weed-bristling, former Union Pacific switching and maintenance yard known as the Balloon Track.
Glass says the telephone survey of "307 likely voters," conducted on May 10 and 11 by the firm Evans/McDonough, shows that voters "would much rather build an aquarium or a park with wetlands on the Balloon Track land." And, according to the poll, 58 percent of voters want the Balloon Track site "thoroughly cleaned up before anything is built on the property," as opposed to "containing the contaminants on the site by paving over it." Sixty percent of voters agreed that "stores like the Home Depot have a direct negative impact on local small businesses," says Glass.
Glass got the idea for the poll "around about Christmas-time," he says, following some discouraging waterfront development meetings, but it took him a while to gather money and find a firm to conduct it. "I realized this project was forever going to change the face of the waterfront and of the city," Glass says. "And yet, the city council was saying, `No, the city feels this way.' I really believed the council was mistaken."
But maybe not everyone in city government has been cheering on the Arkley proposal. On Monday, Eureka Mayor Peter La Vallee sent out a press statement heralding timely newspaper accounts of how Union Pacific is rolling in the dough. "The $35 BILLION railroad company ... has just released financial statements that show a net profit for the last quarter of $311 MILLION," shouted La Vallee. "That is more than $100 MILLION a month in profit, an increase of 143 [percent] over the same quarter last year! During the last three months, the value of their stock has also increased by 46 [percent] ... and the company added 5,000 new employees."
It is clear, said La Vallee, that the company suffers "no lack of money to implement a high level cleanup of toxic waste at the Balloon Track and it is clearly the responsibility of Union Pacific to do so." But, he said, the City of Eureka needs to hold U.P.'s feet to the fire, because he, too, has been hearing from the city's residents that they want a thorough cleanup of the site. And, judging by the figures, the cost of a cleanup "to the full extent of technical feasiblity" would constitute "a mere three days worth of earnings for the responsible party" — big bucks U.P.
So how about it, city? U.P.? Put those 5,000 new employees to work in Eureka?
— Heidi Walters
Glass says the telephone survey of "307 likely voters," conducted on May 10 and 11 by the firm Evans/McDonough, shows that voters "would much rather build an aquarium or a park with wetlands on the Balloon Track land." And, according to the poll, 58 percent of voters want the Balloon Track site "thoroughly cleaned up before anything is built on the property," as opposed to "containing the contaminants on the site by paving over it." Sixty percent of voters agreed that "stores like the Home Depot have a direct negative impact on local small businesses," says Glass.
Glass got the idea for the poll "around about Christmas-time," he says, following some discouraging waterfront development meetings, but it took him a while to gather money and find a firm to conduct it. "I realized this project was forever going to change the face of the waterfront and of the city," Glass says. "And yet, the city council was saying, `No, the city feels this way.' I really believed the council was mistaken."
But maybe not everyone in city government has been cheering on the Arkley proposal. On Monday, Eureka Mayor Peter La Vallee sent out a press statement heralding timely newspaper accounts of how Union Pacific is rolling in the dough. "The $35 BILLION railroad company ... has just released financial statements that show a net profit for the last quarter of $311 MILLION," shouted La Vallee. "That is more than $100 MILLION a month in profit, an increase of 143 [percent] over the same quarter last year! During the last three months, the value of their stock has also increased by 46 [percent] ... and the company added 5,000 new employees."
It is clear, said La Vallee, that the company suffers "no lack of money to implement a high level cleanup of toxic waste at the Balloon Track and it is clearly the responsibility of Union Pacific to do so." But, he said, the City of Eureka needs to hold U.P.'s feet to the fire, because he, too, has been hearing from the city's residents that they want a thorough cleanup of the site. And, judging by the figures, the cost of a cleanup "to the full extent of technical feasiblity" would constitute "a mere three days worth of earnings for the responsible party" — big bucks U.P.
So how about it, city? U.P.? Put those 5,000 new employees to work in Eureka?
— Heidi Walters
2.09.2008
TS - (Larry) Glass accused of 'political crusade'
Glass accused of 'political crusade'
A spokesman for local businessman Rob Arkley called Eureka City Councilman Larry Glass' accusations that Arkley threatened and assaulted him “politically motivated,” one day after the state attorney general's office announced that no charges would be filed in the case.
”These were politically motivated charges by an individual with a longstanding grudge against the Arkleys and the Marina Center project,” said Arkley spokesman Steven Glazer. “It is a shame that he wasted taxpayers' and law enforcement resources in his political crusade.”
Glass denied the characterization, saying the main issue was Arkley threatened him as a public official -- telling him he had him followed and threatening to destroy him if he didn't vote for his project.
”I don't have any personal animosity toward them,” he said. “The charges were motivated by the fact that he threatened a public official.”
Glazer, who declined to comment Thursday when first informed of the decision by a Times-Standard reporter, said he was able to independently confirm the information via a fax from the attorney general's office.
He said the Arkley family was happy to “put the incident behind them.”
In a brief letter addressed to Humboldt County District Attorney Paul Gallegos, the supervising deputy attorney general wrote that the office “carefully reviewed the reports and circumstances of this incident and concluded that no charges will be filed.”
The issue stems from Glass' accusations that Arkley shoved him and threatened him at a reception for the California Coastal Commission in September. Glass filed a police report shortly after the incident.
Arkley's spokespeople have denied there was any physical contact between Arkley and Glass, and characterized Arkley's role as that of a concerned parent.
An investigation by Eureka Police Department Detective Neil Hubbard was turned over to Gallegos, who announced in October that he was requesting that the attorney general take the case. Gallegos said he was present at the function, and was interviewed as a witness.
Kimberly Wear can be reached at 441-0507 or kwear at times-standard.com.
Kimberly Wear/The Times Standard
Article Launched: 02/09/2008 09:03:54 AM PST
A spokesman for local businessman Rob Arkley called Eureka City Councilman Larry Glass' accusations that Arkley threatened and assaulted him “politically motivated,” one day after the state attorney general's office announced that no charges would be filed in the case.
”These were politically motivated charges by an individual with a longstanding grudge against the Arkleys and the Marina Center project,” said Arkley spokesman Steven Glazer. “It is a shame that he wasted taxpayers' and law enforcement resources in his political crusade.”
Glass denied the characterization, saying the main issue was Arkley threatened him as a public official -- telling him he had him followed and threatening to destroy him if he didn't vote for his project.
”I don't have any personal animosity toward them,” he said. “The charges were motivated by the fact that he threatened a public official.”
Glazer, who declined to comment Thursday when first informed of the decision by a Times-Standard reporter, said he was able to independently confirm the information via a fax from the attorney general's office.
He said the Arkley family was happy to “put the incident behind them.”
In a brief letter addressed to Humboldt County District Attorney Paul Gallegos, the supervising deputy attorney general wrote that the office “carefully reviewed the reports and circumstances of this incident and concluded that no charges will be filed.”
The issue stems from Glass' accusations that Arkley shoved him and threatened him at a reception for the California Coastal Commission in September. Glass filed a police report shortly after the incident.
Arkley's spokespeople have denied there was any physical contact between Arkley and Glass, and characterized Arkley's role as that of a concerned parent.
An investigation by Eureka Police Department Detective Neil Hubbard was turned over to Gallegos, who announced in October that he was requesting that the attorney general take the case. Gallegos said he was present at the function, and was interviewed as a witness.
Kimberly Wear can be reached at 441-0507 or kwear at times-standard.com.
Text of Attorney General's office letter
Re: Rob Arkley
Dear Mr. Gallegos:
As a result of a conflict, this office agreed to review for filing the reports involving Rob Arkley. In those reports it is alleged that Mr. Arkley threatened and assaulted Eureka City Councilman Larry Glass in a restaurant during a Coastal Commission mixer. According to Mr. Glass, this incident related to Glass' opposition to Arkley's development of property in Humboldt County. We have carefully reviewed the reports and circumstances of this incident and concluded that no charges will be filed.
Sincerely,
Joyce Blair
Supervising Deputy Attorney General
Kimberly Wear/The Times Standard
Article Launched: 02/09/2008 09:03:54 AM PST
10.25.2007
ER - Attorney General's Office to get Arkley-Glass report
Attorney General's Office to get Arkley-Glass report
by Glenn Franco Simmons, 10/25/2007
A completed and confidential Eureka Police Department investigation into an alleged altercation involving local businessman and philanthropist Rob Arkley and Eureka City Councilmember Larry Glass will be forwarded to the California Attorney General’s Office for its consideration.
Humboldt County District Attorney Paul Gallegos said his office received the EPD report on Wednesday and he estimated it would be sent to the AGO either Wednesday or today, but no later.
Gallegos has previously told this newspaper that he considers Arkley a friend and that Arkley contributed to one of his political campaigns.
In explaining his reasoning for sending the report to the AGO, Gallegos said, “While I believe I can make a fair and impartial decision, I believe that, due to my relationship with both the parties and some of the anticipated witnesses, it is impossible to do so without creating the appearance of an impropriety.
“If the Attorney General’s Office decides not to accept the case, I will review it and make a decision. However, until such an occurrence takes place, I will withhold reviewing any material that is forwarded to us and making a decision regarding the possibility of any criminal charges being filed.”
When The Eureka Reporter contacted the AGO Wednesday, it had not yet received the EPD report; however, Senior California Assistant Attorney General Gerald Engler said, “If and when we receive a request from Mr. Gallegos, we will fully and fairly evaluate whether we should accept the matter based on whatever matters Mr. Gallegos brings to our attention.”
Engler had previously responded to a Humboldt County Democratic Central Committee request that the AGO intervene in this case because of what the HCDCC contended were “political conflicts.”
In rejecting the HCDCC’s request, Engler wrote a letter to the organization and said, “First and foremost, the district attorney is the elected prosecutor of Humboldt County. The law maintains a strong presumption that the district attorney — not the attorney general — will handle prosecutorial matters within the county. Only in extraordinary cases where an actual conflict of interest makes it unlikely that the district attorney can fairly prosecute the case may the district attorney be recused.
“A mere appearance of conflict is insufficient to warrant recusal. Thus, there are numerous cases where recusal has been denied even though the district attorney is called upon to prosecute cases involving county supervisors, sheriffs or other political officials. The mere fact that the case involves a political supporter or political opponent of the district attorney will almost never suffice to justify recusal.”
If the case is sent back to him, Gallegos explained he will determine if there is sufficient information on which to file criminal charges against Arkley.
“Specifically,” he said, “we can and will only file criminal charges if the following four basic requirements are satisfied:
“(1) based on a complete investigation and thorough consideration of all available evidence, the prosecutor believes the evidence shows that the accused is actually guilty of the crime charged;
“(2) there is legally sufficient, admissible evidence to establish the offense independently of any admissions of the accused;
“(3) there is legally sufficient, admissible evidence of the accused’s identity as the perpetrator of the crime charged; and
“(4) the prosecutor has considered the probability of conviction by an objective fact-finder hearing the admissible evidence and concluded that the anticipated admissible evidence is of such convincing force that it would warrant conviction by a reasonable and objective fact-finder after hearing all the evidence available to the prosecutor at the time of charging and after hearing the most plausible, reasonably foreseeable defense that could be raised under the evidence presented to the prosecutor.”
The case stems from an alleged altercation between the two men at a California Coastal Commission reception at the Avalon restaurant in Eureka in September.
In a previous interview with The Eureka Reporter, Glass said he filed the complaint with the EPD against Arkley alleging “assault and battery, menacing a public official and ... stalking.”
Arkley spokespersons have consistently maintained that Arkley did not shove or push Glass.
Both sides admit there was a verbal exchange, but their accounts are different.
Glass claims Arkley threatened to destroy him if he didn’t vote favorably for Marina Center.
However, Arkley’s spokespeople contend that Arkley made no such threat nor did he tell Glass that he was having the council member followed, as Glass also alleges.
Arkley apologized to Glass — an apology that Glass has not accepted.
Arkley family spokesperson Steve Glazer responded to the report of the case being forwarded to the DA’s Office by saying, “Larry Glass has been waging a campaign against the Arkley family for the past 18 months, ever since he heard that there could be a Best Buy in the Marina Center project.
“It is unfortunate that scarce police resources have been wasted on Glass’ political crusade.”
“I really don’t know what is going to happen next,” Glass said. “All I know is that I’m glad that I took a stand and did what I think to be the right thing as an elected official.”
Copyright (C) 2005, The Eureka Reporter. All rights reserved.
by Glenn Franco Simmons, 10/25/2007
A completed and confidential Eureka Police Department investigation into an alleged altercation involving local businessman and philanthropist Rob Arkley and Eureka City Councilmember Larry Glass will be forwarded to the California Attorney General’s Office for its consideration.
Humboldt County District Attorney Paul Gallegos said his office received the EPD report on Wednesday and he estimated it would be sent to the AGO either Wednesday or today, but no later.
Gallegos has previously told this newspaper that he considers Arkley a friend and that Arkley contributed to one of his political campaigns.
In explaining his reasoning for sending the report to the AGO, Gallegos said, “While I believe I can make a fair and impartial decision, I believe that, due to my relationship with both the parties and some of the anticipated witnesses, it is impossible to do so without creating the appearance of an impropriety.
“If the Attorney General’s Office decides not to accept the case, I will review it and make a decision. However, until such an occurrence takes place, I will withhold reviewing any material that is forwarded to us and making a decision regarding the possibility of any criminal charges being filed.”
When The Eureka Reporter contacted the AGO Wednesday, it had not yet received the EPD report; however, Senior California Assistant Attorney General Gerald Engler said, “If and when we receive a request from Mr. Gallegos, we will fully and fairly evaluate whether we should accept the matter based on whatever matters Mr. Gallegos brings to our attention.”
Engler had previously responded to a Humboldt County Democratic Central Committee request that the AGO intervene in this case because of what the HCDCC contended were “political conflicts.”
In rejecting the HCDCC’s request, Engler wrote a letter to the organization and said, “First and foremost, the district attorney is the elected prosecutor of Humboldt County. The law maintains a strong presumption that the district attorney — not the attorney general — will handle prosecutorial matters within the county. Only in extraordinary cases where an actual conflict of interest makes it unlikely that the district attorney can fairly prosecute the case may the district attorney be recused.
“A mere appearance of conflict is insufficient to warrant recusal. Thus, there are numerous cases where recusal has been denied even though the district attorney is called upon to prosecute cases involving county supervisors, sheriffs or other political officials. The mere fact that the case involves a political supporter or political opponent of the district attorney will almost never suffice to justify recusal.”
If the case is sent back to him, Gallegos explained he will determine if there is sufficient information on which to file criminal charges against Arkley.
“Specifically,” he said, “we can and will only file criminal charges if the following four basic requirements are satisfied:
“(1) based on a complete investigation and thorough consideration of all available evidence, the prosecutor believes the evidence shows that the accused is actually guilty of the crime charged;
“(2) there is legally sufficient, admissible evidence to establish the offense independently of any admissions of the accused;
“(3) there is legally sufficient, admissible evidence of the accused’s identity as the perpetrator of the crime charged; and
“(4) the prosecutor has considered the probability of conviction by an objective fact-finder hearing the admissible evidence and concluded that the anticipated admissible evidence is of such convincing force that it would warrant conviction by a reasonable and objective fact-finder after hearing all the evidence available to the prosecutor at the time of charging and after hearing the most plausible, reasonably foreseeable defense that could be raised under the evidence presented to the prosecutor.”
The case stems from an alleged altercation between the two men at a California Coastal Commission reception at the Avalon restaurant in Eureka in September.
In a previous interview with The Eureka Reporter, Glass said he filed the complaint with the EPD against Arkley alleging “assault and battery, menacing a public official and ... stalking.”
Arkley spokespersons have consistently maintained that Arkley did not shove or push Glass.
Both sides admit there was a verbal exchange, but their accounts are different.
Glass claims Arkley threatened to destroy him if he didn’t vote favorably for Marina Center.
However, Arkley’s spokespeople contend that Arkley made no such threat nor did he tell Glass that he was having the council member followed, as Glass also alleges.
Arkley apologized to Glass — an apology that Glass has not accepted.
Arkley family spokesperson Steve Glazer responded to the report of the case being forwarded to the DA’s Office by saying, “Larry Glass has been waging a campaign against the Arkley family for the past 18 months, ever since he heard that there could be a Best Buy in the Marina Center project.
“It is unfortunate that scarce police resources have been wasted on Glass’ political crusade.”
“I really don’t know what is going to happen next,” Glass said. “All I know is that I’m glad that I took a stand and did what I think to be the right thing as an elected official.”
Copyright (C) 2005, The Eureka Reporter. All rights reserved.
10.23.2007
Glass-Arkley investigation headed to DA
Glass-Arkley investigation headed to DA
EUREKA -- Police Chief Garr Nielsen said Monday that the investigation into City Councilman Larry Glass' allegations that businessman Rob Arkley assaulted him has concluded, and a report will be in the District Attorney's Office today or tomorrow.
But it looks like it won't be there for long.
District Attorney Paul Gallegos, reached on his cell phone Monday, said the report will be sent directly to the office of the state Attorney General, who he will ask to take the lead in any possible prosecution.
Gallegos said his office would not review the report.
Gallegos said in a previous interview with the Times-Standard that his decision to recuse his office has more to do with the appearance of a conflict of interest than his ability to handle the case fairly.
What the attorney general will do with the report isn't quite clear.
The Humboldt County Democratic Central Committee sent a letter to the Attorney General's Office last month asking it to take the lead in the investigation and any possible prosecution of the allegations. In a response letter, sent Sept. 26, Senior Assistant Attorney General Gerald Engler declined that request, saying it came prematurely and, as a rule, the state does not step in at the request of a third party.
Now that Gallegos is the one asking to recuse his office, the request might carry more weight. But, based on Engler's letter, it may be far from a sure thing.
”Only in extraordinary cases where an actual conflict of interest makes it unlikely that the district attorney can fairly prosecute the case may the district attorney be recused,” Engler wrote. “A mere appearance of conflict is insufficient to warrant recusal. ... The mere fact that the case involves a political supporter or a political opponent of the District Attorney will almost never suffice to justify recusal.”
Nielsen, who declined to comment on the contents of the report at this point, said the investigation was concluded last week, and the department is giving the report a final read before handing it off to the district attorney.
Glass filed a police report on the heels of a Sept. 5 reception for the California Coastal Commission at Avalon restaurant, where he alleges Arkley shoved him, claimed to have had him followed and threatened to destroy him if he didn't vote for Arkley's Marina Center project.
Reached Monday, Glass said he's not sure where things will go from here.
”I don't know what's going to happen really but, whatever happens, I'm glad I took a stand and did the right thing,” he said.
Arkley's spokespeople have denied there was any physical contact between Arkley and Glass, and characterized Arkley's role as that of a concerned parent.
Arkley spokesman Steven Glazer said the matter was “part and parcel to the campaign” Glass has been waging against the Arkley family over the Marina Center project.
”Glass has claimed he's doing the right thing, but doing the right thing is not wasting scarce police resources on a political crusade against Rob Arkley,” he said.
Nielsen said he is confident in Detective Neil Hubbard's work investigating the incident.
”We did an exhaustive investigation, probably far in excess of what we had done if it had been two people who weren't as prominent in the community,” Nielsen said. “I feel very confident that we did a very thorough investigation.
Oh, c'mon Paul, it's not like you have to swoop up nine felonies and dismiss them all on a single day - you know, that really had the appearance of conflict of interest, this oughtta be a piece of cake! But no - it is another rock and a hard place, just like Cheri Moore - you can't do what the handlers want (they hate Arkley, and see this as a major opportunity), so you have to pass the buck - that's your real conflict of interest. In fact that has been your problem all along. Had you just done your job you wouldn't have had the Palco debacle, the Debi August debacle, the Salzman debacle, the Bowman debacle, the list goes on...
EUREKA -- Police Chief Garr Nielsen said Monday that the investigation into City Councilman Larry Glass' allegations that businessman Rob Arkley assaulted him has concluded, and a report will be in the District Attorney's Office today or tomorrow.
But it looks like it won't be there for long.
District Attorney Paul Gallegos, reached on his cell phone Monday, said the report will be sent directly to the office of the state Attorney General, who he will ask to take the lead in any possible prosecution.
Gallegos said his office would not review the report.
Gallegos said in a previous interview with the Times-Standard that his decision to recuse his office has more to do with the appearance of a conflict of interest than his ability to handle the case fairly.
What the attorney general will do with the report isn't quite clear.
The Humboldt County Democratic Central Committee sent a letter to the Attorney General's Office last month asking it to take the lead in the investigation and any possible prosecution of the allegations. In a response letter, sent Sept. 26, Senior Assistant Attorney General Gerald Engler declined that request, saying it came prematurely and, as a rule, the state does not step in at the request of a third party.
Now that Gallegos is the one asking to recuse his office, the request might carry more weight. But, based on Engler's letter, it may be far from a sure thing.
”Only in extraordinary cases where an actual conflict of interest makes it unlikely that the district attorney can fairly prosecute the case may the district attorney be recused,” Engler wrote. “A mere appearance of conflict is insufficient to warrant recusal. ... The mere fact that the case involves a political supporter or a political opponent of the District Attorney will almost never suffice to justify recusal.”
Nielsen, who declined to comment on the contents of the report at this point, said the investigation was concluded last week, and the department is giving the report a final read before handing it off to the district attorney.
Glass filed a police report on the heels of a Sept. 5 reception for the California Coastal Commission at Avalon restaurant, where he alleges Arkley shoved him, claimed to have had him followed and threatened to destroy him if he didn't vote for Arkley's Marina Center project.
Reached Monday, Glass said he's not sure where things will go from here.
”I don't know what's going to happen really but, whatever happens, I'm glad I took a stand and did the right thing,” he said.
Arkley's spokespeople have denied there was any physical contact between Arkley and Glass, and characterized Arkley's role as that of a concerned parent.
Arkley spokesman Steven Glazer said the matter was “part and parcel to the campaign” Glass has been waging against the Arkley family over the Marina Center project.
”Glass has claimed he's doing the right thing, but doing the right thing is not wasting scarce police resources on a political crusade against Rob Arkley,” he said.
Nielsen said he is confident in Detective Neil Hubbard's work investigating the incident.
”We did an exhaustive investigation, probably far in excess of what we had done if it had been two people who weren't as prominent in the community,” Nielsen said. “I feel very confident that we did a very thorough investigation.
Oh, c'mon Paul, it's not like you have to swoop up nine felonies and dismiss them all on a single day - you know, that really had the appearance of conflict of interest, this oughtta be a piece of cake! But no - it is another rock and a hard place, just like Cheri Moore - you can't do what the handlers want (they hate Arkley, and see this as a major opportunity), so you have to pass the buck - that's your real conflict of interest. In fact that has been your problem all along. Had you just done your job you wouldn't have had the Palco debacle, the Debi August debacle, the Salzman debacle, the Bowman debacle, the list goes on...
10.05.2007
TS - Attorney general says no for now on Arkley-Glass case
Attorney general says no for now on Arkley-Glass case
The Times-Standard
Article Launched: 10/05/2007 01:40:09 PM PDT
State Attorney General Jerry Brown's Office has refused a request by the Humboldt County Democratic Central Committee to take over the investigation into the flap between Eureka City Councilman Larry Glass and local businessman Rob Arkley.
A letter from the office states, “Any request at this time appears premature”.
A Sept. 12 letter from the HCDCC to the Attorney General requested that office “take the lead in the investigation and prosecution of this alleged violation.”
It is alleged that Arkley shoved Glass and threatened to destroy him if he failed to support Arkley's Marina Center project. Arkley, in turn, has claimed that he was merely reacting to comments Glass has made about his daughters.
In a letter to the Humboldt Democratic Central Committee dated Sept. 26, Senior Assistant Attorney General Gerald A. Engler advised the committee his office would “respectfully decline your request to intervene.”
The letter states, “First and foremost, the district attorney is the elected prosecutor of Humboldt County. The law maintains a strong presumption that the district attorney -- not the attorney general -- will handle prosecutorial matters within the county.
Advertisement
Only in extraordinary cases where an actual conflict of interest makes it unlikely the district attorney can fairly prosecute the case may the district attorney be recused. A mere appearance of conflict is insufficient to warrant recusal.”
In the initial letter, HCDCC Chairman Milt Boyd wrote that it is more than just the serious nature of the allegations that caused the committee to ask the Attorney General to handle the investigation.
”Due to political conflicts, Humboldt County District Attorney Paul Gallegos will no doubt want to recuse his office from prosecuting the matter,” Boyd wrote.
Arkley made donations to Gallegos' recall campaign chest and Glass said he thought Gallegos had supported his election campaign.
In response to the letter from the Attorney General's Office, Boyd said the reply “clarifies the legal process involved” and added, “the allegations made in this case are unusual and serious and we appreciate this prompt and clear response from Attorney General Brown's office.”
The Times-Standard
Article Launched: 10/05/2007 01:40:09 PM PDT
State Attorney General Jerry Brown's Office has refused a request by the Humboldt County Democratic Central Committee to take over the investigation into the flap between Eureka City Councilman Larry Glass and local businessman Rob Arkley.
A letter from the office states, “Any request at this time appears premature”.
A Sept. 12 letter from the HCDCC to the Attorney General requested that office “take the lead in the investigation and prosecution of this alleged violation.”
It is alleged that Arkley shoved Glass and threatened to destroy him if he failed to support Arkley's Marina Center project. Arkley, in turn, has claimed that he was merely reacting to comments Glass has made about his daughters.
In a letter to the Humboldt Democratic Central Committee dated Sept. 26, Senior Assistant Attorney General Gerald A. Engler advised the committee his office would “respectfully decline your request to intervene.”
The letter states, “First and foremost, the district attorney is the elected prosecutor of Humboldt County. The law maintains a strong presumption that the district attorney -- not the attorney general -- will handle prosecutorial matters within the county.
Advertisement
Only in extraordinary cases where an actual conflict of interest makes it unlikely the district attorney can fairly prosecute the case may the district attorney be recused. A mere appearance of conflict is insufficient to warrant recusal.”
In the initial letter, HCDCC Chairman Milt Boyd wrote that it is more than just the serious nature of the allegations that caused the committee to ask the Attorney General to handle the investigation.
”Due to political conflicts, Humboldt County District Attorney Paul Gallegos will no doubt want to recuse his office from prosecuting the matter,” Boyd wrote.
Arkley made donations to Gallegos' recall campaign chest and Glass said he thought Gallegos had supported his election campaign.
In response to the letter from the Attorney General's Office, Boyd said the reply “clarifies the legal process involved” and added, “the allegations made in this case are unusual and serious and we appreciate this prompt and clear response from Attorney General Brown's office.”
AG DECLINES
ATTORNEY GENERAL DECLINES HCDCC REQUEST, DEFERS TO DISTRICT ATTORNEY IN ARKLEY/GLASS ALLEGATIONS
The state Attorney General’s office has declined a request by the Humboldt County Democratic Central Committee that the Attorney General’s office take over the investigation of Eureka council member Larry Glass’ allegations of intimidation by local developer Robin P. Arkley II, stating “any request at this time appears premature”. The central committee’s September 12 letter to the Attorney General requested that office “take the lead in the investigation and prosecution of this alleged violation.”
In a letter to the Humboldt Democratic Central Committee dated September 26, 2007, Senior Assistant Attorney General Gerald A. Engler advised the committee his office would “respectfully decline your request to intervene”, stating “First and foremost, the District Attorney is the elected prosecutor of Humboldt County. The law maintains a strong presumption that the District Attorney – not the Attorney General – will handle prosecutorial matters within the county. Only in extraordinary cases where an actual conflict of interest makes it unlikely the district attorney can fairly prosecute the case may the district attorney be recused. A mere appearance of conflict is insufficient to warrant recusal. Thus, there are numerous cases where recusal has been denied even though the district attorney is called upon to prosecute cases involving county supervisors, sheriffs, or other political officials. The mere fact that the case involves a political supporter or a political opponent of the District Attorney will almost never suffice to justify recusal.”
Engler went on to state “neither the District Attorney nor any involved party has asked us to intervene. Even if such a request were made, it is unlikely we would do so given the considerations set forth in the preceding paragraph. As a general rule, the Attorney General will not intervene in a local matter at the request of a third party, such as the Central Committee”, and continued “any request at this time appears premature. Nothing in your letter suggests that the appropriate local law enforcement agency such as the sheriff’s office or city police are unwilling or unable to investigate the alleged crime. That is an essential first step before it is even appropriate for a prosecutor to consider whether to bring charges.”
HCDCC Chair Milton Boyd said the reply “clarifies the legal process involved” and added, “the allegations made in this case are unusual and serious and we appreciate this prompt and clear response from Attorney General Brown’s office”.
http://humboldtherald.wordpress.com/2007/10/04/ag-kicks-arkley-fracas-back-to-humboldt/#comments
The state Attorney General’s office has declined a request by the Humboldt County Democratic Central Committee that the Attorney General’s office take over the investigation of Eureka council member Larry Glass’ allegations of intimidation by local developer Robin P. Arkley II, stating “any request at this time appears premature”. The central committee’s September 12 letter to the Attorney General requested that office “take the lead in the investigation and prosecution of this alleged violation.”
In a letter to the Humboldt Democratic Central Committee dated September 26, 2007, Senior Assistant Attorney General Gerald A. Engler advised the committee his office would “respectfully decline your request to intervene”, stating “First and foremost, the District Attorney is the elected prosecutor of Humboldt County. The law maintains a strong presumption that the District Attorney – not the Attorney General – will handle prosecutorial matters within the county. Only in extraordinary cases where an actual conflict of interest makes it unlikely the district attorney can fairly prosecute the case may the district attorney be recused. A mere appearance of conflict is insufficient to warrant recusal. Thus, there are numerous cases where recusal has been denied even though the district attorney is called upon to prosecute cases involving county supervisors, sheriffs, or other political officials. The mere fact that the case involves a political supporter or a political opponent of the District Attorney will almost never suffice to justify recusal.”
Engler went on to state “neither the District Attorney nor any involved party has asked us to intervene. Even if such a request were made, it is unlikely we would do so given the considerations set forth in the preceding paragraph. As a general rule, the Attorney General will not intervene in a local matter at the request of a third party, such as the Central Committee”, and continued “any request at this time appears premature. Nothing in your letter suggests that the appropriate local law enforcement agency such as the sheriff’s office or city police are unwilling or unable to investigate the alleged crime. That is an essential first step before it is even appropriate for a prosecutor to consider whether to bring charges.”
HCDCC Chair Milton Boyd said the reply “clarifies the legal process involved” and added, “the allegations made in this case are unusual and serious and we appreciate this prompt and clear response from Attorney General Brown’s office”.
http://humboldtherald.wordpress.com/2007/10/04/ag-kicks-arkley-fracas-back-to-humboldt/#comments