◼ Jeff Schwartz: Paul Gallegos Is The Only Logical Alternative For Hagen Supporters – October 23, 2010
yougofree.com's apocalyptic screed prompted Paul Hagen's response and Natalynne DeLapp's meltdown.
What does Pat Higgins have to do with Hagen, Gallegos and the DA race? When Higgins lost the June primary election to Patrick Cleary I was very disappointed because I was a compassionate supporter of Pat Higgins. The next day I became a strong supporter of Patrick Cleary and have not looked back.
Why? Because Cleary, while not my first choice, has some of the same progressive interests, goals and values as Pat Higgins. Ryan Sundberg has none. If I and all the other Higgins voters stand their ground and refuse to vote for Cleary then the conservative candidate wins and puts us on a path back to the dark ages of Humboldt County.
It is very much the same for the Gallegos/Jackson race. Gallegos might not be the progressive candidate you wanted, but he is a progressive candidate. Allison Jackson and her supporters will eviscerate all of the progressive gains over the last dozen years. If we also lose the Neely/Bass and Sundberg/Cleary races, forget about it.
Hagen supporters need to vote for Paul Gallegos in this election. If not, you risk putting back into power those same people who supported clear-cutting our forests, overfishing our waters, and polluting our land. You fought hard for many years to transform Humboldt County from a place where politicians begged for nuclear plants and accepted the likes of Maxxam Corp and Charles Hurwitz. Right now because of the old guard who cared little about the environment, we have a dismantled PG&E nuclear plant that sits on the edge of Humboldt Bay; nuclear rods float in a vat of liquid as they wait to be buried where they stand at the intersection of three tectonic plates. We have an old electric generating plant so radioactive we can’t get rid of it. I don’t need to mention what happened to Pacific Lumber when Charles Hurwitz was welcomed with open arms.
It was the likes of Tim McKay and Greg King of Northcoast Environmental Center (NEC), and land preservationists such as Alex Stillman, Mark Lovelace, Arcata’s Mark Andre and others like Chris Kerrigan, Larry Glass and the list goes on and on that changed our landscape from nuclear power plants and mega-stores to bicycle lanes and community forests; and; yes, Paul Hagen and Paul Gallegos who challenged the old guard to clean up their environmental disasters.
Since 2001, huge strides have been made to move us away from the we-want-your-nuclear-plant crowd to the majority of us who want to protect our environment, clean up our polluted waters and bring egalitarian principles to everyone.
The countywide district attorney race is the focal point in continuing a steady forward thinking community. Gallegos enforces environmental laws and prosecutes bad business practices. Whether he gets a conviction or not, the abusers know he’ll go after them, and they will pause. If the conservative opponent wins, the Humboldt County environment and much more goes down the drain.
Environmental and business crimes are not in Allison Jackson’s vocabulary. At the last debate, the conservative candidate scoffed at Paul Gallegos for going after a national corporation (Skilled Nursing) that was running nursing homes in deplorable conditions abusing our most vulnerable citizens, the elderly, mentally ill and disabled. He won the case and brought a million bucks into the coffers of Humboldt County.
I ask, I implore, I beg those progressive leaders who supported Paul Hagen to endorse Paul Gallegos. I ask all of you Hagen voters out to vote for Gallegos even if he was not your first choice. Staying home or not filling in the square because you did not get exactly who wanted will only put us on a path you don’t want to go down. You can bet on it that the nuclear-plant crowd will stick together and take Humboldt County back to the dark ages.
Jeffrey Schwartz is an Arcata attorney. He can be reached at jdsarcata@gmail.com.
Tags: Gallegos, Jackson
This entry was posted on Saturday, October 23rd, 2010 at 9:33 am and is filed under Election 2010, Opinion. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Showing posts with label Arcata Eye. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Arcata Eye. Show all posts
11.06.2010
Eye - Hagen Helping Crush Progressivism
Poor pathetic deranged Gallegos camp missive:
◼ link
Natalynne DeLapp: Hagen Helping Crush Progressivism – October 28, 2010
Paul Hagen has repeatedly represented to the Humboldt County progressives that he has their best interests at heart. If that is Mr. Hagen’s goal, Mr. Hagen must know that the actions he continues to take to tear down our District Attorney, Paul Gallegos, are directly assisting Allison Jackson and the conservative movement to eviscerate Humboldt County’s progressive movement.
Paul Hagen recently sent a letter to the Arcata Eye claiming that Paul Gallegos is not an alternative now that Mr. Hagen is no longer in the running. Mr. Hagen makes many broad based and generalized attacks on Mr. Gallegos in that letter such as claiming Mr. Gallegos deliberately smeared his opponent and lied doing it. He also makes many dated and petty attacks. Even the editor of the Arcata Eye admitted that he does not believe Mr. Gallegos has engaged in this smear type behavior – recognizing the smearing has generally come from anonymous supporters for both sides.
Unfortunately, the conservative movement has been celebrating their new hero, Paul Hagen and hoping to ride the infighting among liberals to victory. Paul Hagen’s letters condemning Paul Gallegos are displayed prominently on a local blog called Watch Paul, which is the same site promoting Allison Jackson’s candidacy and filled with negative smear tactic character assassinations of Mr. Gallegos – the same type of tactics Mr. Hagen claims he abhors. The Watch Paul blog which is now posting Mr. Hagen’s articles states the following:
“The original purpose of WatchPaul is to post important documents relating to Humboldt County District Attorney Paul Gallegos and his handlers who seek to gain power through the acquisition of political offices. This includes, but is not limited to, the manipulations of “Humboldt Watershed Council,” “EPIC,” “Baykeeper,” and other activist groups – the unregulated orgs.”
In other words, Paul Hagen, whether knowingly or unwittingly, is providing “documents” about Humboldt County District Attorney Paul Gallegos that are now being used in a coordinated effort to crush our important progressive groups such as Humboldt Watershed Council, EPIC, Baykeeper, and other progressive groups.
We all hope and believe that Paul Hagen is not doing this intentionally, but the fact remains that is simply irresponsible for Paul Hagen to help tear down the progressive movement that so many of us worked so hard to create (long before Paul Hagen moved here). Mr. Hagen has privately questioned Allison Jackson’s ethics and commitments to progressive causes, but refuses to do so publicly. Why?
Paul Hagen does not like Paul Gallegos – we get that. But does he really want to spite the local progressive movement just to settle a score? In the words of scripture: When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things. 1 Cor 13.
Natalynne DeLapp
Campaign Manager
Citizens for District Attorney Paul Gallegos 2010
Eureka
Tags: DeLapp, Gallegos, Hagen
This entry was posted on Wednesday, October 27th, 2010 at 8:37 pm and is filed under Election 2010, Opinion. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
◼ link
Natalynne DeLapp: Hagen Helping Crush Progressivism – October 28, 2010
Paul Hagen has repeatedly represented to the Humboldt County progressives that he has their best interests at heart. If that is Mr. Hagen’s goal, Mr. Hagen must know that the actions he continues to take to tear down our District Attorney, Paul Gallegos, are directly assisting Allison Jackson and the conservative movement to eviscerate Humboldt County’s progressive movement.
Paul Hagen recently sent a letter to the Arcata Eye claiming that Paul Gallegos is not an alternative now that Mr. Hagen is no longer in the running. Mr. Hagen makes many broad based and generalized attacks on Mr. Gallegos in that letter such as claiming Mr. Gallegos deliberately smeared his opponent and lied doing it. He also makes many dated and petty attacks. Even the editor of the Arcata Eye admitted that he does not believe Mr. Gallegos has engaged in this smear type behavior – recognizing the smearing has generally come from anonymous supporters for both sides.
Unfortunately, the conservative movement has been celebrating their new hero, Paul Hagen and hoping to ride the infighting among liberals to victory. Paul Hagen’s letters condemning Paul Gallegos are displayed prominently on a local blog called Watch Paul, which is the same site promoting Allison Jackson’s candidacy and filled with negative smear tactic character assassinations of Mr. Gallegos – the same type of tactics Mr. Hagen claims he abhors. The Watch Paul blog which is now posting Mr. Hagen’s articles states the following:
“The original purpose of WatchPaul is to post important documents relating to Humboldt County District Attorney Paul Gallegos and his handlers who seek to gain power through the acquisition of political offices. This includes, but is not limited to, the manipulations of “Humboldt Watershed Council,” “EPIC,” “Baykeeper,” and other activist groups – the unregulated orgs.”
In other words, Paul Hagen, whether knowingly or unwittingly, is providing “documents” about Humboldt County District Attorney Paul Gallegos that are now being used in a coordinated effort to crush our important progressive groups such as Humboldt Watershed Council, EPIC, Baykeeper, and other progressive groups.
We all hope and believe that Paul Hagen is not doing this intentionally, but the fact remains that is simply irresponsible for Paul Hagen to help tear down the progressive movement that so many of us worked so hard to create (long before Paul Hagen moved here). Mr. Hagen has privately questioned Allison Jackson’s ethics and commitments to progressive causes, but refuses to do so publicly. Why?
Paul Hagen does not like Paul Gallegos – we get that. But does he really want to spite the local progressive movement just to settle a score? In the words of scripture: When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things. 1 Cor 13.
Natalynne DeLapp
Campaign Manager
Citizens for District Attorney Paul Gallegos 2010
Eureka
Tags: DeLapp, Gallegos, Hagen
This entry was posted on Wednesday, October 27th, 2010 at 8:37 pm and is filed under Election 2010, Opinion. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Eye - We Need A Real District Attorney (Editorial)
◼ link
Kevin Hoover: – October 30, 2010
Paul Gallegos’ listless DA Office leadership is defined mostly by constant explaining and excuse-making, a supposed law-and-order DA with an uncanny knack for letting bad actors off on technicalities.
The other salient feature of the Gallegosphere is strenuously projecting progressive-hipsterism while running a very traditional, fairly brutal politics-as-usual machine.
Any one of the infamous criminal cases which ended with wrist-tap outcomes might have a quasi-feasible rationale, but Gallegos’ record has never added up to more than typical rural mediocrity. Very, very hip though, and certainly we’re all thankful for that.
Gallegos’s DNA is that of an extremely adequate defense attorney. He’s reliably malleable and dominated by the much-stronger personalities who manage him as a figurehead, including Master Ethicist Richard Salzman and Christina Allbright. These folks provide, in turn, political brains and ideological cover for their enterprise.
That’s good for Paul, because the man can’t speak for himself. Not even intending to, John Matthews of KSLG tripped him up just by asking his stance on Prop 19.
Gallegos is voting for Prop 19, you see, but he doesn’t endorse it. All John wanted to know was why you’d vote for something you don’t endorse.
Listen to the audio clip and be mortified as you hear our county’s top courtroom talent hem and haw, squirm and weasel as he tries to address this obvious contradiction while having it both ways, and fails. kslg.com/gallegos
Can any of the passionate Gallegos supporters please translate what their candidate is trying to say? It’s easier to understand dolphins than Gallegos-speak. “How many more people have to be killed?” the DA rightly wonders, alluding to that the strife the current nonsensical cannabis laws cause. But he won’t endorse Prop 19 “for a multitude of reasons,” none of which he will name.
The elephant in the room is that Gallegos isn’t allowed to endorse Prop 19. Cannabis legalization would undermine the business interests of his major supporters, who are fully invested in the broken status quo. But like any industry-approved politician, he can’t say that, so gasping and tense silences have to do. Does it really matter that the controlling industry is Big Cannabis and not pig ranches or a chemical factory, as in other places? It’s no surprise that Humboldt’s defense attorneys are just thrilled with Paul Gallegos. He’s always been and always will be one of them.
Rap artist Tone Loc appeared at a Gallegos campaign benefit in May, resulting in this Arcata Eye cartoon by artist Dave Held (daveheld.com). Gallegos liked it so much he had it autographed.
The cannabis industry-friendliness and vacuous environmental and social justice talk are why, when you call Gallegos HQ, a young, no doubt idealistic volunteer will probably answer the phone. These folks evidently think they’re helping advance social progress or environmental ideals in some way. But what has Gallegos really accomplished over the years on any of these scores other than mouthing words? The campaign volunteers could better spend their time helping at the Food Bank, or planting trees along a creek in Arcata some weekend.
For all its well-polished Hipster Moderne image-building, Gallegos is the figurehead for a hopelessly old school political machine. It’s one which fires dissenters, hires sycophants and verbally shreds enemies. In the latest example, the campaign manager’s Eye column attempts to conflate the Gallegos brand with Progressivism itself while concern-trolling accomplished environmental prosecutor Paul Hagen as some sort of witless tool of the Right.
Inevitably, Biblical scripture is invoked to cement this point. There’s nothing cynical or manipulative about this, mind you. After all, the question just has to be posed: Does Paul Hagen challenge the Bible?
It’s funny how only soulless monsters ever speak out against such a pleasant fellow as Paul Gallegos. Remember when dapper gentleman Worth Dikeman turned out to be a cop-lover and a racist? Now Allison Jackson is a drunken rageclown and enemy of civil rights. “We have to defeat the fascist,” said one frightened Gallegos supporter. Another one spoke with conviction that Paul Hagen is a “spy,” because he is seen at some of the same public events that person attended. So many enemies.
Given this progression, and with the Gallegos campaign’s newfound affinity for the Bible in mind, one can scarcely imagine what kind of morally bereft Spawn of Satan his next opponent would inevitably turn out to be four years hence. Happens every time.
It’s hard to envision Paul Gallegos masterminding the systematic discrediting of all opponents that marks his campaigns (or masterminding much of anything else, for that matter). For this kind of wet work, he has people.
The Gallegos campaign projects idealism and progressive values while funneling cash in the four figures to the likes of Richard Salzman. Political dialogue these days is toxic enough without this character going around throwing gasoline on it. But, as only a lying political hack can do, he’s managed to con a number of local politicians into thinking that he’s somehow essential to their political survival. ”I am completely happy with the people that I work so closely with and I trust their integrity,” says Gallegos campaign manager Natalynne DeLapp.
At this point, many of us are weary to the bone of the enduringly mediocre performance of the Humboldt County DA’s Office, and even more fatigued with the frenzied flim-flamming and fakery that strives to mask it. These features, plus the scorched-earth attacks on any who question Gallegos, are the true hallmarks of his tenure in office.
Allison Jackson will run a streamlined, no-excuses DA’s Office. If you’re innocent, resources won’t be misspent on futile prosecutions. But if you beat your wife, kill a kid, steal a purse, torture an animal, dump toxic waste, wreck a neighborhood or spew diesel into a creek with a dope factory, you’re going to jail, dude! Have a nice day.
With a real district attorney, law enforcement will have confidence that their work in putting together solid cases won’t sit around getting stale as statutes of limitation expire. I’ve had police ask me to phone the DA’s Office for them about cases, hoping the press would merit the returned call that they don’t. It’s widely known, if not accepted, that politics, not prosecutions, is the currency of the Gallegos DA’s Office.
If Jackson turns out to be just another phony politico like Gallegos, if she impinges on civil rights in any way or if she simply doesn’t live up to the campaign pledges she’s making, she had better know that people like me will be all over her. Probably with redoubled, disappointment-driven commitment, since she’s the one selling a message of relief and straight-up performance. Read this and know, Ms. Jackson: we’re looking to hire a serious attorney here, one who will work on behalf of the long-suffering citizens of Humboldt County, one who will protect the innocent, convict the guilty and protect the rights of everyone without fear or favor.
The Gallegos/Salzman franchise is the establishment – the sick, unresponsive machine whose main function is self-preservation. It has become the problem. Allison Jackson is a strong woman and compassionate attorney. She can talk. We’re so ready for that, for a positive change.
Kevin Hoover: – October 30, 2010
Paul Gallegos’ listless DA Office leadership is defined mostly by constant explaining and excuse-making, a supposed law-and-order DA with an uncanny knack for letting bad actors off on technicalities.
The other salient feature of the Gallegosphere is strenuously projecting progressive-hipsterism while running a very traditional, fairly brutal politics-as-usual machine.
Any one of the infamous criminal cases which ended with wrist-tap outcomes might have a quasi-feasible rationale, but Gallegos’ record has never added up to more than typical rural mediocrity. Very, very hip though, and certainly we’re all thankful for that.
Gallegos’s DNA is that of an extremely adequate defense attorney. He’s reliably malleable and dominated by the much-stronger personalities who manage him as a figurehead, including Master Ethicist Richard Salzman and Christina Allbright. These folks provide, in turn, political brains and ideological cover for their enterprise.
That’s good for Paul, because the man can’t speak for himself. Not even intending to, John Matthews of KSLG tripped him up just by asking his stance on Prop 19.
Gallegos is voting for Prop 19, you see, but he doesn’t endorse it. All John wanted to know was why you’d vote for something you don’t endorse.
Listen to the audio clip and be mortified as you hear our county’s top courtroom talent hem and haw, squirm and weasel as he tries to address this obvious contradiction while having it both ways, and fails. kslg.com/gallegos
Can any of the passionate Gallegos supporters please translate what their candidate is trying to say? It’s easier to understand dolphins than Gallegos-speak. “How many more people have to be killed?” the DA rightly wonders, alluding to that the strife the current nonsensical cannabis laws cause. But he won’t endorse Prop 19 “for a multitude of reasons,” none of which he will name.
The elephant in the room is that Gallegos isn’t allowed to endorse Prop 19. Cannabis legalization would undermine the business interests of his major supporters, who are fully invested in the broken status quo. But like any industry-approved politician, he can’t say that, so gasping and tense silences have to do. Does it really matter that the controlling industry is Big Cannabis and not pig ranches or a chemical factory, as in other places? It’s no surprise that Humboldt’s defense attorneys are just thrilled with Paul Gallegos. He’s always been and always will be one of them.
Rap artist Tone Loc appeared at a Gallegos campaign benefit in May, resulting in this Arcata Eye cartoon by artist Dave Held (daveheld.com). Gallegos liked it so much he had it autographed.
The cannabis industry-friendliness and vacuous environmental and social justice talk are why, when you call Gallegos HQ, a young, no doubt idealistic volunteer will probably answer the phone. These folks evidently think they’re helping advance social progress or environmental ideals in some way. But what has Gallegos really accomplished over the years on any of these scores other than mouthing words? The campaign volunteers could better spend their time helping at the Food Bank, or planting trees along a creek in Arcata some weekend.
For all its well-polished Hipster Moderne image-building, Gallegos is the figurehead for a hopelessly old school political machine. It’s one which fires dissenters, hires sycophants and verbally shreds enemies. In the latest example, the campaign manager’s Eye column attempts to conflate the Gallegos brand with Progressivism itself while concern-trolling accomplished environmental prosecutor Paul Hagen as some sort of witless tool of the Right.
Inevitably, Biblical scripture is invoked to cement this point. There’s nothing cynical or manipulative about this, mind you. After all, the question just has to be posed: Does Paul Hagen challenge the Bible?
It’s funny how only soulless monsters ever speak out against such a pleasant fellow as Paul Gallegos. Remember when dapper gentleman Worth Dikeman turned out to be a cop-lover and a racist? Now Allison Jackson is a drunken rageclown and enemy of civil rights. “We have to defeat the fascist,” said one frightened Gallegos supporter. Another one spoke with conviction that Paul Hagen is a “spy,” because he is seen at some of the same public events that person attended. So many enemies.
Given this progression, and with the Gallegos campaign’s newfound affinity for the Bible in mind, one can scarcely imagine what kind of morally bereft Spawn of Satan his next opponent would inevitably turn out to be four years hence. Happens every time.
It’s hard to envision Paul Gallegos masterminding the systematic discrediting of all opponents that marks his campaigns (or masterminding much of anything else, for that matter). For this kind of wet work, he has people.
The Gallegos campaign projects idealism and progressive values while funneling cash in the four figures to the likes of Richard Salzman. Political dialogue these days is toxic enough without this character going around throwing gasoline on it. But, as only a lying political hack can do, he’s managed to con a number of local politicians into thinking that he’s somehow essential to their political survival. ”I am completely happy with the people that I work so closely with and I trust their integrity,” says Gallegos campaign manager Natalynne DeLapp.
At this point, many of us are weary to the bone of the enduringly mediocre performance of the Humboldt County DA’s Office, and even more fatigued with the frenzied flim-flamming and fakery that strives to mask it. These features, plus the scorched-earth attacks on any who question Gallegos, are the true hallmarks of his tenure in office.
Allison Jackson will run a streamlined, no-excuses DA’s Office. If you’re innocent, resources won’t be misspent on futile prosecutions. But if you beat your wife, kill a kid, steal a purse, torture an animal, dump toxic waste, wreck a neighborhood or spew diesel into a creek with a dope factory, you’re going to jail, dude! Have a nice day.
With a real district attorney, law enforcement will have confidence that their work in putting together solid cases won’t sit around getting stale as statutes of limitation expire. I’ve had police ask me to phone the DA’s Office for them about cases, hoping the press would merit the returned call that they don’t. It’s widely known, if not accepted, that politics, not prosecutions, is the currency of the Gallegos DA’s Office.
If Jackson turns out to be just another phony politico like Gallegos, if she impinges on civil rights in any way or if she simply doesn’t live up to the campaign pledges she’s making, she had better know that people like me will be all over her. Probably with redoubled, disappointment-driven commitment, since she’s the one selling a message of relief and straight-up performance. Read this and know, Ms. Jackson: we’re looking to hire a serious attorney here, one who will work on behalf of the long-suffering citizens of Humboldt County, one who will protect the innocent, convict the guilty and protect the rights of everyone without fear or favor.
The Gallegos/Salzman franchise is the establishment – the sick, unresponsive machine whose main function is self-preservation. It has become the problem. Allison Jackson is a strong woman and compassionate attorney. She can talk. We’re so ready for that, for a positive change.
10.26.2010
Eye - Paul Hagen's Word
◼ Arcata Eye - Paul Hagen: Gallegos Is No Alternative – October 26, 2010
◼ Having already shared my experiences in running for district attorney this past spring in an open letter to the media (Arcata Eye, Oct. 6), I just read a public plea to my supporters to vote for Gallegos, headlined that he is “the only logical alternative for Hagen supporters.” (Jeff Schwartz, Arcata Eye, Oct. 20) That is absolutely not the case.
Now my opponent is calling for my supporters, and that calls to me. Those who know me know that I am “honest to a fault” (Eye endorsement, June 2), and while I completely refrained from negative campaigning and wish to keep it that way, Mr. Schwartz’s article calls for my unvarnished (albeit restrained) opinion. Here are my thoughts on the subject:
First, there are three things I wish to make perfectly clear: One, I have made it very clear to anyone who has asked that I am not endorsing anyone in this race. Two, I have unequivocally told this to Allison Jackson directly. Three, the reasons for this will not change.
Next, please know that I have never had a problem with Jeff Schwartz and I do respect him and those who agree with his statements. I learned a lot campaigning, including insights into what moves Gallegos’s supporters to believe in him. If they still do after reading this, I respect that, too.
My life’s experiences and core values, however, absolutely do not allow me to agree. To the contrary, what I know from hard years of direct experience is that the man is congenitally unqualified, and in so many ways. His defects lie at his core. This, too, will not change.
I write to comment on three areas of character–competence and ethics, with courage spanning them–and I write about the intersection of these in politics as it affects the public good. Please bear with me:
In a professional, one first looks to competence: Can the person do the job well, or learn to in a reasonable time? While many believe that Gallegos was courageous as well as competent in prosecuting Palco, or the Eureka police in the Moore case, neither was actually so. I spent 11 years as an environmental prosecutor, and it still hurts for me to read the Palco appellate court’s decision rebuking District Attorney Gallegos. Read it yourself, it is embarrassing. The police prosecutions were fully as disastrous in the damage done and their cost to the county, not to mention their national coverage for likewise being thrown out of court for failure to meet minimum standards and a crazy legal theory. There are also the Grand Jury reports still finding incompetence in Gallegos’ office. These are well-known facts. All of this he addresses by explaining away, but the facts remain.
As to courage, I would expect nothing less than the DA taking on corporations, etc. I criminally prosecuted two multinational corporations for killing a man at work in Mendocino County, winning a court ruling that corporations have no Fifth Amendment rights and receiving a quarter of a million dollars in settlement in doing so. I also prosecuted Palco twice criminally and got literally every last penny available in penalties, and once civilly receiving $80,000, $35,000 of which I sent to three grade schools in the Van Duzen River valley for violation-related science education. In all that I did as a prosecutor I never once thought about courage, but rather always about displaying high competence at every stage from investigation to settling. To me, doing “the right thing” is at best worthless when you badly screw it up.
Which brings us to ethics. Telling your staff you are going home sick while they stay at work and then going surfing during business hours is not ethical. Nor is using your taxpayer-paid office staff in political campaign announcements, whom we hear on the radio and see on TV and in the newspapers. Nor is deliberately smearing your political opponents, and it’s undeniably not ethical when you lie doing it.
Nor is it ethical to take full credit for what others have done, as in the Big Oil and Tire and the Skilled Healthcare cases, the settlements of which are now being used in ads which the Gallegos campaign is touting was “all because of Paul.” This is not ethical because it is not true. These cases were not “all” Gallegos’s, not by a long shot. Check it out yourself. The Attorney General representing the Regional Water Board did the great bulk of the Big Oil case because the Humboldt DA and the responsible county agency would not, yet Gallegos’s supporters and his ads take full credit. Three private law firms initiated the Skilled Healthcare case and again did most of the work, but in his ads Gallegos takes full credit. His ads are neither true nor ethical.
If you really want the truth about Gallegos’ professional ethics, inquire of him why the other affected DA’s and the Attorney General all refused to join in his Skilled Healthcare settlement due to their ‘ethical concerns’ over his use of secret settlement monies and more. Ask Gallegos himself to explain directly, honestly and openly the formal rebuke he has received from the California District Attorneys Association for his unprofessional use of DA authority in settling that case. Go ahead, ask him to explain honestly and directly. He won’t. That would require real courage and the capacity to tell the truth regardless. He has neither.
I realize that many in Humboldt admire his willingness to file suit against Palco, fight evil corporations, etc. I respect such admiration. And I agree not only in principle, I’ve been there and done that. But this is not what people in Humboldt are really getting.
For an office holder, these character traits take their most telling form in campaigning. While being dishonest is more than bad enough, vilification, smearing, and divisive politics are worse. This is Gallegos’ fourth campaign and in each of the others he has done these things and won. In announcing his first campaign Gallegos shamelessly copied Bobby Kennedy’s announcement speech for U.S. President as his own, without attribution (Tri-City Weekly, Feb. 26, 2002; more plagiarism followed, Eureka Reporter, Sept. 7 and Sept. 8, 2006), promising great progressivism. The recall campaign, however –which I have already publicly condemned – was used as an opportunity to drive Humboldt’s cultural wedges all the deeper; and in the 2006 election his campaign depressed the county’s voting middle and polarized its tails. This does not enhance the public good.
In 2006, opposing candidate Dikeman was made into someone to hate and fear, with the same to Jackson this time. Schwartz himself is using fear in his appeal, using PG&E’s nuclear power plant – a field strictly under federal regulation, no DA can touch it – as the basis for not having Jackson and her “nuclear-plant crowd stick together and take Humboldt County back to the dark ages.” Really? Is that what will actually happen if he loses? Either Gallegos saves us from radiation or “the Humboldt County environment and much more goes down the drain?” Really? This simple dichotomy is more senseless than taking credit for a drop in crime based on gross statistics. Any thinking person knows that simple correlation does not equal causation. And yet, appealing to fear, Gallegos tells us he has made the county safer. Really? Then explain exactly how.
If the Gallegos campaign wishes to “ask, beg and implore” “those progressive leaders who supported Paul Hagen to endorse Paul Gallegos,” it can. Again, I realize that many in Humboldt admire his willingness to file suit against Palco, fight evil corporations, etc. I respect such admiration. And I agree not only in principle, I’ve been there and done that. But this is not what people in Humboldt are really getting.
Regardless of what Gallegos has done or says, he is not my idea of “progressive.” That requires truly living to progressive ideals and delivering solid results. Based on publicly known facts, I have tried to show here why Gallegos’ so-called ‘progressiveness’ is at best just political form without professional substance. Good intentions delivering incompetent results does not equal being “progressive.” Based on my direct personal experiences, my knowledge of Paul Gallegos’ utter lack of what I consider true ethics, courage and honesty, as well as his now-proven political campaign-trash tactics, I believe these things fundamentally disqualify his being a progressive. Or a district attorney.
For all those reading who aren’t concerned about the progressive/dark ages argument, good for you. What matters is results, not talk. So just look to what Gallegos has actually done as DA and how he went about it – his actual results, not what he says they are. After two actual elections he has shown us his best, and just as the Palco appellate court unanimously wrote, he has “failed to prove, on [his] third try, a reasonable possibility that [his] defect can be cured.” And so, making new law, it threw out the case.
Ours is a participatory democracy, a great gift. Each vote matters. Vote your hearts, vote your minds, and vote for the future you want. If it looks anything like my envisioned future, Paul Gallegos is not a “logical alternative.” Like Dan Quayle, Paul Gallegos is no Bobby Kennedy. He is no alternative.
Paul Hagen served as a criminal and civil prosecutor in four North Coast district attorney’s offices, including Humboldt’s. He is currently is an attorney in Eureka and believes deeply in participatory democracy.
An honest word.
Related:
◼ Hagen: ‘The bloom is off the rose’ for incumbent
◼ "Hogwash, Mr. Gallegos"
◼ Failed Gallegos lawsuit one more obstacle for community to overcome
◼
Why DA's Palco suit was ill-advised
◼ Having already shared my experiences in running for district attorney this past spring in an open letter to the media (Arcata Eye, Oct. 6), I just read a public plea to my supporters to vote for Gallegos, headlined that he is “the only logical alternative for Hagen supporters.” (Jeff Schwartz, Arcata Eye, Oct. 20) That is absolutely not the case.
Now my opponent is calling for my supporters, and that calls to me. Those who know me know that I am “honest to a fault” (Eye endorsement, June 2), and while I completely refrained from negative campaigning and wish to keep it that way, Mr. Schwartz’s article calls for my unvarnished (albeit restrained) opinion. Here are my thoughts on the subject:
First, there are three things I wish to make perfectly clear: One, I have made it very clear to anyone who has asked that I am not endorsing anyone in this race. Two, I have unequivocally told this to Allison Jackson directly. Three, the reasons for this will not change.
Next, please know that I have never had a problem with Jeff Schwartz and I do respect him and those who agree with his statements. I learned a lot campaigning, including insights into what moves Gallegos’s supporters to believe in him. If they still do after reading this, I respect that, too.
My life’s experiences and core values, however, absolutely do not allow me to agree. To the contrary, what I know from hard years of direct experience is that the man is congenitally unqualified, and in so many ways. His defects lie at his core. This, too, will not change.
I write to comment on three areas of character–competence and ethics, with courage spanning them–and I write about the intersection of these in politics as it affects the public good. Please bear with me:
In a professional, one first looks to competence: Can the person do the job well, or learn to in a reasonable time? While many believe that Gallegos was courageous as well as competent in prosecuting Palco, or the Eureka police in the Moore case, neither was actually so. I spent 11 years as an environmental prosecutor, and it still hurts for me to read the Palco appellate court’s decision rebuking District Attorney Gallegos. Read it yourself, it is embarrassing. The police prosecutions were fully as disastrous in the damage done and their cost to the county, not to mention their national coverage for likewise being thrown out of court for failure to meet minimum standards and a crazy legal theory. There are also the Grand Jury reports still finding incompetence in Gallegos’ office. These are well-known facts. All of this he addresses by explaining away, but the facts remain.
As to courage, I would expect nothing less than the DA taking on corporations, etc. I criminally prosecuted two multinational corporations for killing a man at work in Mendocino County, winning a court ruling that corporations have no Fifth Amendment rights and receiving a quarter of a million dollars in settlement in doing so. I also prosecuted Palco twice criminally and got literally every last penny available in penalties, and once civilly receiving $80,000, $35,000 of which I sent to three grade schools in the Van Duzen River valley for violation-related science education. In all that I did as a prosecutor I never once thought about courage, but rather always about displaying high competence at every stage from investigation to settling. To me, doing “the right thing” is at best worthless when you badly screw it up.
Which brings us to ethics. Telling your staff you are going home sick while they stay at work and then going surfing during business hours is not ethical. Nor is using your taxpayer-paid office staff in political campaign announcements, whom we hear on the radio and see on TV and in the newspapers. Nor is deliberately smearing your political opponents, and it’s undeniably not ethical when you lie doing it.
Nor is it ethical to take full credit for what others have done, as in the Big Oil and Tire and the Skilled Healthcare cases, the settlements of which are now being used in ads which the Gallegos campaign is touting was “all because of Paul.” This is not ethical because it is not true. These cases were not “all” Gallegos’s, not by a long shot. Check it out yourself. The Attorney General representing the Regional Water Board did the great bulk of the Big Oil case because the Humboldt DA and the responsible county agency would not, yet Gallegos’s supporters and his ads take full credit. Three private law firms initiated the Skilled Healthcare case and again did most of the work, but in his ads Gallegos takes full credit. His ads are neither true nor ethical.
If you really want the truth about Gallegos’ professional ethics, inquire of him why the other affected DA’s and the Attorney General all refused to join in his Skilled Healthcare settlement due to their ‘ethical concerns’ over his use of secret settlement monies and more. Ask Gallegos himself to explain directly, honestly and openly the formal rebuke he has received from the California District Attorneys Association for his unprofessional use of DA authority in settling that case. Go ahead, ask him to explain honestly and directly. He won’t. That would require real courage and the capacity to tell the truth regardless. He has neither.
I realize that many in Humboldt admire his willingness to file suit against Palco, fight evil corporations, etc. I respect such admiration. And I agree not only in principle, I’ve been there and done that. But this is not what people in Humboldt are really getting.
For an office holder, these character traits take their most telling form in campaigning. While being dishonest is more than bad enough, vilification, smearing, and divisive politics are worse. This is Gallegos’ fourth campaign and in each of the others he has done these things and won. In announcing his first campaign Gallegos shamelessly copied Bobby Kennedy’s announcement speech for U.S. President as his own, without attribution (Tri-City Weekly, Feb. 26, 2002; more plagiarism followed, Eureka Reporter, Sept. 7 and Sept. 8, 2006), promising great progressivism. The recall campaign, however –which I have already publicly condemned – was used as an opportunity to drive Humboldt’s cultural wedges all the deeper; and in the 2006 election his campaign depressed the county’s voting middle and polarized its tails. This does not enhance the public good.
In 2006, opposing candidate Dikeman was made into someone to hate and fear, with the same to Jackson this time. Schwartz himself is using fear in his appeal, using PG&E’s nuclear power plant – a field strictly under federal regulation, no DA can touch it – as the basis for not having Jackson and her “nuclear-plant crowd stick together and take Humboldt County back to the dark ages.” Really? Is that what will actually happen if he loses? Either Gallegos saves us from radiation or “the Humboldt County environment and much more goes down the drain?” Really? This simple dichotomy is more senseless than taking credit for a drop in crime based on gross statistics. Any thinking person knows that simple correlation does not equal causation. And yet, appealing to fear, Gallegos tells us he has made the county safer. Really? Then explain exactly how.
If the Gallegos campaign wishes to “ask, beg and implore” “those progressive leaders who supported Paul Hagen to endorse Paul Gallegos,” it can. Again, I realize that many in Humboldt admire his willingness to file suit against Palco, fight evil corporations, etc. I respect such admiration. And I agree not only in principle, I’ve been there and done that. But this is not what people in Humboldt are really getting.
Regardless of what Gallegos has done or says, he is not my idea of “progressive.” That requires truly living to progressive ideals and delivering solid results. Based on publicly known facts, I have tried to show here why Gallegos’ so-called ‘progressiveness’ is at best just political form without professional substance. Good intentions delivering incompetent results does not equal being “progressive.” Based on my direct personal experiences, my knowledge of Paul Gallegos’ utter lack of what I consider true ethics, courage and honesty, as well as his now-proven political campaign-trash tactics, I believe these things fundamentally disqualify his being a progressive. Or a district attorney.
For all those reading who aren’t concerned about the progressive/dark ages argument, good for you. What matters is results, not talk. So just look to what Gallegos has actually done as DA and how he went about it – his actual results, not what he says they are. After two actual elections he has shown us his best, and just as the Palco appellate court unanimously wrote, he has “failed to prove, on [his] third try, a reasonable possibility that [his] defect can be cured.” And so, making new law, it threw out the case.
Ours is a participatory democracy, a great gift. Each vote matters. Vote your hearts, vote your minds, and vote for the future you want. If it looks anything like my envisioned future, Paul Gallegos is not a “logical alternative.” Like Dan Quayle, Paul Gallegos is no Bobby Kennedy. He is no alternative.
Paul Hagen served as a criminal and civil prosecutor in four North Coast district attorney’s offices, including Humboldt’s. He is currently is an attorney in Eureka and believes deeply in participatory democracy.
An honest word.
Related:
◼ Hagen: ‘The bloom is off the rose’ for incumbent
◼ "Hogwash, Mr. Gallegos"
◼ Failed Gallegos lawsuit one more obstacle for community to overcome
◼
Why DA's Palco suit was ill-advised
6.17.2010
AE - New DA unit to take up Hagen's work
◼ New DA unit to take up Hagen's work
dated somewhere around 1/3/07
This week, in Daniel Mintz's article in the Arcata Eye, McKinleyville Press and The Independent, Gallegos announces that he is planning to put together an "environmental crimes unit.
“The idea is that we would be a leader, a hub in northern California for top prosecutors,” said Gallegos.
Staffing would be modest at first, he continued, possibly beginning with a prosecutor that he would hire and the CDAA would pay for. As the unit progresses, fines culled from successful prosecutions might allow further staffing.
“If someone is ripping people off or engaged in unfair business practices, they can expect to be prosecuted as criminals, or sued civilly, or both,” Gallegos said. “And if they’re creating a dangerous work environment – same thing.”"
More code words that say, in no uncertain terms, that Gallegos continues to try to implement Salzman's Plan. Using taxpayer's money to fulfill the activist's agenda at the expense of the People's business.
The purpose of the so-called "Alliance for Ethical Business" was "to promote corporate
responsibility and to ensure that fraud and illegal business practices are
prosecuted in a court of law."
Code words for "get Palco."
read the full article at
http://arcataeye.com/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1
New DA unit to take up Hagen's work
Also posted the FIRST COMMENT on this post.
dated somewhere around 1/3/07
This week, in Daniel Mintz's article in the Arcata Eye, McKinleyville Press and The Independent, Gallegos announces that he is planning to put together an "environmental crimes unit.
“The idea is that we would be a leader, a hub in northern California for top prosecutors,” said Gallegos.
Staffing would be modest at first, he continued, possibly beginning with a prosecutor that he would hire and the CDAA would pay for. As the unit progresses, fines culled from successful prosecutions might allow further staffing.
“If someone is ripping people off or engaged in unfair business practices, they can expect to be prosecuted as criminals, or sued civilly, or both,” Gallegos said. “And if they’re creating a dangerous work environment – same thing.”"
More code words that say, in no uncertain terms, that Gallegos continues to try to implement Salzman's Plan. Using taxpayer's money to fulfill the activist's agenda at the expense of the People's business.
The purpose of the so-called "Alliance for Ethical Business" was "to promote corporate
responsibility and to ensure that fraud and illegal business practices are
prosecuted in a court of law."
Code words for "get Palco."
read the full article at
http://arcataeye.com/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1
New DA unit to take up Hagen's work
Also posted the FIRST COMMENT on this post.
5.31.2010
Eye - Political ‘Harassment’ Claim Refuted
Don't miss the comments:
◼ Political ‘Harassment’ Claim Refuted
– May 29, 2010
Saturday, May 29, 2010
Daniel Mintz
Eye Correspondent
HUMBOLDT – A DA candidate’s belief that Eureka humanitarian Betty Chinn was the target of politically-related “harassment” has been refuted by Chinn.
Chinn had been listed as one of DA candidate Allison Jackson’s endorsers on her campaign website but Chinn’s name was recently removed from the list. Asked why, Jackson e-mailed a statement explaining that Chinn’s “public support was impacting her personally” and so her name was removed.
“I am deeply troubled that she has had to endure any type of harassment due to her support of me in this election,” said Jackson.
But Chinn said that she asked that her name be removed because she didn’t intend to be an endorser. “I stay out of politics,” she said. “It’s not my area, my area is helping the poor.”
Chinn also wants to clarify that she hasn’t had to deal with any harassment. “This is a loving community and to come out and say that I’ve been harassed is not true,” she said. “I came here from communist China, I’ve never felt that I’ve been mistreated by anyone here.”
The first and only time Chinn met Jackson was at an event last February, Chinn continued. “I never said I support her, I did say that I admire her and what she’s doing,” she said, adding that the feedback she got after being listed on Jackson’s website was benign.
“Some people did tell me, ‘Betty, I know you never get involved in politics,’” Chinn said.
How did the supposed endorsement emerge and what constituted the perception of harassment? Jackson said that Chinn was with Rex Bohn, one of her friends, when they met last February. “I asked Rex to contact her to ask if I could use her name and was told that she supports me,” Jackson continued.
She said that in mid-May, Chinn left a phone message indicating she wanted her name removed. When Jackson asked Bohn about it, “All I was told was that she’d received numerous contacts who told her it could jeopardize her work,” Jackson said.
She said she wrote Chinn a letter thanking her and explaining that “I felt ill that anything from this could affect her work because I care about her so deeply,” Jackson continued.
Attributing the situation to miscommunication, Jackson emphasized that she truly believed Chinn had endorsed her and that after hearing she’d gotten numerous phone calls about it, she was concerned for her.
“I am deeply saddened by all of this and the way it’s been spun,” said Jackson.
Tags: election, Jackson
This entry was posted on Saturday, May 29th, 2010 at 2:34 pm and is filed under Election 2010, News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
8 Responses to “Political ‘Harassment’ Claim Refuted – May 29, 2010”
Richard
May 29, 2010 at 5:12 pm
The only “spin” here has been by Ms. Jackson herself.
#2999
Richard
May 30, 2010 at 9:54 am
Here is the original story copied from the printed page of the Arcata Eye:
CHINN CHASED AWAY FROM JACKSON CAMP
(photo of Betty here, with the word: HARRASSED printed below her name)
The removal of the name of one of DA candidate Allison Jackson’s endorsers from her website has sparked speculation and Jackson has said it was done to spare the endorser from politically-related “harassment.”
Political observers have noticed that Betty Chinn’s name has been removed from Jackson’s endorsement list. Chinn’s efforts on Eureka-based free food programs and a new shower facility have gained widespread attention and she’s one of Jackson’s more well-known supporters.
But when her name was removed, it seemed as if her support was withdrawn. Contacted about it, Jackson said the removal of Chinn’s name was done to shield her from reactions to the endorsement.
“While I am honored to have Betty’s support, when I became aware that her public support was impacting her personally and may have impact on her work for those who need our compassion in this community, I removed her name as a formal supporter so as not to have it impact either her or her work,” said Jackson.
She added, “I am deeply troubled that she has had to endure any type of harassment due to her support of me in this election. I have thanked her privately and will continue to thank her for her private support.”
Attempts to contact Chinn were unsuccessful.
#3030
kevpod
May 30, 2010 at 10:14 am
Mr. Nice, er, Richard, why did you edit the byline and dateline out of the story? And why don’t you post some of our lovely correspondence from the last few days? I mean, if you want to provide a complete picture.
#3031
Terrence McNally
May 30, 2010 at 10:30 am
At least he put his name on a post this time…
#3033
kevpod
May 30, 2010 at 10:32 am
In Richard’s defense, he signs his writing. Don’t you remember R. Trent Williams?
#3034
Terrence McNally
May 30, 2010 at 10:45 am
That was classic. Turd blossom politics at its finest.
You think Williams typeset that print story for him?
#3036
kevpod
May 30, 2010 at 10:52 am
Either R. Trent or another in his stable of handy-dandy sock puppets. Maybe the argyle one with the button nose.
#3038
Terrence McNally
May 30, 2010 at 10:57 am
Probably the idealistic rainbow-colored sock that wants to work for change… until becoming desperately cynical watching Richard make the sausage.
◼ Political ‘Harassment’ Claim Refuted
– May 29, 2010
Saturday, May 29, 2010
Daniel Mintz
Eye Correspondent
HUMBOLDT – A DA candidate’s belief that Eureka humanitarian Betty Chinn was the target of politically-related “harassment” has been refuted by Chinn.
Chinn had been listed as one of DA candidate Allison Jackson’s endorsers on her campaign website but Chinn’s name was recently removed from the list. Asked why, Jackson e-mailed a statement explaining that Chinn’s “public support was impacting her personally” and so her name was removed.
“I am deeply troubled that she has had to endure any type of harassment due to her support of me in this election,” said Jackson.
But Chinn said that she asked that her name be removed because she didn’t intend to be an endorser. “I stay out of politics,” she said. “It’s not my area, my area is helping the poor.”
Chinn also wants to clarify that she hasn’t had to deal with any harassment. “This is a loving community and to come out and say that I’ve been harassed is not true,” she said. “I came here from communist China, I’ve never felt that I’ve been mistreated by anyone here.”
The first and only time Chinn met Jackson was at an event last February, Chinn continued. “I never said I support her, I did say that I admire her and what she’s doing,” she said, adding that the feedback she got after being listed on Jackson’s website was benign.
“Some people did tell me, ‘Betty, I know you never get involved in politics,’” Chinn said.
How did the supposed endorsement emerge and what constituted the perception of harassment? Jackson said that Chinn was with Rex Bohn, one of her friends, when they met last February. “I asked Rex to contact her to ask if I could use her name and was told that she supports me,” Jackson continued.
She said that in mid-May, Chinn left a phone message indicating she wanted her name removed. When Jackson asked Bohn about it, “All I was told was that she’d received numerous contacts who told her it could jeopardize her work,” Jackson said.
She said she wrote Chinn a letter thanking her and explaining that “I felt ill that anything from this could affect her work because I care about her so deeply,” Jackson continued.
Attributing the situation to miscommunication, Jackson emphasized that she truly believed Chinn had endorsed her and that after hearing she’d gotten numerous phone calls about it, she was concerned for her.
“I am deeply saddened by all of this and the way it’s been spun,” said Jackson.
Tags: election, Jackson
This entry was posted on Saturday, May 29th, 2010 at 2:34 pm and is filed under Election 2010, News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
8 Responses to “Political ‘Harassment’ Claim Refuted – May 29, 2010”
Richard
May 29, 2010 at 5:12 pm
The only “spin” here has been by Ms. Jackson herself.
#2999
Richard
May 30, 2010 at 9:54 am
Here is the original story copied from the printed page of the Arcata Eye:
CHINN CHASED AWAY FROM JACKSON CAMP
(photo of Betty here, with the word: HARRASSED printed below her name)
The removal of the name of one of DA candidate Allison Jackson’s endorsers from her website has sparked speculation and Jackson has said it was done to spare the endorser from politically-related “harassment.”
Political observers have noticed that Betty Chinn’s name has been removed from Jackson’s endorsement list. Chinn’s efforts on Eureka-based free food programs and a new shower facility have gained widespread attention and she’s one of Jackson’s more well-known supporters.
But when her name was removed, it seemed as if her support was withdrawn. Contacted about it, Jackson said the removal of Chinn’s name was done to shield her from reactions to the endorsement.
“While I am honored to have Betty’s support, when I became aware that her public support was impacting her personally and may have impact on her work for those who need our compassion in this community, I removed her name as a formal supporter so as not to have it impact either her or her work,” said Jackson.
She added, “I am deeply troubled that she has had to endure any type of harassment due to her support of me in this election. I have thanked her privately and will continue to thank her for her private support.”
Attempts to contact Chinn were unsuccessful.
#3030
kevpod
May 30, 2010 at 10:14 am
Mr. Nice, er, Richard, why did you edit the byline and dateline out of the story? And why don’t you post some of our lovely correspondence from the last few days? I mean, if you want to provide a complete picture.
#3031
Terrence McNally
May 30, 2010 at 10:30 am
At least he put his name on a post this time…
#3033
kevpod
May 30, 2010 at 10:32 am
In Richard’s defense, he signs his writing. Don’t you remember R. Trent Williams?
#3034
Terrence McNally
May 30, 2010 at 10:45 am
That was classic. Turd blossom politics at its finest.
You think Williams typeset that print story for him?
#3036
kevpod
May 30, 2010 at 10:52 am
Either R. Trent or another in his stable of handy-dandy sock puppets. Maybe the argyle one with the button nose.
#3038
Terrence McNally
May 30, 2010 at 10:57 am
Probably the idealistic rainbow-colored sock that wants to work for change… until becoming desperately cynical watching Richard make the sausage.
3.17.2010
Eye - Gallegos Seeking Re-election
◼ Gallegos Seeking Re-election - Arcata Eye
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Kevin L. Hoover
Eye Editor
HUMBOLDT – The field of candidates for Humboldt County District Attorney swelled to four over the weekend with back-to-back announcements by incumbent DA Paul Gallegos and former Deputy DA, now private attorney Allison Jackson.
The Gallegos event was held Friday at the former 321 Coffee shop in Old Town Eureka, now called “321 Gallegos.”
Supporters in attendance included many Gallegos backers from previous campaigns, employees of the DA’s Office and Humboldt County Democratic Party officials. A few were given time to say nice things about their candidate.
Campaign Manager Natalynne DeLapp introduced DA Investigator Wayne Cox, who praised Gallegos as an effective and dedicated crimefighter with a “can-do” attitude who is “dedicated to the fair pursuit of justice.” He said Gallegos had innovated and modernized law enforcement, resulting in numerous successful prosecutions.
“He is firmly established and widely respected by his colleagues, and has successfully led the DA’s Office through difficult and tumultuous times,” Cox said.
DeLapp read a statement by Trinity County District Attorney Michael Harper, who said Gallegos is “a good man and a good district attorney” who is “not only a leader in Humboldt County, but all of the North Coast.” She said DAs in Butte, Yuba and Del Norte counties have all endorsed Gallegos.
Next was former Assemblymember Patty Berg. She said “Paul has proven himself to be effective, courageous and independent.”
Continued Berg, “He has shaped the District Attorney’s Office to reflect the values of the people that he serves and has built a 21st Century District Attorney’s Office of which we can all be proud.”
She said Gallegos had grown in the job, keeps his word, and stands up for all citizens equally.
“Isn’t that what we want from our chief law enforcement officer?” Berg asked. She said Gallegos “leads by example” and “is on our side, defending us and protecting us.”
She then introduced her “dear friend, Paul Gallegos.”
Looking fit and dapper in a dark suit and pale blue tie, Gallegos began by thanking his family, supporters, staff and other colleagues.
He then read a prepared statement documenting his efforts to “reinvent Humboldt County politics by encouraging, energizing and empowering the people of Humboldt County to envision the work for a common government that serves all of the people, and not just some.”
He said he did the same for the DA’s Office with a work ethic and leadership in the face of budget and staff reductions. That office, he said, “Seeks justice, not vengeance, for in my view, justice is the highest goal of mankind.”
He asked supporters for “your support, your sacrifice and your labor” against continuing challenges.
He listed “seven sins” first enumerated by Mohandas Gandhi: “Wealth without work, pleasure without conscience, knowledge without character, commerce without morality, science without humanity, worship without sacrifice and politics without principle.”
Berg then praised Gallegos’ “fabulous speech,” and brought the candidate back to the mic for press questions.
The first was what he thought his failures might be and what he learned from them. “Coming back up here to answer that question,” he joked. Then he said that he didn’t “look at the world through failures,” but that he viewed setbacks as “learning experiences.”
Next he was asked about remarks in a Feb. 17 Arcata Eye news story in which he said, with regard to marijuana cases, that “the first key is to remove the hyperbole” and to remain mindful of civil liberties. “We cannot break the law; I’m not going to violate civil liberties,” he said in the story.
He was asked to specify what hyperbole he was referring to and who, if anyone, had suggested that he violate civil liberties.
“Absolutely,” he said. “That the guidelines are 100 plants,” he said. “That we have 1,000 homes in Arcata that are now grow homes as opposed to residences.”
The latter citation inspired giggles from some of his supporters, as the number is often misattributed as an invention of this newspaper.
“These all may be facts, but in the District Attorney’s Office we have to make decisions and analyze problems based on evidence, so whenever I hear these things, I say ‘where are we getting these numbers?’”
Told that it was an estimate by Jack Nelsen, head of the Humboldt County Drug Task Force, Gallegos said “There’s none of us that are immune from talking without having any evidence to support it.”
He said criminal law is a “balancing act between the freedoms of individuals and the rights of the community.”
The vagueness of cannabis laws, he said, “are an oddity” that require deft handling to avoid “rewarding the wicked… and punishing the innocent.”
He said cannabis violations are best handled via code violations and more routine forms of enforcement.
Tags: DA, Gallegos
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Kevin L. Hoover
Eye Editor
HUMBOLDT – The field of candidates for Humboldt County District Attorney swelled to four over the weekend with back-to-back announcements by incumbent DA Paul Gallegos and former Deputy DA, now private attorney Allison Jackson.
The Gallegos event was held Friday at the former 321 Coffee shop in Old Town Eureka, now called “321 Gallegos.”
Supporters in attendance included many Gallegos backers from previous campaigns, employees of the DA’s Office and Humboldt County Democratic Party officials. A few were given time to say nice things about their candidate.
Campaign Manager Natalynne DeLapp introduced DA Investigator Wayne Cox, who praised Gallegos as an effective and dedicated crimefighter with a “can-do” attitude who is “dedicated to the fair pursuit of justice.” He said Gallegos had innovated and modernized law enforcement, resulting in numerous successful prosecutions.
“He is firmly established and widely respected by his colleagues, and has successfully led the DA’s Office through difficult and tumultuous times,” Cox said.
DeLapp read a statement by Trinity County District Attorney Michael Harper, who said Gallegos is “a good man and a good district attorney” who is “not only a leader in Humboldt County, but all of the North Coast.” She said DAs in Butte, Yuba and Del Norte counties have all endorsed Gallegos.
Next was former Assemblymember Patty Berg. She said “Paul has proven himself to be effective, courageous and independent.”
Continued Berg, “He has shaped the District Attorney’s Office to reflect the values of the people that he serves and has built a 21st Century District Attorney’s Office of which we can all be proud.”
She said Gallegos had grown in the job, keeps his word, and stands up for all citizens equally.
“Isn’t that what we want from our chief law enforcement officer?” Berg asked. She said Gallegos “leads by example” and “is on our side, defending us and protecting us.”
She then introduced her “dear friend, Paul Gallegos.”
Looking fit and dapper in a dark suit and pale blue tie, Gallegos began by thanking his family, supporters, staff and other colleagues.
He then read a prepared statement documenting his efforts to “reinvent Humboldt County politics by encouraging, energizing and empowering the people of Humboldt County to envision the work for a common government that serves all of the people, and not just some.”
He said he did the same for the DA’s Office with a work ethic and leadership in the face of budget and staff reductions. That office, he said, “Seeks justice, not vengeance, for in my view, justice is the highest goal of mankind.”
He asked supporters for “your support, your sacrifice and your labor” against continuing challenges.
He listed “seven sins” first enumerated by Mohandas Gandhi: “Wealth without work, pleasure without conscience, knowledge without character, commerce without morality, science without humanity, worship without sacrifice and politics without principle.”
Berg then praised Gallegos’ “fabulous speech,” and brought the candidate back to the mic for press questions.
The first was what he thought his failures might be and what he learned from them. “Coming back up here to answer that question,” he joked. Then he said that he didn’t “look at the world through failures,” but that he viewed setbacks as “learning experiences.”
Next he was asked about remarks in a Feb. 17 Arcata Eye news story in which he said, with regard to marijuana cases, that “the first key is to remove the hyperbole” and to remain mindful of civil liberties. “We cannot break the law; I’m not going to violate civil liberties,” he said in the story.
He was asked to specify what hyperbole he was referring to and who, if anyone, had suggested that he violate civil liberties.
“Absolutely,” he said. “That the guidelines are 100 plants,” he said. “That we have 1,000 homes in Arcata that are now grow homes as opposed to residences.”
The latter citation inspired giggles from some of his supporters, as the number is often misattributed as an invention of this newspaper.
“These all may be facts, but in the District Attorney’s Office we have to make decisions and analyze problems based on evidence, so whenever I hear these things, I say ‘where are we getting these numbers?’”
Told that it was an estimate by Jack Nelsen, head of the Humboldt County Drug Task Force, Gallegos said “There’s none of us that are immune from talking without having any evidence to support it.”
He said criminal law is a “balancing act between the freedoms of individuals and the rights of the community.”
The vagueness of cannabis laws, he said, “are an oddity” that require deft handling to avoid “rewarding the wicked… and punishing the innocent.”
He said cannabis violations are best handled via code violations and more routine forms of enforcement.
Tags: DA, Gallegos
Eye - DA candidate Allison Jackson’s Campaign Announcement
◼ DA candidate Allison Jackson’s Campaign Announcement - Arcata Eye
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Note: The following is a press release issued by the Allison Jackson campaign following her candidacy announcement last Saturday. – Ed.
EUREKA – With more than 100 people who turned out in support, attorney Allison Jackson formally kicked off her campaign in Eureka Saturday afternoon to be the next Humboldt County District Attorney.
Campaign chairman Ron Pierre said the district attorney position is the most important in the county and called for strong leadership in that post.
Pierre noted that the crowd who came to support Jackson was a diverse mixture of residents from across the political spectrum.
Fifth District Supervisor Jill Duffy, who also attended the campaign event, said that Jackson alone possesses the experience and tenacity for the job.
Jackson is a partner at the Eureka-based Harland Law Firm where she has worked since 2004 representing clients in civil litigation, land-use, employment, and other areas of law. Jackson has also worked in the Humboldt, Santa Cruz and Santa Clara county district attorney offices.
Jackson said that as district attorney, she will show leadership and get results–not just give lip service.
“When I am elected you will finally have a district attorney who actually runs the office and who actively works to make sure that the laws are enforced,” Jackson said. “People will be charged and their cases will proceed based upon the evidence of what they have done and not who they are.”
Jackson said she will treat victims and witnesses of crimes with simple human dignity, adding that her core values and principles of law and order were instilled in her by the three generations of formidable women who raised her.
Former Humboldt County Administrative Officer Loretta Nickolaus called Jackson a veteran prosecutor who knows what it takes to administer the district attorney’s office.
Nickolaus said Jackson knows the Penal Code, can give clear jury instructions and gets sentences that fit the crime. She also gave a stern warning to those who might break the law.
“Allison won’t fool around here,” Nickolaus said.
Nickolaus said Jackson is a fierce and effective prosecutor who will represent everyone. She said Jackson brings a wealth of experience and will be there for the victims of crime and their families.
Tags: DA, Jackson
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Note: The following is a press release issued by the Allison Jackson campaign following her candidacy announcement last Saturday. – Ed.
EUREKA – With more than 100 people who turned out in support, attorney Allison Jackson formally kicked off her campaign in Eureka Saturday afternoon to be the next Humboldt County District Attorney.
Campaign chairman Ron Pierre said the district attorney position is the most important in the county and called for strong leadership in that post.
Pierre noted that the crowd who came to support Jackson was a diverse mixture of residents from across the political spectrum.
Fifth District Supervisor Jill Duffy, who also attended the campaign event, said that Jackson alone possesses the experience and tenacity for the job.
Jackson is a partner at the Eureka-based Harland Law Firm where she has worked since 2004 representing clients in civil litigation, land-use, employment, and other areas of law. Jackson has also worked in the Humboldt, Santa Cruz and Santa Clara county district attorney offices.
Jackson said that as district attorney, she will show leadership and get results–not just give lip service.
“When I am elected you will finally have a district attorney who actually runs the office and who actively works to make sure that the laws are enforced,” Jackson said. “People will be charged and their cases will proceed based upon the evidence of what they have done and not who they are.”
Jackson said she will treat victims and witnesses of crimes with simple human dignity, adding that her core values and principles of law and order were instilled in her by the three generations of formidable women who raised her.
Former Humboldt County Administrative Officer Loretta Nickolaus called Jackson a veteran prosecutor who knows what it takes to administer the district attorney’s office.
Nickolaus said Jackson knows the Penal Code, can give clear jury instructions and gets sentences that fit the crime. She also gave a stern warning to those who might break the law.
“Allison won’t fool around here,” Nickolaus said.
Nickolaus said Jackson is a fierce and effective prosecutor who will represent everyone. She said Jackson brings a wealth of experience and will be there for the victims of crime and their families.
Tags: DA, Jackson
Eye - Paul Hagen’s Campaign Announcement
◼ Paul Hagen’s Campaign Announcement - Arcata Eye
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
EUREKA – District Attorney Candidate Paul Hagen held a press conference and reception Friday, March 12 at the Eureka Woman’s Club.
“I love Humboldt County and I want to use my proven ability and experience to protect Humboldt County’s future,” said Hagen. “I have a vision for how the DA’s office can serve the people and I look forward to sharing this vision with the citizens of our diverse communities.”
Hagen has worked as a deputy district attorney in four DA’s offices and has worked under seven elected DAs. He has put together environmental task forces and prosecuted crimes in Humboldt, Del Norte, Mendocino, and Lake Counties.
“If I’m elected, I’ll set clear priorities for the DA’s office and provide support to staff to they have the direction and tools they need to deliver justice,” said Hagen. “We can make our Humboldt County communities safer by vigorously prosecuting crimes of violence, crimes against vulnerable people, and crimes against the public
Why I Am Running
I am running for District Attorney because I believe that together we can protect Humboldt’s future.
How do I know that I will do well in protecting Humboldt’s future? Because my life experiences have given me the proven ability to lead and the proven ability to deliver results.
I have taught in schools and universities. I have put on high-level conferences for both the public and for government personnel. I have taught in numerous law enforcement settings at both the state and federal levels. I have trained agency personnel, investigators and prosecutors how to make cases. I have the proven ability to train, to inspire, and to lead people.
I have worked as both a criminal and a civil prosecutor for more than eleven years in four different district attorney’s offices, under seven different DA’s. In each county I formed and led a multi-agency, cross-jurisdictional task force to investigate and prosecute crimes. I have successfully prosecuted and tried cases criminal and civil, large and small, against individuals, corporations and public officials. I have the proven ability to deliver results in the courts.
And I have learned through all these rich experiences how an effective district attorney’s office should be administered. I know what a district attorney’s office can and properly should do. I have the proven ability to get that done. And if elected, this I will do.
These broad experiences make me uniquely qualified in this election.
Who I Am
I grew up in the American Midwest. My dad was the son of immigrants, he was born on a farm, he did not graduate from high school, but went on to become a skilled electrician to support his family. My mom was the daughter of immigrants, she first learned to speak English in grade school, and went on to become a Registered Nurse before she married.
I am a product of a loving family.
Growing up I worked as a paperboy, a music teacher, a leader in student government in college, an intern in the United States Congress, and as a garbage truck driver. After leaving the Midwest I worked on many types of jobsites as a construction worker. I have worked in many types of office settings from temporary clerk to analyst. I have worked for nonprofits, for government agencies, and in the largest law firm in the State of California.
Work aside, I have built and raced motorcycles and cars. I learned how to custom hand-bevel glass, because it creates beauty. I am an avid open water swimmer and a triathlete in training year-round. Andmost importantly of all, I am a member of the World Famous — Crab Grass Band.
I believe in service to community. I have served my communities by volunteering my time as an educator, as a member of boards of directors, as a member of the Humboldt County Democratic Central Committee, for the State Bar of California, and as a member of the Arcata Planning Commission.
I am 55 years old and I have lived in Northern California for over a quarter of a century, as a husband with my wife of more than twenty-five years, and then as the father of our two daughters around whom our lives revolve.
I am a spiritually rich man.
And I am a family man who believes that there is no better place in the world than Humboldt County to live and raise my family.
What I Believe
Beyond one’s life’s experiences, what one believes sets the stage for what one does. My beliefs and upbringing have set the stage for what I will do if elected.
I will share with you how my beliefs and upbringing came together in being a parent. Here are two of the most important things I have told my children hundreds of times:
First: Three rules for success in life, which I told to them each day for years as they left for school with their mother:
Pay attention, Try hard, Do well. Pay attention, Try hard, Do well.
Second: The biggest rule of all:
Life is about other people. Life is about other people.
I believe these rules are the basis for the advancement of both the individual and of society as a whole. Because in this life we are all tied together. And because in this life we must protect each other and we must protect our common future.
And finally, I believe that each person has the obligation in life to give the best of what they have to the community. Because Life Is About Other People.
What I Will Do As Your District Attorney
I also believe deeply in the values of fairness and justice, community and safety. As your district attorney, I will instill these values in everything the office does.
I have trained myself for years to listen carefully to people, to be attentive and accountable at all times, and to exercise professionalism and sound judgment at every turn. As your district attorney I will emphasize a common sense approach to prosecuting crimes. I hold myself to very high standards and I will accept no less from my staff.
Based on these values, the DA’s office under my leadership will vigorously prosecute crimes involving violence, methamphetamine, abuse of children and elders, sexual and domestic abuse, and crimes against the environment, consumers and workers.
As your district attorney, I will give the very best of my life’s energies to serving the People.
The end result is that I will deliver fair application of our laws, and I will deliver effective, even-handed justice.
Close
We all cherish the diversity, the independence, and the richness of life that makes Humboldt County unique. We all want to protect this place, its way of life, and its future.
We live here because we believe in this place and we believe in each other. That is how I see it.
I pledge to you that if elected to serve as your district attorney, I will give the very best of what I have and what I am.
And so I ask you to please join my campaign and join me in protecting the future of Humboldt County..
Tags: DA, Hagen
◼ link
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
EUREKA – District Attorney Candidate Paul Hagen held a press conference and reception Friday, March 12 at the Eureka Woman’s Club.
“I love Humboldt County and I want to use my proven ability and experience to protect Humboldt County’s future,” said Hagen. “I have a vision for how the DA’s office can serve the people and I look forward to sharing this vision with the citizens of our diverse communities.”
Hagen has worked as a deputy district attorney in four DA’s offices and has worked under seven elected DAs. He has put together environmental task forces and prosecuted crimes in Humboldt, Del Norte, Mendocino, and Lake Counties.
“If I’m elected, I’ll set clear priorities for the DA’s office and provide support to staff to they have the direction and tools they need to deliver justice,” said Hagen. “We can make our Humboldt County communities safer by vigorously prosecuting crimes of violence, crimes against vulnerable people, and crimes against the public
Why I Am Running
I am running for District Attorney because I believe that together we can protect Humboldt’s future.
How do I know that I will do well in protecting Humboldt’s future? Because my life experiences have given me the proven ability to lead and the proven ability to deliver results.
I have taught in schools and universities. I have put on high-level conferences for both the public and for government personnel. I have taught in numerous law enforcement settings at both the state and federal levels. I have trained agency personnel, investigators and prosecutors how to make cases. I have the proven ability to train, to inspire, and to lead people.
I have worked as both a criminal and a civil prosecutor for more than eleven years in four different district attorney’s offices, under seven different DA’s. In each county I formed and led a multi-agency, cross-jurisdictional task force to investigate and prosecute crimes. I have successfully prosecuted and tried cases criminal and civil, large and small, against individuals, corporations and public officials. I have the proven ability to deliver results in the courts.
And I have learned through all these rich experiences how an effective district attorney’s office should be administered. I know what a district attorney’s office can and properly should do. I have the proven ability to get that done. And if elected, this I will do.
These broad experiences make me uniquely qualified in this election.
Who I Am
I grew up in the American Midwest. My dad was the son of immigrants, he was born on a farm, he did not graduate from high school, but went on to become a skilled electrician to support his family. My mom was the daughter of immigrants, she first learned to speak English in grade school, and went on to become a Registered Nurse before she married.
I am a product of a loving family.
Growing up I worked as a paperboy, a music teacher, a leader in student government in college, an intern in the United States Congress, and as a garbage truck driver. After leaving the Midwest I worked on many types of jobsites as a construction worker. I have worked in many types of office settings from temporary clerk to analyst. I have worked for nonprofits, for government agencies, and in the largest law firm in the State of California.
Work aside, I have built and raced motorcycles and cars. I learned how to custom hand-bevel glass, because it creates beauty. I am an avid open water swimmer and a triathlete in training year-round. Andmost importantly of all, I am a member of the World Famous — Crab Grass Band.
I believe in service to community. I have served my communities by volunteering my time as an educator, as a member of boards of directors, as a member of the Humboldt County Democratic Central Committee, for the State Bar of California, and as a member of the Arcata Planning Commission.
I am 55 years old and I have lived in Northern California for over a quarter of a century, as a husband with my wife of more than twenty-five years, and then as the father of our two daughters around whom our lives revolve.
I am a spiritually rich man.
And I am a family man who believes that there is no better place in the world than Humboldt County to live and raise my family.
What I Believe
Beyond one’s life’s experiences, what one believes sets the stage for what one does. My beliefs and upbringing have set the stage for what I will do if elected.
I will share with you how my beliefs and upbringing came together in being a parent. Here are two of the most important things I have told my children hundreds of times:
First: Three rules for success in life, which I told to them each day for years as they left for school with their mother:
Pay attention, Try hard, Do well. Pay attention, Try hard, Do well.
Second: The biggest rule of all:
Life is about other people. Life is about other people.
I believe these rules are the basis for the advancement of both the individual and of society as a whole. Because in this life we are all tied together. And because in this life we must protect each other and we must protect our common future.
And finally, I believe that each person has the obligation in life to give the best of what they have to the community. Because Life Is About Other People.
What I Will Do As Your District Attorney
I also believe deeply in the values of fairness and justice, community and safety. As your district attorney, I will instill these values in everything the office does.
I have trained myself for years to listen carefully to people, to be attentive and accountable at all times, and to exercise professionalism and sound judgment at every turn. As your district attorney I will emphasize a common sense approach to prosecuting crimes. I hold myself to very high standards and I will accept no less from my staff.
Based on these values, the DA’s office under my leadership will vigorously prosecute crimes involving violence, methamphetamine, abuse of children and elders, sexual and domestic abuse, and crimes against the environment, consumers and workers.
As your district attorney, I will give the very best of my life’s energies to serving the People.
The end result is that I will deliver fair application of our laws, and I will deliver effective, even-handed justice.
Close
We all cherish the diversity, the independence, and the richness of life that makes Humboldt County unique. We all want to protect this place, its way of life, and its future.
We live here because we believe in this place and we believe in each other. That is how I see it.
I pledge to you that if elected to serve as your district attorney, I will give the very best of what I have and what I am.
And so I ask you to please join my campaign and join me in protecting the future of Humboldt County..
Tags: DA, Hagen
◼ link
3.04.2010
Eye - Bungled justice for Nicole
I read Mr. Gallegos recent article in the Arcata Eye. Here is a man that says he needs a third term as Humboldt County District Attorney to finish what he started. That is a scary statement, especially if you are one of the victims of his incompetence.
I had the unfortunate opportunity of watching Mr. Gallegos try to prosecute what was suppose to be a murder case in Humboldt County Court. This man is no more a prosecutor than I am a brain surgeon. Mr. Gallegos was always late to court, could not answer any of the judge’s questions and always had the excuse that he did not have the case file with him.
The court-appointed, taxpayer-provided attorney for the defense made Mr. Gallegos look like a deer caught in the headlights and virtually kicked Mr. Gallegos’ butt all over the courtroom.
Some say that Mr. Gallegos needs to leave the courtroom to his deputies and administrate but he has proven that he cannot do this either. The morning that the preliminary hearing was to begin, Mr. Gallegos dropped the case into one of his deputy’s lap, and sent her into the courtroom late and totally unprepared.
After the preliminary hearing, Mr. Gallegos felt that with all of the publicity that this case was getting he could get some personal mileage out of handling the case himself, so he takes it away from the deputy after she spends day and night for a week getting up to speed.
After months of delays from the defense, numerous blunders from the prosecution and thousands of Humboldt County taxpayer dollars Mr. Gallegos decides he cannot prevail in the courtroom in front of a jury, so he plea bargains with the two who took my little girl’s life.
Mr. Gallegos then gives the file to one of his most talented prosecutors so she can go to the victim’s family and try to clean up the mess he made.
Mr. Gallegos did not show up for the sentencing hearing for Jason Whitmill or Anthony Flores which is a good thing because when Mr. Gallegos prosecuted Jason Whitmill back in 2007, he forgot to add his prior felonies which in turn allowed Whitmill out of prison a year early and 12 days before he killed Nicole Quigley.
I will remember this come June’s election and I hope and pray that everyone else in Humboldt County does, too.
Kenneth Quigley
McKinleyville
◼ Letters to the Editor – March 3, 2010 (Updated to include Feb. 24 letters) - Arcata Eye
I had the unfortunate opportunity of watching Mr. Gallegos try to prosecute what was suppose to be a murder case in Humboldt County Court. This man is no more a prosecutor than I am a brain surgeon. Mr. Gallegos was always late to court, could not answer any of the judge’s questions and always had the excuse that he did not have the case file with him.
The court-appointed, taxpayer-provided attorney for the defense made Mr. Gallegos look like a deer caught in the headlights and virtually kicked Mr. Gallegos’ butt all over the courtroom.
Some say that Mr. Gallegos needs to leave the courtroom to his deputies and administrate but he has proven that he cannot do this either. The morning that the preliminary hearing was to begin, Mr. Gallegos dropped the case into one of his deputy’s lap, and sent her into the courtroom late and totally unprepared.
After the preliminary hearing, Mr. Gallegos felt that with all of the publicity that this case was getting he could get some personal mileage out of handling the case himself, so he takes it away from the deputy after she spends day and night for a week getting up to speed.
After months of delays from the defense, numerous blunders from the prosecution and thousands of Humboldt County taxpayer dollars Mr. Gallegos decides he cannot prevail in the courtroom in front of a jury, so he plea bargains with the two who took my little girl’s life.
Mr. Gallegos then gives the file to one of his most talented prosecutors so she can go to the victim’s family and try to clean up the mess he made.
Mr. Gallegos did not show up for the sentencing hearing for Jason Whitmill or Anthony Flores which is a good thing because when Mr. Gallegos prosecuted Jason Whitmill back in 2007, he forgot to add his prior felonies which in turn allowed Whitmill out of prison a year early and 12 days before he killed Nicole Quigley.
I will remember this come June’s election and I hope and pray that everyone else in Humboldt County does, too.
Kenneth Quigley
McKinleyville
◼ Letters to the Editor – March 3, 2010 (Updated to include Feb. 24 letters) - Arcata Eye
7.03.2007
Eye - Pete Nichol's letter
Related post:
What's the objection?
Related stories:
Harbor District fills new Port of Humboldt promotion position
Arcata Eye - New Harbor hire draws fire
Arcata Eye - Nichol's letter
***
June 28, 2007
Roy Curless, President
Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation, and Conservation District
Startare Drive
Eureka, CA 95501
Commissioner Curless,
I regret not being able to attend this evening’s meeting. I ask you to please accept these comments as public comment regarding Agenda Item 10(c) Consideration of approval of Employment Agreement with Wilson Lacy for the position of Director of Maritime Commerce.
On behalf of Humboldt Baykeeper, I would like to ask the Humboldt Bay Harbor District Commissioners deny the request of the Harbor District staff to hire Mr. Lacy as Director of Maritime Commerce. While Mr. Lacy may be well-qualified to hold such a position, this decision utilizes taxpayer dollars to fund a position that currently has no associated program.
Humboldt Bay is currently not an active port, has no modern port facilities, or funding for increasing shipping to a point where it becomes feasible to hire a paid, well-paid I might add, staff person to oversee these operations. I find the District’s direction on this issue very worrisome, poorly thought out, and seriously lacking in strategy.
I assume Mr. Lacy’s role will be to attract the shipping industry to Humboldt Bay. If that is the case, a central question to ask would be “what do they do when they get here?”
It is fairly obvious that without reinstating rail service between Eureka and points south, the concept of Humboldt Bay becoming a competitive port are slim to none. In fact, Mr. Lacy himself said in a Harbor District meeting on July 12, 2006 that “the railroad is essential to the port because there is no other way to efficiently move goods across the continent.”
So why would the District spend $100,000 of taxpayer money each year on a position to court prospective shipping business when a central element in the equation is missing and, in reality, nowhere on the horizon? This seems like a classic case of putting the cart before the horse.
Even if, and I emphasize if, rail service returns to the area, it does not guarantee that port development will ultimately succeed.
The Northwest-Pacific Railroad Financial Feasibility study states that “The movement of freight in waterborne trade requires that the landside rail and/or roadway transportation systems connect with navigable deep water at a location that minimizes total transportation cost. In this sense, a port is simply a location where deep water efficiently meets the railways and/or roadways. Without this efficient inland connection, a harbor may have excellent navigation access but limited functionality as a port.”
Additionally, the Port of Humboldt Bay Revitalization Plan of 2003 states: “… rail access may be restored with the reactivation of the North Coast Railroad Authority (NCRA) line, but the time-consuming and circuitous southbound routing—which must backtrack though other competing port areas—will remain a limitation on Humboldt Bay’s attractiveness for most rail-oriented marine cargoes to/from points beyond the Bay Area where superior rail connections are needed to compete.”
If your Commission approves this position and given the recent addition of two Bar Pilots, with annual salaries of $140,000 each, that would put the annual salary expenditure for Maritime Commerce at $380,000, and currently we are getting two ships in the Bay per month.
I find it very strange that the District has that much of a surplus annually, but cannot plan effectively to budget for the disposal of dredge spoils at the HOODS site, which has been mandated by the Coastal Commission for the next round of maintenance dredging in 6-7 years.
Given that the decision to hire Mr. Lacy is not a time-sensitive decision, I encourage the Harbor District Commissioners to table this item until a more detailed, and strategic, needs assessment for the Maritime Commerce Program is completed. This is a significant expenditure of taxpayer dollars that needs to be thoughtfully considered.
Sincerely,
Pete Nichols, Director
Humboldt Baykeeper
***
But it's ok for "Humboldt Baykeeper" to receive funding from the go-away money paid to the so-called "Ecological Rights Foundation/ERF" - to buy a new Boston Whaler, to set up an office in Old Town, Eureka setting the stage for their own threatened lawsuits to garner even more go-away money...
What's the objection?
Related stories:
Harbor District fills new Port of Humboldt promotion position
Arcata Eye - New Harbor hire draws fire
Arcata Eye - Nichol's letter
***
June 28, 2007
Roy Curless, President
Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation, and Conservation District
Startare Drive
Eureka, CA 95501
Commissioner Curless,
I regret not being able to attend this evening’s meeting. I ask you to please accept these comments as public comment regarding Agenda Item 10(c) Consideration of approval of Employment Agreement with Wilson Lacy for the position of Director of Maritime Commerce.
On behalf of Humboldt Baykeeper, I would like to ask the Humboldt Bay Harbor District Commissioners deny the request of the Harbor District staff to hire Mr. Lacy as Director of Maritime Commerce. While Mr. Lacy may be well-qualified to hold such a position, this decision utilizes taxpayer dollars to fund a position that currently has no associated program.
Humboldt Bay is currently not an active port, has no modern port facilities, or funding for increasing shipping to a point where it becomes feasible to hire a paid, well-paid I might add, staff person to oversee these operations. I find the District’s direction on this issue very worrisome, poorly thought out, and seriously lacking in strategy.
I assume Mr. Lacy’s role will be to attract the shipping industry to Humboldt Bay. If that is the case, a central question to ask would be “what do they do when they get here?”
It is fairly obvious that without reinstating rail service between Eureka and points south, the concept of Humboldt Bay becoming a competitive port are slim to none. In fact, Mr. Lacy himself said in a Harbor District meeting on July 12, 2006 that “the railroad is essential to the port because there is no other way to efficiently move goods across the continent.”
So why would the District spend $100,000 of taxpayer money each year on a position to court prospective shipping business when a central element in the equation is missing and, in reality, nowhere on the horizon? This seems like a classic case of putting the cart before the horse.
Even if, and I emphasize if, rail service returns to the area, it does not guarantee that port development will ultimately succeed.
The Northwest-Pacific Railroad Financial Feasibility study states that “The movement of freight in waterborne trade requires that the landside rail and/or roadway transportation systems connect with navigable deep water at a location that minimizes total transportation cost. In this sense, a port is simply a location where deep water efficiently meets the railways and/or roadways. Without this efficient inland connection, a harbor may have excellent navigation access but limited functionality as a port.”
Additionally, the Port of Humboldt Bay Revitalization Plan of 2003 states: “… rail access may be restored with the reactivation of the North Coast Railroad Authority (NCRA) line, but the time-consuming and circuitous southbound routing—which must backtrack though other competing port areas—will remain a limitation on Humboldt Bay’s attractiveness for most rail-oriented marine cargoes to/from points beyond the Bay Area where superior rail connections are needed to compete.”
If your Commission approves this position and given the recent addition of two Bar Pilots, with annual salaries of $140,000 each, that would put the annual salary expenditure for Maritime Commerce at $380,000, and currently we are getting two ships in the Bay per month.
I find it very strange that the District has that much of a surplus annually, but cannot plan effectively to budget for the disposal of dredge spoils at the HOODS site, which has been mandated by the Coastal Commission for the next round of maintenance dredging in 6-7 years.
Given that the decision to hire Mr. Lacy is not a time-sensitive decision, I encourage the Harbor District Commissioners to table this item until a more detailed, and strategic, needs assessment for the Maritime Commerce Program is completed. This is a significant expenditure of taxpayer dollars that needs to be thoughtfully considered.
Sincerely,
Pete Nichols, Director
Humboldt Baykeeper
***
But it's ok for "Humboldt Baykeeper" to receive funding from the go-away money paid to the so-called "Ecological Rights Foundation/ERF" - to buy a new Boston Whaler, to set up an office in Old Town, Eureka setting the stage for their own threatened lawsuits to garner even more go-away money...
3.24.2007
Eye - Judge weighing Pacific Lumber's dismissal request
These are not in any particular order, but the dates may help with the chronology...
Note the "Timber Yes, Fraud No" buttons, that's Salzman and Shellenberger's work.
Then, remember that the leaked e-mails show that Stoen knows he has no case, had said that he had to give Ken Miller the bad news, but decided he might be able to make this argument fly...
***
Feature Stories – Week of August 4, 2003
Judge weighing Pacific Lumber's dismissal request
By Rebecca S. Bender Eye Reporter
A vocal crowd liberally sprinkled with "Timber Yes, Fraud No" buttons filled every seat in a Superior Courtroom Monday, July 28 for a hearing in the controversial lawsuit brought by District Attorney Paul Gallegos against Pacific Lumber Company (PL). The hearing covered PL's demurrer - a request for dismissal - and motion to bring sanctions against the DA. Oral arguments were made by PL attorney Ned Washburn and by Tim Stoen, Humboldt County Assistant District Attorney. District Attorney Paul Gallegos watched the proceedings from a side hallway.
During Washburn's initial statements, the audience reacted with groans and skeptical laughter to his comment that throughout the entire Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and Sustained Yield Permit (SYP) application process, "never once did Humboldt County, the District Attorney, or the people of Humboldt County object or offer any comments negatively" about the proposals.
At that, presiding Judge Christopher C. Wilson interrupted to politely remind the crowd that the importance of the case made it imperative that he-and they-hear all statements. Although at times murmurs of disagreement continued to ripple through the crowd, particularly during PL's arguments and rebuttals, it was contained within acceptably quiet limits.
PL's protection
PL based its demurrer arguments on the 30-day statutes of limitations for the EIR and SYP and the four-year statute of limitations for fair business practice cases.
Using the date of November 18, 1998, the day on which PL filed its allegedly false information, Washburn argued that the statutes of limitations on both grounds had clearly expired. "I don't believe there's any way that defect can be remedied," he said.
He further argued that Pacific Lumber was protected from prosecution by free speech laws. Because of this privilege, he argued, any information submitted by PL-even if that information is false-is absolutely privileged and exempt from liability.
A fraud case in an environmental context
Assistant DA Stoen's response was much lengthier, sprinkled with touches of humor much appreciated by the audience. He clarified that the DA is seeking civil penalties and injunctive relief against PL for fraud in its wrongful acts in pursuing the project, noting, "It is a fraud case, not an environmental case. It is a fraud case in an environmental context."
In response to PL's claims of expired statutes of limitation, Stoen pointed out that the four-year limit under the Unfair Business Practice Act begins when appreciable damage is done.
He argued that until February of 1999, PL had the opportunity to cease the damage it had caused by submitting false information, but that it failed to take advantage of the opportunity. As a result, the mark for appreciable damage is February 1999, and the DA's case, filed February 24, 2003, falls within the statute of limitations.
Stoen further argued that it was not appropriate to limit a fraud case merely because the case also involved the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), which specifies the 30-day limit on EIRs and SYPs.
'Right to lie?'
Stoen then presented a number of arguments against PL's eligibility for immunity, noting that PL's request for free speech protection is essentially promoting the idea that PL "has a right to lie."
Finally, he pointed out that PL's failure to submit its corrected data through appropriate channels at the California Department of Forestry (CDF) additionally contributed to its fraudulent behavior.
"The corrected Jordan Creek data to this day has never made its way into the administrative record," Stoen said. "This has very extensive, very deep repercussions."
Terse summaries
As the hearing moved on to arguments regarding sanctions, Judge Wilson held up a foot-thick stack of papers and folders and, assuring both parties that he had read their filings, urged them to keep their statements extremely brief.
Washburn took the judge's advice to heart and summed up PL's case bluntly, saying, "The DA's claims are just plain wrong and he knows it."
He took objection to Stoen's request for judicial notice of Judge John Golden's July 22 ruling, which found PL's harvest plan to be "fatally flawed," noting that the ruling was not yet final.
Stoen also kept his remarks short, thanking the judge for allowing him sufficient time to make his case and reiterating the request for judicial notice of Golden's ruling, commenting that it was purposeful in maintaining the lawsuit.
Decision in judge's hands
Judge Wilson did not make a ruling after the arguments, nor did he set a date for doing so. The law dictates, however, that a ruling must be made within 90 days of the hearing, setting October 27 as the final date for the judge to announce his findings.
--
Note the "Timber Yes, Fraud No" buttons, that's Salzman and Shellenberger's work.
Then, remember that the leaked e-mails show that Stoen knows he has no case, had said that he had to give Ken Miller the bad news, but decided he might be able to make this argument fly...
***
Feature Stories – Week of August 4, 2003
Judge weighing Pacific Lumber's dismissal request
By Rebecca S. Bender Eye Reporter
A vocal crowd liberally sprinkled with "Timber Yes, Fraud No" buttons filled every seat in a Superior Courtroom Monday, July 28 for a hearing in the controversial lawsuit brought by District Attorney Paul Gallegos against Pacific Lumber Company (PL). The hearing covered PL's demurrer - a request for dismissal - and motion to bring sanctions against the DA. Oral arguments were made by PL attorney Ned Washburn and by Tim Stoen, Humboldt County Assistant District Attorney. District Attorney Paul Gallegos watched the proceedings from a side hallway.
During Washburn's initial statements, the audience reacted with groans and skeptical laughter to his comment that throughout the entire Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and Sustained Yield Permit (SYP) application process, "never once did Humboldt County, the District Attorney, or the people of Humboldt County object or offer any comments negatively" about the proposals.
At that, presiding Judge Christopher C. Wilson interrupted to politely remind the crowd that the importance of the case made it imperative that he-and they-hear all statements. Although at times murmurs of disagreement continued to ripple through the crowd, particularly during PL's arguments and rebuttals, it was contained within acceptably quiet limits.
PL's protection
PL based its demurrer arguments on the 30-day statutes of limitations for the EIR and SYP and the four-year statute of limitations for fair business practice cases.
Using the date of November 18, 1998, the day on which PL filed its allegedly false information, Washburn argued that the statutes of limitations on both grounds had clearly expired. "I don't believe there's any way that defect can be remedied," he said.
He further argued that Pacific Lumber was protected from prosecution by free speech laws. Because of this privilege, he argued, any information submitted by PL-even if that information is false-is absolutely privileged and exempt from liability.
A fraud case in an environmental context
Assistant DA Stoen's response was much lengthier, sprinkled with touches of humor much appreciated by the audience. He clarified that the DA is seeking civil penalties and injunctive relief against PL for fraud in its wrongful acts in pursuing the project, noting, "It is a fraud case, not an environmental case. It is a fraud case in an environmental context."
In response to PL's claims of expired statutes of limitation, Stoen pointed out that the four-year limit under the Unfair Business Practice Act begins when appreciable damage is done.
He argued that until February of 1999, PL had the opportunity to cease the damage it had caused by submitting false information, but that it failed to take advantage of the opportunity. As a result, the mark for appreciable damage is February 1999, and the DA's case, filed February 24, 2003, falls within the statute of limitations.
Stoen further argued that it was not appropriate to limit a fraud case merely because the case also involved the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), which specifies the 30-day limit on EIRs and SYPs.
'Right to lie?'
Stoen then presented a number of arguments against PL's eligibility for immunity, noting that PL's request for free speech protection is essentially promoting the idea that PL "has a right to lie."
Finally, he pointed out that PL's failure to submit its corrected data through appropriate channels at the California Department of Forestry (CDF) additionally contributed to its fraudulent behavior.
"The corrected Jordan Creek data to this day has never made its way into the administrative record," Stoen said. "This has very extensive, very deep repercussions."
Terse summaries
As the hearing moved on to arguments regarding sanctions, Judge Wilson held up a foot-thick stack of papers and folders and, assuring both parties that he had read their filings, urged them to keep their statements extremely brief.
Washburn took the judge's advice to heart and summed up PL's case bluntly, saying, "The DA's claims are just plain wrong and he knows it."
He took objection to Stoen's request for judicial notice of Judge John Golden's July 22 ruling, which found PL's harvest plan to be "fatally flawed," noting that the ruling was not yet final.
Stoen also kept his remarks short, thanking the judge for allowing him sufficient time to make his case and reiterating the request for judicial notice of Golden's ruling, commenting that it was purposeful in maintaining the lawsuit.
Decision in judge's hands
Judge Wilson did not make a ruling after the arguments, nor did he set a date for doing so. The law dictates, however, that a ruling must be made within 90 days of the hearing, setting October 27 as the final date for the judge to announce his findings.
--
1.31.2007
Eye - Alleged Knifepoint robber set for trial.
What is the effect of losing your experienced prosecutors?
Interesting story in the Arcata Eye... your first chance to see Gallegos' new hire, Allan Dollison at work.
Alleged Knifepoint robber set for trial.
Kevin Hoover
Nov. 7, 2006
The case of James Phillip Geth of Eureka, arrested on multiple felony charges last month, is somewhat untidily proceeding to trial under the stewardship of the county's newest deputy district attorney.
Police say Geth, 22, went on a robbery spree the morning of Wednesday, October 18, beginning at a McKinleyville convenience store and ending up chest-deep in a north Arcata marsh.
Deputy DA Allan Dollison detailed the charges at a preliminary hearing last week before Judge Reinholtsen. The judge threw out some of the charges, but agreed to several and set an arraignment for Thursday, Nov. 16 at 2 p.m.
During the prelim, Dollison questioned Arcata Police officers about the eventful October morning. They related the following:
Sometime after 4 a.m., Geth allegedly held up a minimart in McKinleyville at knifepoint. Video surveillance tapes from the store, which were stolen, but later discovered in the car Geth was apparently using, show a similarly dressed individual performing the stickup.
Three hours later, police say, Geth held up the Gas 4 Less mini-mart at Alliance Road and Spear Avenue, then proceeded down Alliance Road to the Union 76 mini-mart.
There, the robber, wearing a big hat and with his face obscured, is seen on video surveillance tapes pointing a knife at the clerk and a customer. The two were forced into a back room at knifepoint, but the clerk fought the robber off with a stool. The suspect then fled in a car with the store's cash drawer just as APD Sgt. Bart Silvers responded to the scene.
A vehicle pursuit ensued, with APD officers breaking off the chase due to unsafe high speed. A short time later, the vehicle was spotted by a passing California Highway Patrol officer on West End Road and clocked at 87 mph in the 25 mph zone.
The suspect's vehicle ran off the road near West End Road at Aldergrove Road. Police checked the area for the suspect, and found Geth in a tussle in Ericson Court with Sacred Ground employee Scott Birk. Geth then ran off toward Aldergrove Pond with APD Sgt. Dave Brown in pursuit.
Brown followed Geth 75 yards into the marsh, wading at times chest-deep through muck, with the suspect refusing to halt. Eventually, another officer subdued Geth with a Taser and he was taken into custody.
Geth had recently been released form jail and was on probation for a drug conviction.
Nonetheless, Reinholtzen walked through the charges and found that Dollison hadn't adequately linked Geth with the McKinleyville robbery and threw out those charges. He also dismissed an evading arrest charge, since Dollison hadn't established that Police used required flashers or siren in the car chase.
Robbery charges for the two Arcata holdups, plus one count of false imprisonment were accepted by the judge.
Dollison, who has served mostly as a defense attorney rather than as a prosecutor during his career, said he would re-file the dismissed charges.
Geth's relatives listened somberly through the morning and afternoon hearings. During a break, his father, also named James Geth, offered the following statement:
We, his family, are working desperately to keep our child and loved one out of the criminal justice system. What we're trying to get him is qualified psychological hlep for his childhood trauma that few people seem to want to address."
He described his son, known as Jamie, as industrious but troubled. Young Geth, A Eurekan, held three jobs, the father said, and was a popular DJ known as "JP Jesus."
An expanded version of this story will be available at arcataeye.com.
I'll post the link as soon as it is available. Apologies to Kevin if there are any typos in this story, I transcribed it from the paper.
Follow-up:
James Geth pleads
More on Dollison:
State Bar Association Allan Lee Dollison
Like Gallegos, he did not go to an accredited Law School - Western State Univ was not an accredited Law School at the time Dollison attended. It has recently become accredited.
Like Stoen and Schwartz, this guy likes to run for office:
Senatorial candidate suspended in 2000
Smart Voter - Philosophy
Smart Voter, March 2, 2004 Election - Our Environment
He also ran for the California Assembly in 1994.
Discussion at watchpaul:
Tim Stoen, Jeffrey "yougofree.com" Schwartz, and now this...
What're we talkin' about here? Moral Turpitude
Interesting story in the Arcata Eye... your first chance to see Gallegos' new hire, Allan Dollison at work.
Alleged Knifepoint robber set for trial.
Kevin Hoover
Nov. 7, 2006
The case of James Phillip Geth of Eureka, arrested on multiple felony charges last month, is somewhat untidily proceeding to trial under the stewardship of the county's newest deputy district attorney.
Police say Geth, 22, went on a robbery spree the morning of Wednesday, October 18, beginning at a McKinleyville convenience store and ending up chest-deep in a north Arcata marsh.
Deputy DA Allan Dollison detailed the charges at a preliminary hearing last week before Judge Reinholtsen. The judge threw out some of the charges, but agreed to several and set an arraignment for Thursday, Nov. 16 at 2 p.m.
During the prelim, Dollison questioned Arcata Police officers about the eventful October morning. They related the following:
Sometime after 4 a.m., Geth allegedly held up a minimart in McKinleyville at knifepoint. Video surveillance tapes from the store, which were stolen, but later discovered in the car Geth was apparently using, show a similarly dressed individual performing the stickup.
Three hours later, police say, Geth held up the Gas 4 Less mini-mart at Alliance Road and Spear Avenue, then proceeded down Alliance Road to the Union 76 mini-mart.
There, the robber, wearing a big hat and with his face obscured, is seen on video surveillance tapes pointing a knife at the clerk and a customer. The two were forced into a back room at knifepoint, but the clerk fought the robber off with a stool. The suspect then fled in a car with the store's cash drawer just as APD Sgt. Bart Silvers responded to the scene.
A vehicle pursuit ensued, with APD officers breaking off the chase due to unsafe high speed. A short time later, the vehicle was spotted by a passing California Highway Patrol officer on West End Road and clocked at 87 mph in the 25 mph zone.
The suspect's vehicle ran off the road near West End Road at Aldergrove Road. Police checked the area for the suspect, and found Geth in a tussle in Ericson Court with Sacred Ground employee Scott Birk. Geth then ran off toward Aldergrove Pond with APD Sgt. Dave Brown in pursuit.
Brown followed Geth 75 yards into the marsh, wading at times chest-deep through muck, with the suspect refusing to halt. Eventually, another officer subdued Geth with a Taser and he was taken into custody.
Geth had recently been released form jail and was on probation for a drug conviction.
Nonetheless, Reinholtzen walked through the charges and found that Dollison hadn't adequately linked Geth with the McKinleyville robbery and threw out those charges. He also dismissed an evading arrest charge, since Dollison hadn't established that Police used required flashers or siren in the car chase.
Robbery charges for the two Arcata holdups, plus one count of false imprisonment were accepted by the judge.
Dollison, who has served mostly as a defense attorney rather than as a prosecutor during his career, said he would re-file the dismissed charges.
Geth's relatives listened somberly through the morning and afternoon hearings. During a break, his father, also named James Geth, offered the following statement:
We, his family, are working desperately to keep our child and loved one out of the criminal justice system. What we're trying to get him is qualified psychological hlep for his childhood trauma that few people seem to want to address."
He described his son, known as Jamie, as industrious but troubled. Young Geth, A Eurekan, held three jobs, the father said, and was a popular DJ known as "JP Jesus."
An expanded version of this story will be available at arcataeye.com.
I'll post the link as soon as it is available. Apologies to Kevin if there are any typos in this story, I transcribed it from the paper.
Follow-up:
James Geth pleads
More on Dollison:
State Bar Association Allan Lee Dollison
Like Gallegos, he did not go to an accredited Law School - Western State Univ was not an accredited Law School at the time Dollison attended. It has recently become accredited.
Like Stoen and Schwartz, this guy likes to run for office:
Senatorial candidate suspended in 2000
Smart Voter - Philosophy
Smart Voter, March 2, 2004 Election - Our Environment
He also ran for the California Assembly in 1994.
Discussion at watchpaul:
Tim Stoen, Jeffrey "yougofree.com" Schwartz, and now this...
What're we talkin' about here? Moral Turpitude
1.22.2007
Eye - Humboldt County Democratic Party corruption
Arcata Eye - Letters to the Editor – Jan. 16, 2007
Humboldt County Democratic Party corruption
I stated in a previous Letter to the Editor that although I felt that the leadership of the Humboldt County Democratic Central Committee had violated the party’s by-laws and at the very least had some very serious ethical issues in endorsing Dave Meserve, a Green Party candidate, over Mark Wheetley, a Democrat and that I would remain a Democrat. Well, being true to my word this past Wednesday, Jan. 10, I went with my check in hand along with my completed application to become an Associate Member of the party and attend the monthly meeting.
Upon entering the room where the meeting was to take place I submitted my check and application to Mr. Riggs, who then told me that it would be taken to the Executive Committee. Does this mean that not all Democrats are welcome to become Associate Members of the Central Committee? Is there a screening process? Time will tell.
Shortly after that, at 7:10 in the evening the meeting began, and considering that it was after the election and that there would be no elections till 2008, it was well attended. The agenda moved quickly and was for the most part routine.
However, there are some very interesting changes coming up as to how our Central Committee is going to operate our party on our behalf as Democrats. As a result, two questions come to mind upon reflecting on the meeting. Is it going to advance mainstream Democratic principles or continue to move farther to the extreme and continue to merge with Local Solutions and the Green Party? Or is it going to look to achieve a balance that welcomes and is inclusive of all Democrats?
The first item that gives rise to these questions was the discussion and motion to approve on the budget for 2007. This year the budget will be devoted to building the party’s infrastructure, offer training for those wishing to run for political office in 2008, and staff development. These are great places to put the party’s funds and could certainly aid in providing better and stronger candidates in the future. However, it could also be used to weed out those potential candidates that do not toe the line of the party as defined by the present leadership of the Central Committee as was evident in this past election when the leadership attempted to keep the party from endorsing Mark Wheetley for Arcata City Council.
The next item that should give some concern to us rank-and-file Democrats was the “draft” of the Questionnaire for Individuals Seeking to Run for Elected Office. On the surface, like the new direction for using the budget this appears to be a great tool to help a potential candidate reflect and sell assess his/her real desires to run for an elected office, and how much work that entails. It would be an excellent way for a non-judgmental “mentor” to assist a future candidate prepare for what lays ahead in running for office.
However, When the chair of the Campaign Services Committee, Connie Stewart, went through and explained this tool, it became clear that although it may be a tool for potential candidates to use to assess their own readiness to run for elected office, it began to sound a lot more like a screening device. Therefore it became apparent, especially when one looks over the questionnaire and listens to the explanation of its use, that it will be used to screen out Democrats that are not walking the Party line as defined by the present leadership.
If you took each of these items on their own merits and we had a more open leadership that better reflected all aspects of the party or at the very least governed that way, these two items would be a real move forward in the party becoming proactive in assisting future candidates and helping members of the party to grow.
Yet, we rank-and-file Democrats need to be very cautious! This last election clearly demonstrated that our Central Committee leadership suffers from some real flaws in their ethics and their own commitment to the party as demonstrated by their personal endorsement of a Green Party candidate over the officially endorsed Democratic candidate. In addition, our party for the most part appears to be the predominant political party in Humboldt County and thus maintains the greatest power. As a result, the leadership may be suffering from that old saying; “power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
Thus, given the change in the way the budget will be used and the new tool for “mentoring” potential candidates, will our Central Committee continue to slide into the mind-meld with Local Solutions and the Green Party and further alienating the rank-and-file Democrat? Time will tell and so will our involvement in the party to assure that it represents Democrats and does not try to impose or define for us a single definition of a Democrat or our party.
We need a guiding philosophy, not demagoguery. I fear that left to their own devices and unattended scrutiny by the majority of the party membership we will not long be the party of FDR, Truman, Kennedy or Clinton here in Humboldt County.
Sincerely,
Rick Greene
Still a Democrat and maybe even and Associate
Arcata
Humboldt County Democratic Party corruption
I stated in a previous Letter to the Editor that although I felt that the leadership of the Humboldt County Democratic Central Committee had violated the party’s by-laws and at the very least had some very serious ethical issues in endorsing Dave Meserve, a Green Party candidate, over Mark Wheetley, a Democrat and that I would remain a Democrat. Well, being true to my word this past Wednesday, Jan. 10, I went with my check in hand along with my completed application to become an Associate Member of the party and attend the monthly meeting.
Upon entering the room where the meeting was to take place I submitted my check and application to Mr. Riggs, who then told me that it would be taken to the Executive Committee. Does this mean that not all Democrats are welcome to become Associate Members of the Central Committee? Is there a screening process? Time will tell.
Shortly after that, at 7:10 in the evening the meeting began, and considering that it was after the election and that there would be no elections till 2008, it was well attended. The agenda moved quickly and was for the most part routine.
However, there are some very interesting changes coming up as to how our Central Committee is going to operate our party on our behalf as Democrats. As a result, two questions come to mind upon reflecting on the meeting. Is it going to advance mainstream Democratic principles or continue to move farther to the extreme and continue to merge with Local Solutions and the Green Party? Or is it going to look to achieve a balance that welcomes and is inclusive of all Democrats?
The first item that gives rise to these questions was the discussion and motion to approve on the budget for 2007. This year the budget will be devoted to building the party’s infrastructure, offer training for those wishing to run for political office in 2008, and staff development. These are great places to put the party’s funds and could certainly aid in providing better and stronger candidates in the future. However, it could also be used to weed out those potential candidates that do not toe the line of the party as defined by the present leadership of the Central Committee as was evident in this past election when the leadership attempted to keep the party from endorsing Mark Wheetley for Arcata City Council.
The next item that should give some concern to us rank-and-file Democrats was the “draft” of the Questionnaire for Individuals Seeking to Run for Elected Office. On the surface, like the new direction for using the budget this appears to be a great tool to help a potential candidate reflect and sell assess his/her real desires to run for an elected office, and how much work that entails. It would be an excellent way for a non-judgmental “mentor” to assist a future candidate prepare for what lays ahead in running for office.
However, When the chair of the Campaign Services Committee, Connie Stewart, went through and explained this tool, it became clear that although it may be a tool for potential candidates to use to assess their own readiness to run for elected office, it began to sound a lot more like a screening device. Therefore it became apparent, especially when one looks over the questionnaire and listens to the explanation of its use, that it will be used to screen out Democrats that are not walking the Party line as defined by the present leadership.
If you took each of these items on their own merits and we had a more open leadership that better reflected all aspects of the party or at the very least governed that way, these two items would be a real move forward in the party becoming proactive in assisting future candidates and helping members of the party to grow.
Yet, we rank-and-file Democrats need to be very cautious! This last election clearly demonstrated that our Central Committee leadership suffers from some real flaws in their ethics and their own commitment to the party as demonstrated by their personal endorsement of a Green Party candidate over the officially endorsed Democratic candidate. In addition, our party for the most part appears to be the predominant political party in Humboldt County and thus maintains the greatest power. As a result, the leadership may be suffering from that old saying; “power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
Thus, given the change in the way the budget will be used and the new tool for “mentoring” potential candidates, will our Central Committee continue to slide into the mind-meld with Local Solutions and the Green Party and further alienating the rank-and-file Democrat? Time will tell and so will our involvement in the party to assure that it represents Democrats and does not try to impose or define for us a single definition of a Democrat or our party.
We need a guiding philosophy, not demagoguery. I fear that left to their own devices and unattended scrutiny by the majority of the party membership we will not long be the party of FDR, Truman, Kennedy or Clinton here in Humboldt County.
Sincerely,
Rick Greene
Still a Democrat and maybe even and Associate
Arcata
1.01.2007
Eye - DA recall vote set for March 2
DA recall vote set for March 2
By Kevin L. Hoover, Eye Editor
Feature Stories – Week of November 24, 2003
The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors last week voted 3-0, with two supervisors absent, to approve the placement of the recall of District Attorney Paul Gallegos on the March 2, 2004 primary ballot.
That ballot will include incumbent Gallegos, plus one or more challengers who will be identified sometime in the next three weeks. The dealine for any challengers to file for candidacy is Dec. 18.
Adding the recall measure to the already-scheduled election averts a special election, which could have cost the county $150,000 or more.
Supervisors Bonnie Neely and Roger Rodoni were away attending a meeting of the California Association of Counties in the state capital.
The supervisors accepted the county Elections Office's certification that petitioners had submitted at least 11,138 valid signatures in support of the recall measure.
The recall item had been placed on the agenda’s consent calendar, but was pulled at the request of McKinleyville resident Daniel Pierce, who repeated widely publicized concerns about deceptive signature gathering practices on the part of hired petitioners.
Registrar of Voters Carolyn Crnich stated that claims of fraudulent practices have been passed along to the Secretary of State’s Elections Fraud Division, which, she said, is investigating the allegations.
The race is on
With the recall race now inevitable, the Friends of Paul Gallegos (FOPG) wasted no time airing a television advertisement portraying the district attorney as a husband and father committed to family values. The ad shows Gallegos relaxing at home with his wife and two children, thanking voters for placing him in office and reaffirming his commitment to community safety by aggressive prosecution of violent crime.
Gallegos’ opponents have cast him as a rabid environmentalist with a radical agenda who hounds the county’s largest private employer, Pacific Lumber, while plea bargaining away suspected violent criminals captured by police.
"The truth is, Paul is very concerned about children and their futures," said Patrick Riggs, spokesman for the Friends of Paul Gallegos.
Riggs said the TV ad is just the beginning. "We’ll be doing more and more outreach. We intend to use all avenues to reach out to the community with a variety of media and activities."
Dueling claims
With the race underway in earnest, the rhetoric has ramped up as well, with anti- and pro-Gallegos operatives exchanging allegations of impropriety.
Rick Brazeau of Arcata-based MTC Consulting, which manages media efforts for the Committee to Recall Paul Gallegos (CRPG), said his side doesn’t plan to go tit-for-tat with the FOPG. He said the CRPG hasn’t firmed up its advertising and outreach plans "at this early date.
Perhaps attempting to blunt accusations that CRPG is a tool of moneyed interests in the wake of recent disclosures of generous backing by the Pacific Lumber Company, Brazeau characterized the new Gallegos TV spots as costly. "He obviously has lots of money," Brazeau said.
Brazeau alleged that the pro-Gallegos Alliance for Ethical Business (AEB) and the Southern Humboldt-based Committee for Responsive Government are in violation of state election regulations for lack of financial disclosure.
He cited an opinion he said he’d obtained from the Fair Political Practices Commission, which states:
"Pursuant to section 84100, et seq. and 82031, a person must file campaign disclosure statements if the person makes expenditures of $1,000 or more for communications which expressly advocate the election or defeat of a candidate or the qualification, passage or defeat of a measure, or unambiguously urge a result in an election."
By not disclosing their finances, the pro-Gallegos groups illegally opposed the recall initiative, Brazeau said.
Balderdash, said Richard Salzman of AEB. "We don’t feel any need to respond to these allegations," Salzman said. "He should file a complaint with the FPPC if he’s concerned."
Salzman said his groups’ "express advocacy" - backing an elected official during a recall petition drive - is allowed until the date an election is set. Then, the rules change and disclosure is required. Now AEB will recede from the scene and the FOPG, the finances of which are detailed at right, will lead the charge to retain Gallegos.
Salzman said the pro-Gallegos forces are in scrupulous observance of state law, utilizing the advice of election law attorneys and getting opinions from the FPPC before acting. "We’re in absolute compliance with all aspects of FPPC regulations," Salzman insisted.
He turned Brazeau’s accusation around, questioning the lack of a required breakdown in advertising expenditures in a financial filing the CRPG made on Oct. 30.
He also got in a dig at Brazeau over his management of the petition drive. "I find it amusing to be lectured on FPPC regulations by a political consultant who claims not to have known that petitions he filed required direct supervision by circulators, as stated on each petition."
Salzman has been named campaign manager for the pro-Gallegos effort, which this week moves into new offices at 507 H St. in Eureka. A ribbon cutting and open house is set for Saturday, Dec. 6 during the monthly Arts Alive event.
Where Gallegos’ Friends’ funds come from
As required by law, the third quarterly statement of the Friends of Paul Gallegos declares all contributions and expenditures for the period from July 1 through September 30. A total of $8,467 received in monetary contributions during the three-month period also reflects the total received for the entire year to date. Nonmonetary contributions totaled $2,147, bringing the entire amount received for the quarter and the year to $10,614.
The following contributions were made during the third quarter of 2003:
Alan McCann-Sagles: $100
Beth Leebolt: $100
Bill Carlson, North Country Clinic Physician: $100
Brian Ferguson, Owner Ramone’s Bakery: $125
David Davis, MD, Physician: $100
Gary Abena, Owner Turquoise Mine: $100
Holly Hosterman, Holly Yashi, Inc. Jewelry Designer: $100
Ira Blatt, Attorney: $100
James Athing, Chiropractor: $200
Jared Rossman, Property Manager and Landlord: $2,000
Jody Brian, Graphic Designer: $100
John Norton, Handyman: $100, later returned in full
Joyce King, Retired: $200
Lewis Litzkey, Retired: $100
Lynne Wells, Actor: $100
Marge Baird, Retired: $100
Mark Noyes, McMurray & Sons Roofing Sales Rep.: $140
Marilyn Andrews, Retired: $200
Mark Sommer, Mainstream Media Project Executive Director: $100
Nicholas Frank, Investor and Innkeeper: $150
Patrick Riggs, Fortuna City Schools Teacher: $100
Paul Warner, Attorney: $125
Peter Nash, MD, Physician: $100
Rae Shiraishi, Black Oak Farm Farmer: $100
Richard Salzman, Artist’s Representative: $100
Ron Sinoway, Lawyer: $300
Randal Snodgrass, Land Consultant: $100
Sara Starr, Star Track Owner: $100
Susan Parks, Nurse Practitioner for Ted Humphry, MD: $100
William Bertain, Attorney: $140
Contributions of less than $100 accounted for an additional $2,987.
Miscellaneous increases to cash came from Mark Noyes’ $360 bid on cottage stay auction item, and from William Bertain’s $150 bid on family portrait auction item. An additional $150 increase to cash during this period came from unitemized increases under $100.
The following nonmonetary contributions were made during the third quarter:
Bob Goodman, Vintner: $160 in wine donation for fundraiser
Lewis Litzky, Retired: $300 in dinner for six auction item
HealthSPORT: $125 in three-month membership auction item
Nicholas Frank, Investor and Innkeeper: $360 in cottage overnight stay auction item
Hurricane Kate’s: $50 in dinner for two auction item
Elizabeth Mackay, Catchlight Photography Owner: $150 in family portrait auction item
American Hydroponics: $170 in "Baby Bloomer" auction item
Holly Yashi: $417 in jewelry auction item
Folie Douce: $150 in wine auction item
Unitemized nonmonetary contributions of less than $100 amounted to $325, bringing the total nonmonetary contributions for the quarter to $2,207. (The campaign disclosure statement erroneously reports this sum as $2,147 due to an error in addition.)
A loan of $900 was also received from Evergreen Development, Inc. and paid in full during the period.
Expenditures for the third quarter and year to date total $4,066.93.
Moore Methods, Inc. received $2,000 for polling and survey research. Artcraft Printers received $312.68 and the Peace Resource Project received $699.25 for campaign paraphernalia. The Humboldt County Democratic Central Committee received $600 for a table for 10 at the Democrat of the Year dinner. Eileen McGee was paid $170 for graphic design work for buttons, envelopes and posters and Greg Bourget received $285 for phone banks.
Unitemized payments under $100 totaled $161.35, bringing the complete cash expenditures to $4,228.28.
The group currently has no outstanding debt.
Subscribe for full stories!
By Kevin L. Hoover, Eye Editor
Feature Stories – Week of November 24, 2003
The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors last week voted 3-0, with two supervisors absent, to approve the placement of the recall of District Attorney Paul Gallegos on the March 2, 2004 primary ballot.
That ballot will include incumbent Gallegos, plus one or more challengers who will be identified sometime in the next three weeks. The dealine for any challengers to file for candidacy is Dec. 18.
Adding the recall measure to the already-scheduled election averts a special election, which could have cost the county $150,000 or more.
Supervisors Bonnie Neely and Roger Rodoni were away attending a meeting of the California Association of Counties in the state capital.
The supervisors accepted the county Elections Office's certification that petitioners had submitted at least 11,138 valid signatures in support of the recall measure.
The recall item had been placed on the agenda’s consent calendar, but was pulled at the request of McKinleyville resident Daniel Pierce, who repeated widely publicized concerns about deceptive signature gathering practices on the part of hired petitioners.
Registrar of Voters Carolyn Crnich stated that claims of fraudulent practices have been passed along to the Secretary of State’s Elections Fraud Division, which, she said, is investigating the allegations.
The race is on
With the recall race now inevitable, the Friends of Paul Gallegos (FOPG) wasted no time airing a television advertisement portraying the district attorney as a husband and father committed to family values. The ad shows Gallegos relaxing at home with his wife and two children, thanking voters for placing him in office and reaffirming his commitment to community safety by aggressive prosecution of violent crime.
Gallegos’ opponents have cast him as a rabid environmentalist with a radical agenda who hounds the county’s largest private employer, Pacific Lumber, while plea bargaining away suspected violent criminals captured by police.
"The truth is, Paul is very concerned about children and their futures," said Patrick Riggs, spokesman for the Friends of Paul Gallegos.
Riggs said the TV ad is just the beginning. "We’ll be doing more and more outreach. We intend to use all avenues to reach out to the community with a variety of media and activities."
Dueling claims
With the race underway in earnest, the rhetoric has ramped up as well, with anti- and pro-Gallegos operatives exchanging allegations of impropriety.
Rick Brazeau of Arcata-based MTC Consulting, which manages media efforts for the Committee to Recall Paul Gallegos (CRPG), said his side doesn’t plan to go tit-for-tat with the FOPG. He said the CRPG hasn’t firmed up its advertising and outreach plans "at this early date.
Perhaps attempting to blunt accusations that CRPG is a tool of moneyed interests in the wake of recent disclosures of generous backing by the Pacific Lumber Company, Brazeau characterized the new Gallegos TV spots as costly. "He obviously has lots of money," Brazeau said.
Brazeau alleged that the pro-Gallegos Alliance for Ethical Business (AEB) and the Southern Humboldt-based Committee for Responsive Government are in violation of state election regulations for lack of financial disclosure.
He cited an opinion he said he’d obtained from the Fair Political Practices Commission, which states:
"Pursuant to section 84100, et seq. and 82031, a person must file campaign disclosure statements if the person makes expenditures of $1,000 or more for communications which expressly advocate the election or defeat of a candidate or the qualification, passage or defeat of a measure, or unambiguously urge a result in an election."
By not disclosing their finances, the pro-Gallegos groups illegally opposed the recall initiative, Brazeau said.
Balderdash, said Richard Salzman of AEB. "We don’t feel any need to respond to these allegations," Salzman said. "He should file a complaint with the FPPC if he’s concerned."
Salzman said his groups’ "express advocacy" - backing an elected official during a recall petition drive - is allowed until the date an election is set. Then, the rules change and disclosure is required. Now AEB will recede from the scene and the FOPG, the finances of which are detailed at right, will lead the charge to retain Gallegos.
Salzman said the pro-Gallegos forces are in scrupulous observance of state law, utilizing the advice of election law attorneys and getting opinions from the FPPC before acting. "We’re in absolute compliance with all aspects of FPPC regulations," Salzman insisted.
He turned Brazeau’s accusation around, questioning the lack of a required breakdown in advertising expenditures in a financial filing the CRPG made on Oct. 30.
He also got in a dig at Brazeau over his management of the petition drive. "I find it amusing to be lectured on FPPC regulations by a political consultant who claims not to have known that petitions he filed required direct supervision by circulators, as stated on each petition."
Salzman has been named campaign manager for the pro-Gallegos effort, which this week moves into new offices at 507 H St. in Eureka. A ribbon cutting and open house is set for Saturday, Dec. 6 during the monthly Arts Alive event.
Where Gallegos’ Friends’ funds come from
As required by law, the third quarterly statement of the Friends of Paul Gallegos declares all contributions and expenditures for the period from July 1 through September 30. A total of $8,467 received in monetary contributions during the three-month period also reflects the total received for the entire year to date. Nonmonetary contributions totaled $2,147, bringing the entire amount received for the quarter and the year to $10,614.
The following contributions were made during the third quarter of 2003:
Alan McCann-Sagles: $100
Beth Leebolt: $100
Bill Carlson, North Country Clinic Physician: $100
Brian Ferguson, Owner Ramone’s Bakery: $125
David Davis, MD, Physician: $100
Gary Abena, Owner Turquoise Mine: $100
Holly Hosterman, Holly Yashi, Inc. Jewelry Designer: $100
Ira Blatt, Attorney: $100
James Athing, Chiropractor: $200
Jared Rossman, Property Manager and Landlord: $2,000
Jody Brian, Graphic Designer: $100
John Norton, Handyman: $100, later returned in full
Joyce King, Retired: $200
Lewis Litzkey, Retired: $100
Lynne Wells, Actor: $100
Marge Baird, Retired: $100
Mark Noyes, McMurray & Sons Roofing Sales Rep.: $140
Marilyn Andrews, Retired: $200
Mark Sommer, Mainstream Media Project Executive Director: $100
Nicholas Frank, Investor and Innkeeper: $150
Patrick Riggs, Fortuna City Schools Teacher: $100
Paul Warner, Attorney: $125
Peter Nash, MD, Physician: $100
Rae Shiraishi, Black Oak Farm Farmer: $100
Richard Salzman, Artist’s Representative: $100
Ron Sinoway, Lawyer: $300
Randal Snodgrass, Land Consultant: $100
Sara Starr, Star Track Owner: $100
Susan Parks, Nurse Practitioner for Ted Humphry, MD: $100
William Bertain, Attorney: $140
Contributions of less than $100 accounted for an additional $2,987.
Miscellaneous increases to cash came from Mark Noyes’ $360 bid on cottage stay auction item, and from William Bertain’s $150 bid on family portrait auction item. An additional $150 increase to cash during this period came from unitemized increases under $100.
The following nonmonetary contributions were made during the third quarter:
Bob Goodman, Vintner: $160 in wine donation for fundraiser
Lewis Litzky, Retired: $300 in dinner for six auction item
HealthSPORT: $125 in three-month membership auction item
Nicholas Frank, Investor and Innkeeper: $360 in cottage overnight stay auction item
Hurricane Kate’s: $50 in dinner for two auction item
Elizabeth Mackay, Catchlight Photography Owner: $150 in family portrait auction item
American Hydroponics: $170 in "Baby Bloomer" auction item
Holly Yashi: $417 in jewelry auction item
Folie Douce: $150 in wine auction item
Unitemized nonmonetary contributions of less than $100 amounted to $325, bringing the total nonmonetary contributions for the quarter to $2,207. (The campaign disclosure statement erroneously reports this sum as $2,147 due to an error in addition.)
A loan of $900 was also received from Evergreen Development, Inc. and paid in full during the period.
Expenditures for the third quarter and year to date total $4,066.93.
Moore Methods, Inc. received $2,000 for polling and survey research. Artcraft Printers received $312.68 and the Peace Resource Project received $699.25 for campaign paraphernalia. The Humboldt County Democratic Central Committee received $600 for a table for 10 at the Democrat of the Year dinner. Eileen McGee was paid $170 for graphic design work for buttons, envelopes and posters and Greg Bourget received $285 for phone banks.
Unitemized payments under $100 totaled $161.35, bringing the complete cash expenditures to $4,228.28.
The group currently has no outstanding debt.
Subscribe for full stories!
Eye - Schectman downplays past legal problems
In this article, it was revealed that Attorney Steve Schectman, who ran as the shill in the Recall election, stiffed his own guys, the little Earth First!ers who were working for him on two high profile PL related cases.
Schectman downplays past legal problems
Arcata Eye
By Kevin L. Hoover & Rebecca S. Bender, Eye Staff
In August, 2001 and January, 2002, Arcata civil attorney and District Attorney candidate Steve Schectman was on the receiving end of $42,655 in state-dispensed justice over a dispute with four former employees.
The Labor Commission determined that the four were employees rather than independent contractors, and awarded them back wages, interest and penalties.
The story has been bruited in legal and journalistic circles for months, but details first emerged in last Thursday’s Times-Standard.
The labor ruling hinged upon hundreds of hours of work done by four apprentice legal workers between 1998 and 2001.
Angela Wartes, Steven Christianson, Jamie Romeo and Stephanie Bennett, activists for environmental groups including EarthFirst!, performed research and office tasks as part of an apprenticeship program that satisfied California State Bar requirements.
Much of the work done during this time involved two high-profile cases against Pacific Lumber Co. One centered on David "Gypsy" Chain, the forest activist who was killed by a felled tree in 1998, and another for residents of Stafford, whose community was destroyed by a landslide in 1996.
Schectman contended that the individuals had worked as independent contractors and that their agreement stipulated a $1,000 per month payment, based on a 30-hour work week, 18 hours of which were unpaid. Schectman said that these unpaid hours were bartered for legal experience.
However, the Labor Commission found that Wartes, Christianson, Romeo and Bennett qualified as employees. The rulings stated that the agreements between Schectman and the four workers established specific assignments and client contacts for each apprentice and set out a monthly salary for a particular amount of time. It also noted that Schectman had provided computers, office space, equipment and telephone extensions for each worker.
According to Labor Commissioners office records, Romeo, who, at $23,376.85 garnered the largest of the four settlements, signed on with Schectman in October, 1998 as he took up the Chain case. He suggested she become an apprentice and enroll in a law study program. There was no discussion of employment status or pay, though Schectman apparently said he’d be able to offer compensation in the future.
And he did, beginning with a $1,000 per month salary in July, 1999. That changed to $20 per hour a year later. For the duration of her employment, Romeo’s duties included research, scheduling, preparing memoranda and legal briefs, filing, answering phones, taking out garbage and more.
The ruling in Romeo’s case observed that the assignments she was given were related to Schectman’s business and provided an "integral and crucial" part of his business. It also notes that Schectman utilized no other employee labor during the period of the complaint, instead relying on apprentices and volunteers for all support work.
Bennett received just over $9,000; Wartes received just over $6,000; and Christianson received just over $5,000, nearly half of which was due to "willful" failure by Schectman to pay his wages in the designated time period after his discharge.
Reaction
Schectman maintains that the information is "old news" and irrelevant to the recall election. "It’s totally unrelated to the recall and my candidacy," he said.
He said any inference that he doesn’t understand labor law or is not fair to workers is inappropriate. "I understand labor law; I’ve worked most of my career in support of labor," he said.
"There were four people out of the 12 or so that worked in the office at the time that felt they wanted more money and that’s what this is all about," Schectman said.
Deputy District Attorney Worth Dikeman, the DA candidate Schectman has relentlessly skewered as unfamiliar with the law, among other alleged deficiencies, didn’t take the opportunity to hoist his antagonist on his own petard. Instead, Dikeman fell back on a fanciful fable, telling the story of a person who’d sued a bakery when a barrel of flour fell on his head. By way of dashing the defendant’s denials of responsibility, Dikeman said, the judge in the flour-barrel case deployed a Latin phrase applicable to Schectman’s labor dispute: "Res ipsa loquitor - ‘The thing speaks for itself.’"
Police back Dikeman
Last Friday, the Fortuna Police Employees’ Association became the latest police group to endorse Dikeman. The association issued a statement saying members "proudly support" Dikeman and "encourage him wholeheartedly on in his endeavors."
Sandi Bertain, president of the Fortuna Police Employees Association, remarked, "The FPEA strongly believes that because of Worth’s lengthy work experience, his commitment to a positive working relationship between law enforcement and the District Attorney’s Office, and his overall dedication to the justice system, that he would be an excellent candidate for the position of District Attorney."
Schectman downplays past legal problems
Arcata Eye
By Kevin L. Hoover & Rebecca S. Bender, Eye Staff
In August, 2001 and January, 2002, Arcata civil attorney and District Attorney candidate Steve Schectman was on the receiving end of $42,655 in state-dispensed justice over a dispute with four former employees.
The Labor Commission determined that the four were employees rather than independent contractors, and awarded them back wages, interest and penalties.
The story has been bruited in legal and journalistic circles for months, but details first emerged in last Thursday’s Times-Standard.
The labor ruling hinged upon hundreds of hours of work done by four apprentice legal workers between 1998 and 2001.
Angela Wartes, Steven Christianson, Jamie Romeo and Stephanie Bennett, activists for environmental groups including EarthFirst!, performed research and office tasks as part of an apprenticeship program that satisfied California State Bar requirements.
Much of the work done during this time involved two high-profile cases against Pacific Lumber Co. One centered on David "Gypsy" Chain, the forest activist who was killed by a felled tree in 1998, and another for residents of Stafford, whose community was destroyed by a landslide in 1996.
Schectman contended that the individuals had worked as independent contractors and that their agreement stipulated a $1,000 per month payment, based on a 30-hour work week, 18 hours of which were unpaid. Schectman said that these unpaid hours were bartered for legal experience.
However, the Labor Commission found that Wartes, Christianson, Romeo and Bennett qualified as employees. The rulings stated that the agreements between Schectman and the four workers established specific assignments and client contacts for each apprentice and set out a monthly salary for a particular amount of time. It also noted that Schectman had provided computers, office space, equipment and telephone extensions for each worker.
According to Labor Commissioners office records, Romeo, who, at $23,376.85 garnered the largest of the four settlements, signed on with Schectman in October, 1998 as he took up the Chain case. He suggested she become an apprentice and enroll in a law study program. There was no discussion of employment status or pay, though Schectman apparently said he’d be able to offer compensation in the future.
And he did, beginning with a $1,000 per month salary in July, 1999. That changed to $20 per hour a year later. For the duration of her employment, Romeo’s duties included research, scheduling, preparing memoranda and legal briefs, filing, answering phones, taking out garbage and more.
The ruling in Romeo’s case observed that the assignments she was given were related to Schectman’s business and provided an "integral and crucial" part of his business. It also notes that Schectman utilized no other employee labor during the period of the complaint, instead relying on apprentices and volunteers for all support work.
Bennett received just over $9,000; Wartes received just over $6,000; and Christianson received just over $5,000, nearly half of which was due to "willful" failure by Schectman to pay his wages in the designated time period after his discharge.
Reaction
Schectman maintains that the information is "old news" and irrelevant to the recall election. "It’s totally unrelated to the recall and my candidacy," he said.
He said any inference that he doesn’t understand labor law or is not fair to workers is inappropriate. "I understand labor law; I’ve worked most of my career in support of labor," he said.
"There were four people out of the 12 or so that worked in the office at the time that felt they wanted more money and that’s what this is all about," Schectman said.
Deputy District Attorney Worth Dikeman, the DA candidate Schectman has relentlessly skewered as unfamiliar with the law, among other alleged deficiencies, didn’t take the opportunity to hoist his antagonist on his own petard. Instead, Dikeman fell back on a fanciful fable, telling the story of a person who’d sued a bakery when a barrel of flour fell on his head. By way of dashing the defendant’s denials of responsibility, Dikeman said, the judge in the flour-barrel case deployed a Latin phrase applicable to Schectman’s labor dispute: "Res ipsa loquitor - ‘The thing speaks for itself.’"
Police back Dikeman
Last Friday, the Fortuna Police Employees’ Association became the latest police group to endorse Dikeman. The association issued a statement saying members "proudly support" Dikeman and "encourage him wholeheartedly on in his endeavors."
Sandi Bertain, president of the Fortuna Police Employees Association, remarked, "The FPEA strongly believes that because of Worth’s lengthy work experience, his commitment to a positive working relationship between law enforcement and the District Attorney’s Office, and his overall dedication to the justice system, that he would be an excellent candidate for the position of District Attorney."
11.26.2006
EYE - Humboldt Dems endorse an incumbent Dem for Arcata council
This story in the Arcata Eye is really incredible, as it also appears to expose more behind the scenes machinations, and shows what can happen when one person speaks up and puts a stop to it.
Humboldt Dems endorse an incumbent Dem for Arcata council - despite Green opponent's lobbying
Oct. 17, 2006
Kevin L. Hoover Eye Editor
EUREKA – The Humboldt County Democratic Central Committee (HCDCC) last week endorsed Arcata City Councilmember Mark Wheetley’s reelection bid.
The endorsement came after of Arcata resident Rick Greene raised questions about the committee’s endorsement of a single Democrat, Alex Stillman, in September. Greene and other Democrats had expressed concern after City Council candidate Dave Meserve, a Green Party member, addressed the HCDCC in June asking that it endorse a single candidate for the Arcata council. The committee subsequently made the sole Stillman endorsement.
Suspicions of some sort of unseemly arrangement were fueled by the subsequent endorsement of Meserve by activist group Local Solutions Political Action Committee, of which HCDCC Chair Patrick Riggs is a member.
Appearing at last week’s HCDCC meeting, Greene questioned why a well-regarded incumbent Democrat wasn’t endorsed by the committee.
“The simple reason is that no member of the committee made a motion,” Riggs told Greene.
Greene responded by citing Wheetley’s endorsement by Supervisor John Woolley, State Sen. Wes Chesbro and Rep. Mike Thompson. “I find it rather odd that my Democratic Commitee, which endorsed Mark in March of 2005. has not come up for consideration.” Greene said. He further questioned why “members of this commitee” – referring to Riggs – were working for the election of non-Democrats. “I believe if you’re a Democrat, you’re a Democrat, and you work for your party’s candidate,” Greene said.
Sheryl Esparza, a voting member representing Arcata, then made the motion to endorse Wheetley.
“Mark has an extensive background in natural resources, is a critical thinker, a consensus builder and a family man,” she said. “He’s a progressive Democrat with a common sense approach to taking care of business in Arcata and has done a good job on the council thus far. We deserve to have him working for Arcata.”
Barbara Carolan, also representing Arcata, seconded the motion. She said failure to endorse Wheeetley would be “a tacit endorsement of Mr. Meserve.”
Humboldt County Supervisor John Woolley, though not a committeemember, was allowed to speak in favor of the endorsement.
Milt Boyd spoke “reluctantly” against Wheetley’s endorsement, saying HCDCC by-laws prevent endorsement of only two candidates. He said it would be “somewhat divisive” to endorse Wheetley since Michael Winkler, whom he supports, is a “strong candidate.”
After more discussion, Wheetley was endorsed by voice vote without any nays.
“I was disappointed that the Dems endorsed Mark Wheetley, but I’m proud to have the endorsements of Patrick Riggs and Chris Beresford and many other Democrats,” Meserve later said.
Riggs didn’t respond to requests for comment.
***
I wonder why.
***
Also in the Eye Related story:
The first Arcata public opinion poll regarding Arcata City Council Candidates and other local issues and institutions has been conducted
...Arcata Opinion Poll – Oct. 17, 2006
UPDATE:
Dem leaders' backing of Green candidate brings complaint
Humboldt Dems endorse an incumbent Dem for Arcata council - despite Green opponent's lobbying
Oct. 17, 2006
Kevin L. Hoover Eye Editor
EUREKA – The Humboldt County Democratic Central Committee (HCDCC) last week endorsed Arcata City Councilmember Mark Wheetley’s reelection bid.
The endorsement came after of Arcata resident Rick Greene raised questions about the committee’s endorsement of a single Democrat, Alex Stillman, in September. Greene and other Democrats had expressed concern after City Council candidate Dave Meserve, a Green Party member, addressed the HCDCC in June asking that it endorse a single candidate for the Arcata council. The committee subsequently made the sole Stillman endorsement.
Suspicions of some sort of unseemly arrangement were fueled by the subsequent endorsement of Meserve by activist group Local Solutions Political Action Committee, of which HCDCC Chair Patrick Riggs is a member.
Appearing at last week’s HCDCC meeting, Greene questioned why a well-regarded incumbent Democrat wasn’t endorsed by the committee.
“The simple reason is that no member of the committee made a motion,” Riggs told Greene.
Greene responded by citing Wheetley’s endorsement by Supervisor John Woolley, State Sen. Wes Chesbro and Rep. Mike Thompson. “I find it rather odd that my Democratic Commitee, which endorsed Mark in March of 2005. has not come up for consideration.” Greene said. He further questioned why “members of this commitee” – referring to Riggs – were working for the election of non-Democrats. “I believe if you’re a Democrat, you’re a Democrat, and you work for your party’s candidate,” Greene said.
Sheryl Esparza, a voting member representing Arcata, then made the motion to endorse Wheetley.
“Mark has an extensive background in natural resources, is a critical thinker, a consensus builder and a family man,” she said. “He’s a progressive Democrat with a common sense approach to taking care of business in Arcata and has done a good job on the council thus far. We deserve to have him working for Arcata.”
Barbara Carolan, also representing Arcata, seconded the motion. She said failure to endorse Wheeetley would be “a tacit endorsement of Mr. Meserve.”
Humboldt County Supervisor John Woolley, though not a committeemember, was allowed to speak in favor of the endorsement.
Milt Boyd spoke “reluctantly” against Wheetley’s endorsement, saying HCDCC by-laws prevent endorsement of only two candidates. He said it would be “somewhat divisive” to endorse Wheetley since Michael Winkler, whom he supports, is a “strong candidate.”
After more discussion, Wheetley was endorsed by voice vote without any nays.
“I was disappointed that the Dems endorsed Mark Wheetley, but I’m proud to have the endorsements of Patrick Riggs and Chris Beresford and many other Democrats,” Meserve later said.
Riggs didn’t respond to requests for comment.
***
I wonder why.
***
Also in the Eye Related story:
The first Arcata public opinion poll regarding Arcata City Council Candidates and other local issues and institutions has been conducted
...Arcata Opinion Poll – Oct. 17, 2006
UPDATE:
Dem leaders' backing of Green candidate brings complaint
10.22.2006
Arcata Eye - Sources and six-packs - August 4, 2003
The Arcata Eye
Opinions: August 4, 2003
Sources and six-packs
By Kevin L. Hoover
Two words sum up Roger Rodoni's reaction to his financial arrangements with Pacific Lumber being outed:
Caught.
Flailing.
Voters may rightly be concerned that their representative apparently suffers from reading and comprehension problems, since he claims the Fair Political Practices Commission has cleared him of inappropriate conduct. Let's hope he pays better attention to county business than he has the FPPC correspondence.
But if Rog needs help with the first two of the "three Rs," he's sure doing all right with the third, given his highly favorable financial relationship with a major corporation whose local issues he votes on.
With regard to former Eye reporter Daniel Mintz's much-publicized ethical objections, a few observations:
News tips fly in from all over, their origins sometimes unknown and usually unimportant as long as any resulting news story is independently verified and presented with full context. There is an obvious problem with disclosing confidential sources, as Daniel purports to have done.
In fact, I first heard of Daniel's ethical crusade on receiving calls from another local newspaper and radio station about the matter. He went to them, naming an individual as our confidential source, before raising any objections with his editor.
When he did, the next day, he told me that reporting on the unsolicited check and our news tipsters should be "a group decision" by himself, me and other local editors, and suggested that I hire his roommate to write the story. Presumably, I would be paying the roommate to betray our sources. I declined.
There are people in our office and on the phone virtually every week speaking off the record and confidentially about stuff, and that's the way it's going to be. The public is entitled to have a comfort level when communicating privately with us, and now, once again, they may be secure in the knowledge that no one here is going to phone another newspaper and rat them out.
What if Mayor Bob Ornelas was a source for the Rodoni story? I wonder what Daniel would have done if Deep Throat had approached him with Watergate tips. Written a story naming the turncoat in the Nixon administration? Woodward and Bernstein favored a different approach.
If Rodoni discovers evidence that Ornelas rents 9,000 acres for $350 a month from a corporation who's issues he votes on in Arcata, I hope he forwards the info to us so we can verify it and do a story on it. Whether or not something as scandalous as a conflict of interest on that scale proved true - as it did with Roger - we'd never divulge any source's identity, as it would be irrelevant.
Anyone who does this job for more than two days swiftly realizes that legions of politicians, employees, businesspeople and others are ready, willing and sometimes even able to point out alleged misfeasances by their rivals. Our job is to check this stuff out, and, if there's anything to it and it matters, tell the readers. That's what we did.
Daniel has gotten a lot of mileage from saying he resigned from the Eye over principle, but the fact is, the day after I found out he'd gone telling tales of what he thought happened here in the newsroom, his key no longer fit the door. No news organization can function with people around who think it's OK to shop its sources around to other news outlets.
Here's a twist: Being the careful journalist that he is, Hank Sims ran the draft Rodoni story by Daniel for pre-publication feedback as to whether it was, to use a recently discredited phrase, fair and balanced. Daniel voiced no concerns to anyone at the time over sources or torn-up checks - other than to say Hank did the right thing - and Hank later thanked him for the consultation with a six-pack of microbrew, which Daniel accepted.
Anyway, I think Jeff Knapp's suggestion that we write about it when people send in provocative items is a worthy one, except that we get all kinds of things in the mail, from taunts to threats to food to checks, and I reserve the right not to glorify unwanted submissions with a news story.
So, long story short, the Eye didn't take any outside money, we didn't disclose any confidential sources, we offered our readers a first-class investigative piece about an elected official and the only person who took any foamy gratuity from the whole deal is Roger Rodoni's favorite reporter.
###
Follow up - it is important to note that after all the attacks, after the filing of FPPC complaints, Roger Rodoni was cleared by the FPPC. Hank Sims became the editor of the North Coast Journal. Mintz's stories once again appear in the EYE, as well as the McKinleyville Press and Garberville's Independent.
2/17/05 Northcoast Journal RODONI CLEARED:
Opinions: August 4, 2003
Sources and six-packs
By Kevin L. Hoover
Two words sum up Roger Rodoni's reaction to his financial arrangements with Pacific Lumber being outed:
Caught.
Flailing.
Voters may rightly be concerned that their representative apparently suffers from reading and comprehension problems, since he claims the Fair Political Practices Commission has cleared him of inappropriate conduct. Let's hope he pays better attention to county business than he has the FPPC correspondence.
But if Rog needs help with the first two of the "three Rs," he's sure doing all right with the third, given his highly favorable financial relationship with a major corporation whose local issues he votes on.
With regard to former Eye reporter Daniel Mintz's much-publicized ethical objections, a few observations:
News tips fly in from all over, their origins sometimes unknown and usually unimportant as long as any resulting news story is independently verified and presented with full context. There is an obvious problem with disclosing confidential sources, as Daniel purports to have done.
In fact, I first heard of Daniel's ethical crusade on receiving calls from another local newspaper and radio station about the matter. He went to them, naming an individual as our confidential source, before raising any objections with his editor.
When he did, the next day, he told me that reporting on the unsolicited check and our news tipsters should be "a group decision" by himself, me and other local editors, and suggested that I hire his roommate to write the story. Presumably, I would be paying the roommate to betray our sources. I declined.
There are people in our office and on the phone virtually every week speaking off the record and confidentially about stuff, and that's the way it's going to be. The public is entitled to have a comfort level when communicating privately with us, and now, once again, they may be secure in the knowledge that no one here is going to phone another newspaper and rat them out.
What if Mayor Bob Ornelas was a source for the Rodoni story? I wonder what Daniel would have done if Deep Throat had approached him with Watergate tips. Written a story naming the turncoat in the Nixon administration? Woodward and Bernstein favored a different approach.
If Rodoni discovers evidence that Ornelas rents 9,000 acres for $350 a month from a corporation who's issues he votes on in Arcata, I hope he forwards the info to us so we can verify it and do a story on it. Whether or not something as scandalous as a conflict of interest on that scale proved true - as it did with Roger - we'd never divulge any source's identity, as it would be irrelevant.
Anyone who does this job for more than two days swiftly realizes that legions of politicians, employees, businesspeople and others are ready, willing and sometimes even able to point out alleged misfeasances by their rivals. Our job is to check this stuff out, and, if there's anything to it and it matters, tell the readers. That's what we did.
Daniel has gotten a lot of mileage from saying he resigned from the Eye over principle, but the fact is, the day after I found out he'd gone telling tales of what he thought happened here in the newsroom, his key no longer fit the door. No news organization can function with people around who think it's OK to shop its sources around to other news outlets.
Here's a twist: Being the careful journalist that he is, Hank Sims ran the draft Rodoni story by Daniel for pre-publication feedback as to whether it was, to use a recently discredited phrase, fair and balanced. Daniel voiced no concerns to anyone at the time over sources or torn-up checks - other than to say Hank did the right thing - and Hank later thanked him for the consultation with a six-pack of microbrew, which Daniel accepted.
Anyway, I think Jeff Knapp's suggestion that we write about it when people send in provocative items is a worthy one, except that we get all kinds of things in the mail, from taunts to threats to food to checks, and I reserve the right not to glorify unwanted submissions with a news story.
So, long story short, the Eye didn't take any outside money, we didn't disclose any confidential sources, we offered our readers a first-class investigative piece about an elected official and the only person who took any foamy gratuity from the whole deal is Roger Rodoni's favorite reporter.
###
Follow up - it is important to note that after all the attacks, after the filing of FPPC complaints, Roger Rodoni was cleared by the FPPC. Hank Sims became the editor of the North Coast Journal. Mintz's stories once again appear in the EYE, as well as the McKinleyville Press and Garberville's Independent.
2/17/05 Northcoast Journal RODONI CLEARED:
Arcata Eye - Speaking of checks, Roger, check your facts - August 4, 2003
The Arcata Eye
http://www.arcataeye.com/opinion/030804opinion02.shtml
Opinions: August 4, 2003
Speaking of checks, Roger, check your facts
By Hank Sims
It is a rare journalist who enjoys being the subject of a story, especially when the story has a whiff of scandal about it. I am grateful, though, that both local reporters who have written about l'affaire Check-For-$1,000, from the Times-Standard and the North Coast Journal, emphasized that I did not solicit or accept outside payment for an article I did for the Eye and other local newspapers.
Equally, and judging from his public comments, I am grateful that Second District Supervisor Roger Rodoni, whose business relationship with Pacific Lumber was the subject of that article ("A SoHum super's sweet setup with Pacific Lumber," June 9), likewise accepts the fact that I didn't take any outside money for doing it.
But in a letter printed in the July 31 edition of the North Coast Journal, Rodoni has challenged - for the first time, to my knowledge - the factual accuracy of the article. Why this comes nearly two months after the story ran, and why it was not sent to the papers that carried the story, is something of a mystery. Rodoni's critique of the article is unfounded in at least three particulars, though, and readers of the Eye deserve to hear why.
1. Rodoni charges that I "grossly exaggerated" the size of the home and the acreage he leases from Pacific Lumber at Rainbow Ranch. But both are matters of public record.
In regards to the house, records in the Humboldt County assessor's office say that it is 1,872 square feet in size (1,296 square feet on the first floor, 576 on the second), with three bedrooms and one bathroom and that it was built in 1959. I suppose it is possible that this house has been damaged or downsized over the years and that Pacific Lumber has not notified the tax collector. But even if that is so, my reporting was not a "gross exaggeration" but a good-faith attempt to get the facts - and I will happily correct this or any other piece of my story if given proof that it is inaccurate.
It's a bit more puzzling to hear Rodoni challenge the figure I reported for the total acreage included in his lease of Rainbow Ranch. In fact, when I asked him, before the story came out, if the number I had got from comparing his lease to the assessor's maps - around 9,000 acres - was accurate, he told me that it "sounded about right." Perhaps his current objection is that that figure includes timberland as well as pasture, which he uses for grazing cattle. If so, I would remind him that I included in my story his own estimate of the amount of grassland at the ranch - around 3,000 acres. In any case, the lease details which county parcels are included in the property and the county assessor's maps give the size of those parcels. There really is very little room for dispute.
2. The Fair Political Practices Commission is indeed "the law," as Rodoni writes, and it is indeed for the FPPC alone to determine whether he contravened the Political Reform Act when he voted against the district attorney's request to hire outside counsel for the county's suit against Pacific Lumber.
I stated so explicitly in my article.
Rodoni is wrong, though, when he states that the FPPC has cleared him of any conflict of interest. In the first letter he received from the commission, the FPPC's Advice Division said that he had no conflict of interest - provided he pays "full and adequate consideration for the lease of the property."
The second letter from the Advice Division, which Rodoni received in late May, long after the vote had been called, was in response to Rodoni's request for help in determining what "fair and adequate consideration" would be. The letter said that the FPPC did not give advice on actions already taken. It said, furthermore, that the FPPC's Enforcement Division - which is charged with investigating past actions - was currently studying "the same or very similar issues."
I have no reason to doubt that Rodoni has honestly attempted to ascertain his rights and duties as an elected official in regards to this issue. It is to his credit that he made an effort to seek counsel about figuring out what a fair market value for the lease would be. However, it is incorrect for him to suggest that the FPPC has exonerated him - that is for the FPPC's Enforcement Division to determine, and as yet they have not acted one way or the other.
3. Rodoni writes that "there are cheaper per-animal unit rents in this county," which I do not dispute, and suggests that the North Coast Journal contact an HSU range management professor "for enlightenment as to how fees are charged for ranch conditions and cow pasture."
The thrust of Rodoni's argument here seems to be that the fair worth of his lease of Rainbow Ranch should be based solely on its ability to support livestock. This seems disingenuous. The ranch is more than a place for Rodoni to park his cattle - as the Journal has reported, it is also a second home and a place to hunt pig, among other things. If he utilizes the ranch for these purposes, it is only reasonable to take these purposes into account when figuring its value.
Finally, it is unfortunate that Rodoni chooses to characterize my story as a "hit piece," thereby personalizing what should not be taken personally. I have no particular animus against Rodoni's politics, and I may as well say for the record that I thoroughly enjoyed the hour or so he and I spent talking about this and many other matters. But just as the public rightly frowns on reporters who take payola, so it should frown on those who let their affections interfere with their job.
Hank Sims is a rare journalist - and now works for the North Coast Journal.
******
Follow up - it is important to note that after all the attacks, after the filing of FPPC complaints, Roger Rodoni was cleared by the FPPC. (Hank Sims also became the editor of the North Coast Journal.)
2/17/05 North Coast Journal RODONI CLEARED:
http://www.arcataeye.com/opinion/030804opinion02.shtml
Opinions: August 4, 2003
Speaking of checks, Roger, check your facts
By Hank Sims
It is a rare journalist who enjoys being the subject of a story, especially when the story has a whiff of scandal about it. I am grateful, though, that both local reporters who have written about l'affaire Check-For-$1,000, from the Times-Standard and the North Coast Journal, emphasized that I did not solicit or accept outside payment for an article I did for the Eye and other local newspapers.
Equally, and judging from his public comments, I am grateful that Second District Supervisor Roger Rodoni, whose business relationship with Pacific Lumber was the subject of that article ("A SoHum super's sweet setup with Pacific Lumber," June 9), likewise accepts the fact that I didn't take any outside money for doing it.
But in a letter printed in the July 31 edition of the North Coast Journal, Rodoni has challenged - for the first time, to my knowledge - the factual accuracy of the article. Why this comes nearly two months after the story ran, and why it was not sent to the papers that carried the story, is something of a mystery. Rodoni's critique of the article is unfounded in at least three particulars, though, and readers of the Eye deserve to hear why.
1. Rodoni charges that I "grossly exaggerated" the size of the home and the acreage he leases from Pacific Lumber at Rainbow Ranch. But both are matters of public record.
In regards to the house, records in the Humboldt County assessor's office say that it is 1,872 square feet in size (1,296 square feet on the first floor, 576 on the second), with three bedrooms and one bathroom and that it was built in 1959. I suppose it is possible that this house has been damaged or downsized over the years and that Pacific Lumber has not notified the tax collector. But even if that is so, my reporting was not a "gross exaggeration" but a good-faith attempt to get the facts - and I will happily correct this or any other piece of my story if given proof that it is inaccurate.
It's a bit more puzzling to hear Rodoni challenge the figure I reported for the total acreage included in his lease of Rainbow Ranch. In fact, when I asked him, before the story came out, if the number I had got from comparing his lease to the assessor's maps - around 9,000 acres - was accurate, he told me that it "sounded about right." Perhaps his current objection is that that figure includes timberland as well as pasture, which he uses for grazing cattle. If so, I would remind him that I included in my story his own estimate of the amount of grassland at the ranch - around 3,000 acres. In any case, the lease details which county parcels are included in the property and the county assessor's maps give the size of those parcels. There really is very little room for dispute.
2. The Fair Political Practices Commission is indeed "the law," as Rodoni writes, and it is indeed for the FPPC alone to determine whether he contravened the Political Reform Act when he voted against the district attorney's request to hire outside counsel for the county's suit against Pacific Lumber.
I stated so explicitly in my article.
Rodoni is wrong, though, when he states that the FPPC has cleared him of any conflict of interest. In the first letter he received from the commission, the FPPC's Advice Division said that he had no conflict of interest - provided he pays "full and adequate consideration for the lease of the property."
The second letter from the Advice Division, which Rodoni received in late May, long after the vote had been called, was in response to Rodoni's request for help in determining what "fair and adequate consideration" would be. The letter said that the FPPC did not give advice on actions already taken. It said, furthermore, that the FPPC's Enforcement Division - which is charged with investigating past actions - was currently studying "the same or very similar issues."
I have no reason to doubt that Rodoni has honestly attempted to ascertain his rights and duties as an elected official in regards to this issue. It is to his credit that he made an effort to seek counsel about figuring out what a fair market value for the lease would be. However, it is incorrect for him to suggest that the FPPC has exonerated him - that is for the FPPC's Enforcement Division to determine, and as yet they have not acted one way or the other.
3. Rodoni writes that "there are cheaper per-animal unit rents in this county," which I do not dispute, and suggests that the North Coast Journal contact an HSU range management professor "for enlightenment as to how fees are charged for ranch conditions and cow pasture."
The thrust of Rodoni's argument here seems to be that the fair worth of his lease of Rainbow Ranch should be based solely on its ability to support livestock. This seems disingenuous. The ranch is more than a place for Rodoni to park his cattle - as the Journal has reported, it is also a second home and a place to hunt pig, among other things. If he utilizes the ranch for these purposes, it is only reasonable to take these purposes into account when figuring its value.
Finally, it is unfortunate that Rodoni chooses to characterize my story as a "hit piece," thereby personalizing what should not be taken personally. I have no particular animus against Rodoni's politics, and I may as well say for the record that I thoroughly enjoyed the hour or so he and I spent talking about this and many other matters. But just as the public rightly frowns on reporters who take payola, so it should frown on those who let their affections interfere with their job.
Hank Sims is a rare journalist - and now works for the North Coast Journal.
******
Follow up - it is important to note that after all the attacks, after the filing of FPPC complaints, Roger Rodoni was cleared by the FPPC. (Hank Sims also became the editor of the North Coast Journal.)
2/17/05 North Coast Journal RODONI CLEARED: