Main | February 2006 »

January 24, 2006

Harvesting Humboldt’s quality of life?

My Word by George Clark

Our Founding Fathers might have protested “another clever tyranny,” after corporations received the constitutional rights that the Founders intended for living citizens, (Santa Clara vs. Southern Pacific, U.S. Supreme Court, 1886).

Predictably, corporate “freedom of speech” became a political bullhorn unleashing the greatest massed force the world has ever known, turning American’s quaint notion of private enterprise into a tyranny by immortal kings that shape our communities to serve their whimsical interests. Moats of corporate legalese protect their identities, repelling common law, prisons, taxes and growing hoards of peasants demanding accountability. This ancient conspiracy was renamed “privatization” to soften its barbaric history of transferring vast public resources into few royal hands.

In Humboldt’s first historic harvest, rivers and fisheries were devastated, leaving native populations homeless and unemployed — in return for a lovely Carnegie library and Rockefeller Forest. Humboldt’s second historic harvest promises to extract our remaining quality of life, a harvest already experienced by countless American cities plagued by unbridled development, lower wages, job losses, unaffordable housing and epidemics of cancer and childhood asthma unheard of just decades ago.

Despite complaints about “over-regulation,” developers and financiers have been wildly successful in harvesting citizens’ home equity and quality of life through interest-only mortgages; in exploiting public subsidies to build on cheaply acquired wetlands, floodplains, sandbars and brownfields, unaccountable for human and environmental disasters that follow; in irresponsibly building subdivisions miles from downtown, oblivious to America’s inevitable fuel shortages, continuing job exportations and chronically inadequate infrastructures.

According to the National Association of Realtors, one quarter of new homes are purchased by investors, thus artificially inflating home prices, described by UCLA economist Christopher Thornberg as pyramid schemes costing home owners $150 billion during the 1980s market crash. According to the USDA, 96 million Americans live in unaffordable, inadequate or dilapidated” housing. Perfectly legal conspiracies, thinly veiled behind the myth of free enterprise, are diminishing citizen access to shelter, clean environments, health care, jobs, education, pensions and bankruptcy. And each time, America’s forgotten majority loses access to the “pursuit of happiness.”

Compounding these losses is a negligent educational system that manufactures “civic voids” by failing to teach (or model) the fundamental responsibility of voting, thus enabling profiteers to maintain their dominance upon every governmental level. Civic apathy and greed severely weaken America, while developers in other nations profit from government-mandated housing innovations that utilize alternative energy, transportation and conservation. Government’s purpose to improve the quality and security of life would include communities of 700-square-foot homes, requiring all downtown commercial developments to include affordable upper-level condominiums, creating critical sources of equity for millions of returning veterans, graduating students and working-class citizens.

Expecting to meet citizen needs by repeating America’s failed development legacy here in Humboldt County literally defines insanity.

It has been inspirational to witness a majority of voters saying “no” to corporate leviathans Wal-Mart, Calpine and Pacific Lumber. However, today’s “corporatocracy” enjoys unrelenting force and unparalleled anonymity, flooding communities with a well-funded newspaper called the Eureka Reporter, coinciding with the appearance of mysterious front-groups: One, called “HELP,” threatens lawsuits demanding 400 percent growth increases in our communities. Another, called “Eureka Coalition for Jobs,” spent 30 times Chris Kerrigan’s annual Eureka City Council salary to unseat him! Still another, called “R.A.P.I.T.,” warned, “those who think your quality of life is most important are elitist,” (North Coast Journal, Dec. 2, 2004). That’s a quality of life that's made Eureka “one of the top 100 places to live in the U.S.,” without Wal-Mart, Home Depot, Calpine or high growth rates, (T-S, Sept. 12, 2004)!

Ask our increasing number of refugees from Southern California about developers’ promises of “prosperity,” typically followed by employment, wage and benefit losses, then by crime, traffic and diminishing public services.

Yet, developers and their political shills would line our bay with cheap hotels and big boxes, undeterred by repeated voter opposition or public-use zoning restrictions.

Contact Catherine Kuhlman of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board to demand enforcement of cease and desist orders under section 13301 of the California Water Code to stop all developments within our numerous communities that are increasingly threatened by silted streams and wastewater violations.

Also, join Eureka’s Democracy Unlimited and the Healthy Humboldt Coalition and begin electing desperately needed candidates who will represent Eureka’s voting majority, instead of the petulant plutocrats determined to harvest our quality of life.

George Clark, a 30-year resident of Humboldt County, is a self-employed refugee from Southern California. He lives in Eureka.

The opinions expressed in this My Word piece do not necessarily reflect the editorial viewpoint of the Times-Standard.

January 23, 2006

In need of a history lesson

My Word by Gerald McClosky

The Leo Sears My Word article on Jan. 13 puts in sharp perspective his need for a lesson in history other than the one offered by the taxpayers league or the local chamber of commerce.

First off, the term ³free enterprise² has become an oxymoron. We haven¹t had free enterprise in America since the first Congress of the U.S. As for its pre-eminent position in the world, I imagine he¹s referring to the business and industrial complex, along with the chambers of commerce and taxpayers leagues, who devoted four decades to opposing Social Security, wage and hour laws, organized labor, the eight-hour day, overtime, the coffee break, minimum wage, child-labor laws and all the other employee benefits that labor fought to win against the auto, steel, mining, chemical and oil industries during the ¹30s and ¹40s. Obviously Leo never stood on a picket line, his dignity and humanity bleeding from the blows from industry¹s strike-breaking goon squads.

The Leo Sears My Word article on Jan. 13 puts in sharp perspective his need for a lesson in history other than the one offered by the taxpayers league or the local chamber of commerce.

First off, the term ³free enterprise² has become an oxymoron. We haven¹t had free enterprise in America since the first Congress of the U.S. As for its pre-eminent position in the world, I imagine he¹s referring to the business and industrial complex, along with the chambers of commerce and taxpayers leagues, who devoted four decades to opposing Social Security, wage and hour laws, organized labor, the eight-hour day, overtime, the coffee break, minimum wage, child-labor laws and all the other employee benefits that labor fought to win against the auto, steel, mining, chemical and oil industries during the ¹30s and ¹40s. Obviously Leo never stood on a picket line, his dignity and humanity bleeding from the blows from industry¹s strike-breaking goon squads.

If ever American industry became pre-eminent, it was to the credit of the labor movement for their steadfastness, determination and dedication to the rights of employees to gain some degree of dignity in the work place, as well as in the homes they worked so hard to acquire ‹ and to their ability to come together when the nation needed unity of purpose.

As to the Sears nomination for sainthood for the Arkleys, he should be reminded that their philanthropy has limits: first above all else profit to themselves, and second their commitment to using their wealth in support of
right-wing causes wherever they see fit both in and out of Humboldt County. Mr. Sears obviously believes the old adage, "What¹s good for General Motors is good for America," only he substitutes Arkley for G.M. and Humboldt (or
Eureka) for America.

It¹s time we stop the hawking of the taxpayers league and rid ourselves of the political mantra ³whatever the Arkleys want the Arkleys get.² Eureka is not an Arkley fiefdom nor an affiliate enterprise of Security National, as
Mr. Sears would have us believe. They are an enterprise dedicated to making money however and wherever they can with a blind indifference to what¹s best for the community. If left to the Arkleys, we will have a big box outlet in
Eureka with their generic history of cheap labor and poor community philosophy. It will be no better if it¹s called Home Depot or any one of the big-box corporate behemoths championed by the Arkleys.

So let¹s stop worshipping at the mother church of Arkley and give some credit to those who honestly work for the good of the community rather than the already enriched pocketbook of Security National.

Gerald McClosky, who recently retired after a lifetime career in public opinion research, is author of the book "Growing Old Is Not For Sissies." He lives in Fortuna.

The opinions expressed in this My Word piece do not necessarily reflect the editorial viewpoint of the Times-Standard.

January 20, 2006

A family-friendly vision for the Balloon Track

My Word by Carolyn J. Ward

Close your eyes for a moment and imagine the sounds of children’s laughter as you stroll along a trail on the waterfront. Now open your eyes. Have you seen the Balloon Track in its current state? Would you take your children there to play?

I have read numerous articles and opinion pieces about the site and the potential options for future development. I realize that this issue is not without controversy for many in the community. Opinions are being formed and heels are digging in. Before you become entrenched in a decision about this issue, I would like to offer something else to consider.

As president of the board of directors of CampFire USA and the Discovery Museum, I have met with the developers from Security National regarding their plans for the Balloon Track. They have shared our dream of a new and larger home for the Discovery Museum for many years. They have offered to help us make our dreams come true by building it for us in the Marina Center. The “big box” development is much more than what its opponents would have you believe. To read articles and opinion pieces in the paper, one is left to picture a sterile parking lot and a big square box of a store draining life from the community. A blight, if you will, on the waterfront.

The reality, however, is quite different. The Home Depot is only 25 percent of the planned development. The remaining 75 percent is composed of residential housing, local businesses, offices, walking trails and a permanent home for the Discovery Museum. Imagine a two-story Discovery Museum with an open-air space, classrooms and conference facilities, cutting-edge exhibits and breathtaking views of the marina. Kids and families will discover the world around them through hands-on exhibits and engaging programs.

With the development of the Marina Center, a property that is truly a blight on the community can become a useful beneficial space for our local community — not simply to shop, but to live, to work and to play. It will not drain life from the community and the waterfront as it does now, but contribute life to it. It will not drain tax dollars from our pockets, but add to them. Be open-minded. Go look at the Balloon Track. Listen to all the facts. Would you take your children there to play?

I will leave you with one last thought. Many people believe they have a plan for this site — there are many visions that individuals have for its potential development. However, only one of them has the backing of the financial commitment needed to clean up the site and actually develop it, sensitively and beautifully. In three years, what do you want to see? The Balloon Track as it currently exists or …

I can hear the laughter of children echoing across the water. I can see families walking along the tree-lined trails overlooking the bay. Can you?

Carolyn J. Ward, an associate professor at Humboldt State University, is
president of the CampFire USA/Discovery Museum board of directors. She lives in Loleta.

The opinions expressed in this My Word piece do not necessarily reflect the editorial viewpoint of the Times-Standard.

HTL applauds Arkley plan for Balloon Tract

My Word by Leo Sears, Jan. 13, 2006

Whatever happened to private enterprise?
You know, the private enterprise that built our nation to its pre-eminence
in the world.

Examples of its demise nationwide would fill volumes, but the local examples also abound.

The latest, led by Supervisor Bonnie Neely, is the county Board of Supervisors urging the city of Eureka to spend $100,000 in public money to study the Balloon Tract and suggesting that taxpayers foot the bill for the toxic cleanup.


The Humboldt Taxpayers League is on record strongly supporting private enterprise and opposing tax subsidizes to private enterprise.

The standing justification given for development subsidies is that private enterprise can't do it without being subsidized.

This is simply not true in most cases, even when private enterprise is complicit in seeking and raking in the unnecessary subsidies.
As we understand it, private enterprise (Security National, owned by Rob and Cherie Arkley) has proposed to turn the long-vacant, 30-acre eyesore into a productive community asset — without using a dime of the taxpayers' money.

How rare — a proposed development where they say we don't need your subsidies; we don't want your subsidies; we won't take your subsidies.

This is a development and attitude we can only applaud — we need much more of this from the rest of the development community.

Love them or hate them, agree with them or not, there is no denying that the Arkleys have been a positive force in the development and revitalization of our community.

Their vision and efforts toward the betterment of the community they've chosen for their home and headquarters for their businesses are quite evident to all.

It's been eight years since the voters turned down Wal-Mart's Balloon Tract rezoning request.

This was followed by the Arkleys offering to buy it for a city park — based on the assumption touted by the city (that we now know was in error) that the site's contamination could be cleaned sufficiently for that use.
Since then the property has continued to languish, with no credible interest in its development until now.

The Arkleys have once again become actively involved in an attempt to do away with the eyesore. Recent studies have determined that the best way to handle the Balloon Tract's contamination is through partial cleanup and containment by capping to protect the public from contact with the underlying soils.

Considering the contamination problems, the current approach appears to be the most logical use of the property.

Any development of the Balloon Tract will face the onerous and costly task of following the extensive planning processes of the city and a multitude of state agencies, including rezoning if it is to be used for anything but its current “public use” designation.

Whether it's their business developments or philanthropies, the Arkleys have the resources, the ability and a proven track record of putting together projects that benefit the community.

Our governmental agencies would best serve the taxpaying public by putting aside special interests and supporting the current effort by private enterprise to develop the Balloon Tract.

We are very much afraid that doing otherwise will mean squashing this effort by private enterprise.

If that happens, the property will continue to languish as taxpayers' monies are dumped into it — as currently being advocated by Supervisor Neely and the like, who appear to be against any development unless it involves taxpayers' money and all the extra red tape they can heap on it.

Whatever happened to private enterprise?

It's under constant attack, and it's costing the taxpayers dearly.

Leo Sears is president of the Humboldt Taxpayers League. He lives in Eureka.

The opinions expressed in this My Word piece do not necessarily reflect the editorial viewpoint of the Times-Standard.

A wake-up call on big box stores

My Word by Cletus Isbell, Dec. 23, 2005

Those in our community who continually spout the anti-big-box rhetoric have their heads buried in the sand. We already have access 24/7 to the world's largest big-box store. It's the Internet. It has all the traditional big boxes, such as WalMart.com and HomeDepot.com, plus many, many more. Need work clothes? Try Gemplers at gemplers.com. How about electronic parts and supplies? Allied Electronics at alliedelec.com has them all.

Name-brand quality at big-box quantity prices, ordered on your credit card from the convenience of your home. No sales tax, pays the shipping and UPS delivers it to your front door. No questions asked, returns picked up at your door by UPS for replacement or refund.

What's wrong with this picture? From the consumer's standpoint there is absolutely nothing wrong. It provides the ultimate in convenient high-quality, low-cost comparative shopping. From Humboldt County and the community's standpoint, however, it represents a major lost income opportunity. It means a big-time loss of jobs and of sales and property tax income.

How much business is going to the Internet? To get a qualitative feel, ask UPS how much their delivery business to home addresses has grown in the past five years. Ask them how many trucks they run now as compared to five years ago. The growth has been phenomenal and it gets bigger every day.

We're always going to be looking for the highest-quality products at the lowest cost. Working people have to do that. They don't have extra money to just throw away. The people and the county would both be better served if we had big-box shopping opportunities right here in our own community. We should be actively seeking big-box stores and providing incentives for them to locate here — not constantly fighting to keep them out.

It's time we got our head out and joined the real world.

Cletus Isbell, a retired engineer, lives in Freshwater.

The opinions expressed in this My Word piece do not necessarily reflect the editorial viewpoint of the Times-Standard.

Big box vs. local entrepreneurs

My Word by Richard Salzman, Jan. 12, 2006

I want to thank my friend Cletus Isbell for furthering the discussion on big-box stores in his My Word of Dec. 23. I do, however, want to respectfully disagree with three points he makes.

First, I disagree that those consumers now comfortably buying items off the Internet (and getting them home-delivered) will switch to the big boxes.

Instead, the big box's customers will mainly be those of us who now frequent locally owned and operated brick-and-mortar stores.

I want to thank my friend Cletus Isbell for furthering the discussion on big-box stores in his My Word of Dec. 23. I do, however, want to respectfully disagree with three points he makes.

First, I disagree that those consumers now comfortably buying items off the Internet (and getting them home-delivered) will switch to the big boxes.

Instead, the big box's customers will mainly be those of us who now frequent locally owned and operated brick-and-mortar stores.

The second and third reasons have to do with the intertwined subjects of jobs and taxes, and can perhaps be best illustrated with the example of Home Depot, a timely subject coming before the Eureka City Council in the form of a zoning change request for the Balloon Track. A Home Depot would have a
devastating effect on everyone who sells everything from appliances to flooring, hardware to cabinets, lumber to home heating. The list goes on and on (and a Best Buy — another possibility — would include everyone in music and home electronics). Since Home Depot now also does installation, work would be snatched from all sorts of contractors and tradespeople, too.

Yes, some driven out of business will be able to get jobs at the Home Depot, but the ripple effect on our community will be devastating. The key difference is that Home Depot spends most of its money with out-of-the-area suppliers — and sends all of its profits back to corporate headquarters.

Whatever short-term gains there may be in the tax base would pale in comparison to the money drained from our local community. Because whenever a dollar is spent at a locally owned company, it recirculates several times through the local economy. The county has already acknowledged this economic fact of life in a comprehensive study called “Prosperity — The North Coast
Strategy” (available at www.northcoastprosperity.com), which the city of Eureka signed onto.

I urge readers to just do a Google search on “big box impact” and read any of the myriad studies detailing the disastrous effect these stores can have on the economy of areas with a limited population like ours. Our locally owned and operated small businesses are the lifeblood of what has proved to be a vibrant and resilient local economy, but there are limits to how much more impact we can sustain.

The loss of extraction-industry jobs already has been hard on us, and small businesses are the best hope for living-wage jobs. Yet even those businesses which might survive the initial impact and aren't forced to close down will have to cut back: Cut back on their workforce and downsize their American
dream. There is simply not enough business in such a small community to support both the big box and the local entrepreneur.

I don't know that the government could or should stop a big box from coming to town, but business owners, tradespeople and all their customers and neighbors alike ought to tell their elected officials, starting with the Eureka City Council, not to facilitate the process through zoning changes or
the rejection of study grants.

Richard W. Salzman, an artists' representative for illustrators working in advertising and publishing, has long been active in local Democratic politics. He lives in Trinidad.

The opinions expressed in this My Word piece do not necessarily reflect the editorial viewpoint of the Times-Standard.

Thinking outside the big box

My Word by Robert F. Neefus, Jan. 10, 2006

The recent speculation about the possible future uses of the “Balloon Track” parcel that I have seen have shown complete lack of imagination. A two-mile drive from the foot of Broadway south to Pierson's will show you that underutilized commercial and light industrial property already exist.

Eureka does not need more of this type of property zoning. If necessary, there are many other parcels of land that could accommodate and indeed need such redevelopment. Using scenic waterfront property for light industrial zoning, for which there is no demand, is a complete waste of land that could be used to enhance the city's image.

How about a 10,000-seat convention/conference center? And while we are at it, let's put City Hall on top of it and get them out of the ugly block they presently occupy. The 29 acres of the Balloon Track area encompass access to Broadway, the waterfront, the City Marina and Wharfinger building (already a
popular meeting place) and the soon-to-be-developed parcel in front of that.

Eureka does not need more hotel rooms. It needs more hotel guests!

Even cities in the sunshine belts of the world develop convention centers to give organizations an excuse to visit what is otherwise available in many other places. Eureka has a lot of nearby attractions for the visitor and a perfectly charming downtown to entertain and feed them. Without a convention
center, why is anyone going to stop in Eureka? Other places have Victorian towns, trees, ocean, beaches, rain and fog. We have an airport sufficient for the needs of this modest idea and we have sufficient road access and empty hotel rooms. With longer-stay visitors, the downtown area will attract
the human tides it needs to become more than the often-deserted showpiece it currently is. With more life in the city, other visitor groups, like cruise ships, may be more inclined to visit (yes, we need a wharf, not a container facility).

The existing rail line should have a self-propelled trolley system on it, thus linking all our county towns and commercial areas from Rio Dell to Samoa and going right by the Convention Center. Put in a walking/bike trail alongside of it. You could then get around with less auto use, and it augments our bus system.

Let's intelligently develop around what we have and want to see in our future. Big-box stores and “light industrial” are not bringing in a value-added future. Tourism provides a lot of opportunities for other business development later and greater employment opportunities all around.

Successful tourism brings more tourists and more opportunities to serve them. A greater local economy will provide the pressures and needs for further development in other areas at a future time. Think outside the box!

Robert F. Neefus is a former customer service specialist in the yachting industry. He lives in Eureka.

The opinions expressed in this My Word piece do not necessarily reflect the editorial viewpoint of the Times-Standard.

Let the contests begin

Times-Standard editorial, Jan. 6, 2006

Subtly and not so subtly, in public and behind the scenes, the Eureka powers that be are aligning themselves over a number of issues that all coalesce around a single topic — a proposed big box by the bay.

A brief recap: Security National owners Rob and Cherie Arkley have proposed a 105,000-square-foot Home Depot store amid a total 400,000 square feet of development. Security National is in the process of buying the property, known as the Balloon Track, from owner Union Pacific.

The Arkleys say the project could bring 900 jobs and nearly $1 million to the city each year.

Apparently in preparation for developing the property, the Arkleys convinced a majority of the City Council in 2004 to reject a $50,000 Headwaters fund grant to study a range of development options at the site.

This week, 4th District Supervisor Bonnie Neely received board approval to send a county letter to the city to request that Eureka re-apply for the grant to study all options for the long-vacant tract.

Residents will recall that an attempt in the late 1990s to locate a Wal-Mart there failed to muster enough votes in a ballot initiative — paid for by the retail giant — that would have changed site zoning.

Neely, who helped organize opposition to the initiative, notes that big-box development was already rejected at that site by both the voters and the state Coastal Commission, on which she now sits.

Former Eureka Mayor Nancy Flemming, considered an ally of the Arkleys, is challenging Neely this year for the 4th District seat, which covers Eureka.

So now, the county supervisors, the City Council, a former mayor and the Arkleys, known for their business development and philanthropy, are all enmeshed in what could prove to be a very interesting slow-motion but deadly serious tussle in 2006.

On one side is Neely's political survival as a supervisor and her and her allies' views on the Eureka waterfront. On the other is the Arkleys' ability to use their vast resources to shape their own bayfront development dream, through the City Council, the city and state planning process and other means.

Current Mayor Peter LaVallee has noted that the property is the largest undeveloped piece of land in the city and that its fate is of great significance to all residents. That's true. But he's also up for re-election
this year, and will likely face a candidate supported by the Arkleys, as he narrowly defeated Cherie Arkley for the mayor's seat in 2002.

It's uncertain where the public stands in all this. That includes city merchants, who have yet to weigh in on a Home Depot in their midst.

One thing's clear: It will be fascinating to watch the various separate but intertwined contests unfold — including the supervisor's race, the mayor's race and the big-box development proposal — over the next few months.

Who sets agenda on Balloon Tract future?

My Word by Dennis Huber, Jan. 18, 2006

With all the emerging perspectives about the future of Eureka's “Balloon Tract,” it seems appropriate to look at one aspect of this equation that has generally been glossed over, and that is Union Pacific's role and responsibility as owner of this key commercial real estate on the waterfront in Eureka.

In both the Leo Sears piece in the Times-Standard, and in the “Questions for Cherie Arkley” article in the North Coast Journal, while it is acknowledged that the property is seriously contaminated, it is apparently accepted by both Leo and Cherie that the folks responsible for such
extensive toxic damage are somehow free from the ultimate responsibility of rectifying this condition.

What is the logic that drives such assumptions? Why is a “$57 billion corporation” able to operate with such impunity? And why is our community forced to accept such reluctance on the part of a neighbor who has benefited from doing business here? If this was a toxic condition that resulted from a meth lab, would we say don't bother to clean up, the community will take responsibility for your mess? Or maybe, if you would just clean up a little, we will figure out a way to use the property in some restricted way. Why would we consider excusing such a large corporation from the very same standards to which we hold each other?

It is this willingness to excuse entities having vast economic resources that ends up pitting citizens against each other. We need to file suit against such corporations for their refusal to use safe business practices, and simultaneously initiate eminent domain proceedings against them in order to gain control of such a critical part of our core commercial area. Does Union Pacific get a free 30-year pass from acting as a responsible entity in the community simply because we are afraid of their economic strength? Do we tell our children and grandchildren that the toxicity of their downtown area is an acceptable trade-off for having been “blessed” with the presence of large corporations? And what is the real difference between “capping” the toxic condition so that the property can be used for retail development, and cleaning the site so that future generations can choose to use it in whatever way best suits the needs of the community? Whose studies are
telling us that the community should accept such conditions? What assurances are there that this “capping” will guarantee that there will not be continuing toxic conditions that can migrate into the nearby bay waters?

The Arkleys' willingness to take on the development of the property, which has sat unused for decades, must be appreciated. We cannot afford, however, to make short-sighted decisions about how we design the future of our community. Real progress must reflect the courage and vision that builds a
healthy economic foundation for the people of Humboldt County as far into the future as can be seen.

So to answer Leo's question, “whatever happened to private enterprise?” We would have to accept that we, the citizens of Humboldt County, in this instance, have indeed been subsidizing Union Pacific for decades, both by taxing the property at the lowest possible rates, and allowing them to contaminate the site and hold us hostage to the terms of sale that prevent us from using the property in ways that are the most beneficial for our community.

We are put at much greater risk by the attitudes and practices of such private enterprise behavior than we will ever be by the poor and indigent citizens who require the support of facilities like the Rescue Mission.Dennis Huber, a Eureka native, is a woodworking artist and co-founder of
Local Solutions. He lives in Briceland.

The opinions expressed in this My Word piece do not necessarily reflect the editorial viewpoint of the Times-Standard.