Big Box Blog

Since Rob Arkley is partly responsible for Harry Reid being the senate minority leader, shouldn't he have to clean up that mess by making a large campaign donation to some republican in Nevada?

David Cobb is a factually challenged demagogue. Security National's application for a zoning change, recently accepted by the Eureka City Council, is not an attempt to "change the zoning rules", as Mr. Cobb contends. It is within an established City process. Under the application process, the conditions for the zoning change may be amended pending the results of the environmental, economic, and traffic studies that are required for the application. The studies are not the last word, as they are required to withstand review by City and State agencies.
Mr. Cobb also misrepresents the issue that was settled in the 1999 vote. Walmart attempted to circumvent the application and review process by having the voters approve the zoning change via a referendum. The voters correctly rejected that attempt. Mr. Cobb is either startlingly ignorant for an attorney, or intentionally deceitful in not acknowledging the differences between Security National, going by the numbers through the application process, and Walmart, circumventing the application process.
Mr. Cobb's reference to the balloon tract being the "last large piece of undeveloped waterfront property in Eureka" is laughable. It is a post-industrial blight that will remain until the property is re-developed. Mr. Cobb and his groovy cronies simply do not have a realistic alternative to re-development of the balloon tract under commercial zoning.
Two things are certain if Cobb, Democracy Unlimited, Humboldt Baykeeper, Healthy Humboldt, and Local Solutions carry the day, spike the zoning application process underway, and attempt to enforce their standards for environmental cleanup through litigation.
1) The litigation will be a legal train wreck for years if it is not thrown out of court. The legal case for forcing Union Pacific to remediate the site would be severely undercut if a willing buyer is prevented from remediating the site by the actions of those attempting to impose their arbitrary standards on the seller and prospective buyers. There is an excellent chance that remediation costs could become a public liability if actions by public bodies prevent an agreement between private parties leading to remediation. At the very least, public bodies would incur considerable legal costs. The track record of the "no compromise" strategy is clear: years in court and no remediation.
2) The site will remain an urban blight. Cash-strapped governmental bodies are unlikely to play Santa Claus. Potential private funding sources will shy away rather than risk throwing their capital into a political snake pit. There could be a $45,000 publicly funded study on the site (a fraction of the cost required to provide actionable direction). The study might provide a nice vision statement that would help "imagine a healthy, sustainable future", but imagining things does not deliver if action is held hostage to the whims of ideological carpetbaggers and like Mr. Cobb, and the local posse of ideological wingnuts. The publicly funded study and zoning referendum proposed by Mr. Cobb would only become the next phase of an on-going legal and political circus as the "no compromise" faction attempts to impose their ideologically pure, pie-in-the-sky vision on the community at large.
There is one last whopping inconsistency in Mr. Cobb's argument. On the one hand, he argues (correctly) that it was improper for Walmart to circumvent the zoning application process with a referendum. On the other hand, he argues that it is proper for an ideological interest group that has decided that it speaks for "the community" to try to spike the zoning application process and demand a referendum based on its purist ideas.

Gil, thank you for your clarifications. As someone long ago grown up in Eureka, and watching the Balloon Tract activity, it helps.

One thing that would help further is if someone qualified would address the capping proposal carefully. Looking at the brief materials furnished for last week's meetings, there's a hint that similar capping done for other railyards was quite acceptable. Back issues of local papers seem to indicate that the pollution in the Balloon Tract is as one would suspect, mainly petroleum and small amounts of metals from wear, welding, or minor spillage - nothing very hazardous. It would be nice to have that confirmed, and that the clearing and capping proposed is judged by credible expertise to be sufficient and sensible, as it may sound.

The Home Depot question is an interesting one. It seems that there might be at least two useful paths to explore on that.

One would be to engage Home Depot in a bit of dialogue about their new programs in installation services for their offerings: the so-called 'Do it for me' which their CEO Robert Nardelli sees as key in their new growth path. There may be a way to get assurance of a level of shared economics for independent craftspersons and operations here.

The other side is about competition with the private lumberyards/home improvement sellers like Pierson (who I remember) and Myrtletown. Are there enough possibilities of, for example, alliances with contractors plus upmarket range of merchandise compared to Home Depot which will allow diversity to keep these healthy?

Enough from far out of town, but it is a true pleasure to see how persons discuss on this.

Kind regards.

Since I've only been a voter in Humboldt for two years and am not a Eureka resident, I shy from getting involved in this discussion. However, it seems that Mr. Cobb is also a transplant and offers a strong voice in opposition to the developement of something, that in my opinion, would be good for the MAJORITY of the residents of the county.
The statement about "last undeveloped piece" is a joke. There are several lots and buildings in the immediate vicinity that could use major clean up, tear down, etc. It amuses me that people dare to say "Eureka shouldn't change." Are you kidding me? Most tourists can't wait to get though the city.
Tourism, for that matter, ought to be at the heart, for on rainy days of which we have many, what's wrong with giving people an option to shop, that is, spend some money in town? It's embarrassing right now for all of us to have outsiders drive by the balloon tract. Someone wants to clean it up and put a decent, clean, responsible developement in its place. Why is this a problem?
You don't like their politics? You don't want people shopping at Home Depot and putting locals out of business? The Arkleys aren't running for office. They're spending money and putting it into town. And, if you don't want to shop at Home Depot, Target, Walgreens or any other chain, don't go there. You have a choice. Just stop trying to deny others that choice. Let's hear from the people that would use the facilities, not someone who wouldn't.
Finally, I moved here because I love the natural beauty, and that I would not want to change. However, the poverty, the lack of employment, and the general inability of people to have a decent job that sustains a functional family is one of the most sad issues facing this area, in my humble opinion. In all areas of life it's a given, "If you aren't growing, you're dying."

I think David should stick with his part time job as a stuntman on "Brokeback Mountain".

I am not in favor of "Big Box" development in Eureka. Yes, we have Target, but Montgomery Wards had already been at that site for years. The Balloon Tract is not the right place for a Home Depot. Everyone talks about jobs. We need jobs.....blah, blah, blah. Well, Piersons, Almquist Lumber, Shaffers....they all employ a large amount of people. Home Depot will definately effect their business, maybe causing jobs to be lost? I own and operate a bar, restaurant, inn and live music venue in Southern Humboldt. The new casino in Loleta has definately impacted my business to the point where I am thinking about finally selling out. I've had this business for 12 years and have worked day and night to build it up. See, the casinos have lots of money and they can afford to pay major entertainers. They can afford to have cheap food. I can't afford all that, although I try to bring in the best. Maybe pretty soon, other venues will feel the hit and stop having live music also. Then your choice will be down to the three casinos that crowd our area for your entertainment.

I don't have any doubt that the Arkley's have done much for Eureka. Most notable is the zoo. But that seems to cloud a lot of thinking. We need to remember that they are in it for the money too. and one of the problems I see is that they have so much money, they can get pretty much what they want. On February 6th, I wrote to the Eureka City Council with my concerns about the Balloon Tract development. I was and still am concerned that those who benefit from being in the Arkley's favor will vote for their projects regardless of how public opinion feels. In response, I got back a long and rambling letter from one council member who was literally falling all over himself praising the Arkleys. It actually was a very strange letter and not one that I would expect from someone who should keep an open mind. Most of it didn't even make sense so I'm now concerned about the vision that some of our council members have. I say "our" council members as I also have a home in Eureka. I also feel that this development should be the concern of everyone in Humboldt, not just in Eureka.

Finally, I am concerned that the Arkleys have enough resources to push this project through at every level. Already they have bought up web sites that could be used against their project. (see TS 2-16-06 pg. 3) The insert in the Times on February was just the beginning of their campaign to get what they want at any costs. Again, as it is in Washington, whoever has the most money wins.

That’s the thing… this is not about big box; this is about a parcel that has tons of potential with a buyer who is willing to put up the money to make it happen. Nothing has been done with the property in over 25 years. Everybody talks about different things they would like to see there, but I don't see anybody else willing to put up the money to make it happen! Is the land just supposed to continue sitting there, doing us more harm than good?

What will happen when the people of this county no longer allow change to happen? No longer allow it to grow to allow the younger generations to stay here, to want to stay here? If a big box happens to go there, so be it, after all, it is only 25% of the project. If you don't like Home Depot, don't shop there. That’s the nice thing about our country, you have a choice in the decisions you make that directly affect you.

“The Arkley’s are in it for the money too” --your statement almost humors me… what money? The proposed Marina Center will bring a ton of jobs and revenue to the city, NOT to the Arkley’s. Who are you to say how the Arkley's spend their money anyway? They continue to prove they know how to spend the money they have --and we as citizens should be grateful for what they have done to turn this community around, not dictate how they could do it better, after all, it’s not our money.

And who cares if they bought up all the website addresses in the world… the opposition is just mad they didn’t think of it first.

Dear All,

Please ignore my husband's idiotic remarks from above. When he drinks too much, which is often, he tends to reveal his narrow thinking and closed mentality. We moved to Humboldt County two years ago because of its backwards culture. It's like living in the sixties again, and Mr. Cobb has become my hero. People around here need to remember that Eureka is not a production part of the USA, but rather an integral city in the People's Republic of California. If Home Depot wants to put up another stupid big box, let them do it in an area where people value choices, low prices and a strong economy. I prefer decrepit buildings, government jobs, entitlements and more meth heads per capita than anywhere in the US. Tell big business to go elsewhere and leave my piece of paradise right here in Manila alone.

Sincerely,

Lola Regan-Twilly

I am blown away by the elitist tone of Ms. Eliason's post. Jobs are a real concern for working people in Humboldt, not just "blah blah blah." The Eureka City Council should give greater weight to the concerns of Eureka residents who want the area to prosper than to a southern Humboldt resident who can afford a second home in Eureka.

With regard to the concern about big box or chain stores depressing wages, Humboldt is already a low wage area. Small, locally owned enterprises are often the worst offenders in terms of lowballing their workforce. Yakima had a terrible reputation for its treatment of entry-level and production employees, even in the pre-corporate days when it was considered one of the jewels of Arcata: minimum wage, no benefits, and no job security. The pattern is all too common. The owners take care of themselves and maybe some cronies. The rest get table scraps. At least one well known restaurant on the Arcata plaza had(s) a deliberate policy of keeping employee turnover high to take advantage of the available student labor pool and keep wages low. The owner of that same establishment lobbied the Arcata City Council in 1994 to deny permits for a night spot to open in the space later occupied by Cafe Tomo and Mazzotti's. Business ethics are a function of business practices, not whether a business is locally owned or corporate. Home Depot, incidentally, has a relatively good wage and benefit package available for its low-level employees.

It's too easy for business owners to blame their failures on "unfair" competition when it is in fact their own incompetence that is to blame. Daly's and Bistrin's folded after the Bayshore Mall opened because they were poorly managed by disinterested owners. Picky Picky Picky thrives because it adapted its niche. Poor management did in the Eureka Theater. The Broadway Cinema thrives in the face of the same competition the Eureka Theater had. Night spots are not failing because of competition from casinos. They are failing because their owners are unwilling to expend a little imagination, initiative, and effort to provide a quality experience, and to maintain enough control to keep their estalishments out of legal/permitting trouble. Smart business owners can adapt to, and even take advantage of, the environment that would be created by the Marina Center development, Home Depot and all. Home Depot and Ikea in Emeryville, for example, have provided a regional draw that niche competitors in Oakland and Berkeley take advantage of. The local home improvement retailers can do the same.

Granted, the Eureka Reporter's a rag, the Arkleys' politics suck, and they stand to make money off the Marina Center deal. As civic minded business people with a track record of philanthropy, however, they are exemplary. That is more than can be said for their detractors, who seem to be willing to accept continued stagnation and blight as they press for their vision of some sort of New Age theme park for Humboldt. Healthy Humboldt touts itself as advocating infill development, yet opposes it when it is actually proposed. Maybe stagnation and blight are acceptable to some people as part of preserving Humboldt's "small town character." It seems that a group of economically insulated people is more concerned with preventing anything that jars their precious New Age sensibilities than the well-being of communities dealing with the consequences of stagnation and blight.

Great blog you have going on. KarlaX

tenormin

slotmachines