As we learned in the newspapers after the fact, the four members of the City Council who voted to cancel the Master Plan at the last minute did so apparently because each had received a call from Robin Arkley informing them of his intent to buy the Balloon Tract site from Union Pacific. Their decision was impulsive and without a doubt will cast a shadow over the City Council for years to come. It is clear that the Master Plan would have included Mr. Arkley’s ideas for the Balloon Tract. However, by canceling the Master Plan, the council in effect said “no thank you� to any other ideas. It is the sole reason that we were only considering one project at our meeting. Their decision has stirred up controversy and has polarized our community once again.

After the May 24 meeting, Councilman Jeff Leonard stated that it was a “fairy tale� that the Master Plan process would have had an impact on the controversy over the Balloon Tract. This comment, smug and self-serving, could not be further from the truth. If Mr. Leonard had been really listening, he would have noticed that every concern brought up by speakers at the meeting, regardless of their views of the Security National plan, would have been considered by the Master Plan: Viable options, financing of a project, job and growth concerns, cleanup needs, traffic patterns and parking needs, protecting the bay, etc. The primary motivation for the Master Plan was to get a real sense of what sort of project would best serve our community and the future of Eureka and the North Coast. 

I feel betrayed by the City Council because a process that had begun in Eureka and was inclusive was suddenly taken away by four members of the City Council elected to serve everyone. I don’t blame Mr. Arkley for calling the members of the City Council. I wasn’t surprised by that. We all have that right. However, Mr. Arkley in his candor had previously publicly stated that he would rather the democratic process not apply to him under certain circumstances. His implication being that his great wealth entitled him to certain special privileges.

That my City Council gratified this sort of grandiosity is beyond belief. That mentality may be pervasive in the country these days, but clearly not in Humboldt County. It represents the antithesis of what our city and county, much less our country, really stand for. The defeats of Calpine and Wal-Mart, and the defeat of the recall election by Pacific Lumber, should have given the council members a clue as to the values of their own constituents.

The council’s actions do invite questions of their integrity, like it or not. It also may drag out the process of anything happening on the Balloon Tract for years. At the meeting on May 24, I implored the council to bring back the Master Plan if there was any possible way to do so. I stand by that request.

Harry Blumenthal is an artist who also has a private practice in psychotherapy. He lives in Eureka.

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

I’m writing to respond to Brian Morrissey, senior vice president of Security National (which owns the Eureka Reporter), whose guest opinion ran in the April 23 Eureka Reporter, replying to one I wrote which ran April 20.

I feel a master plan for the Balloon Tract, as called for by the city’s own current Strategic Visioning Plan, is necessary to look at all the options for the site in a public process, to determine the highest best use, and then proceed accordingly. The land is zoned public and zoning should only be changed if it is in the public interest — how are we to know if it is in the public interest without examining any other possible options?

Times have changed in Humboldt: Land prices have gone up roughly five-fold over the last
15 years. I feel that the Balloon Tract, representing the last contiguous 30 acres of bayfront property in the center of Eureka, is going to be developed under any scenario — the only question is how. A master plan is the first essential step in doing this.

I feel that a key part of the Arkley/Morrissey/Reporter strategy has been a conscious conflation of Balloon Tract cleanup with development of the Marina Center (as they ultimately decide it): That the former is contingent on the latter. I have read this untruth in half a dozen letters printed in the Reporter; despite daily proclamations of “independence� and commitment to not printing letters with “significant factual errors,� the Reporter continues to print this piece of disinformation that I believe is key for it to help develop public support for the Marina Center.

It is for these above reasons I cannot support the Marina Center development at Eureka’s Balloon Tract.

Neal Latt is an area contractor. He lives in Eureka.

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

I am curious. Why is it that people who move here from other areas, for whatever reason, want to turn our area into one like they just left? What’s that all about? Why did you all move here?

I wrote a letter to the Eureka City Council on Feb. 6 regarding the “Marina Project.� While I believe the tract should be developed, I don’t believe Home Depot should be included. On Feb. 7, I was faxed a response from one council member who literally fell all over himself praising the Arkleys to the point of making me ill. Three pages of blather convinced me that this project needs to be a full county-decided issue, not just a Eureka city issue.

I own a business in Southern Humboldt, which is south of Eureka for all of you who just moved here, and what happens on the Balloon Tract will also directly affect me. I do all my shopping in Eureka for my business and I find everything I need very nicely, thank you. Today I’m going to Pierson’s or Shafer’s to buy all new lamps for my rooms. They both have a wonderful selections! Then I will go to Cash and Carry, Costco, Kmart and probably have lunch at the Cafe Waterfront.

If it’s a nice day, I’ll go see Bill at the zoo. I love Eureka just the way it is!

Loreen Eliason owns the Riverwood Inn in Phillipsville.

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

Something strikes me as very odd when someone like a David Cobb, a short-time resident of Eureka, calls for citizens to “generate a little ... heat on our City Council members.� This rhetoric, seemingly more fitting for an Iraq war debate than a local rezone project, came about after we as a council voted democratically (4-1) to allow a public participation process to proceed on the Balloon Track proposal.

The significance of the Balloon Track is unquestioned, and I look forward to the extensive public review and discussion which will continue on the proposed Marina Center project. I have been so proud to see the community come out to our council meetings in great numbers, and express their views in a strong, but civil manner. The ensuing public dialogue from those with differing visions is one which I hope will offer new ideas or innovative solutions for our council to consider on this strategic piece of private property. The fact that so many people are involved and participating is a testament to the importance of the Balloon Track development to our city and the region.

Of course, our community is changing rapidly, both through our transitioning economy and our shifting demographics. With change, often comes hard questions and tough debate and difficult decision making. And it is a time when, I believe, a changing community must be tolerant of each other's views if civil debate and constructive processes are to move forward. The type of inciting and provocative rhetoric espoused by Mr. Cobb does nothing but work to divide our community more deeply than it already is.

Mike Jones represents the 5th Ward on the Eureka City Council.

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

I’m writing to emphasize that there is a public process in place for real estate projects such as the Marina Center. Security National Properties is exceeding those requirements for community involvement in the process.

Following the City Council’s decision to review petitions for Balloon Tract zoning changes, Security National Properties could have immediately submitted its General Plan Amendment on to the City Council for review. Instead, the company hosted an open house on Feb. 16, at the Wharfinger Building, where proponents and opponents of the Marina Center alike could obtain information and ask project applicants and subject-matter experts any questions about the project. There was no requirement for Security National Properties to host the open house; we did this to provide additional opportunities for the public to comment on the project and ask questions.

Representatives from Security National Properties, The Home Depot, and architectural, environmental, economic and traffic consultants were freely accessible to discuss any questions, concerns and suggestions at the open house. In fact, the attorney for the Humboldt Baykeepers quizzed our environmental consultants at great length. Security National Properties also provided questionnaires for attendees to fill out, as another means of ensuring that all opinions were received. The questionnaires revealed an 82 percent approval rating (10 percent opposed and 8 percent were undecided) for the Marina Center project. Security National Properties is incorporating many of the excellent suggestions received at the open house into a revised design of the Marina Center.

Security National Properties’ open house contrasts sharply with an earlier Marina Center opposition open house. The opposition invited the public to attend, lectured them for about an hour and then asked those who support the Marina Center or are undecided to leave so that they could hold a closed meeting. During that meeting they threatened to litigate throughout the process, apply heat to local officials and stop the Marina Center at any cost. Clearly we have different opinions on what “community involvement� means.

Going forward, there will be many more opportunities for community involvement in the Marina Center project. For example, Security National Properties is planning a second open house in March to focus on environmental topics. Again, there is no requirement for the company to do this, but it reflects our strong desire to involve and partner with the community throughout the planning and development of the Marina Center. Security National Properties will continue to hold topical open houses throughout the process.

As part of the Marina Center development process, the city of Eureka is required to prepare an Environmental Impact Report to determine whether the proposed Marina Center may have a significant effect on the environment. As part of its agreement with the city, Security National Properties will pay the expenses for a third-party consulting firm to conduct a comprehensive environmental, economic and traffic-impact study under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The public will be able to review the third-party consultant’s study and comment on it as well as the Marina Center project at Planning Department and City Council public hearings.

Finally, Security National Properties is more than willing to meet with concerned citizens and organizations about the Marina Center and its impact on the future of Eureka. To schedule a meeting or to voice opinions, ask questions or provide suggestions about the Marina Center, please e-mail us at info@marinacenter.org. We welcome public input and will take it under consideration.

 Brian Morrissey is senior vice president for Security National Properties. His home is in Omaha, Neb.

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

 

I would like to reply to a few of the talking points that Mr. Cobb felt were so important, in his Feb. 12 My Word. First, I would like to start, well, at the beginning. Mr. Arkley does not need a “friendly� media source. Projects like the Sequoia Park Zoo and helping local nonprofit organizations do not need “friendly� press.

Seven years ago there were a lot of local citizens who were not old enough to vote in 1999 and now they are of age. Are you saying that those of the younger generation don’t have a right to have their say in this matter, Mr. Cobb? Next, if you have a problem with the beachfront issue, you should probably take that up with the people who sold the property, not the people who bought it. It was the decision of the sellers, not the Friends of the Dunes or the Arkleys. Next, you keep talking about a democratic process, so why, then, do you take issue with Mr. Arkley donating money to the political groups that he believes in? You being against his rights to do this is an insult to the democratic process. Making financial donations is part of the democratic process. Yes, he sent $500,000 to defeat Tom Daschle, but the bottom line is that the people did not vote for Daschle. This is democratic process.

Your comment about our elected council members not having any courage is just painfully insulting and disrespectful. Just because they did not agree with your views in 2004 doesn’t mean they lack courage. Disagreeing is part of the democratic process. When voting, the issue either wins or loses the vote.

I respect your views on the Balloon Track, but I would like to see your research on waterfront properties in Third World countries. I had no idea Third World countries were turning down chances for economic growth because they have issues with the Home Depot. I understand your fear about this development and our local businesses, but I saw numerous local businesses stand up for the development. I have also seen local businesses growing faster and staying longer since we began opening our doors to the likes of Costco, Longs Drugs, Blockbuster Video and Target. Competition is good, and most business people understand this.

On Feb. 9, the City Council meeting made me so proud to be a native of Eureka. I was able to see my town working the democratic process as well as standing up and speaking out in support of this development. As you will see, people who love this city, including local business owners, would like to see it grow and want to grow with it. I agree with you that our community can do better. Because of Security National, our community is doing better and striving to move forward.

I hope in the future, sir, you will refrain from attacking your community members. Calling Mr. Arkley arrogant and accusing the City Council of having no courage is not necessary. I respect your opinion, just please act like an adult and stop the name calling. I am also begging you not to use such a serious community issue as this for personal political gain and grandstanding to build your constituency for your next election. Thank you.     

Tim Flemming, business manager for the North Coast Substance Abuse Council, lives in Eureka. The views presented above are his own.

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

 

So Union Pacific Corp. and local billionaire developers Rob and Cherie Arkley want to change the zoning rules on the last large piece of undeveloped waterfront property in Eureka.  

But hold on! The citizens of Eureka already rejected an effort to amend the zoning rules on the exact same parcel of land in exactly the same way by a whopping 61 percent to 39 percent at the ballot box in 1999. 

That should have settled the matter in a democracy like ours, right?

The plain and simple truth is that the Arkleys are asking five City Council members to overturn the unambiguous and express will of the entire electorate of Eureka. 

It is hard to imagine a more arrogant display of wealth and power!

But we should probably expect as much from a man who bought over 200 acres of pristine beachfront property out from under the Friends of the Dunes and then gloated that he would fence it off and ensure that it would never be open to the public.

The Arkleys are also the third largest political donors to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, and Rob Arkley spent over $500,000 to defeat former Democratic Party Senate majority leader Tom Daschle in 2004.

And in 2004 four of the five City Council members rejected a Headwaters grant which would have explored all options for this unique parcel in a way that actually empowered and included the community. Only Councilmember Chris Kerrigan had the courage to stand up for the idea.

At the time Rob Arkley made it clear that he didn’t care what the city wanted, and he did not want any public process that would create a master plan for our waterfront. As he stated at the time, “It might not be what I want.�

These folks are obviously used to having their way with politicians.
But beyond all that, the proposed big box development is simply a bad idea, and especially on waterfront property that is already specifically zoned for public use.  

This parcel should be developed for the public use of all of us, not for the private gain of a few. Even Third World countries don’t allow their waterfront property to be squandered in such unimaginative ways!

Mega big box development is particularly bad for our local community. Countless economic studies and real-world experience demonstrate that such a behemoth would drive our beloved local merchants out of business. Money that is currently circulated in our own community would be sent out of the county to corporate headquarters.

At Democracy Unlimited we support local business, and we want our neighbors to thrive. We don’t want Humboldt County to lose its character as a great place to live. We certainly don’t want Eureka to turn into Santa Rosa. 

Lastly, the proposed zoning change does not require a true environmental cleanup. In fact, Union Pacific Corp. is attempting to avoid liability for environmental contamination. We say — hold the owners of Union Pacific Corp. responsible for their actions and demand a full cleanup.

The Balloon parcel is an unpolished gem. A creative public-private partnership could make it shine. We could use this opportunity to imagine a sustainable, healthy future for ourselves and for our children. But it can’t happen if we allow a big box proposal to be shoved down our throats now.  

Our City Council should accept the Headwaters grant and begin a true open public process to explore possibilities. And any decision to rezone this parcel must be made by the voters in a popular referendum. Anything else is an insult to the democratic process.

If you agree that our community can do better, we invite you to join Democracy Unlimited, Local Solutions and Healthy Humboldt at a community organizing event to stop the big box on our waterfront.

On Wednesday, Feb. 15, we will be hosting Supervisor Bonnie Neely, Humboldt Baykeepers and others as we strategize how to stop this project so we can keep our options open. The event will take place at 6:30 p.m. at the Wharfinger building.

This community has won before. We can do it again.

David Cobb, former Green Party presidential candidate, serves on the Steering Committee of Democracy Unlimited of Humboldt County, a Eureka-based community organization. He can be reached at www.duhc.org. He lives in Eureka.

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

It’s a pleasure to see grass-roots democracy in action. A good example was on display Tuesday at the Eureka City Council chambers. A standing-room-only crowd turned out to hear — and comment on — the first public presentation of Rob and Cherie Arkley’s proposed Balloon Tract development, which would include 400,000-square-feet of retail shops, a parking structure, restaurants and office space along with five anchor stores and a 115,000-square-foot Home Depot.

The council is being asked to consider a requested zoning change from public to commercial, residential, office and light industrial use for the contaminated 30-acre waterfront site.

To the City Council’s credit, officials decided to hold another meeting tonight, beginning at 7 p.m. at City Hall, to give more people a chance to comment on the request before a decision on whether to consider a zoning change application is made.

Kudos as well to the Arkleys, who are planning an open house on the project from 4 to 7 p.m. Feb. 16 at the Wharfinger building.

Those events, and extensive reporting on the proposal, should give community residents all the basic information they need to form a decision on the massive planned development.

That’s a good thing, because — since the proponents are asking the city for a key zone change on Eureka’s largest vacant piece of land — this should be a community decision.

It’s a question of what’s best for the community and all its residents, not just any one particular buyer or seller. In fact, the current owner, Union Pacific, has left the rail site abandoned and contaminated for many years.

We urge city officials to move cautiously before committing themselves to the first tantalizing project that comes along. For that reason, all uses for the site should be identified and considered, ideally with an independent study that’s not tied to any one developer.

There’s no hurry here. Even if this project were to get under way tomorrow, completion would be years away.
Much has been said about the current blight and glittering possibilities of the untapped treasure that is Eureka’s waterfront.

Given the area’s key importance, it’s vital that we, as a community, get this exactly right — for us, and for future generations.

Your endorsement of competing studies neatly sidesteps one central issue: Union Pacific (as a private landowner) and Security National (as the proposed buyer) do not want it done. Consider if this was your home or business; would you want a study done on it? ]]> Any highest and best use analysis begins with the question “what is physically possible?� Understanding the environmental and physical (including geotechnical) constraints of the Balloon Tract would cost over $100,000. Once we understand the physical and environmental condition, we would still need to understand any impact on the community. What effect would the proposed uses have on local businesses, schools, the city’s general fund, etc. Chalk up another $75,000 for economic impact studies. Traffic studies? Another $75,000.

The proposed redundant plans cost the city money it does not have and provides no more information than the work being done by the city at Security National’s expense. Redundant plans would cost the city at least another $200,000 at taxpayers’ expense.

Furthermore, your insinuation that the city will somehow be tainted or that it can not lead a thorough and independent study is insulting to the hard-working staff and council of Eureka. The Environmental Impact Report is scoped, written, controlled and directed by the city.

When the General Plan/Local Coastal Plan were adopted by the city in 1984, the site was already vacant and underutilized. During that time, the city elected to zone the property “Public� to provide itself the opportunity to consider any future uses for the site. The city has always contemplated, at some point, a zone change for the Balloon Tract.

“What about Union Pacific?� you asked. While I agree that Union Pacific could have done more to maintain the Balloon Tract, they have fully complied with the state’s environmental law and regulations. Union Pacific has recognized the need to move the site from the railroad’s ownership and have actively marketed it for the last five years or more. Security National is not the first buyer they have negotiated with, rather the only one to have signed a deal.

“What future effect might that have on the waterfront?� Site contamination investigations have been conducted at the Balloon Track site for more than 15 years. The information collected over this time has repeatedly shown that petroleum hydrocarbon and metals contamination exists in the shallow soils. The placement of a barrier cap over the site, coupled with the removal of the most contaminated soil, would minimize rain and storm water from infiltrating to the subsurface and would effectively eliminate the primary mechanism for leaching subsurface contaminants into neighboring properties and the bay.

You also asked, “Why not ask the public what it thinks?� Great idea! Security National Properties would like to invite you and the public to an open house on Thursday, Feb. 16, from 4 to 7 p.m. at the Wharfinger building. Subject-matter experts will be available on a wide range of issues that affect the Balloon Tract site. The public should have the facts before being asked to make a decision on this project. Thank you for ensuring that these points are clearly presented.

Brian Morrissey is senior vice president for Security National Properties. His home is in Omaha, Neb.

The opinions expressed in My Word pieces do not necessarily reflect the editorial viewpoint of the Times-Standard. ]]> tag:www.tsblogs.com,2006:/bigbox//13.93 2006-01-24T20:07:41Z 2006-01-24T20:12:38Z

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.