Wednesday, June 10, 2009

A tiny little group in reality

The opposite of the live and let live crowd, this is petty, vindictive, intolerant "progressive" BS on full display at every meeting you go to. Here's the latest, penned by Jennifer Kalt.
The Future of Humboldt's timberlands

The little tiny group of people, pretending to be so many different groups - the "Humboldt Watershed Council/Healthy Humboldt/DUHC/NEC/Baykeeper cabal. It's the same old same old 5 or 6 people. Kinda like the old joke about the Sheriff of the small town who is also the judge, the Mayor, the City Clerk and the Planning Director. Can we just come up with one name for them all?
Ever the master of self promotion:
Jennifer Kalt represents Healthy Humboldt, a coalition of public interest groups working for a County General Plan that provides healthy housing and transportation choices while protecting resource lands and watersheds by focusing future growth in existing communities. She is also a director of the Northcoast Environmental Center.

She's also Water quality coordinator Jen Kalt...Humboldt Baykeeper representative Jennifer Kalt...Jennifer Kalt, EPIC/Resource Protection Associate,/California Indian Basketweavers Association/Native Plant Society/TPZ "expert"

Pretty funny to see Jen Kalt pretending to care about Humboldt's timberlands, part of the crowd who shut down logging - more of that attempting to dictate what other people will do with property they own. It was particularly interesting to see Jen Kalt's spewing her talking points at the meeting at Azalea Hall during the TPZ debacle - where the other people in the room actually knew the facts, and could address the lies.

I suspect someone will be addressing this little attempt to influence the public, an attempt by people who own nothing, who have nothing vested in the outcome, trying to dictate what others can and cannot do. The kind of people who loves to impose rules and restrictions, but not follow them themselves.

In the meantime, the cabal is "balls to the wall" trying to force their will on the people of Humboldt County by attempting to steer the planning process. They are a very, very small group, despite their efforts to look big.

They are no longer going to just get away with it though - people whose lives are affected have begun to speak up and fight back ◼ Determining the path of Humboldt County Without all the phony fanfare, this one is penned by Estelle Fennell... the executive director of the Humboldt Coalition for Property Rights.

37 comments:

  1. Please Rose, you and your readers should understand that citizens of this (or for that matter any other) county do not own ANYTHING. This includes our bodies. Everything and everyone is owned by the government. We simply lease property from the government by paying the appropriate fees (taxes). The lease agreements always dictate how and for what purpose we use the leased property. Humboldt county and the state of Kalifornia simply have more stringent "lease agreements" than other areas. For that reason all political issues are merely auctions on the terms of the leases.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It's always amusing to see a minority try to dictate terms to the majority.
    It ceases to be interesting when they start getting devious in their efforts to have their way.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Miller and Spreen have their rural Kingdoms so F*** everyone else. Galt is simply their payed mouth piece.

    ReplyDelete
  4. err, I mean, Miller and Spreen have their rural Kingdoms so F*** everyone else. Galt is simply their PAID mouth piece.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Does she do Club Risque, too?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Is the ad hominem approach really necessary Rose? As you well know you can disagree with someone without tearing them down personally. Like Estelle, Jen has a job and she has some expertise and knowledge. You might not like her conclusions, but what's missing in your post is any intrinsic criticism of the substance of her piece. In what respect is she "lying?"

    At the last official meeting, the majority of speakers favored the plan A approach, whether they supported all of its provisions. We'll see who shows up tomorrow night.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Eric, Jen in fact has little expertise and even less knoledge. Even the Forest Service will not hire her any more due to crappy skills and work ethic. In fact the only ones who will hire her pay her to spew their misinformation.

    Watch out for half truths yourself. Twenty or thirty people showed up for the last poorly noticed meeting, hardly a representative sample, as you are well aware but prefer to ignore. But of course the half truth suits your purpose. Lets put land use to a real vote of the people. You will lose 80% - 20% best case. this is why you and your three Arcata friends have to misrepresent the facts of the issue.

    ReplyDelete
  8. The problem with any of the usual suspects and their tag-team orgs is that who can trust them? Now that they don't have Palco to beat up and Arkley's deal is on their back burner, what's a committed politico to do to attack the corporate system? Why join them as Estelle did and Eric who here is hypocritically posing as not being affiliated with corporate developer Bob so he can play out his incessant conflict needs. Meanwhile, those who have been keeping track of the real as opposed to political hype watershed degradation note the turn-around in enviro org circles to actually begin protecting homestead development watersheds by stopping their unregulated spread across rural Humboldt County.

    ReplyDelete
  9. How about you actually let the property owners decide.

    Not Ken Miler's goons.

    Sorry, Eric, but Jen has put herself here, increasingly. And I watched her lie, in a room where the people she was lying about actually got to defend themselves. A rarity.

    All that's missing is the next installment of the carefully orchestrated talking points. I'm sure the next My Word is already in the pipeline. Just remains to see whose name is on it.

    How about Ken Miller just takes care of his own property and quits jonesing after the timber land. And quits using Joyce to do his dirty work.

    ReplyDelete
  10. How about you actually let the property owners decide.

    Sure, and how about we let the drivers decide what rules they want to follow? Maybe I'll just decide to drive on the same side of the road as the British.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Maybe so, Eric.

    It's odd, I would think you would side with individual freedoms and rights, but you increasingly align yourself with the meddlers and restricters.

    Free rein for pot growers but no one else seems to be the current mentality.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Eric,some times you gotta call a spade a spade. Galt is simply full of crap. There are several glaring falsehoods in her PR piece. Even you could point them out. But the real story isn't that,it's that she, just like little marky mark ,is(was) payed to lobby for HWC. Spreen/Miller got theirs so screw you rubes.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Eric, it' none of your damn biz who I let stay in my home or how I heat it or what I build it out of. You some kind of 1984 think/speak agent? Bet you've got ideas,thoughts,personal items,relationships,home up grades or modifications that you wouldn't like me butting my nose into. How would you like some gov ass hole crashing your pad gun in hand checking your every nook and crannie? The public has a reasonable right to protection from real health and safety concerns. My gray water and compost privy and your pot don't rise to that level. You need to get real dude.

    ReplyDelete
  14. It's odd, I would think you would side with individual freedoms and rights, but you increasingly align yourself with the meddlers and restricters.

    In many equations extending one person's liberty may encroach on another's. In this case, certain uses of land can impact on everybody. In an imperfect universe such as ours it's not all about liberty nor all about the community interest. It's about the healthiest balance you can find between the two. Reasonable land use regulation is nothing new. It dates back to the beginning of organized civilization.

    Free rein for pot growers but no one else seems to be the current mentality.

    Not that it's intrinsic to the central points of the conversation, but part of the problem we're trying to address is precisely the excessive draws from the rivers by large scale pot growers. And that's one group which is siding heavily with HumCPR. It's kind of an ironic argument to make.

    ReplyDelete
  15. How would you like some gov ass hole crashing your pad gun in hand checking your every nook and crannie?

    Would I get dinner and a movie first?

    ReplyDelete
  16. No it isn't. Cpr is not for big pot grows. neither are my neighbors or I. And yes you'll get a movie. Eric you have about as much creds as Galt.Not very damn much.

    ReplyDelete
  17. 10:32 and still posting on the net Eric. Pretty PC of you. Carbon footprint and all. Off the grid? Now what will you do if you have to take a late night piss. Better check with Galt/Miller/Spreen on that one.

    ReplyDelete
  18. No it isn't. Cpr is not for big pot grows.

    I didn't say that. I said the big pot growers are for HumCPR, because some of the proposed regulations would put their projects in jeopardy.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Eric, who pays your lawyer fees in Humboldt County? Why this hypocrisy about taking money from pot growers here and dissing them there? Your opinions reflect a political schizophrenia and the more you defend your positions, i.e., the more you talk out of both sides of your mouth, the less credible your arguments sound. But do keep at it. Negative attention is better than none, right? Just ask Nick..

    ReplyDelete
  20. Well, for the first part I'm not "dissing" anyone. Just pointing out the obvious.

    Secondly, everybody in this county owes something economically to pot growers, including you. It's just the reality.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I don't owe pot growers a fucking thing Eric. Pull your head out of your ass if that is your reality.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Oh, yeah, we do - we owe them having to lock our doors. We owe them not being able to hike or ride up in the hills. We owe them not being able to hike in public parklands. We owe them for the housing shortage, less available rentals, and increased housing costs. We owe them the costs of the fire dept. every time there's a growhouse fire. We owe them for the increase in home-invasion robberies and killings. We owe them for increased fees and taxes because they pay none on their substantial illicit incomes. And we owe them a decimated DA's Office.

    Some have owed them their lives.

    Yeah, maybe they come in and pay cash at the local car dealer, and we are supposed to be grateful that they are supporting the local economy... and maybe they would also buy cars if they had legal jobs and paid their taxes and contributed to society the same way all the rest of the people have to.

    ReplyDelete
  23. I really wish people would read what I say and not the words of their own strawman. I was talking about the economy. Pot dollars are a big part of it. Home Depot wouldn't even consider a move here but for the underground money which indicates so much more flowing money around here than what is on paper. That's their criticism of the WalMart opposition study a decade ago - it only looks at the paper.

    That's coming from the horse's mouth.

    ReplyDelete
  24. You sure you got the right end of that horse. Sounds more like horseshit to me. Eric, read Rose's comment carefully this time to see why gross hypocrisy of Progressive activists such as yourself taking money from pot growers and defending them in court and yet turn around where the General Plan is concerned to try to stop more rural development to stop more pot growers from coming in and "spoiling it all" for the new landed gentry. The same people who don't want any industrialization happening in Humboldt County that again might "spoil it all" for the landed gentry that you represent and speak for-out of both ends..

    ReplyDelete
  25. Steven,i often don't agree with you,well don't really understand what you are talking about. But on this issue and Eric's bullshit you are right on.

    ReplyDelete
  26. And Stephen, that responds to what I said how? Focus Stephen.

    ReplyDelete
  27. How about you focus, counselor. Focus on what you posted and perhaps this time see past your cognitive dissonance problem:

    "Well, for the first part I'm not "dissing" anyone. Just pointing out the obvious.

    Secondly, everybody in this county owes something economically to pot growers, including you. It's just the reality."

    "I said the big pot growers are for HumCPR, because some of the proposed regulations would put their projects in jeopardy."

    Not dissing anybody, Eric? And the jab at "big pot growers" and HumCPR is your token nod of respect? And this isn't even touching your hypocrisy issues where you take your monies where you can and do your best to protect the privileged pot grower class that pays your salary.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Stephen 2 Eric 0

    ReplyDelete
  29. Well, I'll let Stephen wander off into his usual delirium. For the record, insurance companies pay most of my salary.

    The point I was making Rose, is that this is one instance where the pot growers and I are on opposite sides. On issues of civil liberties, we tend to be on the same side. Property rights vs. community interests, we don't always see eye to eye.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Eric, you are a flat out hypocrite.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Eric: your clients, how do they retain your services? Where do they get the money for that? Insurance? Working for the park service? Flipping burgers? I don't think so. Your ability to live in SoHum rests in large part on pot growing, the economic upper class with disposable incomes which local non-growers do not have unless they are petite bourgeousie business owners themselves catering to pot growers like you lawyers do. What is so damn hypocritical about yours and other Progressive and enviro activists is that you types have no problem taking pot monies from existing homesteaders but now, much overdue you activists want to stop anymore pot growers coming on to the Humboldt scene like the people did who pay your salary. It's like, "Oh, what a wonderful place! Let's keep it all for ourselves now that we've arrived! It's just plain selfish, me-first, you last, I got mine, go fuck yourself, kind of mentality and when you parade it with your incessant need to provoke conflict, you only stir up the existing antagonism that lurks just below the surface of local activist politics.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Probably about half of my pay comes from insurance companies either in personal injury cases, title insurance claims, or defending people in claims made against homeowner's insurance. It subsidizes the rest of my practice, which is known for being affordable to people who work for a living

    It's not my practice to promote myself on these blogs, but since you asked so nicely I'm telling you. I don't do much criminal work and much of my work is on what is called a contingency basis. I also do plenty of probono work, or sliding scale work when I am convinced the client simply can't afford my fees and when I can afford to offer it. Most of my clients are very happy with my services. This is the first and last time I'm going to address this because generally speaking I keep my blogging separate from my work, except when some jerk forces the issue and I'm forced to defend a 40 year old practice which I believe serves a small town well.

    But it is true that my ability to live in sohum is based somewhat on pot money, as is your ability to live in Rio Dell, or anyone to live in Humboldt County. Like it or not, it is an integral part of the local economy.

    ReplyDelete
  33. What's interesting is that the "Progressives" are so hot to deny other people's rights while proclaiming new 'rights' for themselves.

    YOU no longer have property rights, because THEY don't like you owning property. YOU no longer have the right to build a woodshed because THEY don't have a pot to piss in.

    THEY suddenly have a right to health care at YOUR expense, because THEY have decreed it so. Food at other's expense even if they do nothing to produce for themselves, housing at other's expense, even though they do not work, or save, or create anything to provide for themselves.

    THEY have all kinds of rights,and would like to kill you if you object - though our system of government prevents them from doing so.

    THEY believe the collective ant mass has the right to tell everyone to behave as a drone, and live piled up on top of each other - WE believe in INDIVIDUAL rights to self determination, self responsibility, taking care of yourself and your family and others as much as you can. WE do not believe in taking from others at the point of a gun.

    It's really that simple.

    WE believe that if someone wants to buy, build on and live on 20, 50, 200, 500 acres, more power to them.


    WE are not jealous and small minded.

    It's really that simple.

    YOU having a Porsche or a McMansion does not upset our apple cart, Eric. YOU choosing to live off the grid and outside the normal does not offend or threaten US - and by that I mean the collective US, the POLAR OPPOSITES of the Progressives.

    I don't really think you live your life as a "Progressive" Eric though you espouse their values.

    You worked too hard and too long for what you have - you worked for your grades, for your license, and for your living - when it comes right down to it - if you earned an A, you would not give half your grade to the F student, so that you might both have Cs. You know the fundamental unfairness of that.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Bullshit Eric - for you your "ability to live in sohum is based somewhat on pot money" but mine is not. If you smell like dope or your money does, you are not welcome in my business. I do not go to shops that I believe exist to launder money and I refuse to look the other way. Be a man, grow some balls and you too can stop being a hypocrite.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Eh, I don't think Eric is necessarily a hypocrite.

    Anyway - the ironic thing is we are poised to legalize pot just as they are about to outlaw tobacco. Once Pot is legalized, it will undoubtedly be subject to the same kind of ridiculous draconian oversight.

    Your days of freedom are coming to an end. Enjoy them while you can.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Well, Eric, as "some jerk" calling you on your still continuing hypocrisy that won't admit pot growers support your law practice, I still say that without pot growers you very likely wouldn't be in SoHum because you couldn't make a living. You just can't admit to it straight up, can you? Why is that? You ashamed of taking drug money? And what's this crap about me not being able to live in Rio Dell without pot money? When the government starts growing and marketing marijuana then you might have a point but that's not a very likely scenario but if you need company in your pot dependency, there's always narc anon groups to go to.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Rose at 11:50: BINGO - love you!

    ReplyDelete

Comments are open. Play nice.