Friday, March 25, 2011

”Mark stabbed us in the back”

◼ One reason why the City selection committee not sending Lovelace forward for coastal commission; board sending names of Stillman, Bass, Zanzi, Farley to the governor - Times-Standard
...The board decided to discuss and vote on each candidate in succession, and unanimously voted to send the names of all the candidates, except Lovelace and Farley.

A majority of the few members of the public who spoke -- there were fewer than 10 people in attendance -- opposed sending Lovelace's name and spoke of Bass's consensus building skills, Zanzi's experience with the California Department Fish and Game and Farley's experience on the Ferndale Planning Commission. The board was even told of two petitions, totaling roughly 900 signatures, in opposition to Lovelace, gathered within 24 hours.

”I believe that he (Lovelace) is divisive and he is out of touch with the county,” said Bob Morris, with Humboldt Coalition for Property Rights (CPR)....
Remember - As part of the the scorched earth pursuit of an agenda, Lovelace is the man who hounded and badgered Tom Herman and Roger Rodoni - and hounded and badgered John Campbell to his death.

It remains unknown whether he is behind the Humboldt Herald, though many suspect he is. If he is, then his pursuit of political opponents goes on. If he isn't behind it, and knows who it is, he allows it to go on.

Divisive doesn't even begin to cover it.


And remember: The criticism about Mark needing to attend to needs of his district are fair - he needs to look no further than "community development services" (The Planning Department) and the mess they have made of the general plan process - Last May, he set a time frame, supported by the BOS to bring the completed General Plan to the Board of Supervisors by October of last year, and yet still another six months has passed with no word from Kirk Girard, and communities are becoming increasingly agitated.

Forget the Coastal Commission - clean up the County's house.


  1. I don't think you've talked to Mark before. Heraldo can be very irrational. Mark takes an evidence-based approach to decision making. You may not like his evidence or his conclusions, but there's a world of difference between him and the Heraldo(s). And to imply he hounded a man to his death is just sleezy. Unethical. Shameful.

  2. Is it?

    I agree that Mark comes across as 'evidence-based' and that he does his homework.

    My complaints with him have to do with his duplicity - being PAID to steer the General Plan process and not disclosing that. For one.

    He did hound John Campbell. How can you dispute that?

    As for the heraldo thing -we just don't know, do we? For all we know it is written out of his home. More power to him - or her - or whoever it is. heraldo doesn't come off as being irrational. Agenda driven, yes. And very deliberately so. Sort of like Mark, no?

  3. Did he hound Campbell to the extent that you hound Gallegos?

  4. What's your evidence that he hounded Campbell, and how are you defining 'hound'? The word implies inappropriate conduct. What did he do that was inappropriate to Campbell?

  5. Go back and do your homework.

  6. If Gallegos fall ill, can we blame you?

  7. Go for it - if I am still filing complaints against him years after he has retired.

  8. Ahhh, so in summary, Campbell was never hounded. Now I understand. Thanks. You take a faith-based approach to the world. You have faith the man is evil, so the details don't matter.

  9. To be clear, you just lost a golden opportunity. I was willing to genuinely listen to your evidence, except you don't have any. If you can't support extraordinary claims, how do you expect to be taken seriously?

  10. And you expect to rewrite history. Which is one reason I have not shut this site down.

  11. God is a Republican Rose. You will always be loved.


Comments are open, but moderated, for the time-being. Good luck.