Local Solutions endorses...

◼ Well, one of the defunct group anyway. Dennis Huber.

I'm sorry. You supported Gallegos. Your high-minded words are worse than meaningless.

It's not even up for dispute anymore, how devastating his tenure has been to that office. And you, Mr. Huber, supported it. Promoted it.

I haven't heard any 'we're sorry' from you.

It's a problem.

__________________
◼ The Local Solutions sham
◼ No connection?
◼ Any doubt what Local Solutions' agenda is?

And so it begins.

You thought you had a break from politics Think again. The demonization of Frank Jager has already begun on "heraldo." All the dirty work will come from that source. "oooh, he was against an inquest on the Cheri Moore case...he supports killing children...he's 'dying' to get into office...and...ooooh, he was in office with Nancy Fleming"

Did you know, we now have a new, virulently partisan political party. The challenger, George Clark is not running for the people of Eureka, nor to serve the greater community. No. He is running to solidify the "progressive" power base. Speaking to his fellow "progressives," through Salzman's listserve, Chris Kerrigan has this to say for Clark:

We have come a long way in the last eight years and with the addition of Council Member Larry Glass we are now making great progress. Eureka, the county seat, is a classic bellwether city, and as you have probably heard, as Eureka goes, often so goes Humboldt County.

It is vital that we keep this forward momentum going in our community.

We must unite as progressives behind a candidate, and ensure that the progressive tradition, started with my election to the Eureka City Council eight years ago, continues.

In Solidarity,
Chris Kerrigan

One to watch. Let's see what "forward momentum" the "progressives" advocate.

Now you know

why Jake Pickering got his ass kicked so bad"" in the last election. If you missed his latest insane "My Word" in The Times-Standard don't despair. His buddy, Richard Salzman is pimping the insane rant through his listserve (this time it's "Redwood Progressive.") If you close your eyes, you can imagine the two of them working on the wording... "Say this.." "oh yeah!, That's Good!" "Now twist the knife, use words like 'felonious' and "spokesliar."

The really twisted part, though, is Pickering is running for yet another office. Jake Pickering is a candidate for the Humboldt County Board of Education.

Gallegos still has his fans

This morning's paper touched off a rant in the coffee shop - the guy starts going off about the brutal cops, how bad EPD is, and cited as evidence "You can tell how bad they are, just look at how they treat OUR DA."

Ya gotta be kiddin' me.

-- Just for the record - what does the guy do for a living? He works in the pot fields. Who would he call if he needed help? Not the cops - he is armed.

What is she saying here? The people are too stupid to have an opinion?

Old news, just part of the record - In this letter to the editor, one of Salzman's head Orks chastises the Eureka Reporter for asking whether or not Gallegos can adequately manage the DA's office, based on the Grand Jury's findings. (At least we can assume she actually wrote the letter herself)

She seems to be saying that the people are too stupid and uninformed to have an opinion on that. Pretty funny.

More than that, though, she actually says that only the people who work in that office are qualified to make that call.

So tell us again, Claire, why you didn't listen to the people who did work in that office? Why you allowed them to be demeaned and denigrated? Why you didn't stand up for the working people who had served this county so well?

What happens to people who do speak out, Claire? What happens to people who tell the truth about Gallegos? The spin machine goes into full attack mode. And you are part of it.

Reporter poll exploits grand jury recommendations 7/6/2005
Dear Editor,

As often happens, and is the case here, newspapers and the media enjoy a unique forum for probing the public’s opinions on diverse subjects, many of which are complex or obscure.

Your survey question regarding the District Attorney Gallegos’ ability to “adequately manage the DA’s office” is not one the general public is either knowledgeable about or capable of professionally evaluating.

Only those who have a direct working or a professional relationship with the administration of this office can make that determination.

One may support or oppose Mr. Gallegos’ principles and philosophies but have no knowledge of his effectiveness as a public administrator.

Fortunately, a free press is guaranteed the right to express editorial opinions; sidebar surveys seldom evince much light on public questions. It appears that this Eureka Reporter poll is exploiting the grand jury’s comments rather than engaging in journalism’s highest role: to enlighten the public.

Claire Courtney
Eureka

Related:
◼ TS - Grand Jury Findings and Recommendations
◼ ER - 2004-05 Humboldt County Grand Jury Report 6/29/2005
◼ TS - Grand jury issues scathing DA critique June 29, 2005

"However, the informed, well-organized, diligent leadership essential during difficult times is missing," the grand jury report said. "Operations are neither as efficient nor as effective as they must be."

◼ McK Press - Grand Jury Report: D.A. guilty of 'weak leadership'
◼ ER - 2004-05 Humboldt County grand jury releases its final report
◼ NCJ - GRAND JURY REPORT IN


◼ The Grand Jury Report on the DA's office
◼ The Grand Jury Report on CAST
◼ TS - Gallegos responds to grand jury findings
◼ CAST Response/Grand Jury Report

More on the Witch Hunt..."This is not a NIMBY issue" WITH KHUM UPDATES

In a message dated 5/2/2007 salzman@inreach.com writes:
To: Humboldt neighbors re 17-unit subdivision in Manila...
"...This is NOT just a Manila issue - and NOT a NIMBY issue. it's about what kinds of development the residents of Humboldt Bay wish to allow in our communities in the future, and how these critical decisions should be made...."
"...This is not a NIMBY issue. No developer should be allowed to place a densely packed subdivision of large homes on top of a wild dune ecosystem adjacent to a healthy willow wetland in a rural neighborhood on a narrow road...

Uh huh.


It does happen elsewhere, and it looks kinda nice.

UPDATE:
Letters to the North Coast Journal, from Fennel, his tenant, and a guy from Trinidad - and a correction noted, But the facts still stand. Michael Fennel asserts, and Hank agrees, that Fennel did not BUILD three houses. One existed, One was built and another is planned. Nevertheless, Sims points out, the point of his comments last week was that Fennel wants to hold Riley to a half acre minimum standard that he himself did not - or was not allowed to - follow.

ANOTHER UPDATE:
Calling out all the stops and using the media - today, (Thursday) Michael Fennel is on KHUM decrying Scott Riley's project, saying it is not a "green development" - STILL says this project plans to bulldoze the dunes - says people should be honest - says they are trying to impose a dense new neighborhood - still upset about the scrub pines which were cut, wants to ask for a measuring of the stumps, says he has already measured the stumps - (isn't that trespassing?) Says he doesn't see cutting a new road into the dunes is fair to the protected environment, says the new development must fit in with the character of the existing homes (-?-), and that these 3 story homes just won't fit in with the existing character, in part becasue they have to be built to withstand a tsunami. Says, essentially that John Ash, the architect is lying. (Spin, he says, to call using recycled products and installing solar "green.") No mention of the trail access, nor the fact that Riley offered to donate land to the Community... Like I said, there's no appeasing these guys.

UPDATE to UPDATE (1:31):
Scott Riley called in to KHUM to set the record straight... Wow what a story! Basically, I'll stick to the order in which he spoke:

First he talked about the trees. He said it is illegal to cut anything over a foot in diameter. Then he talked about the trees he cut, He said, first of all, that he planted 150 native trees on the property (turns out he owns a tree farm), and said they had gotten to be about 15 to 20 feet tall. He said when trees grow to a certain height in the sand, they often get blown over, and that that had happened here. So he went in to clean up the dead and dying trees, cut them up for firewood.

Then the harassment begins...The next day, he said, he came to work on them and found a Stop Work' order posted. The County sent out a code enforcement unit to inspect his property, they told him they had gotten complaints from a couple of neighbors. He showed them the trees, explained what was going on. The code enforcement officers found that there was no violation.

A couple of weeks later he cut the trees up and stacked them up. Then another agency came to inspect, this time the Coastal Commission, again because of complaints from Fennel and company. The Coastal Commission representative also sees that this is not a violation.

Then another Federal agency showed up, because Fennel and his friends had complained about an illegal timber harvest.

All three agencies found that no violation had occurred. And, Riley said, he got three cords of wood finally.

Next, the radio host, Mike Dronkers, asked him about the three story houses that Fennel had complained so loudly about.

Riley said first that the house Fennel built was 6 feet from his own property line and that it is taller than any of the houses Riley plans to build, and that across the street Fennel had another 30 foot building. Riley said that his tallest house will be 35 feet in height, and that they will have underground garages.

Giving a background on the dispute, he said that in 1992 he talked to the property's then owners, the Shires, and asked if they would sell the property. they said the property was not for sale, but mentioned that Fennel and Aryay Kalaki had gotten the property appraised and made an offer to the Shires.

Noting that the property was not for sale, they then said that if someone offered them twice what Kalaki had offered, they would sell it. So Riley bought it, and made a lifelong enemy apparently. He said he himself had put the property up for sale, that for 15 years Kalaki and Fennel could have purchased the property and turned it into a dune sanctuary if they wanted to, but they did not.

Regarding the houses, he said he has posted the plans on a bulletin board and that people can see them at the Planning Dept. When he decided to develop it, the County suggested that he do a planned unit development, where you cluster the houses and leave the rest for natural habitat, the new wave of the future.

He said most of Manila is zoned for 5,000 sq. ft lots which is 8 houses to an acre, and some allow 16 per acre, and he pointed out that his property is 8.5 acres, and he is only building 17 homes, much better than the rest of Manila.

He said his homes will be set well back from the wetlands, while Fennel's house is only 7 feet from the wetlands, and that one of Fennel's buildings is in the wetland, something Fennel had requested a variance to hbe allowed to do so.

In fact, he said, Fennel has requested a variance each time he has done something, while he, Riley had not asked for any zoning variances.

The homes he is proposing have sod roofs, passive solar, solar panels, thermal mass, with recycled and organic materials. The building cost is substantially more than a "normal" house. They'll cost $400,000 to $500,000 to build, but they represent a new wave in sustainable development. Riley said he is willing to take the risk, but that it is a gamble, whether or not he will be able to sell them. "Green" housing is more expensive. Like organic produce. But worth it.

It's an ambitious project, and one people should be excited about, especially the so-called enviros.

To Mike Dronkers - like Hank Sims - you deserve thanks for allowing both sides to be told. Very interesting.

It is quite a story. Not a pretty story, though.

Footnote and disclaimer: I was scribbling as fast as I could as the two men were talking. I believe I got all the points correctly. But, given the interest this is generating, and given the fact that Fennel's side looks like they are the nitpicky ones who are probably looking for any little thing I might have gotten wrong that they can use against Riley, I am very thankful to have been given an mp3 copy of both appearances. I'm trying to figure out how to upload the file if I can't link to it at the station, so you can all hear it verbatim for yourselves. So, if I got any number wrong - my apologies.

MORE:
Though Fennel derided Riley's architect, John Ash, Ash is no lightweight. John Ash Group Architects received the Los Angeles Conservancy’s prestigious Preservation Award for 2005. John Ash Group Architects, with offices in both Eureka and Los Angeles, worked as the historic preservation architect on the winning Infomart-Los Angeles Terminal Annex project.

He also writes a column on building design for the Eureka Reporter:
(A new column: Design for Life)
Creating spaces, building fences
The life style brand: Bringing meaning to your life
The lighted path on the search for enlightenment
Doors — our humble guardians should give us more
The continuing story of the door
Defining your home's character
Imagining a better space
My Space, Chapter 2: Building the perfect shower
A brief plan for the 'me space'
A Deck For All Seasons Part 2
Clients come first, real or not

A witch hunt

She was my brother's teacher. She was creative, and innovative, and something of a radical. She talked about saving the forests long before the treesitters and Redwood Summer. She introduced the concept of organic food, and had the kids making (and drinking) carrot juice, brought in xeroxed sheets of information on the formaldehyde in ice cream. She exemplified the back to the land, grow your own, live off the grid lifestyle. And we loved her.

One day, a kid brought a Playboy Magazine into class. When she discovered it in his desk, she did something very unusual. She took it out, and hung it on the bulletin board. And the class had a discussion about what it represented.

The kids knew it to be the right reaction. It was just. It wasn't over-reactive. It was real and it was honest. And they loved her.

But the parents didn't. She was far too radical. And soon she was gone.

And the kids knew - she was the victim of a witch hunt.

It seems ironic to me that her son is now becoming a victim of the same sort of narrow minded thinking - but with a major twist.

Her name was Irene Riley.

Her son's name is Scott Riley.

His proposal for an "eco-groovy" development in Manila has brought out the lynch mob.

Salzman and his "eco-groovy" cohorts kicked into full gear, sounding the clarion call for warm bodies to kill the proposal, promising all kinds of dire consequences if Riley is successful - calling it "a very dense subdivision," stating that The development could be precedent-setting county-wide in a number of harmful ways. They "organized a publicized walk ... so local residents could see for themselves how d-e-s-t-r-u-c-t-i-v-e this will be. They hope that dozens of concerned residents across the Humboldt Bay area will recognize the i-m-p-o-r-t-a-n-c-e of this meeting, and that we're able to pack the chambers with articulate voices of opposition. They claim "None of us are opposed to this property being "developed" as long as it matches the existing neighborhood's low density, and doesn't destroy any of the existing dunes.,, Aryay Kalaki said it would irretrievably change the community's rustic attributes that residents cherish. ”We would permanently lose the rural character,” said Kalaki." (Don't laugh!) (Channel 3 they claim, ran the "publicized walk" as a lead story that night. The Times Standard and The Lumberjack covered it as well - Guys, you might wanna check your sources.)

As Hank Sims details in his recent column, there are some problems with their story.

"...Pine trees. In his letter, (Michael) Fennell stated that Riley was "caught cutting mature beach pines on [his] property prior to submitting [his] development plan." The implication was that this was an illegal act, and in a follow-up call Fennell asserted that it was.

In fact, it was not. The tree-cutting incident was covered in the Arcata Eye at the time. The story from that paper described how officers from the county's code enforcement unit had been called to the scene and had issued a stop-work permit for "possible" violations, but had later determined that no law had been broken. The trees were not, in fact, "mature," at least by the definition adopted by the county. In our phone conversation, Fennell insisted that code enforcement had simply been too busy to prosecute Riley, but this is not the case. No law was broken.

Sand. In his letter, Fennell mentioned that the Riley plan involves "bulldoz[ing] the dunes (about 650 large dump-truck loads)." In fact, the great majority of the sand removed from building sites in the Riley proposal will be used to restore historic dunes on the property, according to engineering plans that have been submitted to the county. Only one "large dump-truck load" of sand is scheduled to be removed from the site.

Density. Fennell, speaking for the community, said: "We welcome any new housing that ... maintains the half-acre minimum standard." (Half-acre-minimum lots are standard for the area's zoning.)

Riley's plan calls for 17 homes on 8.5 acres, which pencils out to one home per half-acre. However, those proposed homes will be scrunched into one corner of the property so that the rest of the parcel, which consists of sensitive wetlands, may be protected as open space. This kind of thing is the purpose behind "planned unit developments." Trevor Eslow, a planner with the county's Community Development Services division, assured us Tuesday that these kind of trade-offs -- smaller lot sizes for preserved open space -- are not entirely uncommon.

In fact, just last year there was another Manila developer who did a somewhat analogous deal with the county. His name is Michael Fennell. Last year, Fennell wanted to subdivide 3.7 acres, 3 acres of which was wetlands or pine forest. Fennell built three homes on the other seven-tenths of an acre, with the county's blessing. According to Eslow, the lead planner on the project, one of the lots was only 15,000 square feet in size -- about .35 acres, well below the standard he sets for Riley's development..."

Riley's development is "green" - the kind of thing that should make these guys happy.

And, there's more to the story. Kalaki has a longstanding grudge against Riley (reportedly he wanted Riley's piece of property, but offered less than Riley, and so did not get it, and has been on a vendetta ever since. There's also some evidence that he uses the "Dunes Forum" to harass Riley.)

Another neighbor is Salzman's buddy, extremist, Paul Cienfuegos.

Why is Salzman suddenly so interested in all proposed development? It's not just that he likes to meddle in other people's business. It appears that he's an active force in Mark Lovelace's "Healthy Humboldt." You can expect activist tactics to be employed, viral email alerts, plaintive "My Word's" penned by people other than him, and Salzman's Orks armed with talking points attending community meetings and speaking against Riley. Riley's only real sin appears to be that he doesn't belong to the Club.

It tells you that these guys are not really in it for "green" reasons. It's about power and control and you can't appease these guys.

The Humboldt County Planning Commission will consider Riley's development at its regular meeting on Thursday, May 3.

Paul Cienfuegos wants you to "share YOUR concerns with the various public officials who will be involved in this decision.
* Michael Wheeler, Humboldt County Planner mwheeler@co.humboldt.ca.us
* Bob Merrill, CA Coastal Commission bmerrill@coastal.ca.gov
* CA Dept of Fish and Game wcondon@dfg.ca.gov
* Your local Board of Supes, especially John Woolley jwoolley@co.humboldt.ca.us"

Will they take the time to check their sources?

ADDTL INFO:
Manila takes second look at Riley development, fluoride
Manila rejects wetland donation from developer

"Medicinal Meth"

This one's for "medicinal Meth" advocate, Ellen Taylor.

Meth addict who made documentary dies
A former trucker whose documentary chronicled an agonizing descent as methamphetamine ravaged his body has died, optimistic to the end that his story would keep others from the highly addictive stimulant.

By his family's account, (Shawn) Bridges already had died at least twice, his heart so damaged by years of using meth -- a concoction that can include toxic chemicals such as battery acid, drain cleaner and fertilizer -- that it stopped and had to be shocked back into beating.

The documentary shows Bridges mostly bedridden, his constant companions a catheter and feeding tube.

"I'd say he's got a 34-year-old body on the outside with a 70- to 80-year-old man on the inside," his father told The Associated Press last May.

But Ellen thinks "...Demonization of meth cripples democracy..."

Inquiring Minds Want to Know...

What's the story here? How'd the "Humboldt Buddhist Peace Fellowship" become part of Salzman's propaganda machine?

Times Standard headline calls it a "Religious Group"but Salzman's "Release" clears that up - calls it "Buddhist Fellowship"

Salzman using these guys on the "Police Review" Bandwagon, right along with Ken Miller.

See the message with full headers and all the incite-a-riot propaganda here.

Any truth to the rumor that Twombly is involved in this one?

Local Solutions

Who's buying this?
From Eric's blog:
An Open Letter to the Progressive Community from Local Solutions

[PLEASE NOTE: We wrote this letter some time ago, but we wanted to wait until the final count for every campaign was tallied and certified before sending it out. As you well know, the process took longer than everyone expected, and then with the holidays right around the corner, we elected to send this message out in the New Year. Our intent is to lay to rest questions from the past and offer a place to begin discussion for the future.]

Dear friends, We are aware that there has been much speculation and question regarding the role of Local Solutions in the November elections. We are deeply disappointed with the results and frustrated that we at Local Solutions were unable to do more to help. We believe the Eureka elections could have been won by focusing on grassroots mobilization with a strong emphasis on coordination and cooperation between campaigns in order to make the task manageable and more enjoyable.

We have spent some time considering how to talk about the issues that concern us, and how to engage the broader progressive community in this conversation. We would like to hear your ideas for building local political campaigns with a spirit of cooperation and respect and your suggestions for what role Local Solutions should play in this work.

Local Solutions was formed to provide tools and expertise for grassroots progressive political organizing. We believe that ethics, integrity, and the process of engaging and empowering voters are just as important as a victory on Election Day.

Elections, particularly in Humboldt County, are won by mobilizing hundreds of volunteers talking to thousands of their neighbors. By focusing on voter outreach and involvement (rather than media or fundraising), elections can be a way to develop new leaders and teach citizens how to mobilize each other. At Local Solutions we care most about building a grassroots movement for progressive power. Each political race is important, but we challenge ourselves to keep our eye on the big picture as well.

During the Measure T and Gallegos campaigns, there was some coordination between campaigns, but most of the voter outreach coordination happened late in the process. As we prepared for the November elections, we hoped we could foster better coordination between campaigns from the beginning, ensuring that the campaigns shared resources with each other rather than competing.

We determined our skills and resources would be best used for voter contact and outreach, focusing on ensuring that every supportive voter went to the polls on Election Day. Local Solutions directors, as individuals or as a group, have managed voter contact, volunteer recruitment, and Get Out the Vote (GOTV) operations in many successful campaigns, including the attempted recall of the District Attorney, the Humboldt campaign against the Schwarzenegger Special Election propositions in November 2005, Chris Kerrigan’s re-election campaign, Kaitlin Sopoci-Belknap’s campaign for Water District, Measure T and key components of the Gallegos re-election campaign.

Local Solutions presented a Coordinated Campaign proposal to the endorsed candidates and their campaign teams. It described how the campaigns could work together to maximize voter outreach, build energy and enthusiasm, and minimize the strain on financial and volunteer resources. We offered trainings on campaign management, candidate training, phonebank management, volunteer recruitment and coordination, and campaign finance reporting. We offered this assistance at a cost of $750 to each campaign. This amount represented a portion of the cost we would incur to create an organized system for voter outreach and GOTV that would be coordinated between all campaigns.

The candidates and the campaigns had a lukewarm response to our proposal, and in the end they decided not to work with us to implement a coordinated campaign. We failed to communicate our vision of the campaign process, and we underestimated the trepidation on the part of candidates and campaigns to work together. It was harder than we imagined to abandon the conventional wisdom, that elections are based on a model of scarcity: Someone will win, everyone else will lose. When winning becomes the only goal of a campaign, each decision becomes based on fear—rather than what is most likely to build skills, knowledge, power, and create a supportive community culture for everyone involved. It is our understanding that eventually the campaigns did work together on their phonebank and GOTV efforts, however the system was difficult to implement effectively by the time that decision was made.

The campaigns were also eager to work with Richard Salzman, a campaign advisor who has a very different attitude about elections than we do. Based upon multiple experiences, we know that Richard wants to win at all costs and spend a lot of money doing it. We appreciate Richard’s hard work, but we decided earlier in the summer that we could no longer work with him. This was no doubt awkward for everyone, but after much internal discussion, it was determined that we needed to be clear that we do politics differently.

While we did not participate in the November election nearly as much as we originally planned, we also did not entirely sit it out. We produced and distributed a direct mailer to progressive Eureka voters, and directed volunteers and donations to the campaigns when individuals came to us asking how they could get involved. We invested $4500 in preparation for the 2006 election, but the resources were largely unused by the campaigns.

This election was an important one for Eureka, and the whole county. Compared to the last several election cycles, the results are certainly a setback for progressives. But it is important that we learn from our mistakes as well as our successes. Let’s move forward and continue working to build a more democratic, sustainable, equitable, and just community. We stand as committed as ever to serve that vision and the people who work so hard to bring it forward. We welcome your questions and suggestions for the future.

In solidarity,
Dennis Huber, Alice Woodworth, Patrick Riggs, Kaitlin Sopoci-Belknap and Nicole Spencer

P.S. In July 2006, Local Solutions made a formal policy not to facilitate indirect campaign contributions to campaigns. We adopted this policy in the interest of ensuring full disclosure of campaign contributions to the public. We understand this is different from the function of most Political Action Committees, but we believe it is in keeping with the principles of our organization. All of the funds received by Local Solutions go directly back into grassroots organizing efforts.

Local Solutions related posts and stories:
Salzman's Empire The Local Solutions sham
New group forms
No connection?
It's in the Headers
Local Solutions' 460 Campaign Statements
Any doubt what Local Solutions' agenda is?
What happened to Local Solutions?
Where is "Local Solutions"?
TS - Local Solutions by Michael Twombly
ER - Another local group decries toxins and big boxes

The truth v. the talking points

The truth:
Writer believes Gallegos, DA's Office are a sham
11/11/2006

Dear Editor,

This letter is in reply to a letter from a Lynn Pettlon. I just hope you or your family never has a crime committed against you, (but if one does occur I) hope D.A. Gallegos will prosecute the villain, especially if the villain is one of Humboldt County’s methamphetamine users. Gallegos will let them plea bargain for probation.

We had a case where a methamphetamine user and ex-felon stole 38 rifles and one pistol — plus 30 diamond wedding sets — from a 90-year-old World War II veteran.

This ex-felon and methamphetamine user admitted to using drugs to the district attorney, but was able to plea bargain for probation for the third time in the past nine months. And you think Gallegos has only lost one out of 11 cases? The Sheriff’s Office and Probation Department had witnesses who would be willing to testify against this thief. A slam-dunk case on this ex-felon.

I called Paul Gallegos and had a talk with him about his case. I told him that the Probation Department, law enforcement and a private investigator we hired sent his office e-mails about this case.

His reply was that his office didn’t receive them. I think Gallegos owes an apology to all law enforcement in Humboldt County for the hard work they do.

And I do believe you, Lynn Pettlon, should get your head out of the sand if you believe that Gallegos has integrity and excellent judgment.

John Hay
Rio Dell
Copyright (C) 2005, The Eureka Reporter. All rights reserved

And, then you have Salzman's talking points:
Gallegos has the support of the majority in county
10/30/2006
 
Dear Editor,

Rarely does any candidate survive relentless media smear campaigns like those waged against District Attorney Gallegos. Amazingly, Gallegos did prevail, twice. I believe he prevailed because he spoke more thoughtfully and fairly. He prevailed because, in marked contrast to his opponent, he advocated equal treatment under the law. Heather Muller gave us the opportunity to see that.

Heather Muller wrote interestingly and gave both sides. By the time I read through her compelling accusations, I was actually interested in Gallegos’ responses, which I found, thanks to Heather’s extensive and unadulterated quotes, to be professional, fair and thoughtful.

Post-election accusations have been interesting also, albeit outlandish. For example, the accusation that Gallegos fired Dikeman because of politics isn’t reasonable when you consider that Dikeman lost 10 of his last 12 cases, whereas Gallegos won 10 of 11.

Also interesting but unreasonable were the September attacks against a tribal member for a tribal donation to Gallegos. First, the tribal member was presumed guilty of charges that were dropped. Aren’t we supposed to presume innocence? Why would the tribal member be charged with rape for having consensual sex with his wife and mother to their two children? Heather alleges favoritism when prejudice is evidenced.

Gallegos was elected to fulfill equal treatment under the law. It is absurd to suggest that he recuse himself whenever justice involves a group that donated to his campaign. The tribe sought equal treatment and it should not be denied it. It is Dikeman whom the higher court found to be unfair, not Gallegos.

I believe that Gallegos brings integrity, excellent judgment and commitment to fair and equal justice for all. Thank you, DA Gallegos. You have the support of the majority.

Please stay the course.

Lynn Pettlon
McKinleyville
Copyright (C) 2005, The Eureka Reporter. All rights reserved.