Tuesday, May 23, 2006

Arcata vs. Business

I'd never thought too deeply about the supposed anti- business atmosphere in Arcata, at least in regards to smaller businesses . I guess I still haven't spent much time on the issue but I was struck by two comments made in two separate articles in today's Times- Standard:

From a story on Rita Pimentel, owner of the popular Rita's restaraunts in Eureka:

"Pimentel considered opening a restaurant in Arcata, but found permitting too daunting."

From a story on Mike Levy, of Bio- Vehicles International:

"Levy said he has owned a Redding location since April of last year, but securing permits for an office in Arcata has been difficult at best."

Hmmm...even with something as politically correct as bio- diesel? Maybe it's true what they say about Arcata being hostile to business? In fairness, I wonder how Arcata's policies compare to Eureka, Fortuna and some of the other towns around Humboldt?

44 Comments:

At 8:08 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

of course arcata is anti-business. the measure t nutjobs took over there years ago and through their committee against democracy and corporations a climate of fear has taken over. ritas would probably be considered some evil chain to those people, especially if they set up a shop in crescent city - gasp, beyond the sacred county line!

 
At 9:09 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

the businesses that are there have a monopoly. also, look at who owns all the buildings on the plaza. it's a cartel, and won't end anytime soon.

 
At 10:20 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

alexandra stillman is who you mean, the same ex-mayor who mobbed up with the measure t nutjobs to perpetuate the control of her cartel. vote local control indeed!

 
At 12:53 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Measure T will protect the rights of small individual businesspeople like Rita (whose food is superior and non-corporate) from the vagaries and greed of faceless corporations like Coca-Cola, the proud parent of Taco Bell. Why is all this talk about corporations making me hungry?

 
At 2:23 PM, Blogger Fred said...

12:53 wrote:"Measure T will protect the rights of small individual businesspeople like Rita (whose food is superior and non-corporate) from the vagaries and greed of faceless corporations like Coca-Cola, the proud parent of Taco Bell.".

Hmmm...let's see; We have Taco Bells in and around the county. Heck, I've never been to Rita's but she might well offer Coca Cola in her restaraunts.

Rita's might even be organized as a S Corp., thus would be prohibited from contributing funds under Measure T. I don't know that, but many local businesses are.

Where's the threat from Coke and Taco Bell? Rita's has thrived in the presence of Taco Bell, and a host of other mexican food places, some are chain restaraunts, some aren't.

I don't see the problem you're trying to suggest exists.

 
At 2:26 PM, Blogger Anon.R.mous said...

I was talking to a guy who opened a in home computer repair shop, they wanted him to get a toxic waste permit, and training. How many LLC's formed because of the workman's comp issue that hit a couple years back, now are going to get voted they can't pay any money because someone might live outside Humboldt County?

 
At 5:25 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

that would also mean ritas as an incorporate business couldnt allow any campaign-related meetings happen in their place or theyll get sued for making a non-monetary contribution.

 
At 8:07 PM, Blogger Tim Hooven said...

Taco Bell is not owned by Coca Cola, its owned by YUM, which used to be Tricon, which was spun off from Pepsico 9 years ago...from the YUM website:

'For the past three years, the company has been recognized as one of Fortune Magazine’s “Top 50 Employers for Minorities.” It also has been recognized as one of the “Top 50 Employers for Women” by Fortune, one of the “Top 30 Best Companies for Diversity” by Black Enterprise Magazine, one of the “Corporate 100 Companies Providing Opportunities for Hispanics” by Hispanic Magazine and by BusinessWeek as one of the “Top 15 Companies for In-Kind Corporate Philanthropy."'

Doesn't sound too bad, for a "corporation".

 
At 8:54 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

they certainly aren't an all-white employer like democracy unlimited is.

 
At 9:00 PM, Anonymous mresquan said...

Anon 5:25,please explain further.

 
At 9:37 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Fred, "S" corporations are not prohibited from contributing under Measure T. You might want to take some time to actually read the law and knock off the disinformation campaign.

 
At 1:12 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Doesn't sound too bad, for a "corporation."

Except it made your kid a fat ass.

 
At 1:23 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

sedentary lifestyle made your kid that way, nothin else

 
At 5:28 AM, Blogger Fred said...

9:37 wrote:""S" corporations are not prohibited from contributing under Measure T".

I believe they are if any of their ownership resides out of county.

 
At 7:37 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Now Meserve wants to stop Cal trans from fixing the 101 "safety corridor"

 
At 8:47 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Looks like the Humboldt Advocate has some company on the loony left with the Arcata Eye becoming the second paper to back Measure T. I guess Kevin Hoover has really gone off the deep end this time.

 
At 9:31 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Fred--

Yeah, IF their ownership lived outside of the County. Not necessarily the case. You and Crawford with your blanket statements as if all corporations are banned...not very honest.

 
At 10:34 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Face it, Measure T is badly written and poorly conceived. I will cost the county money when it is challenged in court and it will fail.

the inmates are running the asylum around here

 
At 11:30 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

This whole argument that someone is crazy or a "nutjob" if they don't agree with you is pretty infantile. Sounds like something you'd hear at the playground.

 
At 12:10 PM, Blogger Tim Hooven said...

Hey 1:12- My kid is not fat, shes a 65lb doberman, she eats right and gets plenty of excercise. I would never let her eat Taco Bell.

Question: If we are a 'local' corporation that works out of the county occasionally and hires workers local to another county (loco-but-not-humboldt-loco), but only for that job, are we still loco under Measure T? Would we only be non-loco when we were working out of Humboldt County but then be loco again when we get back, or when the loco-but-not-humboldt-loco people are no longer on the payroll? I think we would, but it doesn't seem fair. If you are from Humboldt, and mostly loco, most of the time, shouldn't you always be loco, even if you are not currently here?

 
At 1:29 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Measure T is crazy, certifiably in fact.

 
At 3:59 PM, Anonymous mresquan said...

Tim, in your scenario, are all of the shareholders residing in Humboldt?Are the workers hired on as your employees,or are they paid under the table?Or are they contractors hired by you?

 
At 4:18 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

don't you understand? according to measure t, if they have just one employee living in klamath or salyer or somes bar or piercy, then the entire company is considered evil and sue-worthy.

 
At 5:28 PM, Blogger Tim Hooven said...

mresquan, all shareholders live here. We don't pay people 'under the table' , and no, a sub-contractor is not an employee, I meant a paid employee, residing in an area outside of humboldt, working for a company from humboldt who is currently, but not consistently working there. For example - We get a job in crescent city, and hire some local workers to do traffic control, or operate equipment, where do we stand? Are we local? According to what I read, we are now a non-local corporation.

 
At 9:34 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Arcata is the most successful city in Humboldt County.
The lowest occupancy rate, the most successful businesses, the highest tax base and the highest appreciate of property.

As to Measure T. No person will be restricted from making donations to a campaigns. Not even if they are part of an out of town corporation. Not the CEO, not the employes and not the shareholders. No one.

 
At 10:33 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

tell that to the arcata coop. if they commit the crime of having a single member of their board of directors living just over the county line (and many trinity county residents are co-op shoppers), then they are non-local. that means if they give any money to the anti-gmo campaign again, they will be sued. if they allow an anti-gmo campaign meeting in their building, they will be sued. if they allow any candidate or initiative to be promoted at a table in front of their entrance, they will be sued. measure t is complete, fanatical and unrecoverable lunacy. every incorporated business will be under the tyranny of democracy unlimited if measure t were to ever go into effect.

 
At 10:34 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

til your next intiative fixes that.

this is all about gallegos, protecting gallegos, and distracting voters from examining his lousy stinking record.

corporations of all sizes and stripes haven't hurt the people of humboldt county one iota.

the reverse is not true, and measure t will make it so no business who is attacked can fight back.

 
At 6:35 AM, Blogger Fred said...

mresquan writes: "Tim, in your scenario, are all of the shareholders residing in Humboldt?Are the workers hired on as your employees,or are they paid under the table?Or are they contractors hired by you?"

Mark's question offers another reason to oppose Measure T, as I see it: Do we really want to go there- nitpicking over how each and every business in this county is organized when election season comes around?

I was speaking with lefty gadfly, Chuck Harvey, the other day. He said he was opposing T because he didn't know how it could be enforced. He had a point. We'll have to be going back and forth with who owns an S Corp; where they live; where they do business and where their employees work. It will be a mess.

It's bad enough as it is with all the financial reports that need to be filed for campaigns. Even seasoned political operatives get in trouble for improper reporting now. Measure T will make things much worse for everyone involved.

 
At 8:06 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anon 10:39 is right. They needed something to boost the GOTV for Gallegos so this is it. They knew the PL appeal was a loser. My god, it has been a year since it was dismissed and only the notice of appeal was filed. They couldn't write the briefs in this amount of time? Seems like the thing is totally dead.


I read in the NCJ that Gallegos said vote for him because he had the guts to take on PL....he just didn't have the brains or the wisdom or the law.

 
At 12:51 PM, Blogger Anon.R.mous said...


Anonymous said...

Arcata is the most successful city in Humboldt County.
The lowest occupancy rate, the most successful businesses, the highest tax base and the highest appreciate of property.


OK, I laughed when I read that. So if you build less homes, have people living in garages, it's a good thing? So if Arcata has such a wonderful tax base, and the taxes that come in from said tax base, why do our roads look like shit? Arcata also pays the lowest wages in the County of Humboldt (per ave) but you don't see people running around bragging about that do you?

 
At 4:56 PM, Anonymous mresquan said...

So 10:33,explain how tyranny of Democracy Unlimited will exist even though the measure prevents them from making contributions.Kudos to the North Coast Journal for printing that in their article.The No on T folks don't seem to like to put that bit of info out their,as it doesn't help their "power grab by one side"argument.If you don't want Democracy Unlimited to make campaign contributions,then vote yes on T.

 
At 5:39 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Democracy Unlimited
Local Solutions
Alliance for Ethical Business
Ethical Business Alliance
ourhumboldt.org
rainforest action network
forest ethics
humboldt watershed council
salmon forever
trees foundation
save the redwoods
earth first
animal liberation front
earth liberation front
CREG
goodcause.org
sendmoney.org
eureka coalition for jobs

which ones will be prohibited from making contributions?

 
At 5:47 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

the power of democracy unlimited will be the power to sue into submission any business they dont like under measure t. there is no restriction against non-local corporations making lawsuits under measure t, another drafting error from blithering idiots like david cobb who have never practiced law in california.

 
At 6:14 PM, Blogger Fred said...

4:56 writes: "If you don't want Democracy Unlimited to make campaign contributions,then vote yes on T.".

Democracy Unlimited doesn't have to make any contributions. Under Measure T, if a union has just one member in Humboldt County, they're considered "Local".

DU, and the unions, are working together on this, as far as I'm concerned.

In fact, Kaitlin S-P, said earlier on that she didn't see a problem with unions contributing to local campaigns because, to paraphrase: " Unions offer good things to the community. Corporations do not."

Tell that to the 40%, more or less, that voted for Wal Mart.

This is a blatant attempt to shut down dissent, from those that differ from the left wing opinion, as far as I'm concerned.

 
At 10:08 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Gallegos doesn't like Unions, apparently, odd statements he makes go totally in the face of the Unions that endorsed him...very odd. These guys are schizophrenic.

"This is a blatant attempt to shut down dissent, from those that differ from the left wing opinion, as far as I'm concerned."

You're right Fred. 100%

 
At 10:44 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Any non-profit that doesn't have all board members living in Humboldt County will be prohibited from making campaign contributions under Measure T.

Letting someone table in front of your store, putting up a sign - those things are not considered "things of value". When businesses do those things now, they don't get reported under the state filings as contributions -- they won't count as contributions under Measure T either.

 
At 11:42 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

some candidates don't file their FFPC statements at all, like Jeff Lytle. he has signs and he has an ad on fake voter guides, that's well over $1,000

if people don't follow the rules you have now, what makes you think they are going to follow the new ones, especially one as convoluted as MrT

 
At 7:43 AM, Blogger Tim Hooven said...

mresquan, I suppose your silence is the answer, under the conditions I listed above we would no longer be 'local' according to measure "T". Can you explain how this is reasonable? We are the poster-child for 'local corporation', but if we step out of the area for a job, we are not local anymore?

 
At 10:35 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tim, you would definitely be precluded because your views tend to be conservative, and this all about you either agree with us or you are going ot be silenced. Conservative views are anathema, something to be squashed

 
At 12:47 PM, Anonymous mresquan said...

Tim,wow,being away from my computer is an answer for you.What do you have against donating as an individual?You are not the poster child for a local corporation.

 
At 2:16 PM, Blogger Tim Hooven said...

Sorry, I noticed you posted after my last comment and ignored it. I have nothing against donating as an individual. I guess that means you'll have an answer now (Would we be local? Is this reasonable?). We fit the definition of local, why wouldn't we be the poster child?

 
At 11:59 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

That's part of the problem, Tim, all the nitpicking as Fred calls it.
As it is the rules that do exist aren't being followed - take your candidate, Jeff Lytle. He has signs, they cost money, he bought into the fake voter guides, that cost money, if he bought any other ads, that cost money, and if he has a candidate's statement in the ballot, that cost money. Whether it is his own or came from donations, he should have an FPPC number and should have disclosed his finances with regards to the campaign. Help him out, he should immediately file an amended statement.

 
At 3:03 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

innocent mistakes can be costly (and almost all candidates make them) just look at what happened to debi august

 
At 6:57 AM, Blogger Tim Hooven said...

Anon 1159 - That was my point (nitpicking). The reality if measure t is passed is more complicated than most people are talking about. The questions I asked, most likely would have to be defined in court at somebody's expense, but since many small (or local) businesses aren't willing spend $$ to be test cases, they will be silenced. As for Lytle, I don't know why he didn't file those papers. I don't believe he has anything to hide, as he is not accepting $$. Good point, he should turn that paperwork in.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home