Apr 29, 2016

More truth comes out, some of the 11 plaintiffs in Martin's lawsuit had places to go




Kudos to North Coast News for their excellent piece on the Palco Marsh lawsuit and effort to relocate campers.

During the 6 p.m. newscast, a homeless advocate told KAEF that many of the plaintiffs had places to go to.

So, why did they file the lawsuit? What is their and Peter Martin's agenda?

In the same newspiece, several people are taking advantage of the resources offered them to relocate. Eureka Police Chief said that people had a year to find alternatives and some of the people did not lift a finger; not even walk over to the resource right there, every week.

What this shows is, no one needs to be "evicted" on May 2. Eviction is for someone who rents, not squatters, costing taxpayers more.

There will be resources to help people on May 2 all day.






3 comments:

  1. We'll see - if the judge rewards lawlessness, at the expense of the law-abiding homeowners and business owners. Seems to be the way things are going.. Free food, free housing, free phones - and more - but not for the people who work and play by the rules.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hey John....is there a law against making a false statement?
    Lynette Vera and her husband Humberto own property and there's a city
    record about it:
    "special Assessments for Unpaid Administrative Penalties
    April 26, 2016
    Page 3 of 4
    2). Humberto and Lvnette Vera, Eureka. A.P. No. 301-082-014.
    On or about March 6, 2008, the Code Enforcement Unit (CEU) received a referral from the
    Planning and Building Department concerning the property. The report that accompanied the
    referral indicated that there were violations consisting of junk yard and junk cars on the property.
    CEU inspected the property and found that the violations on the property had improved and that
    the adjacent vacant property that they owned had been cleared. On September 22, 2010, CEU was
    inspecting an unrelated property and noticed that the property had deteriorated. On October 4,
    2010, CEU received a complaint from a neighbor regarding the condition of the property. CEU
    confirmed the violations, and a Notice of Nuisance was issued on October 15,2010, and then served
    on the owner on November 17, 2010. The notice detailed violations of Humboldt County Code §
    311-10.1, building/property use or operation in violation of zoning code; 314-81.1, use of mobile
    homes or trailers as place of habitation; § 352-26, junk vehicles; § 371-2, maintaining a junkyard;
    and 521-4, storage & removal of solid waste.
    On December 3, 2015, an administrative penalty in the amount of $1,500 was issued to the
    owners. No appeal of the administrative penalty was requested within the 30 day appeal period and
    the penalty became final on January 8, 2016. The unpaid penalty and costs are One Thousand Five
    Hundred Thirteen Dollars and Forty-Four Cents ($1,513.44), plus interest of 10% per annum from
    February 3,2016, as set by statute"

    https://humboldt.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=2701660&GUID=EDC6A50F-0439-4A87-90BB-166C473073F2&Options=&Search=

    Maybe PalCo marsh was cleaner than their property?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Gerrianne Schulze is a winner:
    http://www.times-standard.com/article/ZZ/20110412/NEWS/110415899

    ReplyDelete