Excited about the Candidates! – The campaigns, well……..

vote by mail
It takes a lot of personal fortitude to step forward and run for public office. Even more difficult is running to unseat an incumbent. In Eureka you are required to live in a particular ward to run, but when you do you have to run in the entire City. Name recognition becomes key to your chances for success.
In this race for Eureka City Council you have two reasonably well known incumbent Candidates. So it’s even more important in this race for the challengers to differentiate themselves from the office holders. The only obvious difference so far is Natalie and Kim’s support for measure R.  But there are other areas we believe they can show their differences.  The East/West rail line and the public moneys that Newman and Albin have spoken about spending on the project would be one area to start with.  There are many other areas we know they would approach differently, but we haven’t heard much about them.

kim bergel


natalie arroyo 1


We hope it happens soon.  As an example, Chris Kerrigan ran a great race but he started late and peaked on election day. 15 years ago that would have been great. Not today, with increasing numbers of voters using mail-in ballots he lost heavily with the early voters. So even though he won at the polling places he lost the election.
We are supporting and pulling for the challengers Natalie Arroyo and Kim Bergel. We just hope their grassroots campaigns start catching fire and become a lot more vocal and visible very soon.  It’s hard to win against incumbents, even if the incumbents have been complete failures.  It’s even harder to beat incumbents if you’re not making it clear to the voters what you would be doing differently.


27 thoughts on “Excited about the Candidates! – The campaigns, well……..

  1. Like Newman’s support with a motion for RREDC’s (Redwood Region Economic Development Commission) increase of the airline slush fund to two million. We’d have American Eagle—they were taking reservations (now called Envoy) going to LAX in a 44 seat RJ (regional jet) if we ever had that MRG (minimum revenue guarantee) money. So far we can’t keep UE/SW (United Express/SkyWest) happy with a 30 seater to SMF (Sacramento), nor Delta happy with a 50 seater RJ to SLC (Salt Lake City), nor Horizon happy with a 76 seater to LAX (Lost Angels). We’ll all be looking right for new air service while the last flight comes in out of left field after the SW/UE burn notice 12/2/2014, losing two out of three destinations at ACV (where Herb Caen alive I am certain he could do an entire column about the airport’s lame names). Currently, when ACV is fogged in, the airline can’t get in when the visibility is 0.25. This leads to cancellations and delays, making the service unreliable. There are things we could do, like apply for a discretionary grant from the FAA (they are handing out millions) to flatten Arkley’s hanger said to be in the way of an improved ILS (Instrument Landing System), install a centerline lighting system for the taxiways for when the VV (vertical visibility) is 100 or 200 and put in an air traffic control tower. While running ACV at stall speed, we just lost this year so far two out of three destinations. We might have to come up with ten cents for each dollar of these projects. Do we have the will, and the leadership? So far, the answer is no. If we pointed out to the FAA the clear and present danger of landing going on without a measured ceiling to poke out of while landing, I’d bet they’d approve these discretionary grants. Sure some of us might like a less costly alternative airline and destination. The devil is in the details.


  2. I would certainly like to hear more from Kim and Natalie. I’m really excited to hear what their plans are for the city!

    Liked by 2 people

  3. Rick, the base customers for air service here are employees. The alternative of driving to S.F. takes 6 hours.

    Given typical local wages, per mile reimbursement, and the cost of air travel from ACV, employee driving is a better value for employers. Especially if the final destination is the Bay Area/Sacramento, which it often is.


  4. Money! Would the tight wad progressives please start walking the walk and help finance the campaigns of the people willing to give their time and effort to change the status quo in Eureka? I couldn’t believe the donations (lack of or small from those who could afford to give more) to the Kerrigan campaign. If we want change we’re going to have to donate so candidates can get the word out. That means money for radio and TV ads! I know both Kim and Natalie are giving everything they’ve got to their campaigns but they can’t talk to every voter. They need radio and TV ads to reach more people. Please donate so these two stellar candidates will have the chance to help this city “live up to its potential”!


    • Maybe you could explain how the “progressive” candidates are going to change the status quo in Eureka, aside from pushing the same sort of policies that have run this state into the ground?

      All the complaints here seem to be in opposition to bringing more business to Eureka. I’m not saying they all make sense- East/West rail, for instance-, but I certainly won’t tie in with the Sell Trinkets to Tourists</i crowd.


    • Fred,
      Go to http://www.democracy.com/VoteArroyo/issues.aspx and under Issues go to “Economy”. For Kim go to http://www.electkimbergel.com/2014/kims-plans/ They will both govern to make Eureka more inviting to industry. Does Eureka even have an industrial park at this point? Both their ideas trump anything Newman has done and makes Albin’s emphasis on attracting cruise ships appear as “pie in the sky” as it is. We need jobs that manufacture usable items day in and day out. We can’t wait around for the next cruise ship to come in and expect to improve our economy selling salt water taffy! Tourism is OK but we need something more stable.

      Liked by 2 people

    • A challenge regarding making Eureka inviting for industry: not much land within city limits. Much of what is, is Coastal Commission jurisdictton, not really City Council. It is good to see the pro-industry rhetoric but then we run into the communications infrastructure (not as solid as it could be in broadband) and transportation. And like the poster above pointed out, airline. It may be cheaper for locals to travel outwards by car, but I believe people from outside industries are not as willi.g to take say a 12 hr roundtrip drive for a business possibility. But it would be fun to see the “progressives” fight the “republicans” over who is more pro-industry. But the $12 minimum is a curious disincentive and I think it is designed to be that. Put a business on Giuntoli in Arcata and pay $9/gr. Put it in Eureka and pay $12/hr. Hmm. It is a local progressive cause celebre but I think they should have written it for $15 over several years.


    • And regarding $12/hr. If a family is receiving food stamps (Calfresh) that wage will not get them off food stamps it will just cause them to lose most of their amount. So their newly earned cash will be going directly to the local grocery industry just like the food stamps did. And to the landlord after they lose their housing subsidy. Not kidding.


    • So, in other words, we’ll no longer be subsidizing all the big box stores and chain restaurants. That sounds good to me!

      Liked by 1 person

  5. Yes. More money in campaigns is the way for progressives to win. Has Kim or Natalie called up RJ Reynolds yet? If not…the time is now! *


    Liked by 1 person

    • Have Kim or Natalie stepped up to the plate and asked the Police Chief to provide a press conference to address the Tommy McClain shooting?


    • Johnny Maniac:

      Has anyone else sitting on the Eureka City Council stepped up to the plate and called for a press conference to address the Tommy McClain shooting?

      The truth is the City Council is hoping the same thing Chief Mills is hoping for… That if they wait long enough to have that press conference the people will have lost interest and the reaction will not be as hot as it would have been Sunday or even Monday.

      Liked by 1 person

  6. yes, Kim and Natalie are going to make Eureka more inviting for business and industry by supporting $12/hour minimum wage. It is clear neither girl has ran a business nor had to make a payroll with this pie in the sky notion that wages grow on trees and can a 33% higher minimum wage can be supported by businesses with more than 25 employees just because it would be nice if they could. They both are guilty of pandering for votes by favoring the increase. they are both stooges for unions who have contracts in place that call for wage increases for their membership if the minimum wage increases.


    • Yeah Direwolf, we need to make sure and protect the profits of Target/Walmart because obviously they aren’t making enough money.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Jim, you really don’t get the big picture. It’s not just Target and Wal*Mart, and it’s not just minimum wage. It’s all businesses and the entire wage structure. It’s county workers who have contracts, it’s the nurses and other help at St. Joes who have contracts. Its the home health workers who are exempt. Its the old and disabled who are living on fixed incomes who can’t afford increases in cost of living. It’s the care homes and hospitals who won’t get an increase in Medicare or Medical disbursements to offset increased labor costs. You have drunk the koolaid, Jim. You have bought into what they have told you, its just a few businesses who can afford it. Let me ask you this, Jim, If it was your business and you had 26 employees, some who only push a mop or broom. would you want to take money out of your wallet to pay them more? Are they doing more work? They still are doing the bare minimum yet, you have less to take home and you have risked your house, your life savings to build a business. Jim, in classic America, to make more money, you need to do more work. That is the way it has been since day one here. There is no self pride in getting a wage increase because of a minimum wage hike, and in the long run, wage increases withouit increased productivity are inflationary. Prices go up and fixed income people suffer. So if you think it is just one Wal Mart and one Target, these issues are just too complex for you.


  7. And what is the idea of ‘enough money’? Jim, you seem to think Wal Mart and Targe are owned by one person. They are owned by millions of people. People who have saved up and invested what they haven’t spent in an effort to make their lives better. Retirements, Jim. Millions of retirements, 401k’s, IRA’s are invested in Wal Mart, Sears, Les Schwab, healthcare. Who are you to tell those millions of middle class people they have ‘made enough’ money?


    • Clearly baloney DW. Nice though. Lets not pass R because of the elderly (who won’t be able to afford cabs to get their groceries) and the middle class. Talk about mind-boggling.

      Look at this* wealth chart. One has to have wealth to care about the Dow? The yellow section of the chart below has wealth and is very concerned about the Dow. They are twenty percent of the nation yet own 83% of the wealth. How much of our political discourse do you think that kind of money buys?

      In contrast 60% of the population in the US (the small but visible red and nearly invisible light blue and blue portions of the chart) owns approximately 5% of the wealth.

      If we start finding ways through the right wing talking points that have been bought and paid for, market tested, etc, and start supporting grassroots proactive and arguably conservative measures, oh, say, like Eureka’s R, maybe we might be able to start turning this graph back to where Americans would like it to be.

      Liked by 1 person

      • so, what Measure R really is a wealth redistribution effort, Jon? And you and your cronies are the ones who are to decide when local businesspeople are ‘rich enough’? No wonder there is not one business owner in Eureka that I”m aware of that supports Measure R. I wouldn’t support a measure that’s intent is to pick my pocket either. Thank you for the clarification but why not just tax the rich more and fund job skill programs so the minimally qualified workers could enhance their work skills and earn more money because they are more productive?


    • “Jim, in classic America, to make more money, you need to do more work.”

      Hahahahahahahahah! Good one.

      Liked by 1 person

      • this has all been very enlightening. There seems to be no desire to lift one’s self up by their own bootstraps in this thread. Rather it seems that increasing minimum wage by a third is an entitlement program paid for by successful businesspeople who work harder and invest more in the community that either jonny or jim ever thought possible…people who don’t want to earn more but just be paid more. pathetic. The welfare state has donned a new mask, and called itself Measure R.


  8. GoldenLion – if you call it a Wealth re-redistribution, we might agree. Look at that graph, wealth had already been redistributed by the right while distracting us all by blaming liberals, progressives, unions and socialists about doing exactly it was you all were doing.

    Yes, marginal tax rates on high incomes (ie taxing the 2 millionth dollar at higher rates) are way too low. Capital gains taxes are too low. These are the price of having 1 and a half parties interested in protecting the interests of the wealthy.

    The way they got away with it in part is emotion-laden phrases like “weath redistribution”.

    I think that wealth chart shows something has to be done. Do you disagree? Are you OK with a society where 40% of it’s members own what? 1 % of the wealth. We have important work to do and policies to change. $12 minimum wage is a bandaid, and a small start – but it is a bandaid in the right direction.

    For once.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. DW has it right. I’m on a fixed income and use the taxicabs. Fuel went up. Ride price went up. Wage went up. Ride went up. They posted something about insurance increase in cabs explaining why it went up again. It use to cost $5.00 for me to go to the store. Now it costs $10. Businesses pass the costs along, and I can’t afford what I have to pay now. I was on board with Kim and Natalie until they supported this measure.


  10. DireWolf @ 3:46. Well put. That’s the party line for 30 years and there is no breaking into that narrative for the true believers. Bootstraps, entitlement, welfare state. Job creators = hard workers, minimum wagers = not trying hard enough. Thank you for being clear instead of this faux concern for the middle class or seniors.

    I’m hoping people will begin to see through this shallow, deceptive and in the end cruel narrative. Measure R is a good starting point to give a boost up to workers. Something liberals and conservatives should agree on.

    Because Dire – you still haven’t answered this. How do job creators justify having the “welfare state” pay for their full time employees who are still eligible for public assistance programs? If they can sleep at night while fighting to insure that these wages that cannot support families not be raised- let alone allow investments for school, homes, etc ….. um ….. I would argue it isn’t hard work that got them to the lofty position they own in your vision of society. It might be the ability to rationalize a different set of ethics than many others in this society can tolerate.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Simple Jon. Not every job should “ensure” you can raise a family. Minimum wage jobs are to give people a start and an opportunity to build skills or go to school. Ever hear of an internship? Interns actually get paid nothing. Why? Because that is how those of us who worked hard all of our lives got here. We learn a trade, and then we got compensated for it. God bless the cashiers at Walmart, but I hope that is not all they aspire to. Why improve yourself when cashiers, mechanics and carpenters all make the same wage. I’m 72 and on a fixed income. Making .50 a day gave me a start, some shoes got shined and it inspired me to join the military and then get an education. Equalizing everyone and removing incentive to better yourself will definitely redistribute the income. Everyone will make $12 per hour.


  11. Old Awesomeness: I don’t disagree with what you are saying in this sense. I believe in hard work and internships and a path to success that involves ups and downs and perseverance. Sounds like you are an example of how this is done. No argument. Period.

    There are service industry jobs – transportation, health care, etc, etc etc which also include clerks at WalMart which are being filled by hard working people who cannot take on the risky chance of training themselves for another job which may not even exist. Chances are, today, in HumCo, that other job doesn’t exist or can be filled by a college grad from HSU or another younger person. No need to be pessimistic, not always, and as you rightly point out there is a path for greater success.

    Having said that, business owners can take advantage of this narrative to employ people at unfairly low wages for years. These service jobs, like it or not, are what our society currently offers to many people. We simply don’t have the blue collar or white collar high paying jobs we once had. So what do we do?

    It comes back to that question – do we allow employers to take advantage of a flooded job market? There will always be someone willing to take a wage that doesn’t pay the bills for whatever reason – internship, living at home, single in a low rent home, etc.

    Without unions to fight for fair contracts, the Fair Wage Folks have found a way through legislation to modernize our local big businesses (25 + employees is big locally). Like any other change, there will be pluses and minuses – in the aggregate though, we will be leveling the playing field a tiny bit for those who most need it and for those we all should most want to succeed. Workers.

    Old, you were born in ’42. Your earning years started around 1960. Take a look at the chart at the bottom of the blog post linked below*. Throughout your life, until 1979, the bottom (wealth-wise) 90% were able to earn a significant portion of our national income during growth spurts. They did this mostly with their labor obviously – something like you did. Learn a trade, earn a living.

    That’s changed in our national economics that has been leveraged to favor the wealthy and to make sure money makes money not labor anymore.

    We don’t really disagree much on your post Old. But yesterday’s entry job is now today’s … job. It’s time “job workers” get paid, not just the “job creators”, and measure R helps to tip the scales a tiny bit. It’s a bandaid that might help out our local hard working people and families while we continue to work on state and federal policies to shift the balance back.


    Liked by 1 person

    • Gotta say Jon, you’re doing pretty well explaining how measure R is going to help Eureka. And very patient with the commenters who simply make ideological arguments.

      One thing I question is why those who say people needing more money to live should work harder don’t apply that advice to those on ‘fixed incomes’? By their logic when prices go up its the “fixed income” recipient’s obligation to earn more. The fact is minimum wage workers are just as much ‘on a fixed income’ as anyone else in that situation. Dividing the economics of ‘fixed income’ people from ‘minimum wage’ people is purely a divisive political strategy.

      As for the idea that in the US getting more money is always based on doing more work, whoever thinks that doesn’t understand about shareholder dividends. In fact shareholders do no work, they’re called ‘passive’ owners but their dividend payments typically increase at or above the price index. There are many other such examples of more money with no additional effort like royalties and licenses.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Ah Not A Native, you don’t see how this hard work thing is supposed to function.

      A share holder does earn more money by working harder.

      It’s just the person working harder is somebody else.

      Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s