Eureka Citizen or “dipshit in his pj’s” as LoCO calls him: responds

Sorry, we left you off the email list earlier.

To whom it may concern:

Our group is still in the process of raising funds for our shelter project.
There are some individuals, within city government, that apparently misunderstood part of our plans.  We do not intend to partner with the government services offered, such as DHSS, MediCal, SNAP, WIC, etc.  We do not want this project to become overrun with government input.  These services will be offered office space, within the shelter facility, at no cost, in order to help speed the resident’s applications/qualifications for assistance.  In NO way will government services be involved with the operation of the shelter facility.
Additionally, we paused in our notifications to the Eureka City Manager, Mayor, and City Council Members, as we secure property and finalize the building plans.  We appreciate your interest in our shelter proposal, and will have a representative contact each office personally, withing the next few weeks.
As for the total raised thus far, we have raised a substantial amount toward construction and the operating expenses.  Although Mr. Sparks is “dubious” of our efforts, and expressed himself, rather rudely to our representative last week, we still have plans to present the project to the city, for permits, and to the county, for zoning/clearance of the site.  We understand that getting all the city, and county, offices in line, and signed off on the project, will take some time.
As for our donors, we remain steadfast that they remain anonymous throughout the process.  The reason for this is simple; we do not want their current, or future business prospects affected by the controversial issue of homelessness in Eureka.
We all know that local governments have failed to properly address the growing homeless population in a manner that accounts for ALL homeless in Eureka.  We plan to make the difference, in a manner, that excludes government involvement completely.
Again, Eureka Citizen is still here, and is still in process of finalizing the full proposal.  We will be ready, soon, for all of Eureka to support this project.
Eureka Citizen
TE says:
If you believe this shit we have this bridge…………………

52 thoughts on “Eureka Citizen or “dipshit in his pj’s” as LoCO calls him: responds

  1. So, “Eureka Citizen,” did you or someone in your group (assuming there is a group) write this comment on LoCo?

    Eureka Shelter 2015! Mercy Me, Mabel! • an hour ago

    Actually, the balloon tract requires that any project placed there be associated with the waterfront and be of marine relation. But, if you had researched that fact, as Eureka Citizen has, you would have already known that.

    As for Eureka Citizen’s shelter project, it is alive and well!
    Seems that just because we did not remain verbal every day with the media and with the city, we “dropped off” or were “spoofing” / “trolling” on Eureka.

    The fact is, we are in process of finalizing the land purchase and getting all the paperwork ready to submit for permits. We have raised enough to start construction, after the land purchase, and have commitments for operational expenses.

    We have a major donor that will address the City Council at their next meeting, and will provide additional information.

    The entire project should be open before the end of 2015.

    Thanks for your confidence as we assist the homeless where our local governments have failed.

    If so, then at least you have finally made a commitment for when your group will “go public,” at least to the extent of having someone speak publicly about your alleged plans.

    But the statement that “The entire project should be open before the end of 2015” seems wildly at odds with your statement above that “We understand that getting all the city, and county, offices in line, and signed off on the project, will take some time.”

    Also, the claim made that “We have a major donor that will address the City Council at their next meeting” is obviously at odds with the statement above that “As for our donors, we remain steadfast that they remain anonymous throughout the process.”

    Care to explain?

    Liked by 2 people

    • That is a valid Eureka Citizen response and we stand behind the statement.


      • O.K., so there it is, a promise has been made that a donor will address the Eureka City Council at their next meeting. So, we shall see..or not see…

        Liked by 2 people

    • We do not see a problem with getting county approval for the permits, and there will be few permits that the city will have to process. Therefore, we are allotting a few months for that entire process to finalize, once all the paperwork is submitted.

      Construction should begin, as soon as all permits are obtained. We will have a contractor begin to clear the property, in preparation for construction, while the county and city process the building approvals.

      We have a single donor, that has requested to break protocol, and will address the city council.

      This donor, prior to a year ago, has no prior ties to Eureka, but also has no extended family to leave a substantial trust account. He has requested to address council to confirm his commitment to the project, and his reasons. This individual is not a direct member of EC, but sought us out to make the donation toward this project.

      Hopefully, this answers your current questions.


      • “This donor, prior to a year ago, has no prior ties to Eureka, but also has no extended family to leave a substantial trust account.”

        Let me guess… he’s a Nigerian prince.

        You’ve had your little laugh… Find a new hobby for yourself.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Mola: Unfortunately, this donor was the victim of a tragic accident that took the lives of his wife and 30 day son. He has sat on the settlement received for nearly 30 years, in an effort to find a cause that would honor his family’s memory. I do not think making fun of this gentleman’s loss is appropriate. Again, he approached our group to make this donation to honor his family.


      • EC:

        Interesting. And how did this fellow happen to find your anonymous little group?

        And having done so, why did he have an iota of confidence that you had any notion of what you are doing?

        And… After seeing what you and your various alter-egos have come up with as far as comments are concerned… did he not have sense enough to realize you are an idiot who can’t do anything but spin yarns and make enemies? Why wouldn’t he have sense enough to pull his money before it is wasted by you?

        Oh, and another detail almost slipped my mind. Before you claimed the money was from business interests wishing to make investments in Eureka. Now it’s a philanthropist?

        Effective lying requires you keep your stories simple. That way it’s easier to keep track of the details.

        Prove me wrong. Don’t piss around with feeble explanations for this bit of incompetence or that… just prove me wrong.

        As you said yourself… the next Eureka City Council meeting could possibly do it.

        Until then… any further anonymous communication from you will have zero meaning.

        Liked by 2 people

  2. And you wonder why no one takes TE seriously?
    You emailed EC, got a valid response, post the response, and then make fun? So much for TE’s commitment to the homeless community!


    • the commitment of all of us questioning your jibber jabber has ALWAYS been good of the entire community, the homeless and homed included…and that the community not be distracted and scammed, that proposals are sincere and honest and don’t try to take advantage of people’s desperate needs and the community’s goodwill.

      You’re attempts to negative spin these reasonable questions and concerns is transparent and pathetic.

      I fully expect you to blame us for your inevitable failures as well.

      Liked by 2 people

  3. Tuluwat Examiner: Can you confirm that the statement you posted above came from the same e-mail address as earlier statements from “Eureka Citizen” came from. Just curious, given that LoCO reports the e-mail address they had been contacted from earlier, was no longer working today.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. “We will be ready, soon, for all of Eureka to support this project.”

    LOL…if you’re for real, you’re also quite an optimist. Have you not noticed the vitriolic attacks on Betty Chinn and others helping the homeless? If, by chance, your group and proposal is for real, then you’re in for a rude awakening. Your proposal, if real, is certain to attract massive opposition…Tuluwat Examiner fans will be the very least of your problems.

    Liked by 2 people

    • We understand there will be opposition, but feel that the location we have chosen, and the project’s design, will become an attractive asset to the community.

      Our goal is to provide a safe environment for the currently homeless to have a roof, showers, meals, and assistance of all needs, to get them on a self-sufficiency path. We plan to offer drug/alcohol rehab facilities, as well, for those who want to end addictions to these substances.

      Also, with this facility, perhaps the city can reclaim the waterfront and begin to finalize the public path that was promised. They can also concentrate on real problems, like crime, blighted businesses, etc.

      Maybe, the city will follow through with low-income housing construction, so the residents of the shelter will have a place to move to after getting things in their lives straightened out.

      The end goal, is to make ALL of Eureka a much nicer, and safer place for every citizen.

      All we ask is that there be some patience exercised as we iron out the details. Then, when the facility opens, give it an honest chance to make a difference to the community. Homelessness in Eureka was not an over-night problem and the proposed shelter project is not an instant fix.


      • At this point I feet I have to keep saying “if real,” but anyway, if real, the argument you’re going to run up again goes beyond the location of the site, the argument you’re going to run up against is the “magnet” argument — that by providing good services to the homeless, you’ll attract more homeless people to Eureka and Humboldt County. I think it’s a bullshit argument, but it is one very frequently heard in any discussion of improving services and facilities for the homeless. The vitriol poured on Betty Chinn for her role in bringing about the shower facility with St Vincent DePaul’s, and her other activities, is just one example. We have also heard the same thing about the Multiple Assistance Center, the (now defunct) Endeavor in Arcata, and so on and so forth. So, better be ready…again, IF any of this is real. If none of this is real, then I must reluctantly congratulate you on some of the most diligent, most committed trolling I have ever seen.

        Liked by 3 people

  5. And yes, everyone, I realize I’m probably just “feeding a troll.” But, so what, they’ve been stuffed to the gills here already, what difference will a few more morsels make. 😉

    Liked by 3 people

  6. Mola: What’s sad is your taking different comments, from different persons, and attributing all of them to our group, presenting a twisted “truth” that you present as fact.

    Let’s get a few things straight:

    A) We did not state that we had only 1 donor. We stated that we had multiple out-of-area corporate donors, who have contributed toward our fundraising efforts. These donors have made commitments toward construction and toward operations of the facility. These donors also requested anonymity, as a condition of their donations. Now, during our fundraising, we made announcements concerning our ideas and updated our efforts. This single donor contacted us to make this donation. As for his reason, we have told you what he told us. We verified his donation via the financial institute that he provided.

    B) We know that this new donor has only been in Eureka for about a year. What brought him to Eureka is unknown to us; we did not ask. He did not state any other reason, other than what was explained about the loss of his family. We do not believe he has any commercial interests, since he has had no other business interests in the past.

    C) As we stated earlier, we have confidence in what we are doing simply because we do have members who have worked for several charitable organizations that operate shelters around the country. We have two former consultants that assisted with the expansion of the St. Vincent de Paul shelter in San Diego; most of our proposal is modeled after the San Diego shelter’s successful programs. 5 of our members have worked with the Salvation Army Shelter Programs in various locations; San Antonio, TX, Dallas, TX, El Cajon, CA, Tacoma, WA, and Sacramento, CA. We have also had several consultations with multiple similar projects and with the Salt Lake City, UT programs. We will be hiring a firm to headhunt operations directors for the Eureka project. We never stated that we, as average citizens, knew how to operate a shelter or programs for the homeless. We did state that we knew how the shelter should be run, without government interference, and that we had a plan in place to operate the shelter efficiently.

    D) Only a single spokesperson is designated to deal with the press, blogs, or city/county communications. You have tried to assimilate other comments and posters to our group. As we do not monitor all boards, we do not know of all the comments you may have read. But, to accuse us of lying to the public, based on your assumptions, is shameful. Please, in the future, if you have questions, email them directly to our email address and we will give you an official response. That way, you are no longer confused by your misguided assumptions.

    As far as Eureka Citizen is concerned, we have effectively answered you concerns. Having done so, you should be clear of your misunderstandings and assumptions. However, we will await your response, and attempt to answer your convoluted spin on the proposed project.

    Eureka Citizen


    • They must be scared shitless of Arkleys response to this, especially after how he talked about Betty Chinn helping the homeless at his infamous war finger press conference.

      Best of luck guy, ask Larry glass what you should expect soon, dark suv’s following the guy home from city council meeting for starters….

      Liked by 1 person

      • Eureka Citizen could care less about Arkley’s opinion, since he has never been involved with our group.

        Additionally, we currently have NO members who have attempted large scale developments in Eureka, ever. We do have members who run local businesses, but simple, family run ones. Our corporate donors are ones that either have already entered the local market, or plan to enter the market if the city can come together and make Eureka a cleaner, safer community.

        Please discontinue the spreading of false associations. Doing so only makes getting this proposal underway that much more difficult.


      • I never said you’re associated with him.
        I stated the opposite.
        Its quite clear that you’re scared of him and his friends finding out who you are.
        Best of luck with your proposal.
        I did notice how confident you are that the county supes will expedite your requests and knowledge that the city council might be a problem.

        We should also start eliminating possible locations, shouldn’t take long to figure this out


    • EC:

      Since I don’t know if I am talking to the “real you” or not I can’t possibly properly evaluate your response.

      Prove your legitimacy or go away. I’m done wasting keystrokes on you.

      Liked by 1 person

  7. “We all know that local governments have failed to properly address the growing homeless population in a manner that accounts for ALL homeless in Eureka. We plan to make the difference, in a manner, that excludes government involvement completely.” (EC)

    Well, except for the essential government services EC claims to welcome inside their building!?

    Local government is accountable to the people, EC is not. Privatizing homeless shelters will not be any more effective that it’s been up to now, privatization has had decades to prove its failure for prisons. EC is permitted to build under SB2, except for coastal zones, and when their money runs out, or the abuses and failures proliferate, big bad government will be forced to step in.

    Utah rediscovered the solution to homelessness that’s been known for centuries. Unless EC plans to start building small independent apartments to gift to the homeless in Eureka, where exactly, does EC’s “self-sufficiency path” lead to?

    A long ride on a Greyhound.

    Private, haphazard “think it build it” planning without extensive public input is exactly what got Humboldt County into its chronic affordable housing deficits in the first place. (At least we know their names).

    Liked by 2 people

    • Again, you misinterpreted our statement; we tried to make the distinction between LOCAL government and government SERVICES for homeless.

      The local governments, City of Eureka and Humboldt County Supervisors, have done NOTHING to help the homeless.

      The government services we will offer space to are DHSS (A State Agency), WIC (Federal Program), SSI (Federal Program), SNAP (Federal Program), MediCal (State Program), and several more. NONE of these services are run by local government.

      Please, if you want to criticize the proposal, then keep the facts straight.

      As for our proposal, we have incorporated some of Utah’s current housing program into this proposal. Amazing how, even though we included that info in our previous statements, you still missed it. Again, please read our statements, not just the negative headlines and followup comments; you won’t find the facts from the gallery crowd.


      • Just for the record, most of those programs are federal and/or state funded, but administered by the county. So you will have to deal with the county DHSS. Again, assuming this is for real. Looking forward to being able to stop having to include that caveat, one way or the other, after the next Eureka City Council hearing.

        Liked by 3 people

  8. Wow…..the Tulatwat and it’s minions have been punked…..BIG TIME!


    • thank you for your contributions, we almost thought you believed ec.
      punked squared.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Right, Marmaduke. JW and “Paul” (who seems to have disappeared?) were the ones who got punked. They were supporting this dipshit and attacking those who weren’t buying his line from the beginning.

        Liked by 1 person

      • It’s called stirring the pot. Think about it…..300 to 400 donors ALL keeping their mouths shut? Or….outside corporations, with no connections to the city, putting up money to clean up Eureka, BEFORE they move in…..because it’s no secret how the locals feel about big companies moving into town. But the story of the big donor from out of town, who lost his wife and kid 30 years ago, was the real topper ! Wouldn’t surprise me if someone dressed as a clown came before the council next week.


  9. Still sounds like hooey and smells like bullshit to me…….

    Liked by 3 people

  10. “Please, if you want to criticize the proposal, then keep the facts straight…we have incorporated some of Utah’s current housing program into this proposal. Amazing how, even though we included that info in our previous statements, you still missed it.” (EC)

    Nowhere in your posts do you claim that small apartments would be gifted to the homeless for as long as they wish to remain, in effect, the only legitimate path to “self-sufficiency”, promised by EC, but not offered.

    This is the the Utah program.

    As pointed out above, both federal and state homeless programs are administered by local government that EC claims will be “completely excluded”. When this is pointed out….EC is silent….

    How sad that this is probably a fraud. Real programs with real funds exhibit far more professionalism, knowledge, insight and openness with little time or patience for such mean-spirited bantering.

    “Punked” or not, those that have graced TE’s coverage know one hell of a lot more about this subject than what’s provided by local print media.

    Thank you for that.

    Liked by 3 people

  11. Wait a second. You have an organization with millions donated or promised, but you don’t have a PO box or bank account to receive donations? Did Councilwoman Bergel give you permission to have donations sent to her?

    Liked by 2 people

    • Don’t why this posted up here. It was, obviously, intended as a reply to EC regarding where to send the donations.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Apparently, you did not read, in the numerous articles on the subject, that we have taken donor funding commitments, not cash.

      If you would like to contribute to the project, once the entire proposal is made public, there will be information to submit your donation.


      • 3 hours ago, you said send it to councilwoman Bergel. If you’re going to run a sucessful scam, you need to keep your facts straight. LMAO


      • JW, that is correct! Since we have not been soliciting CASH from the local area, we have not yet set up a local account to accept cash donations.

        Since we are receiving more and more requests for information, and where to make a local donation to the project, we ask that the donations be sent care of Councilwoman Bergel; Ms. Bergel has been the most supportive member of the city council thus far, having emailed us on a regular basis for information and updates.


      • Once the proposal is presented, there will be a local account to which donations can be submitted. Until then, we request that donations be sent care of Ms. Bergel.


  12. Is it true that this is the same group/individual proposing that panhandlers obtain business licenses to be visibly worn while panhandling?

    The Nazi’s had them for various purposes, criminals, communists, Jews, and others.

    Liked by 2 people

  13. The TE called it early. Eureka Citizen, AKA Paul P, AKA AmTex, AKA Colonel, etc., etc., was in fact just a very active troll. This liar outed his/herself on Loco this morning. Thank goodness we can move past this narcissists BS diversion. Have fun in your mom’s basement, Citizen Troll.

    Liked by 2 people

  14. Donate through a City Council member? Uh… disclosure must happen.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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