Manila ponders redevelopment By Matt Kapko Eye Reporter The Arcata Eye November 4, 2003 The economic downturn in Humboldt County is keeping many public agencies on alert, and while the ever-increasing real estate market may give the façade of an improving economy, the reality is that life in rural areas is becoming more difficult. The decline in forest products and fisheries are squeezing an already tight job market in many rural communities. According to Kirk Girard, director of the county’s Community Development Services, 67 percent of Humboldt County’s economy base still comes from the forest products economy, yet there are now 80 abandoned mill sites scattered throughout the region. He spoke to the magnitude of what’s at stake for rural areas at the Oct. 21 meeting of the Manila Community Services District Board of Directors. As a social services employee of this county, “You see day in and day out the human cost of a dismal economy,” he said. “It’s left these economies in a state of what’s called ‘disrepair.’” Trying to alleviate the impact of a declining local economy, the county Board of Supervisors has taken on the role of a Redevelopment Agency. Its goal is to create a redevelopment plan for towns surrounding Humboldt Bay and the communities that used to have vibrant mills. Third District Supervisor John Woolley, a Manila resident, asked Girard to present the redevelopment plan to the board before he chose whether to include it in the plan. The project is an effort to improve land that is in a “degraded condition because of adverse economic conditions,” Girard explained. To increase revenues for redevelopment, the agency’s goal is to gain interest from both private and public sectors. Girard is hopeful that the 45-year project will produce a four-and-a-half percent increase in growth, as opposed to the 2 percent growth expected without a redevelopment plan. In comparison, a similar plan enacted by Eureka and Arcata is reaching its final years and has produced an 11 percent return, Girard told the board. Opportunities under redevelopment include housing, community planning and building rehabilitation. Although Girard admits that Manila’s input and return may be small in comparison, he still thinks it’s a good idea for Manila. It’s really being part of the gang, Woolley added. “Coastal dependent industrial properties are hard to find,” Woolley said of the closed nearby mills, “These could be gems. We don’t know.” Girard described Manila as a “bedroom community” – something rarely considered for redevelopment – however, the “huge structural change in the economy” is prompting him to take a pro-active stance. Woolley chose to include Manila in the survey to give Manila Community Services District (MCSD) the chance to hear the proposal and offer its recommendation to Woolley. None of the board members voiced opposition to the project, but Girard recommended the board decide against it if it is going to divide the community. Phase II of traffic study approved Funding for the second phase of the Manila Community Transportation Plan has been obtained with the aid of former director Helene Barney through a $44,550 environmental justice grant. The final report from the first phase called for a safety corridor, lowered speed limits and construction of a roundabout on State Route 255. The second phase will finalize planning for the project and result in a series of recommendations for alleviating the increased traffic on SR 255. Many in the community are hoping that the current recommendations will see the light of day and be seen by the county as a worthy approach to improving traffic safety. A timeline will be set after a contract is approved for the project. Private policy discussion? Dendra Dengler, director of the Parklands Community Center and Recreation Commission and candidate for the MCSD board in the upcoming election, brought to the board a petition alleging that district policy was discussed at a training session outside of the public eye. Her letter claims that four MCSD directors (all expect Director Tim Dellas), the general manager, and two commission members (herself included) were all present when discussion was specifically held on redefining the parks and recreation commission. Up for discussion at the meeting was an ordinance drafted by President Linda Lee that would make changes to the commission. Dengler alleged that the ordinance was discussed in the closed meeting. Before the issue was addressed, Woolley interjected and recommended the board consult its attorney before discussing the petition any further. Ordinance criticized When the ordinance was brought up for debate it faced heavy criticism from the board and public. The intention to redefine the commission was seen by some as a push from Lee and not the board as a whole. The allegations of its being discussed in closed session also loomed overhead. “This is my chop job,” Lee said. “I take responsibility for it.” However, “This is not a real quick fly-by-night thing by me, she added. Lee has served on the commission before and said she is only trying to address problems she sees with the commission. Dellas was most vocal among the board in opposition to the ordinance. He wants to avoid the board being perceived as “stiff arming” its way through the process of redefining the commission without included the commission’s input. “It seems a little bit unilateral,” Dellas said. Director Nancy Ihara asked that discussion be delayed until the commission is clear on where the board is coming from and given opportunity to respond. In the end, the ordinance was discussed at length, but a vote was delayed because of the many concerns it brought up. Home