Throughout THC’s series of posts on the Humboldt Area Foundation, many of our readers and commenters have been wondering why there’s been no response from HAF defending some of the points we’ve brought up.
For those of you that regularly listen to the Talkshop program on KINS 106.3 (kudos if you do – THC can’t stand that sort of self-inflicted misery), you may have caught the double bill of Patrick Cleary and Rob Arkley talking about HAF. Just in case you aren’t a sadist, we took the liberty of posting the link to that particular program here.
It takes about 5 or 6 minutes to get into the thick of things, but then it gets interesting. To a certain extent, Cleary does discuss (unconvincingly, in THC’s opinion) some of the questions we have raised in the past. (Also – bonus points to whoever counts how many times Cleary uses the word “nuance” throughout the program.)
For the most part, Cleary artfully sidesteps any substantive answers to the questions posed to him. THC was most disappointed that his discussion of staffing levels touched only upon people employed “directly” by HAF, and did not go into any of the people employed under the entire HAF umbrella. Specifically, the organizations under direction of the Community Strategies wing. Arkley and Cleary spent some time evaluating the necessity of the four bookkeeping positions but Cleary avoids any mention of the ten others that do nothing but stir up divisiveness in our communities.
Aside from that, we were curious about the vacancies on the HAF board of directors. Why did Neil Ewald resign? Perhaps he was fed up with having his name associated with Cleary’s shenanigans? How long have the seats been vacant? And, perhaps most importantly, who are the prospective replacements? A little fresh blood is definitely needed.
In any case, that’s a rare little look into the mind of Mr. Cleary. Also, while THC is pleased that someone directly asked Cleary some of the questions raised here on our blog, why the hell did it have to be Arkley? Sheesh. For better or worse not many people really take him seriously at this point. We believe that these are some pretty important issues that deserve more that a brief KINS interview.
And now for something completely different. In an instance where THC was absolutely thrilled to hear someone asking questions about True North and HAF in a public forum, lets take a look at the Eureka City Council meeting from October 20th. The link to the video of that meeting is here.
We’d like to draw your attention to a statement read by a Mr. Bob Bartley (we think that’s his last name), that begins at the 29:44 mark. (For added entertainment value, be sure to watch Mr. Bartley’s opening act, which precedes him beginning at the 26:30 minute mark. Brava! Also pay attention to the facial expressions of the woman in glasses to the right of each speaker throughout the whole meeting – priceless!)
Lastly, an unnamed community member who has been involved with True North responds to Mr. Bartley’s comments at the broadcast’s 48:12 mark. Another person speaks directly after the first regarding the actions of True North.
THC has already made our viewpoints on True North and HAF abundantly clear. However, we think it’s important to keep providing any and all new information on the subject, and we very much hope you’ll watch and listen to the links we provided. Check it out for yourselves. We couldn’t make this shit up for a thousand cases of Mike’s Hard Cider.
All of us here at The Consequential were touched to tears that our efforts at informing the public are actually bearing fruit. Clearly the KINS interview and the public comments in Eureka are a response to the issues we’ve raised and the impact of the now tens of thousands of regular readers that peruse our digital pages. Yipee!