The Eureka parking lot at Fifth and D, which is slated to be developed into multi-family housing by Dishgamu Humboldt Community Land Trust, a unit of the Wiyot Tribe. | Photo by Andrew Goff.

###

Rob Arkley’s Security National spent more than $1.6 million on a failed effort to preserve some of Eureka’s downtown parking spaces via citizen initiative, and while it looks like voters will wind up rejecting Measure F by a margin of more than two-to-one, the semi-local tycoon isn’t giving up.

On Election Day, before any results had even been tallied, the Arkley-affiliated group Citizens for a Better Eureka filed the opening brief of an appeal in a case concerning the parking lot at the corner of Fifth and D streets — half a block from Security National’s Eureka headquarters.

Citizens for a Better Eureka sued the city in May of 2023 — in one of five lawsuits it would eventually file — alleging that the city failed to comply with provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) when it designated that parking lot as surplus, freeing it up for affordable housing development.

The following July, the city awarded the development project to Dishgamu Humboldt Community Land Trust, a component unit of the Wiyot Tribe, which aims to build a 41-unit mixed-income apartment complex on the parcel, along with a 52-unit project at the intersection of 6th and L streets.

In March, the Wiyot Tribe asked the court to dismiss the suit, arguing that it is “an indispensable party” in the case, but as a federally recognized Indian Tribe it also has sovereign immunity and thus cannot be “joined” or included in the suit. 

Humboldt County Superior Court Judge John T. Feeney evidently agreed with that argument, summarily dismissing the case without explanation.

In the opening brief of his appeal (which was first reported by John Chiv), Citizens for a Better Eureka attorney Bradley B. Johnson argues that Judge Feeney made a mistake in granting the Tribe’s motion. Johnson doesn’t dispute the tribe’s sovereign immunity claims, but he says that’s not the issue.

“[T]his case is not a lawsuit against the Tribe,” his argument says (underlining his). Instead, he says, the case is about whether Eureka followed CEQA when it surplussed the land, which happened before the project was even awarded to the Tribe’s development arm.

“The question presented in the case at hand – whether [the City of Eureka] complied with CEQA when it decided to reduce or remove parking from the parking lot at 5th and D Streets and declare the lot surplus – is one that can be fully resolved in the Tribe’s absence,” Johnson’s argument says. 

In asking Judge Feeney to toss the lawsuit last year, the Wiyot Tribe’s attorneys argued that the Tribe’s plans for the Fifth and D lot are inextricably linked to the outcome of this lawsuit, which makes the Tribe an indispensable party. 

“There’s no way this case can be reconfigured to limit the impact to the Wiyot Tribe because the removal of parking that took place at the April 2023 city council meeting is a necessary first step in the Tribe’s development,” attorney Siena Kalina argued.

The Wiyot Tribe did not immediately reply to a request for comment on the appeal. [UPDATE, 4:19 p.m.: Shortly after this post was published, Wiyot Tribal Administrator Michelle Vassel told the Outpost via email, “We received their brief on Election night. The Tribe is aware of the appeal and will respond accordingly. “]

Eureka’s city attorney, Autumn Luna, declined to comment. The city’s response brief is due by Dec. 5. 

###

DOCUMENT: Opening Brief

###

PREVIOUSLY