From the Humboldt County Sheriff’s Office:

On April 9, at approximately 4:09 p.m., Humboldt County Sheriff’s deputies were dispatched to the 1600 block of Sutter Road in McKinleyville to investigate a domestic-related incident involving a report that a male subject had broken the windshield of a vehicle belonging to his girlfriend.

While deputies were en route, additional callers reported that a female subject had struck the male with the vehicle. Emergency medical services were requested and staged nearby.

Upon arrival, deputies contacted a 44-year-old female, who reported that her 50-year-old boyfriend, Robert Willis Slavens, had jumped onto the hood of her vehicle as she attempted to leave their residence and kicked the windshield. She stated that while she was trying to drive away, Slavens fell off the vehicle onto the ground.

Through statements and evidence gathered at the scene, deputies determined that an earlier incident had occurred in which the victim attempted to leave the residence, and Slavens followed her outside and forcibly brought her back into the home.

Slavens, who is on active CDC parole for prior domestic violence-related offenses, was taken into custody. He was evaluated by emergency medical personnel and transported to a local hospital for treatment. After being medically cleared, he was transported to the Humboldt County Correctional Facility, where he was booked on the following charges:

• PC 207(a): Kidnapping
• PC 3056: Violation of Parole

The Humboldt County Sheriff’s Office urges anyone experiencing domestic violence to seek help. Victims are not alone, and support is available through local law enforcement, advocacy organizations, and confidential hotlines. If you or someone you know is in immediate danger, call 911. For ongoing support, contact the National Domestic Violence Hotline at 1-800-799-7233 or visit www.thehotline.org for confidential assistance.

Anyone with information about this case or related criminal activity is encouraged to call the Humboldt County Sheriff’s Office at (707) 445-7251 or the Sheriff’s Office Crime Tip Line at (707) 268-2539.

###

This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.

###

This weekend’s California Republican Party convention was poised to be a drama-filled event. The party held out a slim hope that its two gubernatorial candidates, if they played nicely enough, could lock Democrats out of the November election and reclaim statewide office for the first time in 20 years.

But then President Donald Trump weighed in, backing former Fox News host Steve Hilton over Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco.

Now, the state party’s endorsement is far less consequential.

“He screwed over California Republicans yet again,” said Rob Stutzman, a Republican political consultant, of Trump. “It’s just political malpractice to not have done a dual endorsement,” he added. “People were briefing the White House on the situation.”

The weekend’s festivities in San Diego mark the first gathering since the state GOP’s bruising loss last November on Proposition 50, the Democrats’ gerrymandering plan designed to oust five Republicans from Congress in the midterm election. That loss only magnified the state party’s growing irrelevance since the ouster and resignation of House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, the Bakersfield congressmember who made sure the national GOP didn’t forget about its California members.

The gubernatorial contest, as well as legislative races, had become the new focal points for a party in search of a way out of the political wilderness. Trump’s endorsement probably dashed any hope of a Republican governor, leaving the Legislature as Republicans’ best chance for wins.

“He screwed over California Republicans yet again.”
— Republican consultant Rob Stutzman on President Donald Trump’s emdorsement in the governor’s race.

Bianco, who recently made headlines for seizing hundreds of thousands of ballots over claims of alleged voter fraud, is still expected to put up a fight for the 60% of delegate votes required to earn the party endorsement. Hilton will likely consolidate GOP support as loyal base voters fall in line behind Trump. Even without the party’s endorsement, Hilton is well positioned to finish in the top-two in June.

But the president’s nod is practically the kiss of death for a general election candidate in deep blue California, a state where even some Republicans tout bucking the president as a talking point on the campaign trail.

“The big fight if you’re trying to be elected governor is actually to have a broad-based appeal in California,” said Matt Rexroad, a Republican campaign consultant who used to work for Bianco. “President Trump doesn’t provide that.”

Republican candidates Chad Bianco and Steve Hilton participate in a gubernatorial candidate forum at Fresno State on April 1, 2026. Photo by Larry Valenzuela, CalMatters

Without the drama surrounding the gubernatorial endorsement, Rexroad decided the convention was no longer worth attending. He canceled his flight from Sacramento and his hotel reservation in San Diego, opting instead to send a proxy ballot with another delegate friend. Rexroad planned to back Bianco.

Trump’s popularity has fallen dramatically nationally since the war in Iran began and gas prices have skyrocketed, worsening his already poor standing among heavily Democratic California voters. Both Bianco and Hilton have sought to minimize their support for Trump, as nearly three-quarters of Californians disapprove of him, and many strategists believed the party’s best shot at the governorship was keeping the president out of it.

“The party is relevant in some localities of the state. But on a statewide basis, the Republican Party is like the Democratic Party in Utah,” said Mike Murphy, a former Republican consultant.

“You can’t think of a worse brand than Donald Trump in California,” Murphy said. “If they cancel the Republican state convention, as far as state politics are concerned, it’d make no difference to the outcome.”

Down the ticket, Republicans hope to hold and maybe even pick up additional seats in the state Legislature.

GOP looks down-ballot for an opening

With a brand irretrievably tied to Trump, one strategy for clawing back Republican losses is to focus on more conservative, inland parts of the state in local races. That includes pockets of Southern California, where Latino voters swung heavily in favor of Trump in 2024 and the party picked up three statehouse seats.

“What’s really going to be the difference-maker for Republicans in California is really focusing the ground game on districts that matter,” and raising money, said Jon Fleischman, a longtime Republican consultant. “If we can hold the seats we are capable of holding on a year that looks like a wave year for Democrats, then Republicans will do really well.”

First-time GOP Assemblymembers Jeff Gonzalez of Coachella and Leticia Castillo of Corona are examples. Each ran a successful campaign in their predominately Latino and slightly left-leaning districts in 2024.

Seeking vengeance, a handful of Democrats have lined up to unseat Gonzalez. Meanwhile, Castillo will face an old challenger. Both Republicans will be walking into this weekend with the party’s endorsement already in hand.

Castillo clinched her seat by fewer than 600 votes two years ago, defeating Riverside City Councilmember Clarissa Cervantes, who had more money and name recognition. But Cervantes, who sought to replace her sister, Riverside Democratic state Sen. Sabrina Cervantes, led a campaign that was muddied by revelations of Clarissa Cervantes’ two DUI convictions.

Assemblymember Leticia Castillo at her desk during a floor session at the state Capitol in Sacramento on Jan. 23, 2025. Photo by Fred Greaves for CalMatters

Gonzalez, a retired Marine, flipped his Coachella Valley district in 2024, which swung for Trump by fewer than two percentage points. He faces three other Democrats, including Indio City Councilmember Oscar Ortiz, and so far has amassed a bigger war chest than all of them.

Some Republicans also worry whether the party is headed in the right direction. In San Diego, local infighting over whether a moderate or far-right candidate would be best positioned to succeed term-limited Senate Minority Leader Brian Jones has stunted the party’s ability to back a single candidate.

Jones and the party establishment have backed Ed Musgrove, a San Marcos City Councilmember, while Assemblymember Carl DeMaio and his group Reform California are pushing for two-time unsuccessful candidate Kristie Bruce-Lane.

Republicans could also look to flip a newly competitive San Diego district represented by first-term Democratic lawmaker Catherine Blakespear. The district has been trending leftward since redistricting in 2020 pulled in more parts of liberal San Diego County and dropped portions of more conservative Orange County. Blakespear has significantly outraised her two GOP competitors, Laura Bassett and Armen Kurdian, one of whom could be endorsed this weekend.

Incumbent Republican Sen. Roger Niello of Roseville could also face a more difficult than usual path to reelection in a midterm where moderate Republicans in liberal areas will have to fight the anti-Trump momentum.

A challenging picture in the U.S. House

Post-Prop. 50, California’s five remaining incumbent Republican House members face a bleak road to reelection. The districts were redrawn so drastically that several members have chosen to vacate their original seats and seek reelection in different districts.

Rep. Kevin Kiley, a Roseville resident whose current district spans much of the California-Nevada border, left the GOP entirely and is running as an independent for a Sacramento-area seat that Prop. 50 made more conservative. Rather than risk his political future by challenging Rep. Tom McClintock, an influential party fixture, Kiley settled on the 6th Congressional District after months of deliberation.

“This is, I think, probably an attempt to salvage something of a career later down the road by putting in the old college try,” said Mike Madrid, an anti-Trump Republican strategist and co-founder of The Lincoln Project.

Longtime Rep. Darrell Issa, whose San Diego County district went from a Republican stronghold to a toss-up, announced his retirement barely before the deadline to file for the ballot. He reportedly explored moving to Texas to seek reelection there, but abandoned that plan when he failed to earn Trump’s approval.

And rather than retire as the longest-serving congressional Republican in California history, incumbent Rep. Ken Calvert is seeking to topple his colleague, Rep. Young Kim, in pursuit of an 18th term after his Inland Empire district was drastically reshaped into a liberal stronghold. Each has raised millions of dollars that they will undoubtedly deploy as they fight for one of the only remaining solidly Republican seats in California.

One bright spot for Republicans could be Rep. David Valadao’s campaign in the Central Valley. The six-term congressman has worked to distance himself from Trump over the years, voting in favor of the president’s second impeachment after the Jan. 6 insurrection attacks. He has only lost reelection once, in 2018 as part of an anti-Trump blue wave. He won back his seat in 2020 in the same election that former President Joe Biden won his district by double digits.

But Valadao faces one of his most difficult reelections yet as Democrats seek to saddle him with his vote for the GOP’s mega budget bill, which has stripped hundreds of thousands of his own constituents of their health insurance through Medi-Cal.

If California Republicans want to notch wins in races like Valadao’s, they know they need to motivate their voters to show up in November for what’s expected to be a bruising election for GOP candidates up and down the ticket.

The weekend’s gathering in San Diego should provide a good pulse check. Trump’s endorsement in the gubernatorial race could energize the base. Or, it might convince enough GOP voters that the result is a foregone conclusion.

PREVIOUSLY

• More Sales Taxes on the Way? Fortuna City Council Adds Measure to November Ballot

Though Fortuna’s money problems haven’t yet hit residents hard, the upcoming years could be tough on the city — and long-term solutions are still being worked out.

Fortuna’s city council decided earlier this week to add a measure to November’s ballot asking voters to add a 0.75% sales tax to transactions completed within city limits (specifics under discussion). It’s a necessary step, they argue, because Fortuna’s $1.8 million short of where they should be every year. Fortuna is earning about $500,000 less in sales tax and TOT revenue (the tax levied on travelers who stay in hotels or Airbnbs) every year than it was in 2020, and annual liability insurance is also $500,000 more. Charts shared by city staff at the council meeting earlier this week showcase a big ‘ol arrow pointing out the gap in between Fortuna’s projected revenue, and the amount it’s actually making. 

Why the decline? Reached by phone earlier today, city manager Amy Nilsen pointed the finger at the implosion of the cannabis industry, a familiar culprit behind many local economic woes. A hostile national economy and expensive gas are likely contributing, she said.

Fortuna’s feeling the strain. City hall implemented a hiring freeze in November of 2025 for all positions paid with general fund money, forcing two jobs (a River Lodge Conference Center coordinator and position in the police department) to remain unfilled. The city council made exceptions for two positions, allowing the appointment of a community development director and a public safety dispatcher in March. 

There will be more cuts. The city council will discuss the city budget and service reductions during their April 27 meeting; Nilsen wasn’t willing to comment about specifics until then. 

Nilsen said hiring the community development director would hopefully allow them to find some strategies that would pull Fortuna out of its rut, but they’re in the “infancy phase;” she said they were still figuring out what those were. 

Expanding Fortuna’s sales tax base will be crucial. If the sales tax measure fails in November, any number of important city departments — parks, community development, street maintenance, public works, the police department — could have its funding slashed. Any issues left unaddressed could compound over time. 

“The city may need to make a pretty intensive effort on economic development,” Nilsen told the Outpost. “…That’s really the long-term solution. That’s going to be pivotal in the future.”

###

At a special meeting on Tuesday, the Eureka City Council gave staff the green light to move forward with a proposal that, if approved by voters, would double the monthly salary for elected officials who haven’t seen a pay raise for nearly 40 years. 

Since 1988, the council’s monthly stipend has remained at a static $500, with the mayor earning slightly more at $625 per month. While some municipalities give their elected officials periodic raises to keep up with inflation, Eureka is a charter city, meaning any pay increases for the mayor and council require an amendment to the city’s charter, and any changes to the charter must be approved by voters.

Speaking at Tuesday’s special meeting, City Attorney Robert Black described the council and mayor’s salaries as being “truly out of date.” The American Institute for Economic Research’s Cost of Living Calculator estimates that $500 in 1988 is equal to roughly $1,370 in today’s money, which represents a 174% increase in inflation.

City Attorney Black | Screenshot

“There are cities with a lesser population than you have that are significantly out ahead of the City of Eureka, as far as compensating elected officials,” Black continued. “One approach to a charter amendment would be to basically lift, in their entirety, the provisions of state law and simply incorporate those provisions … [which] would enable a fairly immediate upgrade from $500 a month to $950 a month. … And you could do an annual adjustment of up to 5% as the state law provides.”

The council could also opt to “simply change the numbers” and double its salary without including an annual adjustment. “The problem with that, of course, is 10 years from now, you [will] find yourself in the exact same situation [as today],” Black said.

Councilmember Kati Moulton spoke in favor of implementing a phased, inflation-based pay hike to avoid “some of the negative stigma that comes with voting for your own pay raise.” Still, she felt it was “fair to ask for reasonable compensation for your labor” and said a pay increase could “encourage working class people to participate in local politics.”

Going back to Black’s previous statement about Eureka’s city council making less than councils overseeing smaller cities, Moulton asked for a baseline of salaries. “The tiers are based on city population,” Black explained. “Every city that is below 35,000, which includes all the cities in Humboldt, is able to make $950. When you go above 35,000 [to 100,000], there’s a higher pay level. I’m not sure what it is, but it’s maybe in the $1,300 to $1,500 range.”

Councilmember Leslie Castellano, whose term ends in November, agreed that a wage increase could encourage more working-class people to run for city council. “This will not benefit me at all, but I’m really happy to support future council members,” she said. “I like the idea of the $950 and … I think that I would be fine with the 5% increase starting next year.”

Councilmember Renee Contreras-De Loach expressed concern that a 5% annual increase would push the council and mayor’s salaries “well over inflation within a couple of years.” Councilmember Scott Bauer, on the other hand, spoke in favor of the 5% increase, adding that “there’s a good chance inflation is going to be 8% this year.”

“Why not have the ability to at least get close to that?” Bauer asked. “Right now, it’s probably close to 5[%], and when fuel goes to $200 a barrel, which it’s probably going to do, I think it’s reasonable to have at least a ceiling.”

The council ultimately directed staff to draw up a proposal that would double the council and mayor’s monthly stipends — up to $1,000 and $1,250, respectively — with annual increases to be determined by the city’s Finance Advisory Committee and capped at 5%.

The city will hold two public hearings — tentatively scheduled for April 21 and May 21 — to refine the proposal and come up with a ballot question that will be presented to voters on the November 2026 ballot.

PREVIOUSLY:

• TO SEATTLE! Alaska Airlines Will Launch Direct Flights Between Humboldt and the Emerald City Beginning in April

###

A highly sought-after direct flight from Seattle, Wash., to Humboldt County’s airport had its inaugural arrival Wednesday.

The trip represented both Alaska Airline’s return to the California Redwood Coast-Humboldt County Airport (ACV), and the realization of a longtime goal to have commercial northbound flights out of ACV. County officials say the flight was highly requested.

“We had no idea when we booked it that this was the first flight in from Alaska [Airlines]. So it was a very fortuitous event,” said Roger Peters, a Cutten resident. He said the direct flight that brought his sister (who hails from Victoria, BC) to Humboldt County made the trip much easier.

“Glad to have the service back,” he added.

Similarly, Sam Marsh and Cassidy Hopkins weren’t aware they rode on the airline’s inaugural flight from Seattle. They booked the trip on a whim, for their first visit to the area.

“It was a great flight, a beautiful view,” noted Hopkins, who said they planned to check out the redwoods.

The route is something officials are hopeful will usher in a new dawn for the airport and boost the local economy.

“Expanded air service really means so much for our community here. It supports a lot of locals,” said Humboldt County Supervisor Natalie Arroyo during remarks, pointing to a recent Humboldt County study finding air service supported approximately 584 jobs and generated $77 million in local economic output.

The last time Alaska Airlines flew into ACV was in 2012, when the airline cut an LAX route. The effort to get this flight took some courting.

In 2022, Congressman Jared Huffman, the Redwood Region Economic Development Commission and Volaire Aviation helped the County’s Department of Aviation bag a $850,000 grant from the U.S. Department of Transportation to help airport officials attract northbound flights, either to Portland or Seattle.

“The county has been recruiting this service for more than a decade, and in that time, we’ve met with Alaska’s representatives 17 times to solidify this deal,” County Administrative Officer Elishia Hayes told attendees, near balloons and a Bigfoot mascot.

Arroyo handed gifts, such as Bigfoot socks and a dawn redwood sapling, to an Alaska Airlines representative.

“We are really excited to be back in Arcata,” said Danny Flores, Alaska Airlines California Director of Station Operations, during a speech.

He said people flying out of ACV can soon use the airline to get across the world. With the integration of Hawaiian Airlines, later this month travelers can buy a ticket from Arcata and eventually get all the way to Rome. And he noted Alaska Airlines is hoping to see some additional flying in Arcata.

“We all hope that the launch of this new flight to Seattle is just the beginning of what’s to come at ACV,” CAO Hayes said.

She said the airport has seen 80% growth since 2019, making it one of the fastest growing small airports in the country.

“I’m personally thrilled that they’re here,” said Nancy Olson, CEO/President of Eureka’s Chamber of Commerce, who lived in Seattle for many years. 

“But also I think it’s going to be really good for our tourism, and bring folks down with much easier access to what we have to offer here,” she said. 

Gregg Foster, the Executive Director of RREDC, agreed. He said it’s long been a goal of economic development groups to have flights going north from ACV, for both tourism and business operations.

This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.

###

A union-backed proposal to tax California’s billionaires to fund health care has put some progressive lawmakers — and their labor allies — in a quandary.

Taxing the rich to backfill Trump-induced federal funding cuts might sound like a no-brainer policy for the party’s left flank, which counts wealth inequality among its top issues.

But despite a strong show of support from prominent national figures, including Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont and liberal economist Robert Reich, the “2026 California Billionaire Tax Act” has become a hot potato for labor leaders.

The proposed initiative would levy a one-time tax of 5% on any resident of California whose net worth exceeds $1 billion, which applies to around 200 people, according to Forbes. That money would plug an estimated $100 billion hole left by federal cuts to Medi-Cal and other social service programs.

Publicly, prominent labor and progressive players have largely kept quiet, unlike Gov. Gavin Newsom who has aired his disdain loud and clear. Yet in private, some union leaders and their allies in the Legislature rail against the measure. Of the critics who spoke with CalMatters for this story — three union leaders and five members of the Legislative Progressive Caucus — only one lawmaker would criticize the measure openly.

Critics question its feasibility and whether the state even knows how to accurately appraise a billionaire’s total wealth, a crucial step to evaluating how much tax they would owe. They fear long-term revenue loss by driving wealthy people out of California. And some resent that the union sponsoring the initiative, SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West, designed the measure to predominantly benefit its members rather than boost the state’s general fund, where it could go to all budget needs.

“It’s not that taxing billionaires in itself is wrong,” said Keely Martin Bosler, formerly the top state budget officer to Newsom and former Gov. Jerry Brown. She is now a Democratic consultant who has advised several of California’s most powerful labor groups, including the Service Employees International Union of California, the parent union of SEIU-UHW. “The way in which this tax specifically is constructed is problematic.”

Many progressive state lawmakers and Capitol heavyweights, such as Sen. Scott Wiener of San Francisco and the powerful California Labor Federation, have sidestepped the question of whether they’d support it, declining for now to take a position on an initiative that has yet to officially qualify for the ballot.

“The Labor Federation won’t take it up for an endorsement until July,” said Lorena Gonzalez, the organization’s president, in a text message.

Yet if the tax lands on the November ballot, as it appears on track to do, progressive critics will be saddled with the tricky optics of opposing — or at least not supporting — a measure that embodies one of their base’s core tenets: taxing the rich.

Even the mere threat the measure could qualify for the ballot has already spurred a torrent of opposition spending — more than $50 million in total so far — from billionaires such as Google co-founder Sergey Brin and cryptocurrency mogul Chris Larsen. Brin’s group, known as “Building a Better California,” has also spawned three new competing ballot measures designed to undermine the billionaires’ tax.

Critics fear that if billionaires like Brin become even bigger perennial spenders in California politics, they could neuter the progressive agenda by bankrolling more business-friendly candidates and ousting left-leaning, labor-aligned legislators.

But the measure’s proponents say they are undeterred by the secretive detractors and challenge their critics to put their names behind their words.

“What we have is a group of so-called leaders who are not reflecting the attitudes of their own constituents,” said Dave Regan, president of SEIU-UHW and the de facto leader of the billionaire tax measure. “That’s why they want to be anonymous.”

Regan said he’s confident the initiative will amass enough signatures to qualify for the ballot before the end of April. Then, he said, “We believe a lot of those people are going to come around and change because this makes sense, because the public is supportive, because their own members are supportive.”

The case for, and against, the billionaires’ tax

So far, polling has shown the billionaire tax is relatively popular with voters. Recent surveys show just over half of Californians surveyed said they’re inclined to vote for it.

Critics point out that California’s existing state tax structure is entirely based on income, rather than net worth. The state would have to appraise each person’s assets, including real estate, art, automobiles and private and public businesses. The billionaires could pay in installments, handing over 1% of their wealth annually for five years.

Bosler said that with income tax filings, the Franchise Tax Board can use data from federal tax returns to verify its own analysis. Since there’s no federal wealth tax, California would be forging uncharted territory with no tax compliance support from any other source or agency — a risky move that could invite legal challenges.

“The state is not a miracle worker, like, they’re not going to suddenly be able to do all of this like perfectly,” said Bosler. “I mean they will do their best, but I just think this is expertise that they have built up over 50-plus years. Like, none of this is in their wheelhouse at this point.”

But champions of the tax argue it is the only real solution on the table so far to save hospitals, health care jobs and, ultimately, patient lives they say are at risk due to federal funding cuts to Medi-Cal and food assistance programs.

Supporters note that the tax is not intended to solve California’s structural budget problems.

“It’s one-time funding to fill what we hope is a one-time hole,” said Brian Galle, a tax law professor at UC Berkeley who helped craft the measure. Galle said only around 200 people would be subjected to the tax, so the extra burden on the Franchise Tax Board wouldn’t be too great.

“It’s not like FTB is going to get a blizzard of tens of thousands of new returns that they’re going to have to figure out a whole new data system for cracking,” said Galle.

Why some progressives aren’t on board

Those who have qualms with the initiative have largely kept their criticisms private.

One liberal state legislator, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said the infighting among the unions puts progressive lawmakers in a difficult position. While he empathizes with the urgency that health care workers feel, he and other Democrats are not convinced the policy could withstand legal challenges and worry about the wealthy employing savvy accounting maneuvers to skirt the tax altogether.

Some organizations that are synonymous with progressive politics in California, such as the Working Families Party, also haven’t taken a position, even as other unions such as the Teamsters and AFSCME California support it.

Even the powerhouse labor union SEIU California is choosing not to take a position on the measure, which is spearheaded by one of its local affiliates, SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West.

Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, right, speaks with Assemblymember Chris Ward during an Assembly floor session at the state Capitol in Sacramento on Sept. 12, 2025. Photo by Fred Greaves for CalMatters

Assemblymember Chris Ward, a member of the progressive caucus, called the measure a “well-meaning effort by UHW,” but criticized the proposal for being just a one-time tax primarily benefiting the health care sector rather than boosting the state’s overall revenues. Regan said SEIU-UHW made the tax one-time to nullify the argument that it would push billionaires out of the state.

Ward noted that he and his colleagues are considering “superior” bills, such as one that would close a corporate tax loop to generate $3 billion per year, and another that would create a new tax on corporations that pay workers so little that they qualify for Medi-Cal and nutrition assistance.

Regan argued these measures would only make California more unaffordable, since businesses would pass their increased costs along to consumers.

Ward, the sole state lawmaker who would candidly share his concerns about the initiative with CalMatters, said he and his colleagues have heard pushback from “a number of other labor organizations that don’t support that initiative,” primarily because its members would not directly benefit from any of the revenue. Uniting labor, he said, is the key to any successful revenue solution.

“There’s a need to look at a wealth tax for a more broad range, including health care workers but other purposes that are state priorities,” Ward said, “and that will be left off of the table if this is the only question we’re seeing.”

###

For the record: An earlier version of this story misstated Dave Regan’s leadership role with SEIU-UHW. He is president, an elected position, not executive director.

###

CalMatters‘ Nadia Lathan contributed to this story.

###

In an effort to close the gaps that prevent the city’s homeless community from accessing immediate shelter, the City of Eureka is pursuing new housing alternatives, including a city-sanctioned encampment.

At last night’s meeting, the council looked at several encampment setups in California and Oregon — ranging from strictly regulated city-run facilities to self-governed communities that more closely resemble a commune — to get a better sense of what would work here in Eureka. The council received the report, but did not take any formal action on the item.

The renewed push for emergency shelter options comes nearly one year after the city council rejected a controversial proposal that would have increased penalties for some people living in unauthorized homeless encampments. That proposal drew sharp criticism from homeless advocates who argued that it would cause undue harm to unhoused community members and create additional barriers to housing and supportive services. As a result, the council tossed the ordinance and instead formed an ad hoc committee to explore strategies to expand the city’s options for emergency shelter.

That ad-hoc committee includes council members Renee Contreras-DeLoach and G. Mario Fernandez, Eureka City Manager Miles Slattery, Managing Mental Health Clinician Jacob Rosen, CAPE Project Manager Jeff Davis and Chief Building Official Brendan Reilly.

During a presentation on that committee’s work at last night’s meeting, Contreras-DeLoach said city staff looked at two city-sanctioned “alternative shelters” in Portland, Oregon, including the Multnomah Safe Rest Village and Weidler Village, as well as Dignity Village, a membership-based community that calls itself “a radical experiment to end homelessness.” Staff also took online tours of a city-sanctioned encampment in San Rafael and The Grove in Sacramento, a 50-unit tiny cabin community for transitional-age youth.

Contreras-DeLoach acknowledged that there are “advantages and disadvantages” to each setup. Looking specifically at the Portland sites, she noted that the city-run Multnomah Village is made up of identical cube-like units (similar to the Betty Kwan Chinn Homeless Foundation’s Bayside Village) and is “very, very meticulously maintained” with tight security. Dignity Village, on the other hand, has more of an artsy, commune-type feel.

“It’s considered democratically self-administered, self-governed and self-operated,” Contreras-DeLoach said, referring to Dignity Village. Looking at an aerial view of the site, she pointed out piles of people’s belongings and garbage. “They did say to staff that … this community has had quite a few fire calls. …. You can see that there’s some safety concerns with how this one’s being operated.”

“I think there’s probably a happy medium between the two,” she added. “Studies have shown people do better and they heal better when there’s more of a sense of community, and we know that that’s often through environmental design and planning.”

Contreras-DeLoach also went over some of the different structure types that were used in each encampment, which range from fully-assembled one-room units to double units with a kitchenette and bathroom facilities, which exceed $20,000 per bedroom. 

Contreras-DeLoach noted that a locally made and eco-friendly option could be sourced through Building Lives By Building Structure (BLBS), a Hoopa Valley-based hempcrete business. “They’re built like a home … and, price-wise, they come in at about the same price point,” she said, referring to the $20,000 per unit figure. However, she acknowledged that BLBS does not yet operate at the scale required for, say, a 25-unit tiny house village.

An example of a Conestoga Hut. | Screenshot.

The structures she was most interested in were Conestoga Huts, insulated, hard-shelled structures that are built kind of like a hoop house with a flat, plywood base that’s elevated off the ground. They’re used in tiny house villages and encampments throughout Oregon, but they’re not as common here in California because they’re considered tents and are subject to different zoning laws than other tiny house structures, Contreras-DeLoach said.

“One of the issues that we have in an encampment situation is that the tents have to be ADA accessible … which, in some ways, sounds almost counterintuitive because we’re talking about people that, right now, are stuck in bushes and potentially gutters and doorways. It seems like anything would be an improvement,” she said. “[These are] sturdy, non-flammable, insulated [and] safe, [with a] locking door and window, which solves a myriad issues.”

The biggest selling point for the Conestoga Hut is perhaps the price. A fully assembled unit costs around $4,500, and an unassembled unit is closer to $2,500.

“My takeaway from all of this [research] is that this is doable,” Contreras-DeLoach said at the end of her presentation. “After going through this and really looking at it, I’m like, ‘This is something that we can really do. This is an option for us to get people off the streets and in a more stable situation.’ These aren’t intended for long-term [use], but they could last for a really long time.”

Councilmember Leslie Castellano asked if the ad hoc committee had spoken with any specific entities or individuals willing to host an authorized encampment or tiny house village and, if so, where it would be located. She also asked about potential funding opportunities. Contreras-DeLoach said the ad hoc committee had spoken to a few faith-based organizations and private individuals about setting up Conestoga Huts, but couldn’t say who. 

Slattery noted that staff applied for “a private donation from an entity south of here” and said the city is focusing its efforts on a 40-unit village at a property owned by the Betty Kwan Chinn Homeless Foundation at Second and A streets.

“We’ve looked into the PLHA [Permanent Local Housing Allocation] for funding to have that site prepped,” he continued. “We have a layout designed for that site, and that layout has been proposed to both the private donor as well as the organization that we’re seeking a donation from. We got really good news today: Our staff had spoken to that organization, and based on those conversations, we’re optimistic, but we won’t know until we hear back.”

Contreras-DeLoach | Screenshot

Contreras-DeLoach added that the faith-based organizations and private donors wouldn’t be able to host anything large-scale. “These would be much smaller,” she said, adding that the churches would have to expand their designation as an “institution” with the state to include welfare. “There’s multiple churches that are interested in having anywhere from two to five. So again, that’s not very many, but it’s what they feel like they can manage.”

Speaking to the design of some of the encampments in the presentation, Councilmember Kati Moulton emphasized that a colorful and even potentially cluttered space doesn’t mean it isn’t clean or poses liability risks. “There is room for both health and humanity.”

“I was at the Raven Project for many years, and if you’ve ever been inside that house, it is absolutely covered in artwork and memorabilia,” Moulton said. “It’s got a garden that’s thriving [and] it’s got a kitchen that’s really active. There’s lots of color, and the people who come in there to get services often end up employed there … and they all kind of leave their mark on the place.”

Mayor Kim Bergel expressed her appreciation for the in-depth report, but said she was disappointed that the ad hoc committee hadn’t done more to nail down a location for the encampment.

Bergel | Screenshot

“We’ve been having this conversation for 10 years,” she said. “When we shut down the camping ordinance, my understanding was … that [the committee] was going to bring back locations, people to manage the situation and how to keep people indoors. And I do appreciate that you did a lot of work on this, but it feels like we’re still in the same place. We still don’t have a location. … We don’t have any idea about how these things are going to be funded and who’s going to run it.”

Contreras-DeLoach said she didn’t feel it would be appropriate for her to make a recommendation to the council, given that many of the details hadn’t been worked out. 

“I can say, here are the grants that they’re applying for, here are the sites that we’re looking at, here are potential investors,” she said. “I don’t know how far everybody got in the process before, but I think that some of it is just waiting on us.”

Bergel continued to voice her concerns, noting that she had to call the city’s non-emergency line twice last week because tourists were being yelled at in Old Town. On top of that, Bergel said she was tired of seeing people throw “all their stuff all over the place” at Madaket Plaza.

“You guys know me. It’s not that I don’t care about people, but I can understand how some people are afraid, and we’ve got to come up with some ideas,” she continued. “We are hitting the rock, but things aren’t changing. … The people that I see sitting out in front of Free Meal in all kinds of filth … I don’t see how we’re being compassionate by allowing those kinds of behaviors. … It’s been a problem, but it’s more of a problem now.”

Moulton took the opportunity to reiterate a statistic Contreras-Deloach had shared earlier in the presentation: Uplift Eureka has successfully rehoused 259 people since 2018, and its Homeless Prevention Program has assisted 87 others. Moulton asked Uplift’s manager, Jeff Davis, how many of the 259 people rehoused ended up back on the streets. 

“In the ballpark of 80 [or] 85% success rate of folks that are still housed today, which is extremely high, and I think that goes to show our dedication,” Davis told the council. “When we work with folks in our Rapid Rehousing Program, we are working with folks who have the highest need and the highest level of vulnerability. If we had 100% success rate, we wouldn’t be helping the right people. We wouldn’t be helping the folks who need it the most.”

After some additional discussion, the council agreed to accept the report but didn’t take any further action on the item.

###

Want more city council coverage? Check back tomorrow!