Matthews. | LinkedIn.

Meredith Matthews, a former Arcata mayor and current City Councilmember, has submitted her letter of resignation as executive director of the Arcata Chamber of Commerce.

In a brief phone interview with the Outpost, Matthews described her chamber gig as “probably the best job I’ve ever had,” adding, “I love the staff, the board and the community.”

Matthews, who has served as the Arcata Chamber’s ED for a little over two years, plans to continue in the role through July 15.

“I’m committed get through the Fourth of July and make sure the chamber is set up for success,” she said. She also plans to help the organization hire her replacement. The chamber has already begun a search and has issued a press release with details. Click here to download that.

As for her own plans, Matthews has been hired as the next executive director of the Humboldt Lodging Alliance, a nonprofit focused on boosting local tourism. She’s scheduled to start that job on Aug. 4. 

Below is her letter of resignation from the Arcata Chamber:

Dear Chamber Members,

It has been an absolute pleasure and privilege to work alongside you over the past two years. Together, we have strengthened the Arcata Chamber of Commerce, not just as an organization, but as a true cornerstone of our community.

I am so proud of all we have accomplished to serve our members better. We have built a robust social media presence that tells the stories of our local businesses and shares the spirit of Arcata far beyond our city limits. We’ve expanded events on the Plaza and throughout the city, creating opportunities for connection, celebration, and economic vitality. We’ve broadened our outreach and deepened our partnerships, including our work with Cal Poly Humboldt, the City of Arcata, and countless local organizations to support business growth and build a stronger, more resilient local economy. Together, we’ve reimagined what the Chamber can be—a resource, an advocate, and a place where members feel seen, supported, and celebrated.

The love I have for our business community and the City of Arcata is immeasurable. I’m excited to continue serving this region as the new Executive Director of the Humboldt Lodging Alliance, where I will have the opportunity to work with partners across Humboldt County to promote sustainable tourism, support local businesses, and bring more overnight visitors to our community.

I am confident the Chamber will continue to thrive in the capable and dedicated hands of Gloria, Zach, and our incredible Board of Directors. I look forward to supporting their work as a Chamber member and as a continued advocate for our local business community.

Please feel free to reach out to me in the coming weeks if you have any questions, or simply to stay connected. I’ll look forward to seeing you at mixers, workshops, and community events around town.

Thank you for trusting me with this role. It has truly been one of the greatest honors of my career.

Warmly,

Meredith Matthews

Six Rivers National Forest release:

Yesterday, the Six Rivers National Forest received  lightning from thunderstorms that passed over Northern California.  

As of 7:30 a.m. PDT this morning, there were approximately 282 lightning strikes over the  North Coast. Firefighters are responding to lightning fires as they are discovered by both ground and aerial resources. At this time, there are five confirmed lightning fires on two Ranger districts.  

Gasquet Ranger District 

Myrtle Fire – Approximately .1 acre with ground resources on scene. The fire is located   northeast of Crescent City on Low Divide Road near Forest Route 17N21 near the top of the   ridge. Fire is controlled and in patrol status. 

Goose Fire – Approximately .25 acre located northeast of Klamath near Red Mountain Road   (forest road 15N13). Forest Service resources include three engines, one handcrew, one   watertender, an air attack and two helicopters responding. CAL FIRE Humboldt-Del Norte Unit  is providing two additional handcrews and two dozers to clear paths for access to the fire. 

Goose Two Fire – Approximately .1 acre located east of Rocky Saddle. Currently one Forest   Service engine onsite, and fire was detected using interagency aircraft. Fire is contained and   firefighters are working on mop up and control.  

Broken Fire – Currently the size is unknown, located northeast of Klamath near the east fork  of Goose Creek. Forest Service resources include three engines, two handcrews, and one   watertender responding. CAL FIRE Humboldt-Del Norte Unit is also assisting with two   handcrews and 2 dozers to clear paths for access to the fire. 
Orleans/Ukonom Ranger District  

Orleans/Ukonom Ranger District 

Wooley Fire – Currently unknown size, this fire reported in the Marble Mountain wilderness  near the Black Mountain Trailhead. Aircraft patrolled the area and were unable to locate,   however, aircraft will continue to patrol.  A Red Flag Warning remains in effect until 11 p.m. tonight and more lightning is in the forecast  today over the Six Rivers National Forest. 

# # #

Holdover lightning fires can smolder for days and even weeks following a thunderstorm. It can  take several days of dry and warm weather for these fires to become visible. 

Firefighters will continue to monitor conditions and respond to lightning fires as they are  discovered in the coming days.  

“The Six Rivers National Forest has steep, challenging terrain where access can be a challenge,  especially with lightning fires burning in remote areas,” said Six Rivers National Forest Fire  Management Officer Josh Eichamer. “We are committed to swift suppression with public and  firefighter safety our top priority.” 

Firefighters will make appropriate risk-informed efforts to fully suppress small fires before they  become large, complex incidents to ensure protection of lives, property, valuable timber and  natural resources. This means suppressing fires as swiftly as possible to minimize fireline  exposure and readiness for the next ignition. 

“This is the annual week of remembrance honoring fallen wildland firefighters,” Eichamer said.  “It is a somber reminder of the risk wildland firefighters face and as we respond to lightning  fires our ultimate goal is for every firefighter to make it home safely to their family and friends at  the end of the incident.” 

To help firefighters focus on lightning fire response, area residents and visitors are asked to be  careful with anything that can spark a wildfire and to help prevent additional fires. The public  can also report suspected wildfires by calling 911. 

As a reminder, all fireworks are prohibited on National Forest System lands, including the Six  Rivers National Forest and developed recreation sites. This includes poppers, sparklers and  other fireworks. 

The Forest is not currently under fire restrictions, but preventing human-caused wildfires is  important, especially as firefighters are responding to lightning fires. Campfires should never be  left unattended and should be dead out and cold to the touch before leaving. 

Press release from U.S. Rep. Jared Huffman:

Today, Natural Resources Committee Ranking Member Jared Huffman (D-Calif.) released the following statement after the Senate passed President Trump’s Big, Ugly Bill:

“The Senate just jammed through a scorched-earth reconciliation bill so toxic that it is worse than the House version if you can believe it. It takes away healthcare from millions of Americans, rips food assistance from kids and seniors, and guts the very safeguards that protect our clean air and water — all to reward the same fossil fuel CEOs Trump asked for a billion-dollar campaign check. It props up the dirty energy of the past, suffocates clean energy, and sticks American families with higher costs, dirtier air and water, and growing floods, fires, and climate disasters.  

“Republicans tried to push through the biggest public lands sell-off in modern history — and got rejected so badly they had to yank it. But make no mistake: this bill still guts protections, opens millions of acres to drilling, mining and logging, and rewrites the rules into a pay-to-play scheme for Trump’s billionaire donors. And this just adds to what the Trump administration is already doing to sell out our public lands to polluters and developers.   

“This isn’t a beautiful bill; it’s a Big Betrayal. It slashes hundreds of thousands of good-paying jobs. It kneecaps investments that are finally flowing to rural towns, Tribal Nations, and working-class communities. And it would drive up costs across the board — electricity, healthcare, food — forcing families to pay more just so fossil fuel CEOs and already wealthy corporations can rake in record profits. No wonder nearly two-thirds of Americans oppose it.   

“Now it heads back to the House, where Republicans better be ready to explain why they’re ripping up healthcare and food assistance, selling out public lands, gutting clean air and water safeguards, and driving up energy bills, all so billionaires and Big Oil CEOs can get richer.”

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

###

In summary

California’s excise tax on legal weed is increasing, despite efforts to keep it lower to help the struggling industry. Lawmakers left it out of the state budget they passed Monday.

A substantial tax hike for California’s faltering legal cannabis market is set to take effect today, despite an aggressive industry campaign to suspend the increase that won the support of Gov. Gavin Newsom and other political leaders.

The excise tax for weed is 19% as of July 1, up from 15% — the result of a political deal three years ago that was intended to buy more time for the legal market to stabilize but which cannabis business operators now warn could chase away customers and push them over the edge.

“I’ve never experienced collective malaise like this,” said Genine Coleman, founder of the Origins Council, which represents small farmers in the historic Northern California growing region known as the Emerald Triangle. “People are so concerned with their survival and so deflated. It’s a dangerous space.”

An excise tax is a levy imposed on a good by the state before sales taxes are applied. While a push to freeze the cannabis excise tax through the state budget failed last month, a bill that would lower the rate back to 15% for the next six years is still moving through the Legislature. Newsom has pledged to sign a proposal halting the tax increase if it reaches his desk.

“I’m intimately familiar with the conversations around that and have great confidence that we’ll achieve our stated goals,” Newsom said during a press conference Monday.

Cannabis growers, dispensary owners and consumer advocates rallied for months at the state Capitol to avert the tax increase, which they argue could deal a fatal blow to businesses already operating with slim margins.

The price of weed has plummeted since voters legalized recreational cannabis through Proposition 64 in 2016, the result of a rush to overproduction even as most cities and counties in the state remain closed off to retail sales. Meanwhile, California is struggling to bring its market out of the shadows; the state Department of Cannabis Control estimates that legal sales still comprise less than 40% of weed consumption in California, which the industry attributes to state and local excise and sales taxes that can increase prices for consumers by a third.

Taxable cannabis sales in California dropped to $1.09 billion for the first quarter of 2025, down 30% from their peak in early 2021 and the lowest quarterly sales in five years.

Tax was intended to offset cannabis harms

It’s a crisis for the industry — communities that traditionally relied on cannabis production have collapsed economically — but also a problem for the state’s finances. Tax revenues from weed sales provide guaranteed funding for child care slots, environmental cleanup, substance abuse education and impaired driving prevention efforts as California faces a growing budget deficit.

“This was a poor time to say, ‘let’s starve the state even more,’” said Tom Wheeler, the executive director of the Humboldt County-based Environmental Protection Information Center, which joined a coalition of child care, environmental and tribal advocacy groups to lobby against a tax freeze.

He said it was important to uphold the promise of Proposition 64, which includes using cannabis tax revenue for programs that offset the harms caused by the cannabis industry, and expressed skepticism that the tax increase would hurt sales.

“I think the average consumer would not notice that,” Wheeler said. “At what point do we stop cutting taxes to benefit the industry?”

The 2022 agreement offered relief to growers by eliminating a cultivation tax, but it allowed state regulators, after a three-year pause, to raise the excise tax to make up for the lost revenue.

During budget negotiations last month, Newsom — who also wants to begin using cannabis tax revenue for enforcement against illegal cultivation — and Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, a Democrat from Salinas, supported extending the pause on the excise tax. They could not reach a compromise with Senate President Pro Tem Mike McGuire, a Healdsburg Democrat who notably represents the Emerald Triangle.

In a statement, McGuire said “taxes on California’s overregulated cannabis industry have been a train wreck for years,” but he raised concerns about the fiscal implications of freezing the tax. State analysts estimate that increasing it to 19% could yield about $180 million per year for the state.

“It’s important to acknowledge that any freeze will create a budget shortfall which would impact critical community programs funded by cannabis tax dollars,” he said.

California could ‘forfeit a huge opportunity’

Industry representatives warn that further raising taxes will push price-sensitive customers back into the illicit market, hurting businesses teetering on the edge and actually lowering cannabis tax revenue in the long run.

“The math isn’t there,” said Amy O’Gorman Jenkins, executive director and lobbyist for the California Cannabis Operators Association. “We have no objections to how cannabis tax revenues are being spent. All we’re maintaining is that you can’t squeeze blood from a stone.”

They haven’t given up, though repealing the tax increase now that it’s taken effect will be even more challenging.

Assembly Bill 564, which would set the cannabis excise tax at 15% through the end of June 2031, passed the Assembly unanimously in May and now awaits consideration in the Senate.

Assemblymember Matt Haney, the San Francisco Democrat who introduced the measure, said he will keep fighting to get it to the governor. But he was furious that the Senate allowed the tax hike to take effect, which he said sent a message to legal cannabis operators that there is no incentive to follow the rules.

“This tax could kill this industry and there’s still not enough being done,” he said. “California is going to forfeit what should have been a huge opportunity for our state.”

###

Press release from Humboldt Bay Fire:

On June 30th 2025 at approximately 2:30 pm Humboldt Bay Fire responded to a significant residential structure fire involving a single-story home with detached garage. The fire, which caused extensive damage, resulted in a total loss of both structures, with estimated damages exceeding $200,000.

Upon arrival, the first engine company encountered heavy fire involvement and immediately deployed a deck gun to combat the blaze before transitioning to an offensive fire attack. Rapidly deteriorating fire conditions forced the four units on scene to shift to a defensive strategy, prioritizing the protection of neighboring homes. Despite significant challenges due to Humboldt Bay Fire Station 2 being unstaffed for the day due to staffing shortages, the responding units successfully contained the fire, preventing it from spreading beyond the involved residence and garage.

One firefighter sustained an eye injury during the operation and was transported to the emergency room for treatment. Humboldt Bay Fire would like to thank neighboring agencies for providing critical coverage for multiple additional calls for service during the incident, enabling the department to focus on fire suppression efforts.

Following a thorough investigation, the cause and origin of the fire remain undetermined due to the extensive damage to the structures. Humboldt Bay Fire remains committed to serving and protecting the community and appreciates the support of our mutual aid partners during this challenging incident.

Humboldt Bay Fire would like to also remind the community of the importance of maintaining good clearance of any vegetation around structures especially as we move into the wildland fire season.

Press release from the Humboldt County Sheriff’s Office:

On June 30, 2025, at approximately 7:00 a.m., deputies from the Humboldt County Sheriff’s Office (HCSO) responded to a report of a gunshot victim in the 8000 block of Kneeland Road, Kneeland.

Upon arrival, deputies discovered that Ashley Nicole Bartles, age 37, had discharged a firearm while at an unpermitted marijuana cultivation site in the area. The victim, who sustained serious injuries, was promptly transported to a local hospital for medical treatment.

Following a thorough investigation, deputies established probable cause to believe that Bartles discharged the firearm in a willful and grossly negligent manner. She was subsequently arrested and booked into the Humboldt County Correctional Facility on the following charges:

• California Penal Code 245(a)(2): Assault with a Firearm

• California Penal Code 246.3(a): Negligent Discharge of a Firearm

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.

A decade-spanning political battle between housing developers and defenders of California’s preeminent environmental law likely came to an end this afternoon with only a smattering of “no” votes.

The forces of housing won.

With the passage of a state budget-related housing bill, the California Environmental Quality Act will be a non-issue for a decisive swath of urban residential development in California.

In practice, that means most new apartment buildings will no longer face the open threat of environmental litigation.

It also means most urban developers will no longer have to study, predict and mitigate the ways that new housing might affect local traffic, air pollution, flora and fauna, noise levels, groundwater quality and objects of historic or archeological significance.

And it means that when housing advocates argue that the state isn’t doing enough to build more homes amid crippling rents and stratospheric prices, they won’t — with a few exceptions — have CEQA to blame anymore.

“Saying ‘no’ to housing in my community will no longer be state sanctioned,” said Assemblymember Buffy Wicks, an Oakland Democrat who introduced the CEQA law as a separate bill in March. “This isn’t going to solve all of our housing problems in the state, but it is going to remove the single biggest impediment to building environmentally friendly housing.”

Unlike most environmental laws, which explicitly mandate, monitor or ban certain environmental behavior, CEQA is just a public disclosure requirement. The 54-year-old statute requires state and local governments to study and publicize the likely environmental impact of any decisions they make. That includes the permitting of new housing.

But for years, the building industry and “Yes in my backyard” activists have identified the law as a key culprit behind California’s housing shortage. That’s because the law allows any individual or group to sue if they argue that a required environmental study isn’t accurate, expansive or detailed enough. Such lawsuits — and even the mere threat of them — add a degree of delay, cost and uncertainty that make it impossible for the state to build its way to affordability, CEQA’s critics argue.

With today’s vote, the Legislature will be putting that argument to the test. Gov. Gavin Newsom, who spent much of last week cajoling the Legislature to pass the bill as part of his budget package, is all but certain to sign it.

Now the question is whether this monumental political and policy shift will actually result in more homes getting built in California’s cities.

Many of the bill’s backers are optimistic.

“I think when we look back on what hopefully is California finally beginning to confront this housing crisis, this year — 2025 — and this bill will be viewed as a turning point,” said Matt Haney, a Democrat who represents San Francisco in the Assembly where he chairs the housing committee.

On paper, the new law, unlike most that deal with housing approvals and environmental regulation, is actually pretty straightforward.

Urban “infill” housing developments — housing built in and around existing development — are no longer subject to CEQA.

There are some exceptions and qualifiers, but development boosters say they are relatively minor.

The exemption is“the most significant change to the California Environmental Quality Act’s effect on housing production since CEQA was passed,” said Louis Mirante, a lobbyist for the Bay Area Council, a business coalition that regularly pushes for legislation that makes it easier to build.

The bill is limited to projects under 20 acres, but that cap is only relevant to the biggest multi-block-spanning mega developments.

A certain level of density is required, but it really only precludes using the policy for single-family home construction.

Before any project can move forward, any affiliated tribal government will have to be notified first, but the consultation is put on a short timeline.

In order to qualify for the exemption, a proposed project must also be consistent with local zoning, the regulations that determine what types of buildings can be constructed where. But thanks to another CEQA-chopping bill authored by San Francisco Democratic Sen. Scott Wiener that exempts many changes to zoning rules from CEQA and which is also packed into the budget, that appears less likely to be a real constraint.

To buy off the ferocious opposition of the State Building and Construction Trades Council of California, a construction union umbrella group, the bill also includes some higher wage requirements.

But those rules are not likely to apply to most potential residential development projects. “The lion share of housing being built” in California will no longer be governed by CEQA, said Mark Rhoades, a planning and development consultant in Berkeley.

Take a massive five-story apartment building spanning a full city block, said Bill Fulton, a longtime urban planner and professor at UC San Diego.

“You don’t have to worry about labor and you don’t have to worry about CEQA? That’s a big deal,” he said.

CEQA seachange

What a difference nine years make.

Consider how things went back in 2016 when then-Gov. Jerry Brown tried to ram a CEQA fix for California’s rising housing costs through the state budget process. Brown’s big idea was to “streamline” the housing approval process, allowing developers to make an end-run around the California Environmental Quality Act, so long as they set aside a certain share of units for lower-income residents.

A coalition of construction labor unions, environmental interests and local government groups torched the idea. The proposal didn’t even get a vote.

Nearly a decade later, once again a Democratic governor opted to stuff a CEQA-trimming policy package through the budget process in the name of cheaper housing.

The measure passed overwhelmingly in both the Senate and Assembly — and this time it didn’t even include an affordability requirement.

Learn more about legislators mentioned in this story.

Wicks’ proposal is somewhat narrower than the 2016 version, exempting only infill. New suburban-style subdivisions carved from farmland or undeveloped sagebrush will not qualify.

That infill focus has made it easier for the Democratic-controlled Legislature to swallow such a significant scaling back of California’s signature environmental law. Promoting denser urban development generally means using less land, constructing new housing that uses less energy and setting up new residents to do a lot less driving.

“When you are building housing in an existing community, that is environmentally beneficial, it is climate friendly, that is not something that should be subjected to potentially endless CEQA challenges and lawsuits,” Wiener said on the Senate floor on Monday just prior to the vote, when the measure passed 28 to 5.

Even so, Wicks’ proposal always looked like a long shot.

Since Brown’s failed gambit, lawmakers have managed to pass a raft of bills giving housing developers an escape route around CEQA. But those laws have always contained a trade-off. Developers get to skip CEQA, but in exchange they have to pay state-set “prevailing wages” (which typically work out to union-level pay), hire union workers outright, set aside a certain share of units for lower income residents, or some combination of the three.

These conditions were born of political necessity. A CEQA lawsuit — or even the suggestion of one — makes for a powerful negotiating tool. Organized labor groups, mostly especially the building trades council, have not been keen to give up that leverage without getting something in return.

As housing developers proved less willing to use the new streamlining laws than those bills’ sponsors and supporters had hoped, many pro-building advocates, academics and commentators began calling for environmental streamlining with no strings attached.

Wicks answered that call earlier this year. Under her proposal, infill developers would be allowed to ignore CEQA, full stop. That marked a major break from recent legislative precedent, and one that seemed a stretch, even with so many Democratic lawmakers carting around copies of Abundance.

The deal that almost wasn’t

Just last week, Wicks’ proposal seemed on the verge of collapse.

A version of the bill introduced last week included what amounted to a minor wage hike for the lowest paid construction workers, who are virtually all non-union. While the state’s carpenters’ union supported it, the trades council emphatically did not — with one of the groups’ associated lobbyists likening it to Jim Crow. The trades objected so strenuously — arguing that it set dangerous precedent and undercut apprenticeship programs — that lawmakers removed the proposed wage change.

Instead, developers working on projects that are entirely designated to be affordable would now be required to pay prevailing wages in order to take advantage of the new law.

Developers of any projects over 85 feet tall would be required to hire a certain share of union workers. There are added restrictions for construction in San Francisco specifically.

By the standards of prior housing streamlining bills, those are relatively modest concessions. Most developments over 85 feet use concrete and steel frame construction, which require a higher skilled labor force that is often unionized anyway.

Most entirely income-restricted housing projects make use of public subsidies that require paying union-level wages.

“Affordable housing is forced to play by different rules because the state has decided that if you are receiving public funds a certain wage should be attached to it,” said Ray Pearl, executive director of the California Housing Consortium, which advocates for affordable housing construction. The addition of a prevailing wage requirement for affordable housing “is a head scratcher,” he said. “But it really is reaffirming existing policy.”

That leaves every other type of housing project: Market rate and mixed-income apartment buildings under seven-or-so stories. For that type of construction, which defines the bulk of urban development in California, CEQA is soon to be entirely optional — no string attached.

That this is the new trades-endorsed deal has been met with a perplexed kind of glee from some corners of the “yes in my backyard” movement. The new version of the bill “is now *even better,*” UC Davis law professor Chris Elmendorf marveled on Twitter.

Will it matter?

What will urban housing construction look like in California without CEQA?

There are no shortage of reasons not to build housing in California. Labor costs, even without regulatory requirements, are high. So are interest rates. Tariffs and aggressive immigration enforcement are more recent sources of uncertainty. Developers are always happy to complain about slow permitting, high local fees and inflexible building codes.

“It’s not the CEQA costs that are holding up housing,” said Rhoades, the Berkeley consultant.

“I don’t think this is going to make more development happen,” he said of the budget bill. “It’s going to make development that is already happening a little easier.”

Critics of the law can and do point to specific projects — housing for students, housing near public transit, affordable housing built upon city-owned parking lots — that have been sued in the name of the environment as examples of “CEQA abuse.”

Under the new laws, such litigation will largely go away in California’s cities.

“The one thing we do know is that CEQA is a time suck,” said Ben Metcalf, managing director of UC Berkeley’s Terner Center for Housing Innovation and the former head of the state’s housing agency under Brown. “If you can just get out of that six months, nine months, twelfth months of delay, that takes a whole cohort of projects and gets them in the ground sooner. In a state that’s facing a housing crisis, that’s not for nothing.”

But the more important consequence of CEQA, many of its critics regularly argue, has been its chilling effect.

How many new units of housing would have been built, but for concerns that they might become ensnared in environmental litigation? How many developers, anticipating a possible legal challenge, have preemptively pared back their plans? How many financiers of housing projects pulled out or demanded higher interest rates over such concerns?

California may soon find out.

###

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