Hemp activist Benjamin Franklin Grant protests the county’s hemp moratorium outside the Humboldt County Courthouse on Monday. | Photo by Andrew Goff.
###
A time-traveling weed legalization activist from three or four decades ago would probably be confused to arrive in present-day Humboldt County and learn that marijuana is legal while cultivating hemp, weed’s fibrous, non-psychoactive sibling, remains banned throughout the unincorporated land. Yet here we are.
On Thursday, the Humboldt County Planning Commission unanimously voted to indefinitely extend the county’s industrial hemp moratorium, which has been in effect since May 2019, and to forward an ordinance to the Board of Supervisors that would make the prohibition permanent.
There are a couple of exceptions to the ban. First, College of the Redwoods will have permission to seek a special permit that, if approved, would allow hemp to be grown for educational and research purposes on the school’s main campus, just south of Eureka.
Secondly, as the word “industrial” suggests, the ban is meant to prevent commercial-scale operations, so the “personal use” size limits in the county’s Commercial Cannabis Land Use Ordinance (CCLUO) will apply to hemp as well. That means people can grow up to six hemp plants or maintain 100 square feet of cultivation on parcels smaller than an acre; up to 200 square feet on parcels of one to five acres; and up to 400 square feet on parcels larger than that.
Also, individual cities can make their own rules. They can implement their own bans on industrial hemp, as both Blue Lake and Fortuna have done, but if they don’t, hemp cultivation is permitted by default.
In 2020, the Humboldt County Agricultural Commissioner’s Office registered two industrial hemp growers — one growing in Arcata and the other in Rio Dell, according to Ag Commissioner Jeff Dolf. In an email on Monday Dolf said, “We also were contacted by a business in Arcata which expressed interest in producing industrial hemp nursery stock, but as yet have not received a completed application from the interested party.”
Why the ban in the rest of the county? Well, in a series of public hearings and workshops held in 2019, quite a few local cannabis growers came out and voiced concerns that industrial hemp could produce uncontrolled pollen drift along with pests and pathogens that might contaminate their own crops, potentially destroying large swaths of the region’s lucrative commercial cannabis.
This whole debate erupted in 2019 after the federal government — somewhat unexpectedly — lifted its longstanding ban on hemp cultivation with passage of the 2018 farm bill. While hemp has historically and most commonly been grown as a source of durable fiber, used to produce rope, textiles and paper, etc., it can also be cultivated as a source of cannabidiol, aka CBD, a compound that has blossomed into its own lucrative industry. CBD is now regularly infused into food, health and beauty products and marketed as a treatment for conditions such as anxiety, epilepsy, pain and even cancer, though the scientific evidence for those claims remains thin.
While commercial cannabis regulations in California include robust — some say oppressive — systems of permits, fees and taxes, federal legalization of hemp meant that it can be grown more or less like any other agricultural crop. In California that means little more than registering your grow site with your county’s agricultural commissioner and paying a $900 fee.
Some growers saw hemp cultivation as a back door that would allow them to produce a lucrative cash crop legally without being overburdened by regulations. Others maintained the libertarian argument that the government has no business telling people what crops they can and can’t grow on their own land.
At Thursday’s Planning Commission hearing, SoHum resident and regular hemp advocate Benjamin Jefferson Franklin Grant spoke against the moratorium.
“There are potential threats to the local cannabis industry from cross-pollination and pests,” he allowed, “but those aren’t problems that we can’t solve.”
The public workshops held last year informed the development of an eight-page draft ordinance aimed at establishing local rules for the industry, and Grant argued that the necessary protections — including allowing only female hemp plants as a means of preventing pollen drift — were baked in.
Frustrated with the Planning Commission’s decision, Grant took to the street in protest. On Monday he stood outside the Humboldt County Courthouse with picket signs — “Honk for Hemp,” one read — and handed out free packets containing six 10 feminized hemp seeds apiece. (Only males and the occasional hermaphroditic plant are capable of producing pollen.) Grant said he plans to go back and hand out seeds again on Tuesday as an act of civil disobedience.
Describing himself as a hemp grower and researcher with a degree in horticulture from the University of Southern Illinois, Grant said he grew 120 acres of CBD hemp in 2019 and has a seed labelers license in Wisconsin.
As for the Planning Commission’s recommendation to make the ban permanent, Grant said defiantly, “Nothing’s permanent in a democracy.”
But local cannabis industry insiders remain steadfastly opposed to industrial hemp. Ross Gordon, policy director for the Humboldt County Growers Alliance, said that the scale of industrial hemp operations can reach thousands of acres, making it virtually impossible for local officials to inspect each individual plant and ensure that they’re feminized. (The state defines industrial hemp as a cultivation area of at least one-tenth of an acre, or 4,325 square feet.)
Gordon also said the genetics of hemp plants are not as stabilized as plants with higher levels of THC, the psychoactive compound in cannabis. This creates a higher likelihood of male and hermaphroditic plants, he said. And while cannabis regulations include stringent restrictions on pesticide and water usage, those rules don’t apply to hemp cultivation. [CORRECTION: Dolf informed the Outpost, “The same pesticide laws that apply to high-THC cannabis also apply to industrial hemp.” Gordon acknowledged this, though he noted that cannabis products face more scrutiny and accountability because they must be tested for pesticides, herbicides, heavy metals and other contaminants.] Hence the concerns about pests and pathogens.
The HCGA sent the Board of Supervisors a six-page white paper in November outlining their arguments against allowing industrial hemp production in Humboldt County.
Asked if he had any objections to Grant handing out free seeds at the courthouse, Gordon said, “Not at all. Prop. 64 says everyone gets to grow six plants, so I think that’s awesome. People should get their personal use.”
The Board of Supervisors have yet to set a date to consider the industrial hemp moratorium.
Dr. Ian Hoffman, Humboldt County Public Health Officer, took questions from local reporters today. Most of the questions had to do with Supervisor Rex Bohn’s request for his board to sign on to a letter asking the state to devolve pandemic-related economic decisions to the counties, but there were also a few questions about vaccination and the recently discovered variations of the virus.
Video above, rough transcript below.
###
From the North Coast Journal: “Based on Humboldt County’s epidemiological data, do
you think any consideration should be given to loosening local COVID-19 restrictions at
this time? Why or why not?”
I think I’ve said many times, and hopefully it’s been
clear, that our data locally suggests we should be in the purple tier. That has not changed
at all, in fact it’s only worsened, and so no, I do not think there should be any
loosening of restrictions at this time.
From the North Coast Journal: “Is implementing COVID-19 guidance and restrictions by zip
code a viable proposal? Why or why not?”
It’s certainly not one that Public Health
is taking or has looked at, I think there are logistical concerns, you know the way
that people move about in our community is not only within their ZIP code, ZIP codes
are quite small areas, so that’s why we’ve gone with a county-wide approach.
From the North Coast Journal: “Do you see value in a statewide approach to COVID-19
restrictions? Why or why not?”
I think again I’ve been very clear on this, that we do
think the statewide approach has value, and would continue to follow that approach.
From the North Coast Journal: “Do you feel it’s important for local officials to maintain
a consistent, unified message regarding the efficacy and importance of local and state
health orders and guidelines? Why or why not?”
I think it is helpful if we can all be on
the same page t o put that out there. Obviously there are folks who don’t always agree,
and we try to bring people to the table to have that discussion before we put policy
out there, so we are always trying to work towards a unified message, but sometimes the
communities we’re representing aren’t unified in that approach, so we’ll continue
to work towards bringing people to the table and talking and trying to get everyone on
the same page.
From the Redwood News: “You’ve mentioned in the past that our local data wasn’t in
line with the State’s tier assignment for Humboldt County…i.e., us being in the red
vs. purple tier. Some local leaders are talking about the Healthy Communities Resolution that
essentially calls for freedom from the State’s covid regulations, and also objects to the
tier assignment system. What does Public Health think about this resolution? Does the County
have any plans to deviate from the State’s tier assignments and focus on more local regulations?”
So lots in that question, I’ll start with the local data not being in line. Whenever
that’s happened, it’s that our data locally suggests that things are worse here, not better,
so in those circumstances we’ve talked about being more restrictive than the state, not
less restrictive. The recent red tier movement was mostly because of the state’s blueprint,
was entirely because of the state’s blueprint and the equity metric gave us credit for taking
care of disadvantaged populations, and having lower COVID rates in those parts of our society
here in Humboldt County. So I think we will continue to follow that, and if we see a message
locally that looks like it should be more restrictive, talk to our leaders and see if
there’s an appetite for a stronger health order versus just recommendations, just like
we did recently. I think that those would be the only plans to deviate from the tier
system at this time.
From the Lost Coast Outpost: “The Board of Supervisors on Tuesday will consider a
resolution brought forth by Supervisor Rex Bohn asking the state for more local control
over COVID-19 regulations, including the ability to implement zip code-specific regulations
and reopen schools. Would this resolution be helpful to Public Health? How would it
change the county’s approach, if at all?”
So I think the ZIP code, we already addressed,
and in terms of schools, schools have always been supported by Public Health to remain
open when it is safe to do so. So from the beginning of this pandemic, in March, my predecessor
Dr. Frankovich, Dr. Ennis, they worked with the schools to try to keep them open. There
were many local decisions made by school boards, teachers, families who didn’t feel that
that approach was what they wanted to do. The state approach has also encouraged opening
of schools and trying to support it. And so it was not until recently that we moved to
the purple tier that there were restrictions on reopening any schools. But from March until
November, any school that wanted to open was encouraged to open, and we tried to support
that as best as we could at Public Health.
From the North Coast News: “We are seeing that some vaccines aren’t being utilized across
the U.S. despite the high demand. Is Humboldt using their full allotment? And, when will
the county be getting their next allotment?”
Yeah, so as I’ve been saying, we get allotments
each week, and that can vary from week to week. So we’ve had weeks of getting thousands
of doses, some weeks of getting hundreds of doses. Not all of it has been used, but I
think we are online to use up, all of what we have on hand in the next few weeks, and
hopefully we are beginning the phases of looking into the next steps of Phase 1B as we wrap
up Phase 1A. And you know, I think that we’ve been told by the state that, for at least
the next probably month or two months, the amount we’re getting is likely to be fairly
consistent of first doses, and that has been about one to 2,000 on average every week,
and so I’m hopeful that we will continue to get that one to 2,000 doses each week in
the coming months.
From the Two Rivers Tribune: “With all concerns regarding the efficacy of vaccines and mutated
strains of the virus, and possible false-negatives caused by the variant strains, Please share
your biggest concern of impacts of what the variant strains can cause the county, do we
think they have arrived already?”
So with these new strains there’s always, this is
a virus that has continued to mutate and always will mutate. One of the things about Coronavirus
is that it’s fast moving and mutates very quickly. Most of those mutations die out,
some of them catch on.
You know with regards to ones that have affected testing or vaccine,
we have not seen any significant evidence to that, certainly we’ll keep people apprised
if that is the case. In terms of whether that is circulating significantly here, I think
it’s highly unlikely, we do know that there have been cases in the state of California,
but we have no evidence to suggest that it’s here in Humboldt County at this time. The
epidemiological data that’s being done, surveillance at a nationwide level, suggests
that only one in 1,000 people who have been infected with the Coronavirus recently have
these variants.
So it’s a pretty low likelihood, but again if we are not able to control the
spread of the virus, just like it did in London and in England, it could take hold much more
quickly, so there are a lot of efforts being done nationally and in the state of California
and locally here in Humboldt to do surveillance for these variants and try to get ahead of
it before it takes a strong hold.
From the Lost Coast Outpost: President-elect Joe Biden has signaled that his administration
will pursue a policy of shipping vaccine as quickly as possible, rather than holding back
second doses for booster shots. At the same time, the California Health Department says
that it is making a strong push to ramp up vaccine delivery over the coming days. How
is county staff adapting to the push to deliver vaccine into arms faster?
Yeah, as of right now we have no directive or evidence to start delaying second doses,
so we have started this week with second doses as they come in and as they were planned.
In terms of how we are trying to adapt, we sent Public Health staff into skilled nursing
facilities to vaccinate over the last few weeks to try to speed things along. We opened
up a public health clinic last week that has greatly increased the capacity and our staff
and myself have been working with local health leaders to encourage increasing the number
of appointments for giving vaccines in the coming weeks.
From the Redwood News: Has Public Health done any surveys or polls to gauge how the community
feels about getting vaccinated for Covid-19? Does PH have a general idea of how much of
the community is interested in getting the vaccine when it’s rolled out to the general
public? What would you say to those people who may be hesitant about getting vaccinated?
So yes, we have been doing surveys. We did survey all of our healthcare partners early
on to see what the interest was and how many folks they would need. We recently rolled
out a community survey to get that sort of feedback on a broader population of Humboldt
County. And that is just starting to come in. From the general uptake of the vaccine
nationally, we’ve seen places where you get upwards of 90% of people taking it and
sometimes less. It averages around in the 60-70% range for most places in terms of uptake
of how many were offered versus how many people took it. I think that for anyone that is hesitant
for this vaccine, I would start by saying it’s a safe vaccine. It has been through
its trials. We’ve now given it to millions of people here, as well as around the world
- many millions more. And we haven’t seen great changes in that concern for safety.
So it continues to be a safe vaccine. It’s also a highly effective vaccine - one of the
most highly effective vaccines we’ve ever seen at 94% efficacy which is much greater
than we could have ever anticipated. So if we want this pandemic to end, this is really
the tool that we need to have this pandemic end.
From the North Coast News: Do you think that incarcerated people should have higher priority
for vaccination over other elderly or high-risk groups? With Del Norte County so close and
Pelican Bay — is it wise to prioritize those populations given outbreaks that can potentially
affect the outside community?
We have not reprioritized in Humboldt County, incarcerated or other groups who are in the
tier 1B. These are extraordinarily difficult decisions that have to be made. If we look
at the numbers of people who are affected by this, the group 75 and older, absolutely
have the highest risk of being hospitalized, having bad outcomes, and certainly of death.
So, from the standpoint of protecting those that are at the highest risk from bad disease,
that’s why we will prioritize those who are 75 and older in phase 1B. As more information
comes out, if this does really look like a tool that will reduce the spread of COVID-19,
those conversations could change - that going into areas where there is higher likelihood
for spread. But right now, the vaccine is really a tool to protect the individual, not
to protect the society.
From the North Coast News: With hospitals so overwhelmed in other parts of the state,
and the CDPH ordering facilities with room to accept patients from those at capacity,
will Humboldt County accept patients from out of the county into our hospitals?
As I’ve answered this before, we are not at a place right now. This is a possibility as
things worsen across the state. So I would stay tuned and we’ll see how things go in
the coming weeks with surges worsening in areas that are closer to us.
From the Redheaded Blackbelt: At this point, does Humboldt County expect to receive transfer
patients from other regions, such as from the Bay Area where ICU capacity is at 3%?
If so, would these be non-Covid patients, or would there be a possibility that Humboldt
could be receiving COVID-positive transfer patients? Please elaborate on how those decisions
to transfer an individual are made, and what factors are considered in addition to available
beds?
So, also like I’ve mentioned before, I think if we are going to get transfers, they’re
going to be from areas that are much closer to us like the Bay Area or potentially even
closer like Mendocino, or Del Norte. The current state of affairs from the state, the only
request for transfers have been COVID patients. As far as I know, those have only come from
counties in the far southern reach of the state, many hundreds of miles away. We don’t
know what that could look like locally though, as this push of hospital cases comes closer
to our county. The decision to transfer is made on a lot of things. It’s not just based
on bed availability, it’s really based on concerns for the stability of a patient. There
are factors of cost of transferring patients over longer distances and then local conditions
that are allowing that accepting facility to have the ability to also care for the patients
there locally.
From the Two Rivers Tribune: What information can you give us regarding the amount of variant
stains of COVID-19 which have been detected in the State of California, and what factual
information can you provide in those regards?
So I think we’ve pretty much answered this in the previous question. There is the U.K.
variant that is slightly more contagious in terms of its spread that is circulating here
in California, at extremely low levels, has not been picked up at high levels yet. There
has been none found in Humboldt County to date. As far as we know, these strains are
no more deadly, or making people more sick than the other strains. They just seem to
be a little bit more contagious, and that number has changed dramatically over the course
of the past few weeks. It’s hard to pinpoint exactly how much more contagious this variant
really is, but as we learn more about it, it seems like that number has come down each
week, in terms of how much more contagious it is than the widely circulating variant.
From the Redheaded Blackbelt: Can you please update the community on networking efforts
to rally additional nurses for expanded hospital capacity?
We have, as public health, started to collect information from our health care volunteers
who want to help in the vaccine effort. These are EMT’s, paramedics, nurses, other folks
in health care who want to volunteer for the vaccine effort. In terms of the hospitals,
I keep in touch with the hospitals about their surge planning capacity. They definitely are
watching their staff very closely. I don’t know of any volunteers for that level, but
I do know that there is a lot of look at what our local capacity is and how we could pull
in and rearrange things to use some of our local resources if we had a surge here in
Humboldt County.
On December 28th, 2020 special agents with the Humboldt County Drug Task Force (HCDTF), with the
assistance of the Humboldt County Sheriff’s Department, served a search warrant on Jesse Hanson (40
years old – Eureka). HCDTF agents had identified a drop vehicle that Hanson had left parked in the 3500
block of Broadway St. in Eureka. Hanson was observed multiple times riding a motorcycle to this vehicle,
retrieving drugs from the vehicle, and then riding off to meet customers. HCSO Deputies detained Hanson
as he arrived back at the drop vehicle.
Agents searched Hanson and located a small quantity of methamphetamine and $2700 in US currency.
Inside the vehicle agents located ¼ pound of heroin and a digital scale. A records check revealed that
Hanson had an active felony warrant for his arrest as well as multiple counts of probation in Humboldt
County.
Hanson was booked at the Humboldt County Jail for the following charges:
H&S 11352 Transportation of controlled substance for sale
H&S 11351 Possession of controlled substance for sale
H&S 11377 Possession of methamphetamine
Anyone with information related to this investigation or other narcotics related crimes are encouraged to
call the Humboldt County Drug Task Force at 707-267-9976.
Just two weeks after his arrest for the death of a Eureka teen, 19-year-old Ismael Lopez Jr. pleaded guilty today to all charges.
Lopez was scheduled this afternoon for a preliminary hearing, held to determine whether there is enough evidence for a trial. Instead his attorney, Conflict Counsel Meagan O’Connell, told Judge John Feeney the Ferndale man “would like to enter his plea today.”
On Dec. 17, Lopez was driving with a blood alcohol level about twice the legal limit when his car crashed into two parked vehicles on Myrtle Avenue. His passenger, 18-year-old Emily Perry, was killed in the early-morning crash near Russell Lane.
Lopez was hospitalized for his injuries but was arrested Dec. 28 on a warrant.
Vehicular manslaughter cases usually take months, if not years, to resolve. But Feeney, speaking to Deputy District Attorney Jane Mackie, said if Lopez Jr. wanted to plead guilty today, “we have no alternative but to accept that.”
The judge then ordered a break in the hearing so Mackie could contact Perry’s grieving family and inform them about the surprise change of plea.
Lopez admitted to vehicular manslaughter without gross negligence and drunken driving causing injury. He also admitted the special allegation that his blood alcohol level was .15 percent or higher when the fatal crash occurred.
Before accepting the plea, Feeney asked Lopez whether he’d had enough time to discuss his decision with his attorney. The judge also wanted Lopez to understand “there’s no promise or guarantee that you’ll be placed on a grant of probation.”
Feeney referred the case to the Probation Department for a pre-sentence investigation and report. The Probation Department will make a recommendation on the sentence.
Lopez was in the courtroom today, wearing an orange jumpsuit, a mask and gloves.
At prosecutor Mackie’s request, Feeney ordered that Lopez be held without bail until his sentencing on Feb. 4. The sentencing is scheduled for 8:30 a.m. in Courtroom Two.
At a hearing last week, Perry’s mother said her daughter was a straight-A student who planned to become a dentist. Perry graduated from Eureka High School, was enrolled in college and was already living on her own.
Last week, Humboldt Bay Fire received a request for vaccinators from
Humboldt County Public Health in order to assist in the massive
COVID-19 vaccination efforts currently underway in the county.
Humboldt Bay Fire graphic.
The
State of California Emergency Medical Services Authority recently
authorized paramedics to administer COVID-19 vaccines in light of the
pandemic and large-scale need for vaccination. North Coast Emergency
Medical Services subsequently created a policy and training to
quality locally-accredited paramedics.
Acting
under the authority of the County Public Health officer and North
Coast EMS, Humboldt Bay Firefighter/Paramedics began administering
the vaccine at a Public Health satellite clinic last Wednesday,
January 6, and will continue through January 22, 2021. This is an
invitation-only clinic run by Public Health in order to administer
first doses to the adults remaining in the Phase 1a category, which
includes health care-related entities.
Humboldt
Bay Fire personnel began receiving their first doses of the vaccine
during the week of December 21, 2020 and are receiving the second
dose beginning this week, the week of January 11, 2021.
Humboldt
Bay Fire is honored to be able to take such an active role in helping
to protect the members of our community from this devastating virus.
Humboldt Redwoods State Park Naturalist John “Griff” Griffith is back with another informative science lesson.
In today’s episode, “Griff” riffs about the symbiotic relationship between spotted owls, Humboldt’s flying squirrels, Douglas firs and truffles.
“The Doug fir needs the truffle, the truffle needs the flying squirrel, the spotted owl needs the flying squirrel and the spotted owl also could use old-growth Doug firs. And when its throwing up at the base of them, it helps kick of this mycorrhizal relationship,” Griff explains in the video. “Isn’t ecology interesting!”
Bonus: Griff also imitates a spotted owl. Enjoy the full lecture in the video embedded above.
Lawmakers would need to meet deadlines in February and March, far earlier than normal.
The record $89.5 billion education budget Gov. Gavin Newsom unveiled Friday includes $2 billion in grants aimed at nudging schools to reopen classrooms for its youngest students by mid-February and $4.6 billion for summer school to address students’ learning.
The governor’s push to reopen schools, though, comes as many of the state’s large, urban districts have delayed or scaled back plans for in-person learning amid the state’s worst surge in coronavirus cases since the pandemic initially closed schools almost a year ago.
School districts will also be under tight deadlines if they wish to receive the full $450 to $750 per student in grant funding. In order to get the full amounts, districts will have to submit to the state by Feb. 1 plans outlining the safety and testing measures for in-person learning with approval by their local employee unions, according to trailer bill language describing the program.
Schools then must offer in-person instruction to students in transitional kindergarten through second, as well as students most at risk of disengaging from school, by Feb. 16, followed by third- through sixth-graders by March 15.
“Those (younger) kids are falling through the cracks, and we have all the support in the world.” — Gov. Gavin Newsom
Schools — and the governor — are under intense pressure from parents and communities to reopen campuses as they near the anniversary of their initial March 13 closures. In California, reopening schools has been left to local superintendents, schools boards and employee unions, resulting in a patchwork of school reopenings that’s created a divide between private and public schools.
Newsom also is putting the Legislature under a time crunch by asking lawmakers to push through his proposed school-reopening grants in the next two weeks and the $4.6 billion learning loss plan by end of March, ahead of the traditional summer deadlines.
Aided by better-than-projected state revenues, Newsom’s budget plan pays down two-thirds of the schools’ $11 billion in deferrals. It also marks the most significant involvement by the governor in the state’s charged school reopening debate since he introduced reopening guidelines in July that effectively kept most schools closed to start the year.
During his budget presentation Friday, Newsom affirmed his position that schools should be open for in-person instruction if done safely and spoke of his youngest children’s struggle learning remotely.
“Those kids are falling through the cracks, and we have all the support in the world,” Newsom said. “I can’t imagine what’s happening for millions of other children. This is why this is so important.”
But the governor’s reopening plan has come under criticism both from local school leaders who say it would do little to help districts most impacted by the virus, as well as teachers unions pushing against reopening schools as cases climb.
Los Angeles Unified superintendent Austin Beutner said Monday that the governor’s plan “falls well short of what’s needed to help our schools” because it neither sets across-the-board safety standards nor sets a requirement for when schools should reopen.
“It leaves the definition of a safe school environment and the standard for reopening classrooms up to the individual discretion of 1,037 school districts across the state, creating a patchwork of safety standards in the face of a statewide health crisis,” Beutner said. “And it reverses a statewide commitment to equity based funding of schools.”
Beutner, leader of the state’s largest school district, and six other superintendents from large, urban districts raised concerns about Newsom’s reopening plan ahead of its release. The superintendents pushed back against the proposed $2 billion coming out of the state fund earmarked for K-12 schools and community colleges. In a Jan. 6 letter, they said the proposal shuts many of their schools and students out of grant funding because they reside in communities with some of the state’s highest case rates.
The nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office also raised concerns about the reopening plan, writing that the “proposal sets unfeasible time lines” in an analysis of the governor’s budget.
“(The governor’s plan) leaves the definition of a safe school environment and the standard for reopening classrooms up to the individual discretion of 1,037 school districts across the state, creating a patchwork of safety standards in the face of a statewide health crisis.” — Austin Beutner, Los Angeles Unified School District Superintendent
Suzanne Kitchens, president of the California School Boards Association, praised Newsom’s budget plan for easing the financial strain on schools by paying down most of the deferrals, as well proposing a 3.84% cost-of-living adjustment for schools, but added that “we have work to do on both the school reopening and summer school plans.”
“While some schools will undoubtedly take advantage of the incentives to reopen schools this spring, others are not in a position to do so given community health concerns, local standards, funding, resource staffing, and capacity limitations,” Kitchens said.
Newsom’s budget does not propose extending the school funding protections that held attendance-based funding flat this school year. The proposal assumes in-person learning as the “default mode of instruction” during the 2021-22 school year for funding purposes.
As California schools begin the new semester, most will remain learning remotely, many indefinitely. Some of the state’s districts, such as San Francisco, have yet to come to agreement with their local teachers union on how to reopen schools. Others, such as Oakland, have said they planned to reopen campuses once their counties reach the orange tier at the request of their unions — a requirement more stringent than what state public health officials allow for in-person learning. Los Angeles also resumes the year remotely indefinitely as cases there have surged.
A key distinction between Newsom’s reopening plan and legislation Democractic lawmakers introduced last month is that the governor’s effort does not establish a requirement for when schools have to reopen.
Assembly Bill 10, which legislators plan to advance this month, would require that schools offer in-person instruction starting in March once their county moves out of the state’s purple tier. The bill is in response to the fact that many school districts, primarily those in Bay Area counties, stayed closed after they had clearance from public-health authorities to reopen.
Teachers unions have pushed back against Newsom’s plan and AB 10, saying schools should not reopen without extensive health and safety measures and until after the state’s current surge.
“We are in the middle of a devastating COVID-19 surge, and any discussion of returning to in-person instruction is premature,” Jeff Freitas, president of the California Federation of Teachers, said Friday.
Other highlights from Newsom’s education budget include:
$315 million to support teacher professional development, such as social-emotional learning and implicit bias training.
$300 million in special education funding, with an emphasis on services for infants, toddlers and preschoolers, adding to the $100 million for special-needs students passed last year.
$400 million in one-time funds toward preventative and early intervention behavioral health services for students.
$15 million to continue developing the state’s cradle-to-career longitudinal data system, an effort Newsom championed since his first year in office.
A requirement that high school seniors complete the Free Application for Federal Student Aid, known as FAFSA.
###
CALmatters.org is a nonprofit, nonpartisan media venture explaining California policies and politics.
