Humboldt County Sheriff William Honsal (seated, far left) watches today’s hearing with deputies and employees of his office. | Photo by Sage Alexander.

PREVIOUSLY

###

The idea of establishing a civilian-led oversight system for the Humboldt County Sheriff’s Office has proved divisive among the local community — a fact lamented today by Second District Supervisor Michelle Bushnell. 

But after another round of polarized public comments, today’s do-over hearing by the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors had the same result as last time around: The proposal was advanced. However, “advanced” doesn’t mean “approved.”  There’s a lot of process between here and there. 

As it did two weeks ago, the board voted to form an ad hoc committee consisting of Bushnell, Fourth District Supervisor Natalie Arroyo and other county staffers. That committee is charged with developing a draft ordinance for this oversight proposal and bringing it back to the board in September for further deliberation. (The matter had to be heard a second time due to a public access snafu on April 28.)

The movement for civilian oversight of county sheriff’s departments has gained momentum in recent years, with a dozen California counties establishing or working toward such a system, albeit not without occasional pushback from law enforcement. When the 2023-24 Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury recommended such a system locally, it said:

Civilian oversight of elected offices such as the Humboldt County Sheriff’s Office promotes good management, fiscal responsibility, transparency, and accountability without interfering with the Sheriff’s Office’s enforcement and investigative functions.

The proposal is to create an independent policy and practice board, which would have subpoena power, and to have the county hire an inspector general. Sheriff William Honsal opposes the proposal; he has argued against it on social media and at public hearings, noting that his position is independently elected and accountable to existing oversight boards and state agencies.

Most of the people who called in to today’s meeting voiced support for a civilian oversight committee. Some argued that it would increase transparency and improve public trust. Others noted that if the board doesn’t act, community members will likely develop their own ballot initiative to advance the idea. A caller from McKinleyville took issue with Honsal’s recent characterization of oversight advocates as a “special interest” group.

There was a higher percentage of opponents to the proposal among the public speakers who addressed the board in person. Several vouched for Honsal and his deputies on personal grounds, attesting to their honesty, competence and kindness. Others argued that civilian oversight would be costly and redundant. 

When the public comment period wrapped up, First District Supervisor Rex Bohn reiterated his own opposition to the proposal. He argued that Honsal’s popularity has been proved by the fact that he’s run for re-election unopposed, and he estimated that the oversight proposal could cost the county as much as $750,000. 

“If it costs any more than two deputies we can put on the street, there’s no way that I can support this,” Bohn said. He later suggested that anyone who serves on an oversight committee would “invariably be people that … are looking for problems when there are no problems.”

Bushnell indicated that she doesn’t really support the idea either and only agreed to serve on an ad hoc committee two weeks ago so that she could be involved in the process. She noted that state law already delegates oversight authority to grand juries, district attorneys, the Attorney General’s Office and the California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST).

“I don’t know what more people could add to that,” she said.

Arroyo said she would have preferred for the board to approve putting a ballot measure before the voters in November, and she said, “I personally welcome any kind of additional transparency that people want to have, including over me.”

She also noted how uncomfortable it can be facing down such staunch opposition from a phalanx of officers in the board chamber.

“We have certainly seen a lot of turnout from law enforcement when we have discussed this, and I’ll be honest: even I’m a little intimidated by it,” she said. “I grew up with law enforcement. I spent a lot of time working closely with law enforcement, and it [still] makes me nervous. It makes me a little shaky and a little anxious to have this type of conversation in a way that’s just not supported and where we can’t really come together to see what some of the benefits might be.”

Third District Supervisor and Board Chair Mike Wilson said that while he’s had very positive experiences with Honsal and his deputies, he stands by his support for advancing the oversight committee.

Last time around, the motion to do so passed 4-1, with only Bohn dissenting. This time, Bushnell also voted “no,” but the motion still passed, 3-2.

Humboldt Commons Appeal Denied

Earlier in the meeting, in another 3-2 vote, the board rejected an appeal from the nonprofit developer behind the Humboldt Commons senior housing project in McKinleyville, upholding a requirement that Life Plan Humboldt pay for widening a key stretch of Hiller Road.

The Humboldt County Planning Commission unanimously approved the subdivision and a special permit for this project back in March, but in doing so it imposed a condition of approval related to street improvements.

Project Manager Emma Haskett delivered a PowerPoint presentation and told the board, “This requirement was not anticipated or disclosed during pre-application, and we believe it goes beyond what is fair and proportional for our project.” 

Life Plan Humboldt President Dr. Ann Lindsey concurred, saying it would cost an extra $200,000 to construct the required 13‑ft travel lane on Hiller Road. Together, Haskett and Lindsey argued the widening demand is legally disproportionate to their traffic impacts and threatens the affordability of the county’s first “aging‑in‑place” community, which already must fund nearly $1 million in public improvements, including trail connectivity.

Planning and Building Director John Ford and two of his department’s planners, on the other hand, argued that the condition is a “pretty standard,” safety‑driven frontage requirement and a key piece of the long‑planned McKinleyville Town Center street network. 

Bohn said he supports county staff and the Planning Commission and would therefore be voting to deny the appeal. Supervisor Steve Madrone, whose Fifth District includes McKinleyville, said he supports the appeal.

“I think what really stands out for me is that the applicant is absolutely willing to … do the curbs, gutters and sidewalks, which is what the normal requirement would be for any other development.” Requiring road paving on top of that struck Madrone as too much to ask.

Arroyo said she agreed with Bohn rather than Madrone, a rare alignment that “may cause some tension,” she quipped. 

“This is about bike and [pedestrian] circulation in all of McKinleyville, and I think it’s absolutely reasonable” to require frontage road improvements, she said. “And I’m a little surprised that it would be seen as not reasonable.” Arroyo pointed out that Hiller is a key connector schools, services and the McKinleyville Family Resource Center.

Bushnell expressed frustration with what she sees as inconsistencies between what’s required of rural landowners versus subdividers on county roads, and she went back-and-forth with staff in search of a compromise. For example, she suggested a cost-sharing agreement whereby Life Plan Humboldt would chip in for the county’s larger Hiller improvement plans. Madrone made a similar suggestion later in the meeting.

Public Works Director Tom Mattson poured some cold water on such proposals, noting that it could be 10 or 15 years before the county project comes to fruition.

Ultimately, the board voted 3-2, with Madrone and Wilson dissenting, to deny the appeal. That means Life Plan Humboldt will be responsible for constructing a 13‑foot paved area along the Hiller Road frontage within five years of the building permit issuance. 

Screenshot.

In Memoriam

Early in the meeting there was a big outpouring of love for Lindsey Day, a man who worked on the county’s Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) team for nine years and who died last week after “a short but valiant fight with cancer,” County Administrative Officer Alishia Hayes said.

Day was a professional woodworker, specializing in furniture-grade cabinetry, and judging by the 30-minute procession of emotional testimonials — from supervisors, staff and the public — he made a huge impact on countless people.

Hayes teared up talking about Day, saying he was gigantic in both stature and humor. Friends and family members offered tributes, and staff played a slideshow of photos of Day with others.

Bohn was clearly moved. “I have never seen an outpouring like this, and a true amount of — it’s not grief or sympathy; it’s, ‘Damn, we were lucky to know him,” he said.

Wilson referred to Day as “probably the most huggable person in this building” and said, “There just was an aura about Lindsey that was just unmistakable. From the first second I met him, it was just like, ‘Whoa, this guy is magic,’ right?”

The board eventually adjourned today’s meeting in Day’s honor.