###

Get hype, fellow film nerds! Above you’ll find 18 glorious seconds of the upcoming film now officially titled “One Battle After Another,” directed by renowned auteur Paul Thomas Anderson (“Boogie Nights,” “Punch Drunk Love,” “There Will Be Blood,” “Phantom Thread”) and starring Leonardo DiCaprio.

More importantly, of course, the production was all up in Humboldt County last year, so scan the teaser trailer closely for recognizable landmarks or landscapes. (Is that Leo running across the Northtown Arcata pedestrian bridge at the 0:03 mark? Maybe not.)

We’ll have to wait until next week for the first full-length trailer. The film’s highly anticipated release has been delayed from Aug. 8 to Sept. 24, with rumors of a premier at the Cannes Film Festival. 

With an estimated budget of $140 million, the movie costars Sean Penn, Benicio del Toro, Regina Hall, Wood Harris and Alana Haim. The screenplay, written by Anderson, was inspired by Thomas Pynchon’s 1990 novel “Vineland,” a densely comic yarn of weed-fueled paranoia and political subterfuge set in a lightly fictionalized version of late ‘80s Humboldt/Del Norte/Mendocino counties.

Relive Paul and Leo’s local adventures via the links below.

###

UPDATE: Multiple readers spotted the Eureka High School campus at the 12-second mark:

###

PREVIOUSLY

• Film Set to Shoot in Eureka is From Renowned Director Paul Thomas Anderson, With Leonardo DiCaprio, Sean Penn and Regina Hall, According to Industry Reports
• (PHOTOS) Hollywood Magic Transforms Cutten Plaza Into a Mexican Mini-Mall for DiCaprio Movie Production
• Northtown Arcata Will Be Swarming With Movie Folk Tomorrow, As Bigtime Production ‘BC Project’ Films in the Neighborhood
• (WATCH) First Look at Leonardo DiCaprio In Character for New Paul Thomas Anderson Film Currently Filming in Humboldt
• MOVIE DAY! My Diary of Hanging Around Waiting For The Stars to Show Up In Northtown, and the Things I Saw There
• Buh-Bye, Leo! Local Production on Paul Thomas Anderson’s New DiCaprio Movie Has Wrapped
• Alas, We Have to Wait Until Summer 2025 to See Leo Dicaprio’s Locally Filmed Paul Thomas Anderson Movie

PREVIOUSLY: A State Appellate Court Says Weed is Illegal ‘Because Federal Law Says So.’ What Does That Mean for Humboldt?

###

Press release from the Department of Cannabis Control:

SACRAMENTO - Upholding California’s law making cannabis legal, the California Supreme Court has depublished a California Court of Appeal decision in JCCrandall v. County of Santa Barbara, so that it has no effect as precedent.

The California Supreme Court’s action eliminates the Court of Appeal’s suggestion that California’s cannabis regulations were unlawful due to cannabis being unpermitted on the federal level.
 
“We are pleased the Court agreed to address that Court of Appeal decision at the Department of Cannabis Controls’ request, supporting California law and its legal cannabis industry,” said DCC Director Nicole Elliott.
 
The case involved the County’s issuance of a permit to a cannabis cultivator whose distribution of cannabis required use of a decades-old roadway easement over an adjacent landowner’s property. The landowner objected to use of the easement for cannabis on the grounds that cannabis is federally illegal. 
 
On January 3, 2025, the Court of Appeal agreed with the landowner in a decision that prohibited use of the easement, preventing issuance of the local permit, and suggested more broadly that California’s cannabis regulations were unlawful because cannabis is federally illegal. Today’s decision rescinds this opinion.
 
Other California courts of appeal have long upheld California’s cannabis regulations, ruling that they do not conflict with federal law. In addition, the California Legislature has provided that commercial cannabis activity conducted in compliance with California law and local standards is lawful, and not a basis for voiding rights secured by an easement. 

###

NOTE: This story was originally published by Redwood Voice and is reprinted here with permission.

###

The matriarch of Alexandre Family Farm says a new consumer class-action lawsuit against her family’s dairy operation, stemming from allegations of animal cruelty that are nearly a year old and revealing new claims, is without merit.

The animal cruelty allegations levied against the Alexandres in an April 11, 2024 exposé from the nonprofit organization Farm Forward forms the basis of this new lawsuit, Taylor v. Humane Animal Farm Care and Alexandre Family Farm. It also accuses the Alexandres and Humane Animal Farm Care — the organization behind the Certified Humane logo — of deceiving consumers.

According to the complaint, Humane Animal Farm Care allowed the Alexandres to continue to display its logo despite knowing that the farm didn’t meet the organization’s “advertised standards of animal welfare.”

The lawsuit may result in Alexandre Family Farm paying the plaintiffs more than $5 million, Farm Forward Director of Education John Millspaugh wrote in a March 10 post on the organization’s website.

In a written statement to Redwood Voice Community News on Friday, Stephanie Alexandre said she and her family looked forward to disproving those allegations in court.

“Our mission is to farm in harmony with nature and to honor the Earth and all the animals under our stewardship,” she said via email. “Our commitment to our animals is unwavering. We take any allegations — particularly those related to animal welfare — extremely seriously.”

The class action lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court of the Southern District of California on March 7 by the Irvington, New York-based firm Richman Law & Policy.

It comes alongside a separate civil case Sacramento-based Legal Impact for Chickens filed against the Alexandres in October. That case cites the same allegations brought up in the April 11, 2024, Farm Forward exposé and was filed in Humboldt County Superior Court.

Attorneys for Legal Impact for Chickens and the Alexandres appeared before Humboldt County Judge Timothy Canning in a demurrer hearing Friday. According to Sage Max, legal operations specialist for Legal Impact for Chickens, the defendants are asking the court to dismiss the lawsuit.

After hearing from both parties, Canning said he’d issue a ruling in about 90 days or “hopefully less.”

The plaintiff in the new lawsuit is San Diego resident Leilani Taylor and other unnamed consumers. According to the complaint, between 2018 and 2024, Taylor regularly purchased Alexandre Family Farms half and half and eggnog at Jimbo’s, an organic grocery store chain based in the San Diego area. However, “absent the use of the [Certified Humane] logo, Plaintiff Taylor would not have paid as much for the products and likely would have chosen other products that represented more humane treatment of animals used for food.”

The Alexandres have used the Certified Humane logo on its milk, half and half, yogurt, sour cream, kefir, cheese, milk powder and eggnog since 2021, according to the complaint.

According to Humane Animal Farm Care, only operations that have earned certification from its organization may display its logo, the complaint states. The organization states that “if a farm cannot or will not correct their nonconformances… HFAC will no longer continue to certify them. They are removed from the program and the logo is removed from the product,” according to the lawsuit.

In addition to relying on evidence outlined in Farm Forward’s April 2024 report, the law firm behind the class action lawsuit also used an independent investigator who visited Alexandre Family Farm and allegedly found that the animals there were “subjected … to horrific abuse.”

According to the complaint, the investigator observed calves left in dirty hutches “covered in filth” without outdoor access and for a month longer than Humane Animal Farm Care allows.

HAFC states that calves may be kept in individual hutches until they’re eight weeks old, according to the complaint. They must be kept clean, be able to turn around, lie down and rest without hindrance and have access to an outside exercise area. And the hutches  must be arranged so that the calves can see and hear other calves.

However, the lawsuit states the investigator in November 2022 documented calves living in “filth consisting of feces, urine and mud. The filth covered the floors, denying the calves bedding, and covered the calves themselves as well.”

Alexandre Family Farm employees told the investigator that the farm “did not clean the hutches at all while the calves were using them,” the lawsuit states. According to the complaint, confining an animal without providing an adequate exercise area is a misdemeanor under the California Penal Code.

Other allegations of animal cruelty in the complaint were first revealed by Farm Forward and an April 12, 2024 article in the Atlantic. These include pouring salt into cows’ eyes and gluing on denim patches in an attempt to alleviate infection and cancer and using a pocket knife to cut a cow’s teat off.

In her statement to Redwood Voice, Alexandre said they have a policy of “required reporting if any incidents of concern” are observed. Alexandre Family Farm also works with a leading veterinarian and animal nutritionist to update its animal welfare protocols.

“We perform rigorous staff oversight and update training of all employees to ensure that they continue to have the knowledge and tools needed to comply with our commitment to animal welfare,” she said.

###

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

###

When Gov. Gavin Newsom launched his new podcast last month, he touted it as an opportunity to understand the MAGA movement’s motivations and figure out a path forward for Democrats after the party’s bruising losses in the 2024 election.

But the early response has predominantly been bewilderment — from supporters, critics and the public alike — as listeners struggle to make sense of Newsom’s intentions, his political evolution and what the show signals for his leadership of California.

The governor’s about-face from leading critic of President Donald Trump to MAGA-curious pundit comes at a critical moment for the state, as California launches legal battles against Trump administration policies and faces potentially hundreds of billions of dollars in federal funding cuts.

Republicans have dismissed Newsom’s concerted shift to the center on some issues as disingenuous and roasted him for diverting his attention away from solving the state’s problems. Even many allies who applaud Newsom for reaching across the ideological aisle were troubled by his early guests and how the governor boosted their ultraconservative views.

And in Sacramento, legislators and advocates are scratching their heads. If the podcast is, as insiders widely suspect, Newsom’s attempt to redefine himself ahead of a long-anticipated presidential bid, then what does a renewed focus on the national stage mean for the remaining two years of his governorship?

“Quite frankly, we’re all asking those questions,” said state Sen. Ben Allen, a Santa Monica Democrat.

Allen pushed for a limit on single-use plastics in California that Newsom signed into law in 2022 — before scrapping rules to put the law into effect right before the final deadline this month, citing cost concerns, and telling regulators to start over. Environmentalists fumed that the governor was bowing to industry pressure after an election in which affordability was at the forefront of voters’ minds.

“I think people are trying to figure out what’s going on,” Allen said.

The governor’s mixed messages

Newsom gave nearly all his attention in the first part of the year to the response and recovery from the devastating wildfires that burned through Los Angeles County in early January. Despite initially proclaiming last fall that he would again lead the resistance to Trump, national politics took a backseat as the governor navigated their complex relationship to lobby for federal disaster aid, which California has not yet secured.

But Newsom seemed to flip a switch in late February with the podcast launch. Since then, the governor has not held any public events or press conferences, allowing the four episodes of his show released so far to drive his messaging almost completely, though he has also waded back into denouncing federal Republicans on social media.

That has created a conundrum for those trying to understand how what Newsom says in these casual conversations may translate to his day job running the biggest state in the country. When his remarks generate headlines — as they did during the controversial first episode featuring the Trump-aligned activist Charlie Kirk, where Newsom called it “deeply unfair” for transgender athletes to participate in girls’ sports — his office refuses to clarify his positions.

Speaking to far-right former Trump adviser Steve Bannon on the third episode last week about the president’s foreign trade strategy, Newsom said he was “not an absolutist as it relates to being against tariffs,” just days after the governor put out a statement that “tariffs are nothing more than a tax on hardworking American families.” Spokesperson Izzy Gardon would not explain when Newsom supported the use of tariffs, directing CalMatters back to his comments on the podcast.

Cornered by reporters at the Capitol this week, Newsom dodged questions about whether he supported Republican-led legislation that would ban transgender women and girls from competitive sports in California. “I haven’t seen any bills,” he repeatedly said.

The shifting tone and positions without explanation has undermined Democrats’ trust, said Anthony Rendon, who was Assembly speaker when Newsom took office during Trump’s first term promising to make California a bulwark against the president.

Rendon, who termed out of the Legislature last year, said he talks to former colleagues who now wonder whether they should strategically shift their priorities so that they don’t waste time on measures that Newsom will simply veto.

“They’re mystified,” he said. “‘WTF’ is the most common text message I get.”

Uncertainty in Sacramento

Many lawmakers, not wanting to damage their relationships with the man who ultimately decides the fate of their agendas, are loath to speak publicly about the governor’s podcast. Those who will can be painstakingly diplomatic, emphasizing that they remain committed to their own work.

“We just have to remain focused. The outside noise to me is neither here nor there,” said Sen. Lena Gonzalez, a Long Beach Democrat who serves as the Senate majority leader. “Sometimes words are just words, and I’m hoping that that’s where it stays.”

Some of the most progressive lawmakers at the Capitol have spoken out against Newsom’s choice of guests and his comments about transgender athletes, but they have largely separated those complaints from the governor himself, whom they characterize as an ally.

Assemblymember Ash Kalra, a San Jose Democrat, said there is too much focus on what the governor is doing as the Trump administration challenges democracy itself. He said it was not helpful for Democrats to go after each other when they should be fighting the Republicans in Washington, D.C.

“I do think that every Democrat right now should be ringing the alarm as to the constitutional crisis that we’re having, and anything that detracts from that I think minimizes the dangerous place we’re in as a nation,” Kalra said.

Like many Democrats, Allen complimented Newsom for “talking to people from different perspectives in different parts of the country” as the party tries to make sense of Trump’s victory in November. But Allen said he didn’t want Democrats to take the wrong lessons from the 2024 election and be afraid to assert their values.

“I do think that some of the people who have been on his show have been a little fringe,” Allen said. “I worry that they may be anchoring the conversation in a way that’s counterproductive.”

Gov. Gavin Newsom addresses media after signing legislation in Los Angeles on Sept. 28, 2023. Photo by Alisha Jucevic for CalMatters

Listeners confused and distraught

Listeners have been equally perplexed. Voter data expert Paul Mitchell surveyed 1,000 Californians before and after the first episode of the podcast dropped and found a tangle of conflicting responses.

Asked to watch three snippets of Newsom’s conversation with Kirk, nearly a quarter of respondents said they viewed the governor as more moderate, but twice as many people said the podcast harmed their perception of Newsom as improved it.

“In the short-term, wow, Republicans are not convinced and Democrats are not pleased,” Mitchell said, pointing to hundreds of open-ended comments from the survey in which conservatives largely expressed suspicion of Newsom’s intentions and liberals felt betrayed.

Mitchell also tracked a drop in the governor’s approval rating, from 52% to 47%. But since the launch, positive and negative sentiments about the podcast have dropped while neutral sentiment has nearly doubled — with political independents seeming more receptive.

“That could be voters kind of cracking the door open,” Mitchell said. “If he’s trying to get away from the Gavin Newsom caricature, then that might be something he’s doing.”

Yet a true political reinvention, one that could reshape the arc of his career, is a long-term project, for better or worse.

Liberal donors and activists who backed Newsom in the past were shaken by the early episodes, which also saw the governor brush past comments that the 2020 election was stolen from Trump without any debate as he cozied up to figures who have been accused of antisemitism and doing a Nazi salute. Movie star Jane Fonda compared Newsom to the former UK Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, known for appeasing Adolf Hilter’s early territorial annexations to avoid war.

Ludovic Blain, executive director of the progressive donor network California Donor Table, slammed Newsom for “capitulating to authoritarians,” even as he expressed hope that the governor would grow a stronger backbone and defend civil rights as the podcast continues.

“He’s turning the Democratic Party into one that stands for nothing,” Blain said. “We do expect Gavin to be better.”

‘I don’t think this podcast is gonna help him’

And if Newsom is going to persuade the public that he’s got bipartisan appeal and is electable in purple states, that day still looked far away at the recent California Republican Party convention in Sacramento. Attendees — even the young men whose drift to Trump in 2024 has convinced Democrats that podcasts are the future — were not buying the governor’s transformation.

“He hasn’t done anything to build any trust. And I don’t think this podcast is gonna help him,” said Topher Hall, a 25-year-old college student from El Dorado County wearing a Make America Great Again Again sweatshirt.

Hall said he had watched clips from the podcast on Kirk’s social media and felt that Newsom was merely trying to use the large established audiences of his conservative guests to build his own platform.

After growing up apolitical in the liberal Bay Area, Hall said he was drawn to the Republican Party in recent years by its stances in favor of gun rights and against transgender athletes. But Newsom’s comments about the latter had struck him as opportunistic flip-flopping.

“He’s kind of a slick politician. I think he’s like the used car salesman of politics. I think he’s just Hollywood,” Hall said. “He’s just a sellout.”

Jessica Rutan, a 60-year-old retired educator from Fullerton, said Newsom lost her completely with his dictatorial lockdowns during the coronavirus pandemic. But she listened to his conversations with Kirk and Bannon, curious what they would say to him — and whether the governor would actually take their advice.

She was frustrated that he had not, calling Newsom’s engagement with the conservative activists “so disingenuous” and the “wrong priority” following the Los Angeles fires.

“Your place is the governor. You have a job to do and now you just want to sit on a chair and act like you’re buddies with people?” said Rutan, who sported a bedazzled red-white-and-blue elephant pin. “You have people in the state you need to take care of. Why aren’t you doing your job? And that’s what I’m most annoyed with.”

Cynthia Ross passed away peacefully on February 27, 2025. Cynthia was born on June 10, 1938 in St. Paul, Minnesota to Caroline Lilly Mundy and Harry L Mundy. She graduated from Summit School in 1956 and spent two years in college before joining the Sisters of Mercy Convent for 10 years.

Cynthia moved to Chicago, Illinois and met her husband Robert Ross. They were married for many years and moved to Eureka in 1988. After moving to Eureka, Cynthia became an Ombudsman at the Senior Resource Center, where she worked for 30 years ensuring that care facilities in Humboldt and Del Norte County were caring for their residents properly. It was in this capacity that Cynthia became familiar with the Especially You facility and ultimately told her family that was her choice if she were ever to need long-term care. The family wishes to thank Especially You, Amanda and their staff for the excellent care that Cynthia received.

Cynthia was preceded in death by her grandparents, Leonard and Agnes Lilly, her mother and father, her husband Robert Ross, her niece Chaundra Riggs and her great niece, Donnayah Bell. Cynthia was also proceeded in death by her partner, best friend, and caregiver Eric Zink. After matchmaking from their mutual hair, stylist Steven, Cynthia and Eric became inseparable and were together for 13 years, traveling to many countries and truly enjoying each other’s company.

Cynthia’s long-time friend, Jane Riggan described Cynthia as a true force of nature with great wisdom and great determination. Jane went on to say that Cynthia was a very bright woman, a problem-solver and that she worked hard to make the world better for many people because of her strong sense of justice. Cynthia was also a fiercely loyal, thoughtful and generous friend who was also very devoted to her family. Jane described Cynthia and Eric’s relationship of sharing their mutual love for classical and jazz music, modern art, humor and good food.

Cynthia is survived by a large and extended family. She is survived by her sisters, Sandra Mundy Irvine (Raymond), of Boca Grande, Fla., Jamieson McGrath Marx of Carlotta, CA, her brother, Kent Mundy of Panama City Beach, Fla., and her grandson Michael Coan-Ross (Alisa Coan-Ross). She is also survived by her great-granddaughters, Andrea and Tsifira Coan-Ross as well as her nieces and nephews, Cynthia Irvine and Tara Mctigue, Kali Serotta (Chris Washington), Marishka Riggs, Indicus Riggs (Rachael Riggs), Orion Riggs, Ivory Marx and Atticus Marx. She is also survived by her great nephews and nieces, Christopher Washington, Mishaundra Washington, Nikita Washington, Marisha Ramirez, Shayna Riggs, Osiah Riggs, Ryker Meza and Finn Meza as well as many great nieces and nephews. We also can’t forget to mention Nathan Zink and his family. Our family will greatly miss Cynthia and Eric’s jovial presence at family functions.

A celebration of life is scheduled for May 3 from 12 to 4 p.m. at the Samoa Women’s Club.

###

The obituary above was submitted on behalf of Cynthia Ross’s loved ones. The Lost Coast Outpost runs obituaries of Humboldt County residents at no charge. See guidelines here. Email news@lostcoastoutpost.com.

It is with heavy hearts that we announce the passing of Vernon Lee Broyles, a beloved husband, father, Papa, and great-grandpa, who left this world on February 16, 2025. Born on January 7, 1952, to Clyde and Hazel Broyles, Vernon was the oldest of three boys and grew up in the community of Eureka, where he graduated from Eureka High School in 1970.

Vernon’s life was a testament to love and dedication. He married the love of his life, Linda Hatten, just two months after a fateful blind date, on November 23, 1972. Together, they shared 52 wonderful years filled with laughter, adventure, and unwavering support for one another. As a devoted father, he raised two daughters, Tiffany and Angie, instilling in them the values of kindness, hard work, and the importance of family.

Vernon dedicated over 35 years of his life to the Pacific Lumber Company, where he was known for his strong work ethic and camaraderie with his colleagues. His commitment to his community extended beyond his job; he was an active member of the Scotia and Rio Dell Volunteer Fire Department and the Scotia Men’s Club, where he made lasting friendships and contributed to the well-being of those around him.

A man of many passions, Vernon found joy in the simple pleasures of life. He loved fishing, camping, and taking long “rides” with his best friend, Buddy Bennett. He looked forward to his weekly visits with Barry Scholl, where they would reminisce and share stories. The two were like brothers to him.

Vernon had a playful spirit, often delighting in the thrill of arrowhead hunting along local beaches and metal detecting for hidden treasures. He had a knack for finding value in the overlooked, believing that anything free was worth its weight in gold. His harmonica playing brought joy to family gatherings, and his annual trips to Disneyland with his family were a highlight of each summer.

A true animal lover, Vernon found peace in nature, whether it was watching birds, feeding deer, or spoiling his little dog, Summer. He had a gift for conversation, always ready to share a story or lend an ear to anyone who would listen.

Vernon is survived by his loving wife, Linda Hatten Broyles; his daughters, Tiffany Land (Ken) and Angie Crandall (Karl); his five grandsons, Kyler Griffith, Austin Crandall, Quest Crandall, Korbin Land, and Konnor Land; and his cherished great-grandson, Teale Griffith.

As we remember Vernon, we celebrate a life well-lived, filled with love, friendship, and countless memories. He will be deeply missed but forever cherished in the hearts of those who knew him.

We will be having a celebration of life on July 5, 2025 at the Scotia Fireman’s Ballpark.

PREVIOUSLY: Eureka’s Homelessness-Related Laws Could Soon be Toughened Up a Bit. Here’s What Critics Say They Fear Will Happen, and What Cops and Other City Employees Say They Want to Do

###

After hearing three and a half hours of impassioned — and at times enraged — public testimony from concerned residents and homeless advocates at last night’s meeting, the Eureka City Council unanimously voted to postpone its decision on an ordinance that would increase penalties for people living in unauthorized encampments. 

The draft ordinance — linked here — is a “streamlined” version of two existing policies that restrict unlawful camping, sitting, lying and loitering in public spaces. Staff believes the modified ordinance would serve as an “additional tool” to encourage unhoused community members to “engage with available services” by upgrading penalties from an infraction to a misdemeanor, which, upon conviction, could result in up to a year in jail or a fine up to $1,000.

The proposed ordinance would allow the city to redirect offenders to rehabilitative services instead of jail through its Law Enforcement Alternative Diversion (LEAD) program.

“I hope that [it’s] clear to our entire community that the City of Eureka is 100 percent committed to balancing accountability with compassionate support for individuals experiencing homelessness,” said City Manager Miles Slattery. “This recommendation comes from the endorsement of your professional staff with decades of experience in the field of progressive police practices, social service, programming and mental health. All of these professionals are intimately familiar with our unhoused community members and interact with them daily, seven days a week.”

Managing Mental Health Clinician Jacob Rosen, who leads Crisis Alternative Response Eureka (CARE), went over the finer points of the proposed ordinance and the LEAD program. He acknowledged homeless advocates’ concerns surrounding increased penalties for offenders but offered reassurance that it would “increase the efficacy of the accountability interactions with EPD.”

Rosen | Screenshot

“The idea behind having the misdemeanor is it provides more motivation for the individual to then participate with LEAD. This isn’t something that is necessarily meant to be a one-off, except in extraordinary circumstances,” Rosen said, referring to a “one-off” interaction with EPD as opposed to someone who has been contacted or cited on numerous occasions. “The first step in this process is the referral … the second part is intake. We then have the ‘plan development phase’ … and then talk about engagement — getting the client engaged in the community with the services that they desire, connecting them to those services, and then graduation.”

Rosen emphasized the importance of “reducing barriers” for people who choose to participate in LEAD to increase the program’s chances of success. The city is hoping to expand drop-in hours at the city’s new community resource center, located in the Municipal Auditorium at 1111 E Street, to accommodate LEAD participants. “Or we can go out in the field and meet them there,” he said.

Once intake is complete, LEAD staff will work with the individual to determine what resources they need and help them set long- and short-term goals to get to their eventual graduation from the program. 

“Completion of LEAD is based on participation towards the individualized goals, not regimented activities,” Rosen said. “This isn’t something where people are going to come and do community service, right? This is going to be something where they identify what they need and then work toward those specific goals. It’s going to look different for each individual.”

Rosen reiterated Slattery’s previous point, emphasizing that the purpose of the ordinance is to balance accountability with compassion and “increase the efficacy of accountability interventions.” He added that the LEAD program will use programs and systems that are already in place and will not require the city to bolster other services. The program could be ready for implementation as soon as May 1.

Special Program Manager Jeff Davis, who heads Uplift Eureka, emphasized that the city’s “No. 1 goal” is to get the city’s unhoused community into affordable housing. “This is the key,” he said. “This is how we move towards ending homelessness, is having adequate housing, especially low-income and very-low-income housing.”

Davis said staff has made “significant strides” in getting people housed through the city’s Homeless, Housing, Assistance and Prevention (HHAP) programs. The city has housed over 200 people through its Rapid Rehousing Program, which offers assistance to people experiencing “Category 1” homelessness. Another municipal program launched at the end of last year has helped prevent 16 households “at imminent risk of experiencing homelessness” from losing their homes, Davis said. 

Once it’s up and running in the next month, the Crowley Site, a long-awaited transitional housing project on Hilfiker Lane, will provide 33 tiny housing units with shared restrooms, kitchens and laundry facilities to unhoused people living in encampments in the greenbelt along the Hikshari’ Trail. The city has several other affordable housing projects in the works, including the Sunset Heights project near Winco.

Davis added that there are shelter beds available for people who need a safe place to sleep at night. The Eureka Rescue Mission currently has 120 beds, with a 40-bed overflow, on the men’s side of the shelter, and 63 beds, with an eight-bed overflow on the women’s side. 

“If, at any point in time, those are at capacity, the city has an overflow of 25 additional beds at St. Vincent de Paul’s, and that has not been activated in over two years,” Davis said, adding that the Betty Kwan Chinn Foundation provides another 96 beds. “In total … the City of Eureka, including overflow, [has] 352 beds.”

Turning to questions from the council, Councilmember Kati Moulton asked why it is necessary to increase the penalty from an infraction to a misdemeanor. “You can still get engaged with services with or without that infraction,” she said. “Why do you feel that we need to have a misdemeanor level added to or in place of that?”

Rosen noted that CARE staff and EPD’s Community Safety Engagement Team (CSET) regularly engage with unhoused people but acknowledged that “each of those programs hits barriers with certain clients for various reasons.” Sometimes people are struggling with substance abuse or mental illness that can make it difficult for people to want to change, he said.

“The hope is that this tool can be used selectively and sensitively, adding another tool to the toolbox,” Rosen continued. “We’re not planning on changing how we operate. In the extensive meetings we’ve had with CSET, CARE and Uplift, there really isn’t a goal to change because we know that what we’re doing right now works for a lot of folks.”

Dozens of people packed into council chambers spoke during the three-and-a-half-hour public comment portion of the meeting, which carried on until 1:30 a.m. Most of the commentary came from homeless advocates and allies who feared the proposal would “criminalize people simply for existing.”

“I’m not a criminal yet, but I will be for being homeless,” said one speaker who only identified herself as Jammie. “These organizations that you guys have are not gonna apply for me. I’m not what they want. I do have mental illnesses, I’m on the street, I have a child but I can’t get housed. Why is that? [Is it] because I make too much money? … I’ll tell you one thing: If you gave some people just a chance to fucking live and exist in a community space, I betcha you’d see some differences.”

Other people talked about their own experiences living on the streets and shared stories of police brutality, while others criticized the city for failing to provide adequate resources for people in need. A handful of speakers drew comparisons between the criminalization of unhoused people and the ongoing war in Gaza and dedicated a portion of their three-minute speaking time to the tens of thousands of Palestinians who have been killed.

However, several people spoke in favor of the ordinance and praised staff’s approach to addressing the city’s homelessness crisis. Lea Nagy, president of the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) Humboldt, said she’s worked with families across the country and has been told that Humboldt County and Eureka have “some of the best programs for homeless people in the whole United States.”

“I went to a crisis intervention training in Denver, and I said to these different states, ‘Do you have CSET? Do you have a CARE team? Do you have this?’ [And they said,] ‘No, we don’t know what you’re talking about.’ I just want to applaud the people here — everybody here cares about the homeless,” Nagy said, gesturing to the room full of people. “I really support you guys in the City of Eureka. You are amazing.”

Aaron Ostrom, a local business owner and volunteer with PacOut Green Team, spoke in favor of the ordinance and praised the city for taking a “progressive” approach to confronting homelessness and dealing with encampments.

“You’ve come up with some fantastic solutions, and I think this is another great, nuanced solution to addressing the homeless encampment problem,” he said. “I feel like you guys are positioned to be leaders within the community — even the state — in how you’re dealing with the homeless crisis. … I think this is a very progressive way to reduce arrests and get them into beds and get them into services.”

As the meeting approached the seven-hour mark, the discussion returned to the visibly exhausted city council.

Moulton made a motion to continue the discussion at the council’s next meeting on April 1, noting, “I don’t think sleeping on [this decision] is going to do any harm.” Councilmember Scott Bauer seconded the action.

Councilmember Renee Contreras-DeLoach asked for the discussion to be pushed out even further, noting that the newly formed ad hoc committee for encampment alternatives hasn’t even had its first meeting. She made a motion to table the discussion “for a length of time.” Councilmember G. Mario Fernandez offered a second.

Contreras-DeLoach | Screenshot

“I’m not comfortable passing an ordinance like this until we start addressing some other things first,” Contreras-DeLoach said. “It’s not a ‘no’ for me, it’s a ‘not right now’ because I think there’s some structural things that need to be worked on. I feel that we should involve other members of the community in this conversation. … I also want to talk to our chief and city manager about the managed encampment possibility.”

Councilmember Leslie Castellano asked for the motion to include several points of direction for staff to consider before the item comes back to council. She asked for the formation of a working group comprised of people with lived experience on the streets, business owners, local leaders, people from the faith community and others to help staff create an ordinance that addresses some of the concerns brought up at the meeting. She also asked about the possibility of bringing back the homeless court, increasing detox facilities, sanctioned camping and starting LEAD as a pilot program, among other suggestions.

“It looks like we could potentially work with the [District Attorney] to look at opportunities to implement LEAD-type programs for people who are already … entering the system,” she said. “That way, we’re not adding people to the system; we’re helping to divert people away from those systems.”

After a bit of additional discussion and some confusion about the motion on the table, the council agreed by consensus to direct staff to look into Castellano’s suggestions and voted 5-0 to table the ordinance discussion to a date uncertain.