###

Local home health care workers gathered outside of Rep. Jared Huffman’s Eureka district office this afternoon to demonstrate against a Congressional Republican budget proposal that would slash billions of dollars in spending on Medicaid, threatening health care coverage for some of the 80 million U.S. adults and children enrolled in the safety net program, according to the Associated Press and other news outlets.

Clad in their custom-issue purple t-shirts, the assembled union members are employed through California’s In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) program, which provides assistance to seniors and disabled individuals while allowing recipients to remain in their homes.

Jonathan Peña, an organizer with SEIU Local 2015, said the GOP budget proposal, which aims to reduce federal spending by $880 billion over the next decade, would create an existential threat to the IHSS program. Roughly $15.3 billion of the program’s $25 billion annual budget currently comes via federal funding.

“So if this passes, it’s either going to get rid of the IHSS program or it’s going to defund it by a large amount, which means people are not going to have care,” Peña said. “People are going to be homeless, and the economy is going to get even worse.”

Neither Huffman nor any members of his staff were present at the demonstration, and while the North Coast’s Congressional representative has voiced support for in-home caregivers, the demonstrators said they hoped to reinforce that stance and encourage him to convince his Republican colleagues to oppose the spending bill.

[CORRECTION/UPDATE: Local District Representative John Driscoll met with the demonstrators shortly after the Outpost interviewed them.]

Some of the workers described what the loss of the program would mean to them personally.

“I have a daughter who’s 13 and has severe autism, and I am her mom and her caregiver,” said a care worker named Danielle. She said it’s already difficult to find backup help. “Nobody wants to do this work. I can’t get respite care; I can’t get any help. So if this [spending proposal] goes through, I’ll have to get another job and find somebody to take care of my daughter, which is already impossible.”

With a vote on the spending bill scheduled for early next week, Peña said he and his fellow demonstrators hoped to drop off letters for Huffman in which IHSS caregivers tell their stories and describe how they’d be affected if IHSS ceases to exist.

“The elderly are going to be left to die in their homes,” said Heidi Chandler, another union member at today’s gathering. “The person I take care of doesn’t have transportation. I do his shopping and his medicines, everything. I’m the only contact he has.”

Danielle wondered how the budget might impact The Glen Paul School, which serves severely disabled students at its Eureka main campus and in classrooms across the county. 

“The Area 1 on Aging also is going to be affected by this, and they provide meals on wheels,” Chandler said. “I mean, it’s going to devastate Humboldt County if this happens.”

SEIU Local 2015 members plan to demonstrate again outside the Humboldt County Courthouse on Monday.

###

After hearing from more than a dozen local realtors and homeowners at Tuesday’s meeting, the Eureka City Council unanimously voted to table its decision on a proposed update to the 2024-25 fee schedule that would increase the cost of sewer lateral replacement for property owners with especially deep or problematic plumbing. The city council will revisit the item at its next meeting.

The proposed fee schedule would, if approved, create three “fee in lieu” categories for repairing lower laterals — the section of sewer pipe that runs from the property line of a building to the public sewer main under the street — as required by the city’s Private Sewer Lateral Ordinance. Under the ordinance, homeowners are responsible for blockages occurring anywhere in the lateral. If an inspection determines the lower lateral determined to be defective — or if it’s made of clay — it must be replaced.

The “fee in lieu” system was introduced after the ordinance was adopted in 2019 to address ongoing issues with follow-through. Instead of hiring their own contractor, property owners can pay a set fee to the city — currently set at $8,000, payable upon the sale of a building — that allows staff to take care of repairs on their behalf. 

However, over the years, staff have encountered lower lateral installations that exceed the average cost due to the depth and/or complexity of the sewer lines. The updated fee schedule would impose additional fees for lower laterals that are more than five feet underground. The proposal, if passed, would increase the “fee in lieu” for deep lower laterals to $12,600. Fees for “non-standard installation” would be determined by the city engineer.

Speaking at Tuesday’s meeting, Eureka City Manager Miles Slattery emphasized that people who have already gone through the city’s loan process or are “in the queue” would not be affected by the fee increase. “What this does is it prevents the overall cost [from] going up because these lower laterals are costing people more money.”

“The rate was established at $8,000 for those lower laterals … but what we’re seeing now are there certain properties that skew that average.” Slattery explained. “The reason for the deeper lateral costs is because the contractor having to comply with OSHA. Once you get to five feet [below the surface], you have to provide shoring, [which] increases the cost to do those lower laterals. Staff thought it was more equitable … to separate that out.”

Councilmember Renee Contreras-DeLoach seemed to support staff’s approach, noting that she would be “completely uncomfortable” with spreading the cost to other property owners or imposing additional fees on ratepayers. “That would be unjust, I think,” she said.

During the public comment portion of last night’s meeting, several local realtors raised concerns about the increased costs, especially the new category for “non-standard installation.” Jill MacDonald, a realtor with Coldwell Banker Cutten Realty, said she would be willing to accept the fee increase for deeper laterals but felt the unspecified fee for “non-standard installation” was a step too far. She gave an example of a “non-standard” situation where a house sold for $247,000 and the estimated cost for lateral replacement was a jaw-dropping $30,000. 

“That’s why we’re outraged,” she said. “There has to be a cap, it can’t just be an open-ended number. And we can’t have our sellers go into escrow and not know what they’re committing to.”

About a dozen other real estate agents, mortgage brokers and property owners echoed MacDonald’s concerns, several of whom accused the city of using the fee structure as a way to generate additional income. 

“Due to many decades of not keeping their side of the street maintained, the City of Eureka is looking to generate income for repairs to its sewer mains and lower laterals by taking of homeowners’ equity, and now they want even more money during a real estate transaction,” said Victoria Copeland, a realtor with the Key Real Estate Group. “There are many other ways that money for this maintenance could be generated. The city did not have to institute this ordinance — they chose this route.”

Following public comment, Slattery said the lateral installation that was projected to cost $30,000 was put on hold “because it was so cost prohibitive,” noting that it is a unique situation that is typically exclusive to commercial properties or housing developments with “interties” — trunk-style sewage lines that service several units.

“We’re not here to gouge people but at the same time, we’re not here to get sued by EcoRights again,” Slattery added. “So we need to demonstrate that we’re trying to get to a point there will be something coming back to council to address these issues of interties that happen in the city. … The frequency isn’t as high as what you’re hearing [tonight], but it does definitely happen.”

Councilmember Scott Bauer and Councilmember Leslie Castellano floated the idea of imposing a cap on fees for “non-standard installations” but City Attorney Autumn Luna urged the council to stick to the proposed update to the fee schedule. 

After a bit of discussion Luna and the council agreed to revisit the issue with City Engineer Jesse Willor present. Councilmember G. Mario Fernandez made a motion to postpone the discussion

Before closing out the discussion, Castellano reiterated Contreras-DeLoach’s previous point that the fees should not be passed onto ratepayers. She also said “it’s not fair” that property owners are tasked with fixing inherited sewer issues.

“There’s a million things that we’ve inherited now in 2025 that aren’t fair,” Castellano said. “I would love to go back and have a stern talking to folks in, like, 1950, but I can’t do that. … We have to address a lot of inequity right now … and I commend staff for doing their best to try to make it as fair as possible, given the current situation. … We don’t want to increase those rates and cause that harm to people who are residents in our communities.”

The voted 5-0 to continue the discussion at its next meeting on Tuesday, March 4.

###

What else happened at Tuesday’s meeting, you ask?

• Eureka Police Chief Brian Stephens presented the department’s annual report for 2024. EPD has made “significant strides in recruitment, filling vacancies, and increasing staffing to levels we haven’t seen in years,” Stephens said. “While our patrol division and dispatch remain short by three officers and three dispatchers, respectively, the rest of the department is fully staffed,” he said, adding that EPD has seen a surge in applications for all positions.
• During the non-agenda public comment portion of the meeting, about a dozen people called on the city officials to do more to address Eureka’s homelessness crisis. Some speakers criticized the city for failing to provide adequate shelter during extreme weather events, while others took aim at the city council’s recent decision to consolidate the city’s Camping Ordinance and the Sitting or Lying on Sidewalks Ordinance into a single, simplified ordinance with “more teeth.” Elsewhere in the meeting, councilmembers DeLoach and Fernandez volunteered to meet with staff monthly to discuss emergency shelter opportunities and guidelines.
• The city council also received a report on tsunami and disaster preparedness from Ryan Derby, the county’s director of emergency services. The presentation focused on the tsunami warning that was generated by the Dec. 5 7.0 magnitude earthquake and the chaotic response that followed. Derby recommended that local municipalities and participate in a countywide tsunami evacuation drill and bolster access to information about disaster preparedness.

###

For more than half a century, California’s “lemon” law was considered one of the best in the nation at giving consumers the legal right to demand car companies fix or replace defective vehicles still under warranty.

Now, California lawmakers are scrambling to repair recent changes they made to the law to satisfy the very car companies accused of making so many lemon vehicles that their lawsuits have been clogging the state’s courts.

But the “fixes” lawmakers are considering have angered consumer groups, frustrated legislators and seemingly divided the car makers between ones that face a lot of lemon lawsuits and the ones that don’t.

“I think what we have is a messy and frankly — all due respect — illogical resulting situation,” Sen. Roger Niello, a Republican whose family owns several car dealerships in the Sacramento area, said at a hearing last week. “I feel like I’m in Alice in Wonderland, quite frankly. What’s up is down and what’s down is up.”

With hope of granting relief to the courts, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed legislation last year intended to speed up the process, in part, by cutting years off the time consumers can exercise their rights to get their defective vehicles fixed or replaced. The law also puts more responsibilities on car owners to initiate claims instead of on the car companies.

But that law divided car makers because those that face fewer lawsuits wanted more time to prepare their best defense, and they felt it was too friendly to lemon law attorneys. So when he signed the bill, Newsom told lawmakers to act quickly this year to allow car makers to opt out of the new process and continue to work under the old rules.

Now, legislators are racing to pass the changes before the new law takes effect April 1. And they need a two-thirds vote of the Legislature to make the bill effective immediately.

Meanwhile, they’re hearing concerns about a confusing two-tier lemon law with fewer consumer protections that is primarily intended to help the companies facing the most lawsuits. Just four companies are responsible for more than 70% of California’s lemon law cases: GM, Stellantis (formerly Fiat Chrysler), Nissan and Ford, according to consumer groups.

It makes Susan Giesberg furious.

She spent almost a decade working on lemon law issues at the California Department of Justice. Now retired, she says she and her husband had to invoke their rights under the state’s lemon law under the old rules when their Chevy Volt broke down last summer.

“This lemon law has gone through Republican and Democratic (attorneys general) and governors with support over the years,” she said in an interview. “It’s just so shocking that under Democratic leadership that this would have gotten through.”

So how did it?To answer that you have to go back to August, in the final chaotic days of the legislative session.

How lawmakers jammed through new lemon law

As lawmakers were rushing through hundreds of pending bills – most of which had been under discussion for months – two Democrats, Sen. Tom Umberg of Santa Ana and Assemblymember Ash Kalra of San Jose, changed a stalled child-support bill into new, never-vetted legislation that sought to reform how lemon law disputes are resolved. Stripping out stalled legislation, replacing it with a completely different bill and jamming it through at the last minute is disparagingly known in the Capitol as a “gut-and-amend.”

The lawmakers acknowledged that the bill, Assembly 1755, was the product of months of secret negotiations between U.S. car companies – primarily General Motors – consumer attorneys and judges who were frustrated that their courtrooms have become clogged with lemon law cases.

Between 2018 and 2021, GM’s 9,800 lemon law suits accounted for nearly one in three lemon law suits filed in California, according to the most recent stats from consumer groups. A company spokesperson in a written statement to CalMatters defended its record and the new California law.

“General Motors is continuously recognized by top consumer intelligence groups for vehicle reliability, quality, and customer loyalty,” GM spokesperson Colleen Oberc said in an email. She called the legislation “a pro-consumer bill that will help drivers get back on the road sooner, while also helping clear court backlogs, benefitting both customers and the auto industry.”

California defines a “lemon” vehicle as one that has serious warranty defects that the manufacturer can’t fix, even after multiple attempts. The lemon law applies only to disputes involving the manufacturer’s new vehicle warranty.

If the manufacturer or dealer is unable to repair a serious warranty defect in a vehicle after what the law says is a “reasonable” number of attempts, the manufacturer must either replace it or refund its purchase price, whichever the customer prefers, according to the California Department of Consumer Affairs.

Disputes can be resolved through arbitration or in court if a buyer sues.

The number of lemon law cases in California courts climbed dramatically since 2021. There were nearly 15,000 filings in 2022 and more than 22,000 in 2023. In Los Angeles County, nearly 10% of all civil filings are now lemon law cases.

Kalra and Umberg pitched their legislation last year as a way for auto companies and car buyers to settle their disputes quicker and without needing as much time in court.

But Tesla and several foreign auto companies including Volkswagen and Toyota that aren’t sued nearly as much said they were cut out of negotiations. They opposed the legislation.

Consumer groups, meanwhile, called the legislation a blatant and shameless attempt at weakening the lemon law by the very companies that get sued the most because they sell the most defective vehicles.

There was a lot more in the bill, which was about 4,200 words long (the equivalent of a 16-page double-spaced term paper). What’s more, the bill’s legislative analysis, intended to explain the context and impact of a bill in non-legal language for lawmakers, was more than 10,000 words.

The bill passed easily even though some lawmakers complained they were uncomfortable with having to decide such a complicated, confusing piece of legislation so quickly.

“There wasn’t a single person who represents the people of California who knew about this and was a part of those conversations – for months,” Democratic San Ramon Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan told her colleagues on the Assembly Judiciary Committee in the final days of the 2024 legislative session. “They dropped this in our lap, and they expect us to buy an argument related to the urgency that feels, to be honest, not real. And we’re supposed to move this in a week’s time.”

Newsom signed the bill in September, with an accompanying letter to lawmakers demanding they fix the law.

Meanwhile, just a few weeks after Newsom signed the bill, the California Supreme Court weakened California’s lemon law even more. The court ruled that the state’s lemon law doesn’t require manufacturers to honor a car’s warranty when it’s re-sold as a used vehicle.

Before the Supreme Court’s ruling, courts had interpreted the lemon law to require manufacturers to replace or repair a defective used car or truck if the clunker was sold within the window of its original new-vehicle warranty.

Uncomfortable lawmakers pass bill anyway

Fast forward to last week and the Senate Judiciary Committee’s first hearing of the new two-year session. There was one bill on the agenda: Senate Bill 26, the legislation that Newsom requested. The new bill does not address the state Supreme Court ruling.

And again the clock is ticking toward a new deadline.

The bill frustrated Sen. Aisha Wahab, a Democratic senator from Fremont. She told her colleagues she was worried the two-track legal system for different car companies would make an already confusing scenario for desperate car owners more difficult to understand.

“I’m very concerned about those first-time buyers, those immigrant communities, those people that don’t have the privilege to understand half of the stuff that was mentioned here,” she said. “It makes it too hard to begin with.”

Umberg, the bill’s author, suggested that after lawmakers pass this bill to meet the April deadline, they might need to pass other legislation to address lawmakers’ concerns as well as the Supreme Court’s used-vehicle ruling.

That didn’t sit well either.

“It’s unfortunate that protections for the consumers have gotten so complicated that we can’t more easily explain this law or the previous law, and I thought this was a clean-up (bill),” said Sen. María Elena Durazo, a Democrat from Los Angeles. “Now it seems like there may be a clean-up to the clean-up, maybe another clean-up, you know, after that.”

Nonetheless, the bill ended up easily passing the 13-member committee. Wahab declined to vote, and Democratic Sen. Angelique Ashby of Sacramento cast the only “no” vote. Ashby was one of the lawmakers who opposed last summer’s bill as well.

“I still believe that it does not do enough to remove unsafe vehicles from our communities,” she said of this latest bill. “In fact, I argue that this might have more unsafe vehicles in our communities, and I think I would not be alone in that assessment. I don’t think it holds manufacturers accountable.”

Sen. Niello said he had to reluctantly vote for Umberg’s bill since it would help negate – at least for some auto companies – the legislation he also opposed last summer.He said he wished lawmakers would just scrap the bill Newsom signed last year “and bring all of the interested parties together” to re-negotiate reforms to the lemon law, which he said probably could use some after five decades.

Instead, he had to hold his nose and vote for another rushed bill.

“This is a perfect example of why we should not be approving legislation that is a gut and amend at the last minute of the end of session,” Niello said.

###

CalMatters.org is a nonprofit, nonpartisan media venture explaining California policies and politics.

Karen Kay Barsanti passed away on Monday, December 23, 2024 at Mercy Hospital in Redding with her husband and children at her side.

Karen was born on July 10, 1941 in Brush, Colorado to Catherine and Merle Warden. The Wardens moved to California and resided in Carlotta for many years, where Karen attended Cuddeback Elementary and graduated from Fortuna Union High School in 1958. It was when Karen was helping in the kitchen during a dance at the Carlotta Grange Hall that I (Richard) asked her to dance. A short time later, Karen invited me to the sweetheart ball at Fortuna High School. We were married on February 17, 1962, then traveled to Fayetteville, North Carolina where Richard was stationed in the Army.

Upon his discharge they returned to California and resided in Scotia for a little while, then purchased their first and only home in Fortuna in 1964. Karen was employed by Crocker National Bank, working through its many changes until it became US Bank, from which she retired.

She enjoyed gardening and bird-watching, the Giants baseball games as well as the 49er’s football team. She enjoyed a couple of cruises to the Mediterranean with her husband and friends and their many trips to Arizona to see her sister Karma and her nieces and nephew. At home Karen enjoyed going to all the local basketball, baseball and football games to watch all the kids she and I got to know over the years. Writing down their names and uniform numbers, keeping score, fouls, won/loss records and points each kid scored. These are recorded in the many notebooks she kept her entire life. She also enjoyed her monthly excursions to Starbucks with her friends.

Karen is survived by her husband Richard of 63 years, her son Ryan and daughter Becci(Tim), the lights of her life, grandchildren Teghan and Hacher, her nieces Cathy Mader(Jeff), Della and Joe Bellum., her great-nieces Abigail and Annabelle, great-nephew Bryson.

She was preceded in death by her parents Catherine and Merle Warden, and her sister and brother-in-law, Karma and Robert Bellum. A celebration of life will be held on Saturday, April 12, 2025 at 2 p.m. at the Rio Dell Fire Hall. In lieu of flowers, please make a donation to a charity of your choice.

###

The obituary above was submitted on behalf of Karen Barsanti’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 the heaviest of hearts that we announce the passing of Gary Wayne Fuller. He passed away peacefully surrounded by loved ones on February 12, 2025. He has gone home to be with his savior Jesus Christ.

Born February 9, 1954 to his parents Tommy and Orla Fuller, he was the third of six children. He grew up and lived in Eureka his entire life. He had a love of sports playing both basketball and football in high school and football at College of the Redwoods. He continued his love of sports as an adult, his favorite team being the San Francisco Giants. He loved spending time with his friends and family and it was often around the dining table, talking, laughing and eating good food. Gary loved to feed his people; no one ever left his house hungry, and you always hoped to leave with a plate of his famous peanut butter fudge.

Gary was largely involved in his church community at First Covenant Church. He always said when he found his faith, he was saved. He loved Jesus and loved to share His word. He and his wife Valarie are members of their church, and participated in many church events like the Triumphant Life Camp, the annual live nativity scene, and even hosted bible study in their home. Gary was a skilled drywaller, that was his career and his talent. His work ethic and expertise transferred to many homes and commercial buildings throughout Humboldt County creating long lasting beautiful textures. The first thing he would do when he walked into any home was feel the wall. For 30 years he and his son, Eric, worked alongside each other. That was very special to both him and Eric.

Gary is survived by the love of his life, his wife, Valarie Fuller, along with her parents Carol and Eugene Loveland. He leaves behind his siblings Connie Lilze, Karen Hillis, Sheri Poletski, Tami Roberts, and Kevin Fuller. Children Eric (Crystal) Fuller, Amy (Marc) Dolce, and Jennifer (Erick) Grindle, grandchildren Tyler and Brooke Grindle, Kelly and Gunner Dolce, and Angel Barker, and great-grandchildren Oliver, Blakely, and Sawyer Grindle. Gary was blessed with an abundant amount of nieces, nephews, cousins, neighbors, and friends who have all had a special place in his life. Gary considered everyone his family and he absolutely loved and adored all of them.

He is preceded in death by his parents Tommy and Orla Fuller and his brother-in-law Stan Poletski.

A celebration of life will be held at a later date, and family and friends will be notified in advance. In lieu of flowers, please make a donation to Triumphant Life Camp in the name of Gary Fuller.

Carol DePucci passed away at home in Hydesville on February 6, 2025 at the age of 86. She was born December 26, 1938, in Logan, Montana. She moved to Scotts Mills, Oregon in 1946, with her parents Arthur and Goldie Boyts, brother Tommy and sister Ruth. There she met Richard Parks, and they married in 1956.

She later married Fred DePucci. Many good times were spent at their home in Rio Dell and their place at Ruth Lake.

Carol went to work at the City of Fortuna Police Department in 1971 as a dispatcher/clerk. She was promoted to senior dispatcher/records clerk in 1979. She retired after many years as a dispatcher.

Her many hobbies included reading, crocheting, cooking, camping, boating, swimming and traveling. She especially enjoyed going on cruises.

Carol is survived by her children Arnold and Terri Parks, Robin Robertson, Curtis and Paula Parks, Sherry and Gaylon Rock, Tony and Carolyn DePucci and daughter-in-law Andrea Murillo. Her grandchildren Joe Parks, Jesse Parks and Toni Anello, Kelsie Parks and Nerissa Holt, Renee and Ben Grimes, Nathan and Lindsey Robertson, Carson Parks and his fiancé Britney Johnson, Isaac Parks, Amanda Colegrove, Joshua and Sarah Colegrove. She also leaves behind numerous great-grandchildren, great-great-grandchildren, nieces and nephews.

Carol was preceded in death by her parents, Arthur and Goldie Boyts, her brother Tommy Boyts, her sister and brother-in-law Ruth and Earl Nally, her former husband Fred DePucci, and her daughters Terri Renee Parks and Vicky Machado.

Robin would like to give special thanks to all the friends and family that helped take care of Mom in her final years. Including, but not limited to, Jesse Parks, Kelsie Parks, Scott Swain, Wanda, Cathy, Jamie, Monica, Paul and Rick.

Family and friends are invited to attend the graveside service at Sunrise Cemetery in Fortuna on Friday, February 28 at 2 p.m.

There will be a celebration of life following the graveside service at the Monday Club in Fortuna at 3 p.m.

Arrangements are under the care of Goble’s Fortuna Mortuary.

###

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

###

On Monday afternoon, the Outpost was contacted by a local federal worker asking us to report on employees at Redwood National Park and Six Rivers National Forest who’d been fired over the weekend.

“The Trump/Musk administration sent them termination notices citing their insufficient fitness and qualifications for their positions, which is categorically false,” the tipster reported. “Park operations are officially in jeopardy and it’s going to have significant impacts on the tourism industry, not to mention the health of our public lands.”

Over the past few days, the U.S. Forest Service has fired about 3,400 recent hires while the National Park Service fired about 1,000 workers as part of President Donald Trump’s push to cut federal spending and bureaucracy. The layoffs left some fired workers suddenly without housing and sparked alarm among conservation agencies.

“Allowing parks to hire seasonal staff is essential, but staffing cuts of this magnitude will have devastating consequences for parks and communities,” National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA) President Theresa Pierno said in a statement.

Employees were blindsided by the move.

“Today I lost my dream job as a permanent park ranger in the NPS,” Alex Wild reported via Instagram Sunday. “I’m still in shock, and completely devastated. I have dedicated my life to being a public servant, teacher, and advocate for places that we ALL cherish. I have saved lives and put my own life at risk to serve my community.  And today, without any warning, I got a termination email … .”

Wild quoted from the email he received, calling its message, “the biggest slap in the face imaginable.”:

The Department determined that you have failed to demonstrate fitness or qualifications for continued employment because your subject matter knowledge, skills, and abilities do not meet the Department’s current needs, and it is necessary and appropriate to terminate, during the probationary period, your appointment to the position of Park Ranger.

The Outpost’s efforts to get more information from both the National Parks Service and the U.S. Forest Service — including the number of local employees fired, the possible impacts to services, etc. — have not been fruitful. An emailed inquiry sent to Redwood National and State Parks Superintendent Steven Mietz was forwarded to a public information officer, who, in reply, said such questions should be directed to the Pacific West regional office. 

Scott Clemans, the lead public affairs specialist and spokesperson for that office, sent a brief and rather forlorn-sounding reply this afternoon: “We’ll provide that information as soon as we can,” it said. “I don’t know how long it will take before we’re able to get back to you, though.”

Meanwhile, in response to an email to Six Rivers National Forest, Public Affairs Specialist Adrianne Rubiaco directed us to contact the press officer for the USDA Forest Service’s Pacific Southwest Region. Our email to that office was answered more than 24 hours later by a USDA spokesperson who provided a statement that has been widely distributed. It says, in part:

[U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke] Rollins fully supports the President’s directive to improve government, eliminate inefficiencies, and strengthen USDA’s many services to the American people. We have a solemn responsibility to be good stewards of the American people’s hard-earned taxpayer dollars and to ensure that every dollar spent goes to serve the people, not the bureaucracy.  

As part of this effort, USDA has made the difficult decision to release about 2,000 probationary, non-firefighting employees from the Forest Service. To be clear, none of these individuals were operational firefighters. Released employees were probationary in status, many of whom were compensated by temporary IRA funding. 

This afternoon we sent a reporter to the Six Rivers National Forest headquarters near the Bayshore Mall. An employee onsite said all inquiries must go through Washington, D.C., headquarters.

Any local federal employees (including the recently fired) willing to share your perspective, anonymously or otherwise, can email the Outpost at news@lostcoastoutpost.com.