Aryay came to Humboldt County, like many others, to live out some of the visionary propositions of the 1960s. He had so far been rewarded with beatings, arrests and a fat file in the offices of the FBI. His photo had made the front page of the San Francisco paper when HUAC (the House Unamerican Activities Committee) came to town hunting for commies and subversives. Sprayed by fire hoses along with other protestors, cops dragged him feet first down the marble stairs of city hall’s rotunda, hands jammed in the pockets of his corduroy jacket, looking like he was exactly where he wanted to be.

Even as the child of a liberal and cultured Portland family-he began violin at an early age-he reacted badly to unreasoned authority. Sent to a pre-eminent eastern college, he left during his first year with an allergic reaction to the prevailing idea of order. Only after living a year with relatives in Berkeley, who introduced him to leftist living and found him a job driving a furniture truck — beautiful music and working class politics-did he begin to find his way to health and happiness.

He enrolled at UC Berkeley, studied history, and joined SLATE, the political group that preceded the Free Speech Movement, introducing politics to the “quiet generation” of 1950’s college students, around issues like racial discrimination-yes, in Berkeley!-as well as apartheid in South Africa, atomic bomb testing but also mandatory ROTC and the segregation of women at UC football games.

From college he went east again, working for the National Lawyers Guild as an organizer wherever his skills were needed — in the Jim Crow south, north again, then back to the west coast where he worked with the Farmworkers under Cesar Chavez, and with the Panthers in some of their early organizing around breakfasts for children and the armed defense of neighborhoods.

All these now-famous actions attracted increasing violence during the Vietnam years, from Nixon’s dirty tricksters to hard-hat goons, leather-wearing bikers, and from trigger-happy cops and national guardsmen. This repression created strong solidarity on the left, but it was also met with hardening dogma and an all too familiar authoritarianism.

It was time to move to the country.

Aryay began half a lifetime of work on an old house in Manila, he started an organic garden, supported himself by knife sharpening and carpentry-and he continued to be a political organizer wherever a social ill presented itself. In mid-century America, spraying toxic herbicides had become a chief tool of forest management, highway maintenance, and yard care, and it spoke personally to anyone with allergies. Aryay and his partner, Ann-Marie Martin, worked as co-chairs of Humboldt Herbicide Task Force, and under their leadership this practice-so widely accepted as to appear “normal,” never to be questioned-turned out to be deeply unpopular with a huge swath of the public, from Native basket weavers to nursing mothers, from health workers to farm workers. Organizing is never finished-many of these toxics are still permitted-but now in Humboldt County there are rules and regulations in place. You can still see the signs in front of rural houses: NO SPRAY.

A decade later, still in Manila, Aryay and a hand-picked group of activists began a campaign against off-road vehicles that were destroying its dunes and threatening the peace and safety of the community. Again, off-road driving was an accepted activity (Ronald Regan declared it a national form of recreation) affecting only some low-value hills of sand and a fewlow-income people. But organizing begins with asking questions and when people were queried at the mall and grocery stores, it was true that they didn’t care as deeply as they might about their poor neighbors and endangered wallflowers, but they really, really wanted dune buggies off their beaches. And when they formed a coalition, and held it together for years of protests and meetings, people got their property, their personal safety, and their beaches back.

These contributions to community well-being, and many others, smaller and quieter, were never Aryay’s end goal, not what he was most proud of. When he was in hospice and wrote his own brief obit, he mentioned none of that. It was his home repair, small jobs for people of modest means-he’d place an ad in Senior News-along with his organic gardening, and especially his composting that he listed among his chief accomplishments. In musical quartets and on remodel jobs, while bowling and engaged in friendships were his greatest pleasures, most especially with long-time companion and wife,Marcia Brenta and her two children, Amelia Hughes and Mario Brown. Aryay celebrated community in their home in Bayside, honoring day of the dead and solstice for many years. He embraced excursions to Breitenbush,Oregon and Rubio, Smith River for process and rejuvenation. Aryays loud gutfaw-hawl when something struck his funny bone, was a reminder of his delight in good company.

But when he saw the need for change in our lives, he was on us. From our most private moments-to his last breaths he argued for the efficacy of the compost toilet-to the most dire challenges of sea level rise, he was organizing us like lost sheep. In his final days in hospice, his letter to the editor appeared in the Mad River Union.

“The people who survive the coming changes and challenges will have to live closer to the Earth, from [off] the Earth, and with each other.” Like a good organizer, he told those people (maybe you) to ask questions: “Questions about what of the industrial culture can be salvaged, and for how long, will be important to ask.”

Thanks, Aryay. You will be missed.Our VERBEENA. Aryay will be remembered by many family and friends in Portland, Humboldt, Berkeley, San Anselmo and Santa Rosa.

Celebration of life will be held at the Humboldt Unitarian Fellowship
24 Fellowship Way, Bayside, CA 95524
June 7th
5-8 pm
RSVP
707-601-4687

###

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

Edward Albert Waterman
March 10, 1953 - March 8, 2025

Edward Albert “Ed” Waterman, 71, of McKinleyville, passed away suddenly on March 8, 2025, just two days shy of his 72nd birthday.

Born in Bakersfield to James and Mary Waterman, Ed graduated from East Bakersfield High School in 1971. After high school, Ed proudly served his country in the United States Navy as an Aircrewman, working as an Anti-Submarine Warfare Operator until he was honorably discharged in 1976, earning a National Defense Service Medal. Following his military service, Ed pursued his passion for architecture at California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, where he graduated in 1980 with a Bachelor of Science in Architecture. Starting as a draftsman, he eventually became a licensed architect in Bakersfield, embarking on a distinguished 44-year career and focusing on the diversity of buildings and restoration. Ed’s parents were pillars in the Kern County education system. This strong sense of community instilled in Ed influenced his commitment to projects with the Bakersfield City School District, contributing to new builds, remodels, and modernization. Ed’s career diversity also took him to the East Coast, where he worked in Athens, Georgia, for Clark County, Heery International, and Motorola Inc.

Ed’s love for his family was evident in every aspect of his life. He and his future wife Maria, who attended the same high school, were brought together by fate at Raintree Health Gym in February 1984. They married on May 1, 1987, and Ed lovingly embraced the role of stepfather to Maria’s two sons, Desi and Damian. He dedicated himself to enriching their lives, introducing them to camping at Montana De Oro, fishing at Stony Creek, hiking the Sequoia National Forest, skiing at Sierra Summit, and the literary worlds of J.R.R. Tolkien.

Ed was a devoted family man who took immense pride in his role as grandfather. He never missed his granddaughter Rebeca’s dance performances or his grandson Kainoa’s soccer and basketball games. His love for his family remained unwavering until his final moments.

In 2001, Ed briefly took a break from his job in architecture and was trained to be a commercial truck driver. Shortly after, Maria joined him, and they became a team at Covenant Transport, working as long-haul drivers. This opportunity allowed Ed and Maria to see parts of the United States they had never imagined traveling to. Ed’s love for cooking reflected his warm and hospitable nature. He often entertained and prepared extravagant meals for friends and family, including his legendary “Eddie’s Spaghetti.” Usually working on projects around his house, Ed enjoyed his weekend trips to the hardware store. His joy in cuddling on the couch with Maria and their dog, Tuffy, while binge-watching their favorite show or enjoying a Georgia Bulldogs football game was part of his loving and caring personality.Upon retirement, Ed and Maria relocated to Humboldt County to be closer to family. Still, Ed’s passion for his profession and civil service soon led him to join the Humboldt County Department of Public Works as a Construction Projects Manager.

At the time of his passing, Ed was looking forward to his upcoming retirement and had enthusiastically planned numerous projects, including building a new chicken coop, restoring his vegetable garden, and visiting friends across the country. Ed was preceded in death by his parents, James and Mary Waterman. Ed is survived by his loving wife Maria, stepsons Desi Vega and Damian Vega, grandchildren Rebeca Vega and Kainoa Vega, brother David Waterman (Marsha), sister Karen Velgouth (Norman), Sister-in-law Elvira Zavala-Patton, numerous nephews, nieces, and family too large to mention as well as friends and colleagues whose lives were touched by his kindness, integrity, and dedication.

Ed’s commitment to service was a testament to his dedication and selflessness. He served his country, his profession, his community, and above all, his family with unwavering commitment. His legacy of love, craftsmanship, and adventure will continue to inspire all who knew him.

###

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

###

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

###

One of the most controversial housing bills of the year has lived to be voted upon another day, but only by surviving the Legislative equivalent of two back-to-back prison breaks.

Last week, Senate Bill 79, a bill by San Francisco Democratic Sen. Scott Wiener to boost apartment and commercial construction around major public transportation hubs, passed the Senate Housing Committee over the strenuous objections of its chair, Sen. Aisha Wahab, a fellow Democrat from Fremont.

That was a notable development in its own right. Committee chairs tend to get their way on the bills that pass through their committees. When a majority of a committee’s members decide to buck Legislative decorum and tradition and steamroll that committee’s chair, it’s often taken as a sign that California’s dominant Democrats are unusually divided over an issue; that the issue at hand is especially contentious; that the legislators either aren’t receiving clear guidance from Legislative leadership or are willing to ignore that advice; or some combination of all of the above.

Fast forward to this week and it happened again.

In the Senate Local Government Committee, Sen. María Elena Durazo, a Los Angeles Democrat, urged a no vote on Wiener’s bill.

She didn’t get her way. The bill passed with the backing of all the other Democrats on the committee. Durazo voted “no” with the two Republicans.

A chair getting “rolled” is an unusual spectacle in Sacramento. In the typically arcane and perfunctory proceedings of the Legislature, this bit of human drama pops up once or twice a year. For it to happen twice in a row for the same bill is without any obvious precedent.

“Extra unique” is how Chris Micheli, a longtime California lobbyist and public commentator on the Legislative process, described the situation. “Beyond the particular bill at hand, it could give an indication that there is a philosophical split in the caucus.”

So far Senate President Pro Tem Mike McGuire, a Santa Rosa Democrat, has refused to comment publicly on where he stands on the divide within his caucus, whether the two chairs speak for him and whether he plans to intervene to smooth things over.

For some advocates, the silence from McGuire has been deafening.

“The Assembly seems to recognize the urgency of this moment and Governor Newsom has routinely signed with great enthusiasm even the most difficult housing bills to reach his desk, but the Senate appears more isolated from the rest of California on housing than it has in recent years,” Jim Wunderman, president of the Bay Area Council, which co-sponsored SB 79, wrote to McGuire late last week. “As ‘one of our own,’ a member of the Bay Area Caucus, and President Pro Tem of the Senate we feel compelled to write to you to share our deepening concern that the progress that we need on housing may ultimately stall in the Senate.”

McGuire’s office did not respond to a request for interview before this story was published.

After the caucus, Wiener downplayed the idea that there are irreparable divisions within the caucus.

“You have two chairs who have just a different perspective and that’s normal and, you know, I appreciate that we’ve been able to go through this process very respectfully,” he said. “We’re all grown ups.”

As for McGuire: “He’ll weigh in when he needs to weigh in,” said Wiener.

McGuire is termed out of the Legislature next year, an expiration date which may limit his influence.

The increasingly public philosophical split within the Democratic caucus was apparent in both committee hearings. Wiener is a prolific housing legislator whose views align with the broader “Yes In My Backyard” movement which sees California’s housing affordability crisis as the product of an overall housing shortage. For that group, which includes Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas and the Assembly Appropriations Chair Buffy Wicks, making it easier to build more homes more cheaply, quickly and densely is the policy north star. Wicks said as much at a recent Legislative hearing.

“’I’m like a one trick pony,” she said during a debate over a statewide rent control bill. “We’ve got to make it easier to build more housing in California and that has been really my sole focus since I’ve been here.”

Wahab and Durazo represent a different faction of the Democratic Party. Both have stressed that they aren’t opposed to new housing construction and that they share the view that the state faces a severe housing shortage. But they are more skeptical of the private development that tends to be a byproduct of the YIMBY movement’s proposed legislation, and believe state law that encourages it should come with terms and conditions.

Wiener’s bill would allow housing developers to build apartment, condo and mixed-use towers on or near train, subway and light rail stations, ferry terminals and at the intersection of heavily used bus lines, regardless of what local zoning or building design rules specify. It would also remove barriers to transit agencies that want to do the same on their own land.

“If we leave decisions about what to build up to market-rate developers who do not have the broader public interest in their minds, it’s the wrong way to go,” Durazo said. “While I want to help members move their legislation forward, sometimes bills go against our core values and amendments won’t address that.”

“We are aligned on the vast majority of issues,” Wiener said in response. “In this one, unfortunately, we are deeply not aligned and I do not believe that building more housing near public transportation, housing of every variety, goes against our core values.”

State Sen. Scott Wiener, a San Francisco Democrat, addresses lawmakers on the first day of session in the California Senate, on Jan. 3, 2024. Photo by Fred Greaves for CalMatters

The bill doesn’t require private developers to set aside a share of units for low-income residents. Last week, Wahab called the lack of an explicit affordable housing requirement a “sweetheart deal” for the housing industry. Some affordable housing and anti-gentrification activists have turned out to oppose the bill, arguing that expanding opportunities for private development would come at the expense of affordable housing opportunity and turbocharge displacement.

The bulk of studies that have looked into the question have found that new market-rate housing reduces neighborhood rents and tends to ease displacement pressures.

Wiener has stressed that apartments and condos are inherently more affordable than single family housing and that the bill would not preclude other state and local affordability requirements that developers might be subject to from applying. In the committee hearing today, Wiener said that he is “exploring the possibility” of including a minimum affordability requirement.

The bill is also opposed by many local governments and neighborhood groups that resent the state’s usurpation of their land use authority and opponents of dense development. Ditto the State Building and Construction Trades Council, an umbrella group representing many unionized construction workers, who regularly oppose housing bills that lack stringent labor standards, and some environmental justice advocates.

Another Wiener bill, Senate Bill 607, which would make it easier for urban multifamily housing projects to avoid environmental review — a priority of many Assembly Democrats — also survived, despite Durazo’s “no” vote.

Both bills are now scheduled to go to the Senate Appropriations Committee.

This latest legislative kerfuffle could be a sign of things to come. This year, Assembly Democrats have put forward a vast package of housing bills aimed at speeding up development. Though some are eye-glazingly technical, others may incite the same Dem-on-Dem infighting that broke out over Wiener’s bill.

“(SB 79) could foreshadow tough sledding for some of the Assembly bills,” said Micheli.

###

PREVIOUSLY:

• CalFire is Planning to Move Its North Coast Headquarters to Rio Dell. So Why Are City Officials Worried?

###

Last we checked in with the Calfire Humboldt-Del Norte unit’s plan to move from its longtime base in Rohnerville Fortuna to Rio Dell, city officials were not entirely happy with the idea, which would take a prime developable parcel right next to the highway off the market. There go the tax revenue that new homes and businesses on that site might provide.

But the city has been dreaming such dreams for decades, and now the state owns the land. They’re moving forward with the new CalFire headquarters, and are now laying the groundwork for a required environmental impact report.

To that end, there’ll be a public meeting in Rio Dell on the evening of May 14. A full “notice of preparation,” including information about what they’re looking to learn at this meeting, can be found at this link.

It sounds like they’re going big. According to the notice of preparation, the new headquarters, the 18-acre site will include 

[A]n emergency command center; a future fire station; facilities to house administrative programs; a CAL FIRE training facility; Law Enforcement Program; Resource Management Program; State Fire Marshall Program, and related staff; facilities for onsite parking, maintenance, and use of CAL FIRE trucks and equipment; other support buildings; covered parking with photovoltaic panels; onsite circulation; a telecommunication tower; facility supporting infrastructure and utilities including a sewer system, domestic and fire water systems, stormwater detention, site lighting and fencing, and landscaping and irrigation.

###

Here’s the full meeting notice from California’s Department of General Services:

The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE), with assistance from the State of California Department of General Services (DGS), will be the lead agency and will prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) compliant with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), to determine potentially significant adverse environmental impacts resulting from the construction and operation of the proposed CAL FIRE Humboldt – Del Norte Unit Headquarters Facility Relocation Project (also referred to as “the proposed project”). An Initial Study will not be prepared (CEQA Guidelines Section 15063[a]). DGS will rely on responsible and trustee agencies to provide information relevant to the analysis of resources falling within the jurisdiction of such agencies. Input is requested on:

• The scope and content of the environmental analysis, including identification of specific issues that will require closer study due to the location, scale, and character of the project;
• Mitigation, including that which would avoid or reduce potentially significant impacts; and
• Alternatives to the proposed project that could potentially avoid or reduce potentially significant impacts.

Written comments on the Notice of Preparation: The Notice of Preparation is being circulated for public review and comment for a period of 30 days beginning April 29, 2025. Written comments will be accepted through May 29, 2025. Comments, along with the name and contact information of the appropriate person in your organization, should be addressed to:

Stephanie Coleman, Senior Environmental Planner,
Department of General Services, Real Estate Services Division
Project Management and Development Branch / Environmental Unit
707 3rd Street, 4th Floor
West Sacramento, CA 95605
environmental@dgs.ca.gov

A public scoping meeting will be held to provide opportunities for agencies and interested parties to obtain information about the project, ask questions of the project team, and provide comments on the scope of the environmental analysis. A brief presentation on the proposed project and the CEQA process will be given at the start of the meeting, followed by an open house format where attendees will have the opportunity to talk to planning team members. All comments made at the meeting will have to be submitted in writing to be considered during preparation of the EIR.

• Date and Time: May 14, 2025, 4:30 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.
• Location: Rio Dell Elementary School Multipurpose Room — 95 Center Street, Rio Dell, CA 95562

###

DOCUMENTS:

• Notice of Preparation for the project

Press release from CASA (Court Appointed Social Advocates) of Humboldt:

Humboldt County, CA — CASA of Humboldt stands in solidarity with our national network in expressing deep concern over the recent federal decision to cut funding to the National Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA/GAL) Association. These cuts could significantly impact thousands of children in foster care nationwide who depend on trained CASA volunteers to advocate for their best interests.

We want to reassure our community that CASA of Humboldt is not directly impacted by this funding decision. Our program does not receive funding from National CASA, and we remain strong, stable, and fully committed to the children we serve in Humboldt County.

“Our work has always been rooted in local relationships, community dedication, and a deep belief that every child and family deserve to be seen, heard, and supported,” said Jeanne Gordon, Executive Director of CASA of Humboldt. “We are incredibly proud of the strength of our program and the tireless commitment of our volunteers, staff, and supporters who make this work possible every day.”

We are especially grateful for the ongoing support from our Judicial Council, Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) funding, and California CASA, as well as numerous local grants, foundations, and individuals. The impact of that support was clearly evident this past weekend, when our community showed up for our kids and a record-breaking amount of funds were raised at our annual Hope Blooms Here Gala on Saturday, April 26.

Now more than ever, continued local support is vital. As national resources face uncertainty, our ability to provide high-quality advocacy to every local child in foster care depends on our community’s sustained involvement.

If you would like to support CASA of Humboldt—as a volunteer, donor, or advocate—please contact Amber Madrone Anderson at amber@humboldtcasa.org or (707) 443-3197.

Together, we can ensure that every child continues to have their voice heard and the consistent support they need and deserve.

###

###

Facing mounting financial losses, three local funeral homes abruptly ceased operations this month, leaving Humboldt County residents with just two options for local funerary and cremation services. 

The closure  — affecting Sanders Funeral Home and Humboldt Cremation & Funeral Service in Eureka, and Paul’s Chapel in Arcata — came just four months after workers formed an independent union, raising questions about whether the decision to shutter the facilities was driven solely by financial strain or influenced by tensions between the newly organized workers and out-of-state ownership.

In a recent interview with the Outpost, Guy Saxton, the Pennsylvania-based businessman who co-owns the three shuttered businesses, Ocean View Cemetery-Sunset Memorial Park, along with numerous other funeral homes and cemeteries across the country, emphatically denied claims that the decision to close had anything to do with the Humboldt Funerary Union. 

“We were just hemorrhaging money with no reasonable prospect of ever becoming profitable,” Saxton said, adding that the businesses were losing between $20,000 and $30,000 per month. In December, those losses ticked up to $40,000 when several pieces of equipment broke at once. “Not only was it costly to repair, but we also had to send our cremations to Ayers. It was a disaster.  … We considered two or three proposals to reorganize staff, but even those proposals didn’t have us breaking even. We would have still had to reinvest money to see if it was going to work, but there was really no path toward profitability.”

Asked why he and his business partner, John Yeatman, opted to close all three funeral homes at once rather than consolidating operations, Saxton said the facilities were all “run as one,” with most staff members working at all three locations. “And they were all losing money,” he added.

For decades — or in the case of Sanders, nearly 120 years — the three funeral homes provided local families with end-of-life planning and funerary services, ranging from traditional burials (the body is embalmed and buried in a casket, often with an accompanying ceremony) to direct cremation (the body is cremated without any viewing or funeral service). But traditional burials have been on a downward trend for decades as people gravitate toward more cost-effective options like cremation, which is often thousands — or even tens of thousands — of dollars cheaper than full-service ceremonies.

Data compiled in the National Funeral Directors Association’s “2024 Cremation & Burial Report” indicates that the U.S. cremation rate is “expected to increase from 61.9 percent in 2024 to 82.1 percent” by 2045. “The rising number of cremations can be attributed to changing consumer preferences, weakening religious prohibitions, cost considerations, and environmental concerns,” the report states. 

Aubree Baker, former funeral director at Sanders Funeral Home and provisional president of the Humboldt Funerary Union, acknowledged the industry-wide shift toward cremation and shared Saxton’s concerns about the financial impact on local funeral homes, but felt those issues could have been addressed by smarter business practices and consolidation, not shuttering services.

“We agreed with the employer that, for example, Paul’s Chapel and Humboldt Cremation should close and that all of the business coming through there could be handled at Sanders … and offer competitive pricing in that model,” Baker told the Outpost. “There were a lot of other ideas that were brought up over the years … but the employer just kept pushing back and telling us we have to change the general price lists. … The costs of doing business have increased steadily over the years and we haven’t seen any increase in prices that would offset some of those additional costs.”

Some of these issues were what inspired Baker and other employees to form a union in the first place. 

Forming the Humboldt Funerary Union

People who enter the death care industry aren’t in it for the pay. While salaries are generally dependent on experience and location, Google searches and online forums indicate that the average pay for a funeral director is comparable to a teacher’s salary. Comfortable, but not high-paying by any means. Baker entered the field, in part, because it gave more meaning to his own existence.

“It’s just something you’re drawn to. I’ve struggled with depression in my life, and while I was working with AmeriCorps doing removals as a kind of side gig, I had this renewed appreciation for my life,” he said. (In death care, removals refer to the process of moving a deceased person to a funeral home or other designated facility.) “Doing that work, being around death and being around people grieving really helped me — gosh, I’m getting sappy — appreciate the preciousness of life. It felt really comfortable to me to be in those types of environments and to help people through those moments.”

Megan Weshnak, former lead of operations and apprentice embalmer at Sanders Funeral Home and provisional vice president of the Humboldt Funerary Union, said her interest in the death care industry sparked when she was a teenager. Growing up in Los Angeles, the only air conditioner in the house was in her parents’ bedroom, where her mom had a collection of books about forensics that ignited an obsession.

“My parents were both at work during the summer, so I’d hang out in that air-conditioned room — they didn’t have a TV in there — and read these books by Patricia Cornwell,” she said. “The main character in the series is a medical examiner in Brockville, Virginia, and I just remember reading those books and being fascinated by the forensics and pathology — everything surrounding death investigation. And I was like, ‘I’m gonna do that! I’m gonna be the chief medical examiner at Quantico!’”

At the time, she didn’t realize how much schooling would be involved. She got into cosmetology after graduating from high school, but held onto her interest in death care. Years later, she found herself in a deep conversation with the embalmer for Paul’s Chapel.

“I just happened to run into her, and we had this hour-and-a-half conversation about all sorts of things. It ended with her saying, ‘I want to hire you,’” Weshnak said. “I started with removals, learning how to talk to grieving families and helping with daily operations. Eventually, I started the embalming apprenticeship, and I love it.”

“I do this because I can,” she continued. “It’s meaningful and it’s rewarding to me. So many people say, ‘I could never do what you do’, but I look at a Hospice nurse and say, ‘I can never do what you do’. Once someone is in my care, it’s about making that experience as peaceful as possible for the family.”

One of the problems with the death care industry, locally at least, is the lack of support for the people in it. Baker and Weshnak said they were driven to form a union to improve the “terms and conditions” of their employment, including increased access to mental health benefits and better pay.

“I think death care as a whole, not just in this particular company, is very underpaid. And there’s a significant mental health impact on the people that work in this field,” Weshnak said. “I don’t think the benefits really aligned with the needs of the people that worked [at the funeral homes]. … One specific thing we wanted to change was the pay structure for our removal staff. It was very difficult to get people to stay because it’s not very enticing work. In these negotiations, we were hoping to have removal staff paid in a similar manner as coroner’s on-call.”

While there are several trade associations representing funerary workers, unions are few and far between. Baker didn’t want to join a union representing a variety of trades, so he decided to create an independent union.

“We wanted to create something specific to us,” he said. “We know all of our issues and needs, so we felt it would serve us better if it were independent. That way, we would have control of it, versus having to put someone else in charge of our interests. The other thing is the timeline.  We could be a lot more expeditious if we went independent rather than trying to affiliate and going through a whole process with an established entity.”

One of the first steps in establishing a union is gauging support. At least 30 percent of employees must sign the authorization cards before the proposal can be presented to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) for consideration. If more than 50 percent of employees sign authorization cards, the employer can choose to recognize the union without an election through the NLRB. 

In September of 2024, Baker distributed the authorization cards and received signatures from a majority of employees. He shared the news with the business owner during a staff meeting and, later that night, sent an email to request formal recognition. The next day, he was asked to join a conference call with upper management.

“It was veiled as a sort of strategic meeting around some changes in business practices,” Baker recalled. “They said the businesses weren’t doing well, and they were having to make some changes to avoid continued financial loss. We felt that they were implying – or possibly threatening — layoffs or closure. A few days later, the owner [Saxton] showed up. He didn’t talk about the union, he just walked around and brought a friend over to look at the buildings.”

Baker said he hadn’t met Saxton in the five years he worked for the three funeral homes. During a subsequent meeting, Baker was informed that the company wasn’t going to voluntarily recognize the union, meaning the proposal would have to go through the NLRB process. 

“They said, ‘We know you think that you should be in the union, but we think you shouldn’t.’ We’re just letting you know because that’s how we’re filing this petition,” Baker said. “Then we went through this intense nine-hour hearing with the labor board in November. … Long story short, the union was victorious in our hearing, and I was found to be eligible for union participation.”

“And then the smear campaign began,” he added.

While employees waited for the NLRB to make a final decision, someone began distributing flyers containing misinformation about the aspiring union. The flyers alleged that Baker was attempting to fool employees and making false promises about the union.

“Aubree never said any of that,” Weshnak said. “It’s very strange that these are the things they’re putting in there. Tell people they cannot vote, or that their [authorization] card signature was their vote? That’s 100 percent not true. It’s just an attempt to trick employees.”

The smear campaign failed, and in mid-January, the NLRB certified the Humboldt Funerary Union. Over the next few weeks, the union started meeting and distributing educational materials to members. They started getting documents together for post-certification. “That’s when the company said they were going to lay people off,” Baker said. 

The union fought back, arguing that the company couldn’t fire anyone because it would go against “status quo,” the agreed-upon terms and conditions of employment. “They can’t make any changes to our terms and conditions of employment without bargaining,” Baker said. 

“We pushed hard,” he continued. “They presented their concerns and reasoning for wanting to do layoffs, certain financial goals they were trying to accomplish. And we replied with, ‘Here’s some things that we will do and some other things you can try. We project that if you do all these things, it would essentially meet your goals.’ They said, ‘No, we need to lay people off.’”

While union leaders weighed the pros and cons of standing their ground to “save as many jobs as possible,” the company started taking actions “to imply closure,” Baker said. 

“They told all of us to stop ordering merchandise, to only sell off the floor,” he said. “We also heard from an employee at the cemetery that the funeral homes were closing. That communication was not happening with the union. So we asked, ‘Are you guys closing or not? We’re hearing rumors, and you’re acting like you’re closing.’ And they said, ‘We haven’t made a final decision yet.’”

Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act bars employers from threatening employees with adverse consequences, such as closing a workplace, if they support a union, engage in union activity, or select a union to represent them. However, it can be incredibly difficult to prove if a violation has occurred, especially if the issues predate the union. 

“Whether or not an argument could be made, we’re a new, independent union. We don’t have money for legal counsel. How could we fight a complex case like this?” Baker asked. “The only last-ditch effort we had to save the company and everyone’s jobs was to relent on layoffs. We made a counterproposal that would preserve the financials. … A few days after we made that offer, they said they were closing all three funeral homes.”

I asked Baker and Weshnak if there was any indication that closure was imminent before unionization efforts started. Baker said he was aware that the company “was not terribly successful,” noting that there was a long-time manager who “was not attending to the financials as carefully and aggressively as they should have.” 

During our conversation, Saxton maintained that the closures have nothing to do with the union, reiterating several times that the decision to shutter the businesses “was purely financial.” He said he wasn’t able to relay to the union just how bad the financial situation had gotten because of the “quiet period,” a term applied to companies in the process of going public. During a “quiet period,” companies must restrict certain communications and public information to ensure investors have access to the same information at the same time. 

“It means that you can’t share information that might look like you’re trying to put your thumb on the scale or intimidate people to vote in a certain way,” Saxton said. “Once we got the request to unionize, I couldn’t come out and say, ‘Hey guys, just want to let you know we’re losing a lot of money.’ That’s not technically allowed. My understanding — I’m not an expert —  is, at that point, you can’t really tell them because it could influence the vote.”

As soon as it was possible, Saxton said he shared financials with the union. At that point, he went over a few restructuring plans with the union but was met with resistance, due to proposed layoffs. “Even if we restructured, it was a Hail Mary to try to not lose money,” he said. “And eventually, we just ran out of time.”

Employees were informed of the impending closure around the beginning of April, and layoffs soon followed. As of this writing, the websites for all three funeral homes indicate business as usual. A call to each business was answered by polite people working for an outsourced phone service company who confirmed that the businesses were not accepting new cases.

Asked whether the businesses and properties were for sale, Saxton laughed at the question and asked if I had taken business classes or understood the value of a business. 

“Would you buy something with perfect knowledge that into the future you would always lose money?” he asked. “No. We’ve listed the real estate at Paul’s for sale. I mean, if somebody wants to buy it and put a funeral home in there, they can do that. I’m told that that’s not the highest and best use for that property, and it’s going to probably end up being something else.”

Saxton said he intends to sell Sanders as well, though the property has yet to be listed. 

Impacts on Remaining Mortuaries

The closure of the three funeral homes means Ayers Family Cremation and Goble’s Fortuna Mortuary will have to pick up the slack. Baker and Weshnak spoke highly of their former competitors but worried that the sudden uptick in cases could overwhelm their facilities.

“We handled over 500 cases a year between the three businesses,” Baker said. “Most of the death care in this community will have to be absorbed by the two other funeral homes, and it’s a huge impact. Not to mention that Sanders Funeral Home has been in business for over 100 years. It’s a huge loss to the community in terms of that legacy and all of the families that have used Sanders’ services over the years.”

Saxton said he’s been in contact with the owners about the closures and said he would be willing to help with transferring cases during the transition. 

Reached for additional comment, Chuck Ayers, owner of Ayers Family Cremation, told the Outpost that his staff is preparing for a larger call volume and plans to expand some of their services to meet local demand. Ayers will take over some of the burial services that were previously provided by Paul’s Chapel. Goble’s will take over the rest, he said. 

“I don’t think it’ll be drastic,” he said. “My understanding is that those three facilities [handle] less than 50 percent of local business. … It’ll be a substantial number of calls for us to take on, but not so much to overwhelm the two remaining mortuaries.”

The thing that keeps coming up, Ayers said, is concerns about prearrangements with the shuttered businesses. People who’ve prepaid for funeral or cremation services can have their arrangements easily moved to Ayers of Goble’s. 

“We’re really getting the brunt of this frustration,” he said. “That money is safe. It doesn’t disappear with the closure of a funeral home. We can help transfer it, but there may be fees owed. It just depends on the case.”

The Outpost also contacted the Humboldt County Coroner’s Office about anticipated impacts associated with the closure. Sergeant Brandon Head said it’s difficult to determine the scale of the impact because the coroner’s office doesn’t keep tabs on each funeral home’s case volume, storage capacity or total cremation numbers. 

If storage capacity becomes an issue, he said the coroner’s division would be willing to “help out where possible if decedents need to stay in storage longer than usual.” In 2024, his office conducted 350 death investigations, nearly 200 of which were determined to be natural causes. Another 400 deaths were reported to the coroner’s division in 2024, but did not require a full investigation.

“The severity of impact will depend on how the remaining companies adapt to the change and handle a likely increase in case load,” he wrote via email. “The remaining mortuaries offer a variety of services. I would hope the community still has access to what they need. It may just take a little longer to put their loved one to rest.”

The closure of the three facilities has hit Baker particularly hard. Not only did he lose the job he loved, but he also lost his on-site housing at the funeral home.

“I’ve lived there for over a year,” he said, noting that it’s common practice for funeral directors to live on-site to accommodate families in distress at any hour. “It’s not the company’s fault at all, but my personal financial situation is such that I may have to file for bankruptcy because of the sudden loss of income. The personal impact is really dire.”

Baker and Weshnak both expressed concerns about job prospects, given that they work in such a niche industry.

“I have a lot of different skills, but they’re all specific trades,” she said. “Could be an office administrator? No. Could I be a service advisor? Yes. Could I be a hairstylist? Yes. Could I work as a death care provider? Yes. … Not only that, but it seems everyone I talk to is getting laid off from their jobs right now. There’s a lot of people looking for work and not enough jobs.”

Neither Baker and Weshnak could say what’s next for their careers, but their dream is to open a new local death care facility that would offer alternative services and green burial practices, including green burials and human composting.

“That would be a huge benefit to our community,” Weshnak said. “We have all of these experienced death care professionals that work in death care for a reason. It’s a labor of love.”

###

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

###

In its first hundred days, through a series of executive orders, the Trump administration has reimagined this country’s social contract with its citizens.

The administration pledges more opportunities and fewer guarantees, less forgiveness and more consequences. Its 139 executive orders issued since Jan. 20 form an outline of American life as imagined by its most conservative residents, concentrating power in a unitary executive who can force changes as transformative as the New Deal.

The deluge means California, usually the state suing to advance a progressive agenda, now finds itself fighting in court to preserve the status quo – playing defense, not offense. Instead of arguing for higher vehicle emissions standards or broadening the definition of a waterway, the state has filed or joined 16 lawsuits against the Trump administration since Jan. 20 on issues ranging from preserving birthright citizenship to restoring billions of dollars in health and medical grants.

That effort continued on Tuesday with a lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s extensive cuts to AmeriCorps.

“We’ve had plenty of instances of California needing to play defense, going back to the Reagan administration,” said Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the UC Berkeley School of Law. “I think what’s different from the first term is qualitatively, how much of a disregard they have for the Constitution and the law.”

Attorney General Rob Bonta, who took office in 2021, said the difference between the first and second Trump administrations has been the speed and pure number of executive orders filed early in his tenure.

“The comparison with Trump 1.0 shows that it is high volume, high speed (this time),” Bonta said. “We’ve brought a lawsuit more than once a week in the first hundred days, and during Trump 1.0 there were about 120 lawsuits over four years.

“We’re gonna hit around 100 at this rate in two years, so it’s almost double the pace.”

States and organizations challenging Trump in his first term won close to 70% of their legal battles, albeit a number of them were abandoned when Trump left office in 2021. That encompassed 123 lawsuits over four years, at a cost of about $10 million per year. This time around, state legislators set aside $50 million to cover the state’s legal bills.

Bonta said he expects the pace of the lawsuits to continue.

“Any time and every time the Trump administration breaks the law, we will take them to court,” Bonta said. “It’s very not normal and also not acceptable that we have an administration that so blatantly, brazenly, frequently and consistently breaks the law.”

The verbs used in the executive orders promise to “unleash,” “restore” and “reform” various elements of American life, from oil and gas rights to dominion over the ocean. One order targets “the Obama-Biden war on showers.” But the most far-reaching executive orders are the ones in California’s sights, including tariffs, birthright citizenship and voting rights.

Those at the forefront of conservative legal theory find the executive orders to be a vindication of a textualist, originalist read of the Constitution and an end to the “administrative state” in which regulators and bureaucrats are politically and legally insulated from the decisions they make.

Conservatives celebrate Trump’s strategy

One of the earliest defenses of the Trump administration’s legal strategy was delivered by Catholic University of America law professor J. Joel Alicea at the conservative Heritage Foundation’s Edwin Meese III Originalism Lecture in March.

“Over the last three months, we have seen President Trump directly challenge the delegation of power by Congress to administrative agencies and the insulation of power from presidential supervision,” Alicea said. “Contrary to the press’s depiction of such actions, they are hopeful developments for the rule of law.”

The stakes are high, Alicea said, and the opportunity for constitutional originalists is now, after more than a century of progressivism.

“It required two progressive presidents of extraordinary determination and political skill — Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Delano Roosevelt — to create the administrative state and impose a progressive constitutional and political theory on our structure of government,” Alicea said. “It stands to reason that it will require another president of extraordinary determination and political skill to undo what his predecessors accomplished.”

The presidential administration California is fighting is not the one the state’s lawyers first faced off with in 2017. This time, the Trump administration came better prepared, worked faster and had a more concrete vision for a legal framework, Chemerinsky said.

“I think that they were so much better prepared,” Chemerinsky said. “And they really had the flood-the-zone mentality.”

The difference between the first and second Trump administration’s legal strategy is the 2025 version’s contempt for due process and the rule of law, Chemerinsky said.

“He didn’t try to end birthright citizenship in his first term,” Chemerinsky said. “He didn’t try to put people in a prison in El Salvador in his first term, he didn’t claim the ability to refuse to spend money appropriated by federal statute in his first term, he didn’t claim that he could fire anyone in the executive branch, even if there’s a statute limiting it.

“He’s taking executive power so much further than the first term, than any president ever has.”

Where will U.S. Supreme Court draw the line?

In its lawsuit against the Trump administration over its order that voters provide proof of citizenship, California’s attorneys alleged that the executive order interferes with the state’s right to govern itself and usurps Congress’s power to legislate.

“It bears emphasizing: the President has no power to do any of this,” the lawsuit asserts. “Neither the Constitution nor Congress has authorized the President to impose documentary proof of citizenship requirements or to modify State mail-ballot procedures.”

Much of the fight over that order and the others challenged by California will take place under the shadow of a U.S. Supreme Court that has consistently voted 6-3 to uphold elements of the Trump agenda.

“I think that the (Supreme Court) ultimately is gonna rule in favor of Trump’s ability to fire members of agencies,” Chemerinsky said. “I think that there’s others that Trump has done, like end birthright citizenship, put people in prison in El Salvador, where I don’t think he’s likely to succeed.”

Chemerinsky said he’s not sure where the Supreme Court could or would draw a line in the sand.

“I would’ve thought the line would be taking people, putting them in El Salvador and claiming that no court could provide release,” Chemerinsky said. “I still think that’s going to be the red line, but I don’t think it’s gonna be unanimous.”