Two candidates who want to help lead Humboldt County as Fifth District Supervisor fielded questions from voters in a forum Tuesday night hosted by the League of Women Voters of Humboldt County.

Though the two candidates seemed to mostly agree on policy positions they were asked about, Mary Burke emphasized her management and financial experience in McKinleyville government and a local nonprofit, while Evan Schwartz leaned into his everyman status and business experience.

The Fifth District Supervisor represents a wide geographic stretch of the northern and eastern communities of Humboldt County with roughly 28,000 residents — including McKinleyville, Trinidad, Orick, Hoopa, Willow Creek and Weitchpec.

Voters in the district will decide between the two on the June 2 ballot. 

Both candidates said their number one priority, if elected, is economic development. With two weeks out from election day, they made their case for the position at the televised event.

Thoughts on McKinleyville projects

Burke and Schwartz each live in McKinleyville, which hosts over half of the population of the district, and addressed questions submitted to the League to weigh in on a handful of proposed developments in the unincorporated community.

On the topic of a proposed Amazon “last-mile” distribution warehouse near the Humboldt County Airport, each lamented the company but pointed out the warehouse falls within the intended use of the land, zoning wise. They each spoke in support for a community benefits agreement with Amazon.

When asked about the Humboldt Commons project, a nonprofit senior living community planned on 14.6 acres south of Hiller Road, they both hailed it, with Burke saying “it’s the perfect place for us to densify housing and development.” One concern she noted was the safety of seniors navigating nearby roadways. 

Schwartz agreed on both fronts, similarly calling for plans for sidewalks and the like. He noted he’s been run over by a car before, when speaking about pedestrian safety during the forum.

As for the so-called “road diet” — a proposal that would take roughly a half a mile of Central Avenue and reduce it from five lanes to three —Schwartz strongly opposed it, at least for now without additional connectivity.

[CLARIFICATION: Schwartz emailed the Outpost to emphasize he’s been against the road diet since 2013. The term “for now” originally used in this story meant without added transportation improvements.]

He pointed to emergency access and circulation problems.

“I think that it’s impractical to have traffic calming measures on our only main road without additional connectivity,” he said, calling for more county funding from Measure O and repurposing of the bridle trail, rather than traffic calming measures.

Burke agreed McKinleyville’s connectivity and pedestrian access is a problem. She said the road diet plan “may not be the right solution for that road, not until we get to see what better circulation looks like.”

She wants a traffic circulation study that includes bikes and pedestrians, a plan she worked to get a grant for while directing McKinleyville Community Services District.

“As supervisor, I will make sure that there is a comprehensive circulation plan that takes into account the needs of pedestrians and bicycles as well,” she said.

As for other parts of the district, like north and east, each touched on ideas and concerns. 

Schwartz called for keeping water in the Trinity River and fire management, speaking in support of prescribed burns using tribal burn methods.

Burke called for community-based plans for emergencies designed to connect community services with Humboldt County’s office of emergency services. She pointed to issues like the Missing and Murdered Indigenous Persons crisis and mental health in Hoopa.

Both saw potential in Orick’s proposed community wastewater treatment plan.

Economy and Housing

Both aim to prioritize economic development and saw changes in the county’s permitting process as key to address economic and housing struggles.

Schwartz called for the removal of ambiguity from the permitting process, something he said would also help with housing, and for zoning changes to allow for development. He also sees potential for more tourism development in Orick, if people who live there want it.

Burke spoke in support of a county tourism plan and upcoming developments in the district. She pointed to the county’s proposed “one-stop shop,” for the public for permitting, a center the county wants to develop at Eureka’s old Kmart, when asked about housing affordability. She said the center could help builders know what to expect from the process.

The project recently was noted as having a timeline of 5-7 years at a Eureka planning commission meeting.

Approach

While the pair agreed on many fronts, their methods to address problems were different. 

Burke pointed to her emotional intelligence and communication abilities. 

As for connecting with people across the district, “I would plan on setting regular office hours out in the eastern part, Willow Creek, and Hoopa, and setting those office hours ahead of time, so people can rely on me being there,” she said, along with holding and attending meetings.

Schwartz, meanwhile, said his advantage was listening and learning from people.

“I’m happy to engage. I really enjoy learning from other people’s perspectives, and as Fifth District Supervisor, my role largely is going to be to serve the community,” he said, saying he aims to speak to different groups and understand where everyone’s coming from.

On a question about addressing financial problems, he said he’d personally do a ride-along with each county department to find areas to cut stop wasting money, and called for increasing the sales tax base in the Fifth District.

[CLARIFICATION: Evan Schwartz emailed the Outpost Thursday morning to specify his goal is to “identify redundancy and inefficiency, not to make cuts.”]

Meanwhile, Burke spoke in support of ongoing county efforts to address the budget deficit, like ending draws from the general fund and the assessor’s office catching up on a backlog of properties to boost taxes.

And she spoke in support of raises for county staff, while acknowledging it’s going to be tricky while managing the budget.

Both candidates said they supported a HCSO oversight committee and adding more trails.

In closing, Schwartz emphasized he wanted to bring his authentic self to the Board.

Earlier, he said he wanted to run to get the county back on track financially, noting his small business and financial management experience (he is the founder of several businesses).

“I have not solicited for or accepted any endorsements, because this is a nonpartisan position. So, I did not feel that it was right to ask anybody to endorse me. Similarly, I did not take one penny from anybody to run my race, because I was raised not to take money from people, because people tend to hold it over your head. I am not a politician, I am a community member that understands politics,” he said.

Meanwhile, Burke’s endorsement list is lengthy. She was endorsed by current Fifth District supervisor Steve Madrone way back when he announced he wouldn’t run again in spring 2025.

She’s also endorsed by Congressman Jared Huffman, state assemblymember Chris Rogers, state senator Mike McGuire, Humboldt County Third District Supervisor Mike Wilson, Fourth District Supervisor Natalie Arroyo, the Yurok Tribal Council, Humboldt County Democrats, the Humboldt Deputy Sheriffs Organization and multiple local unions.

She said after knocking on doors, she’s been inspired by the people she’s spoken to.

“You show up, you’re working hard for the vision for a healthy, prosperous Humboldt County, one where we all live well, and you’ve shown up for me too,” she said.

She said she’s motivated to put her decades of experience as an elected official, with watershed restoration and community efforts, to work. 

The forum was hosted by Anne Hartline, voter service chair for the League of Women Voters of Humboldt County, and streamed on KEET-TV.

Does anything inspire more emotion than bicycles? (In this country, at least.) Riding them can make people rapturous with joy, and at the same time, make others rage, sometimes to a point where almost killing someone sounds like a fine idea. The city of Eureka released results from a survey completed by over 1,000 people about the C Street Bicycle Boulevard and the yet-to-begin G Street Bicycle Boulevard, and the results make it clear that folks here aren’t immune from their cortisol-spiking properties.

“You fuckers keep adding bike lanes we dont want,” reads one answer to an open-ended question asking respondents for their thoughts on the G Street project. “The street is for cars. Fuck YOU!”

Most of the survey-takers weren’t filled with quite as much vitriol, but the data definitely indicates that most of them don’t like the completed C Street project, and don’t want another one. Close to 50% of respondents said they were “strongly opposed” to building island medians; another 18% “opposed” the idea. Only 20% favored them. The mood was even more tilted against “vehicle limiting installations,” partial or full traffic closures that allow cyclists to move across traffic safely. Almost two-thirds of the 1,047 responses were against the suggestion. A paltry 16%, tallied between both categories, approved. 

The outlook was a little brighter for “mini traffic circles.” About 46% were against them — either strongly or normally — and 35% liked the idea. 

Almost half of the respondents said they never ride bikes in Eureka. Almost all — 90% — said their primary mode of transportation was a motor vehicle. 6% ride every day, and 13% do it every week. 

The city of Eureka said in a Facebook post that the final design hasn’t been chosen, and that community feedback will guide the details. It’s not going to turn G Street into a one-way or limit parking.

The people who wrote 1,614 responses to the open-ended questions aren’t entirely against the bicycle boulevards, but the ones that are really hate them.

“I HATE IT!!!” someone wrote. “I LIVE ON C ST AND YOU DID IT WITHOUT EVEN CONSULTING US!!! AND IT ISN’T LIKE YOUR GOING TO LISTEN TO ANYONE WITH THIS SURVEY!!!! WE NEED NEW CITY LEADER NOT THE GROUP WE HAVE IN THERE NOW!!!!”

“THE DUMBEST THING THAT YOU COULD HAVE DONE!” wrote another. 

“I honestly cannot think of a more ridiculous design than the one that has been implemented,” some guy wrote at 2:30 a.m., according to the timestamp. “The idea that the City thinks there are enough bicyclists in Eureka (2.5% of all workers in Eureka as stated in the final Eureka Bike Plan) to ruin a perfectly good two way street that travels from Harris Street to Downtown is unbelievable.”

Plenty of other people complimented the safety features of the C Street project, and were excited for another one.

“I would love to see G street upkept and used more often!” wrote one. “I think it has great potential for this.”

The G Street Bicycle Boulevard Project Manager, Brittany Powell, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

PREVIOUSLY

• Search Warrant Served at Miranda’s Rescue Amid Allegations of Felony Animal Abuse, Fraud and Conspiracy
• Fortuna, Ferndale and Rio Dell Pause Animal Services Contracts With Miranda’s Rescue as Sheriff’s Office Investigation Continues

###

In the affidavit for a search warrant served at Miranda’s Rescue on May 1, Humboldt County Sheriff’s Detective Julian Aguilera reveals that the Sheriff’s Office has taken eight dead dogs into evidence. The dog carcasses were covered in dirt and blood, and some if not all have what appear to be bullet holes in their heads, the affidavit says.

According to Aguilera’s sworn statement, two women, one of whom lives on the property right next to the nonprofit animal rescue in Fortuna, admitted to trespassing onto Miranda’s Rescue property in the dead of night and digging up the dead dogs from a mass grave. The women said they’d captured owner Shannon Miranda on a motion-activated trail camera earlier that day using a tractor to dump the carcasses into a hole, Aguilera reports in his statement.

The affidavit goes on to say that Miranda, the 55-year-old man who founded the animal rescue operation 28 years ago, lied about the fate of at least one of those dead dogs, telling staff at the Oakland shelter where it had come from that the dog been adopted. Miranda also lied to the Sheriff’s Office, Aguilera statement says, and after investigating the situation and interviewing the key people involved, the detective concluded that Shannon Miranda had killed those eight dogs as part of a money-making scheme.

“[I]t is my belief that Shannon murdered these dogs so that he could accept more from Oakland Animal Services for financial gain,” Aguilera’s affidavit says.

The operations manager of the Oakland Animal Services Shelter, Melinda Tierney, told Aguilera that Miranda would get paid $400 to $1,000 for every dog he accepted from the shelter, via a nonprofit affiliate. The Oakland shelter was transferring hundreds of dogs per year to Miranda’s Rescue, enough for him to generate at least $178,000 in revenue over the past three years alone, the affidavit says.

Meanwhile, public records reveal that over the past two years at least, Miranda’s Rescue was receiving hundreds more dogs from shelters scattered across the state, from Del Norte County to Palm Springs.

The Sheriff’s Office’s Major Crimes Division is now investigating Miranda over “credible” allegations of felony animal abuse, animal cruelty, fraud and conspiracy.

Attempts to reach Miranda for this story were unsuccessful. Calls to his cell phone trigger a voicemail message from Miranda inviting the caller to leave a message, but a recording then says the mailbox cannot accept messages. Texts sent to the phone showed they went through but they did not receive a reply.

More than 600 dogs received in a year

Aguilera’s affidavit notes that Miranda’s Rescue advertises itself as a no-kill rescue, adoption and sanctuary facility. As a 501(c)(3) nonprofit operating the rescue operation and four local thrift stores, the organization is “encouraged” to abide by the same guidelines and recommendations as shelters in the state, but it’s not mandated.

“There is no regulatory body that oversees Miranda’s Rescue,” Aguilera attests.

Miranda’s Rescue has formal Memorandums of Understanding with a variety of cities, counties, animal shelters and nonprofits around the state and beyond. This includes shelters in Oakland, Berkeley, Contra Costa County, Monterey County and Solano County. The cities of Fortuna, Rio Dell and Ferndale all paused their contracts once news of this investigation broke, and Oakland has reportedly done the same.

The Sheriff’s Office has obtained copies of the contracts that Miranda’s Rescue has with several of these government organizations, and they show the prices that Miranda requests for taking in dogs, according to Aguilera’s affidavit. While the local governments pay him a flat monthly fee — $450 per month from Ferndale, $800 per month from Fortuna and $1,450 per month from Rio Dell — other shelters (or the nonprofit organizations that partner with them), pay between $400 and $1,000 per dog.

“Of all the agreements, Solano County is the only shelter that has a term listed [stating] that Miranda’s Rescue may not euthanize a dog to create space for additional dogs,” Aguilera’s statement says. “In the past year, it is estimated that Miranda has received approximately over 600 dogs from various shelters. This number does not include any animals privately surrendered to Miranda’s Rescue. It is estimated that Miranda’s [Rescue] received approximately $510,000 in payment for caring for these dogs.”

Sabrina Woods is a volunteer at Solano County Animal Shelter. In a phone interview Monday she told the Outpost that this shelter alone sent 126 dogs to Miranda’s Rescue in 2025, via a nonprofit rescue partner, at a rate of $500 per dog.

Jennifer Raymond, founder of the nonprofit Humboldt Spay/Neuter Network and one of the women whose trespass operation triggered the current Sheriff’s Office investigation, has long been suspicious of operations at Miranda’s Rescue, and a little over a year ago she purchased the parcel right next to it.

“And I thought, ‘This is the way to find out, because I will be right there,’” she said. 

Asked whether she really bought the property for that sole purpose, Raymond replied, “I did.” After a beat she added, “I mean, it happens to have a wonderful old Victorian on it, and I love fixing up old houses. But … I bought it specifically so I could see what went on at Miranda’s Rescue, and to try to figure out where these animals were going.”

‘Guilty of lying’

On April 27, the morning after Raymond and her friend Jenna Moore (aka Jenna Kilby) say they dug up the dog bodies, Detective Aguilera interviewed Miranda at his Fortuna property. In his affidavit the detective says Miranda was “very open with law enforcement,” opening his home and offering a tour of the facility.

He denied killing and dumping the eight dogs that had been found.

“Shannon advised that he was not truly a no-kill shelter and that he did the best he could with the resources available to him, … ” Aguilera’s statement says. Miranda told the detective that he typically employs a veterinarian to euthanize animals but occasionally has to shoot one himself when “immediate action was required to prevent further suffering,” the affidavit says. 

Miranda admitted to taking compensation for surrendered dogs but said he uses the money for their care. He also admitted to being over capacity, with 69 dogs currently onsite despite terms in his conditional use permit allowing a maximum of 60.

Also on April 27, Raymond and Moore called the Sheriff’s Office that to report that they’d seen multiple large loads of dirt delivered to Miranda’s Rescue a day earlier and deposited in the same field where they’d dug up the dead dogs.

Aguilera saw the dirt mounds during his tour of the facility and asked Miranda about it. “Shannon informed us that he was trying to level the field for his horses,” the affidavit says.

Once the bodies of the dead dogs were obtained by the Sheriff’s Office, investigators found that six of the eight had been microchipped for identification.

Moore had told Aguilera that she’d identified one of the dogs as Zora, a big, black female with clipped ears who’d recently been shipped to Miranda’s Rescue by Oakland Animal Services. Aguilera spoke with that shelter’s operations manager, Melinda Tierney, who confirmed that Zora had been delivered to Miranda’s less than a month earlier. She said Zora had no temperament issues and was in good health at the time.

A social media image showing Zora before she was sent to Miranda’s Rescue.

“Melinda stated that a shelter employee received a picture message from Shannon Miranda on April 25, 2026, of Zora on a leash with the message, ‘Zora adopted,’” Aguilera’s statement says. 

Tierney told Aguilera that the shelter had arranged to bring seven more dogs to Miranda’s Rescue a few days later. Aguilera’s interview with Tierney led him to conclude that Miranda had killed those eight dogs so he could accept another lucrative shipment from Oakland, the affidavit says.

Woods, the volunteer from Solano County, told the Outpost that she tracked other dogs from the hole to shelters in Oakland, Berkeley and Palm Springs. One of the dogs, named Charmaine, was described in a social media post as being friendly with people and other dogs.

Charmaine, another of the dogs allegedly dug up on Miranda’s property, in a social media post.

Woods said she personally visited the shelters in Oakland and Berkeley so she could present the evidence she’d gathered.

On Monday, in a story by the Times-Standard, Oakland Animal Services Director Joe DeVries said his shelter immediately stopped transferring dogs to Miranda’s Rescue after learning about the investigation and hearing from “a Solano County volunteer.”

Woods confirmed that this was her.

On May 1, the day Miranda’s Rescue was searched, Miranda spoke on the phone with Tierney, the Oakland shelter’s operations manager. “He again lied to her and told her that Zora was adopted out,” Aguilera’s affidavit says.

Later that day, Miranda spoke with DeVries, who said he wanted to retrieve any remaining Oakland dogs from Miranda’s Rescue. Miranda told DeVries that he did not have good records and said several of the dogs he’d recently received from Oakland had to be “put down,” or had jumped out of cars, the search warrant says.

“Shannon admitted [to DeVries that] he lied about Zora” but said he did so “to spare the transport officer’s feelings,” Aguilera’s statement says. Miranda later told Humboldt County Animal Control Officer Andre Hale that he’d had to put Zora down because the dog had killed a cat and bit him. 

“Shannon told Andra [sic] that he was guilty of lying,” Aguilera’s statement says. 

A records check on Miranda revealed that he had a misdemeanor embezzlement conviction in 1993. Despite the age of the conviction and the fact that it was expunged from his record earlier this year, Aguilera says in his affidavit, “it shows a pattern of Shannon’s behavior in business.” 

According to the affidavit, Oakland Animal Services transferred 445 animals to Miranda’s Rescue from 2023 through 2025. If Miranda charged $400 for each of those dogs (the lowest amount specified in his agreement with the shelter’s affiliate organization), then “Miranda’s Rescue would have generated approximately $178,000 in revenue,” from that shelter alone.

Aguilera concludes that Miranda is “killing the dogs for financial gain” and says in his affidavit, “It is believed there may be more victims of potential abuse or fraud.”

‘Very complicated’

The Outpost recently obtained heavily redacted copies of Sheriff’s Office reports with similar allegations. Two years ago, for example, the office received a call from someone reporting that Miranda’s Rescue was receiving a $500 surrender fee and then “just putting the animals down under false pretenses of rehoming [them].”

In February 2025, the Sheriff’s Office received another report from someone who said they’d surrendered three healthy dogs to Miranda’s Rescue and at least two wound up dead. The report says Miranda confirmed that all three dogs had died but he didn’t have euthanasia records. 

“Per Miranda one died in kennel, one [was] euthanized by adoptive owner, one died in foster care.”

Reached via phone on Tuesday, Humboldt County Undersheriff J.D. Braud acknowledged that despite all of the evidence gathered thus far, this remains a “very complicated” investigation.

“We’re trying to utilize all options, including calling in additional resources or experts where we can,” he said. 

Aguilera’s affidavit says, “Due to some of the dogs being shot in the head, I request to seize the firearms located at his property to ensure no other dog is killed, and in order to locate the firearm that was used in Zora’s death and to prevent the killing of any future dog.”

He goes on to say, “I believe that he [Miranda] is prepared and able to destroy evidence.”

According to the search warrant return inventory, the Humboldt County Sheriff’s Office seized the following from Miranda’s Rescue on May 1:

• a Ruger 10/22 rifle with ammo
• a Beretta .380 pistol with 11 boxes of ammo
• a Remington 870 model shotgun with ammo
• a pellet gun, bb gun and air rifle
• adoption records and related paperwork
• a gray tote, and
• various electronics, including an iPhone, a laptop and a flash drive

Raymond said she knows that she may well be criminally liable for trespassing, but that doesn’t bother her.

“I have to go to jail for this I’m willing to, because I will get great pleasure sitting in a court of law under oath, talking about what I’ve witnessed,” she said. “Because it is absolutely abominable that anyone would do this — to the animals, and also to the people who thought they were saving those animals.”

The Sheriff’s Office is requesting any tips or information relevant to this investigation be called in to their tip line at 707-268-2539

A bedeviling lawsuit filed against the city of Arcata a year and a half ago claiming that the city unlawfully constructed a roundabout on private property doesn’t seem to be much closer to completion than when it was filed. 

The suit, filed by Marc Delany and his son, AO Kirki Ben Tut Malik Silkiss, claims their property lost more than $500,000 in value because of land they say was taken by the project. Their property, 2212 Jacoby Creek Road, borders the new-ish roundabout on Old Arcata Road. When it was constructed, the city also added a sidewalk down to the roundabout, which necessitated expanding the road. Delany and Silkiss say that they lost parking space for 11 cars. The property houses multiple businesses, including their own: StreamGuys, an audio streaming-services business. 

Delany and Silkiss weren’t the first party to fire a salvo; Arcata sued them first. In Sept. 2024, a month before Delany and Silkiss filed, Arcata requested an injunction that would force Delany and Silkiss to let the city finish the roundabout. In July 2024, before work began on the property, Delany walked up to several construction workers and threatened them, according to court filings. Construction halted. 

A week later, Arcata received a letter from Silkiss’ attorney challenging the validity of the encroachment permit Arcata got from Humboldt County for the project. He claimed it was outside of the county’s right-of-way. (The city’s attorneys noted that the county maintained the storm drain, drain pipe, and ditch they worked on the whole time Silkiss owned the property.)

Work stopped on the project for more than two months while the city and Silkiss attempted to negotiate a deal. In September, the city’s attorneys thought they’d reached one: the city wouldn’t pave outside the county’s drainage area (except on one 280 square foot chunk south of the driveway), and Silkiss and Delany would let work resume. Then, a twist: “without explanation,” Silkiss’ lawyer, Chris Hamer, emailed the city telling them the deal was off, according to the filing.

The city was a little desperate, show the court filings. Arcata needed the injunction. If construction wasn’t finished by October, it would have to be “winterized” for inclement weather, which would cost $500,000. It would also have to pay the contractor additional fees to “remobilize,” and control traffic through the unfinished construction area. 

Humboldt County’s court granted the injunction, as well as a temporary restraining order that prohibited Silkiss and Delany from threatening any construction workers or city employees and from preventing them from finishing the project. It was completed in late 2024, but the Delanys’ lawsuit is still snaking through court. They claim that the city unlawfully utilized some of their property to expand the road, build a sidewalk, extend an electrical conduit, and store construction equipment while the project was ongoing. An update, filed in April, says that both the Delanys and the city would prefer to settle the suit before it goes to trial; however, Hamer had spinal fusion surgery earlier this month, and won’t be able to meet for mediation before late June or July.

The Delanys weren’t completely wrong. In Dec. 2024, Arcata admitted that some of the project — a bit of the extended Jacoby Creek Road — was built on the Delany’s property, but claimed that it had the right to through a prescriptive easement. The city’s attorneys denied the other claims. 

Delany opposed the project long before it even began. According to reporting done by the Mad River Union, he appealed to the Coastal Commission in 2022, questioning the validity of Arcata’s Coastal Development Permit that allowed it to alter the road. He lost. An account with his name once commented 18 times on a 2021 Outpost article about the project, opposing it and asserting that the project was a ruse that would allow Arcata to annex Bayside.

“That intersection is not in Arcata, and that land is used by the grange, and bike enthusiast for parking, overflow parking during events and any fucking anything Bayside wants,” he wrote. “Its NOT Arcata… So go fuck youself.”

Arcata City Manager Merritt Perry told the Outpost that the roundabout was built to establish a clear transition from the city into unincorporated county land, and provide a safer intersection.

“I think it’s a great project,” Perry said. “I think it’s a net benefit to the surrounding property owners. The project was a success in many ways, and it would be nice to be able to put the complaint from this adjacent property owner to rest, and to move on from this project that has provided a lot of benefit to the community.”

Hamer, still recovering from surgery, wasn’t available for comment. Silkiss and Delany didn’t respond to a request for comment.

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

###

With President Donald Trump dragging them down in the polls, California Republicans are repackaging one of his core crusades into an idea they hope will be more palatable to voters.

They are framing their successful push to get a voter ID law on the November ballot as a “common sense” measure.

“We’ve structured this initiative based on what voters across the political spectrum would want,” Republican Assemblymember Carl DeMaio of San Diego said in a March interview, adding that showing an ID at the polls shouldn’t be any different than using one to buy alcohol or pass airport security.

DeMaio and other backers point to polling that shows 56% of California voters support requiring ID at the ballot box and that most states require or recommend an ID to vote.

But even in their pursuit to appeal to moderates, GOP lawmakers haven’t given up pushing Trump’s debunked claims of widespread voter fraud.

Last month, GOP legislators held a “stop the fraud” press conference, where they alleged without proof rampant corruption across state government, from elections to homelessness programs, and urged Newsom to call a special election to “audit” the alleged fraud.

The polling they point to also shows, however, that support for requiring identification at the polls drops to 39% when voters are told it is backed by DeMaio and could suppress turnout.

Voting rights groups say the measure would create needless barriers and would stifle turnout among low-income and disabled voters.

Current law already requires counties to routinely review voter registration databases to remove anyone who is ineligible to vote in case of a move, incarceration or death.

“Those checks and that maintenance of that list is already happening,” League of Women Voters executive director Jenny Farrell said. “We don’t need to erect new barriers.”

Voter suppression concerns tank voter ID support

If passed, as many as 1 million eligible voters could be kept from voting. Another 500,000 aren’t registered and don’t have the necessary documents it would require, according to UCLA Voting Rights Project director Matt Barreto.

“There’s been a very consistent finding in almost any state, in any environment, that lower-income and working-class voters are less likely to have an updated, valid ID,” he said.

Labor groups who bankrolled Democrats’ campaign for last year’s redistricting proposal, Proposition 50, are funding a similar opposition campaign focused on Trump’s push for a proof-of-citizenship bill in Congress.

Meanwhile, Democrats want to increase penalties for violating election laws after Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, a candidate for governor, seized hundreds of thousands of ballots earlier this year over baseless claims of voter fraud in the 2025 election.

Bianco, who seized the ballots in response to unproven claims from a right-wing activist group, supports voter ID.

Critics say he’s stoking fear among voters and that there are already adequate safeguards.

“We have a two-person rule where no ballots are ever in an area that’s not with at least two people observing what’s happening,” said Gail Pellerin, Democratic chair of the Assembly elections committee, at a UCLA elections panel last month.

Ramping up the base?

Experts agree voter fraud is rare.

However, fears about election integrity have risen among Republicans since Trump falsely claimed the 2020 election was stolen, spurring GOP lawmakers across the country to introduce bills seeking to tighten voter restrictions.

This is DeMaio’s third attempt at a voter ID ballot initiative. It qualified for the ballot last month.

Assemblymember Carl DeMaio announces that supporters of the CA Voter ID Initiative will submit more than 1.3 million signatures to qualify the measure for the November 2026 ballot during a press conference at the west steps of the state Capitol in Sacramento on March 3, 2026. Photo by Fred Greaves for CalMatters

Strategists say there’s little evidence that ballot initiatives actually turn out voters, but this measure is something intended to activate voters in what will likely be a difficult election year for Republicans.

“Issues like this, that are kind of red meat issues for Republicans when the governor’s race is fairly lackluster, it helps,” Stutzman said. “It’s all upside. It’s not going to hurt Republicans to have this on the ballot.”

Following bruising losses after Prop. 50 and in other states, GOP leaders are hoping to hold onto three statehouse seats they flipped in 2024 and gain others. But Trump — and his push for national voter restrictions — threatens Republicans’ success at the ballot box.

“It’s a loop that Republicans keep hammering on, either fraud or ineptitude, or waste in dollars,” Stutzman said. “It’s kind of traditional Republican messaging.”

###

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

###

California lawmakers are poised to kill legislation that would have forced them to immediately release lobbying letters from business and advocacy groups and given the public a new window into the secretive world of Capitol lobbying.

Two bills that would have required the Legislature to post the letters lawmakers receive from registered lobbyists and groups trying to influence legislation never received a hearing in the California Assembly.

CalMatters has been trying for more than a year to get real-time access to these public records to add transparency to the legislative process.The letters detail the concerns or approval groups express about the hundreds of bills lawmakers introduce each year, often passing them after just a few minutes of debate and public testimony.

Now, the Democratic lawmaker in charge of the committee that would have to approve the measures for them to advance says the Legislature doesn’t need a law to put the letters online.

Assembly Rules Committee Chairperson Blanca Pacheco “supports the goal of improving public access to position letters,” and is “interested in identifying practical ways to make that information more accessible without requiring legislation,” according to her spokesperson, Alina Evans.

Evans’ emailed statement makes clear it’s unlikely the public will be able to read the letters online any time soon.

“Before any letters could be posted or distributed outside of the Assembly network, there are technical, privacy, accessibility and cost considerations that need to be addressed,” Evans said.

She added that Assembly employees are assessing whether the current system used to submit the letters “can be updated in a way that is secure and adheres to accessibility requirements. A larger rebuild may require a more formal process and funding discussion.”

The bills’ likely demise disappoints a prominent good-government group, which is pushing for the legislation.

“We think allowing the public to have access to these position letters is just going to make the policymaking process fundamentally more transparent,” said Daniel Conway, a lobbyist for Common Cause California.

The group notes that at least 10 state legislatures post advocacy letters online. That includes Republican-controlled states such as West Virginia and Democratically-controlled states such as Hawaii.

“If advocacy materials are important enough for legislators and staff to review while making policy decisions, the public should generally have timely access to those same materials,” Common Cause wrote on its website.

Common Cause says that posting letters for every bill online would help people better understand legislation, identify policy disputes earlier and encourage constructive dialogue and compromise.The measures are Assembly Bill 2063 by Republican Greg Wallis of Rancho Mirage and Assembly Bill 2557 by Rebecca Bauer-Kahan, a Democrat who represents the San Ramon area.

Neither lawmaker responded to CalMatters’ interview requests. A spokesperson for Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas of Salinas referred CalMatters to the Assembly Rules Committee.

CalMatters seeks to make letters public

CalMatters has sought to obtain the letters as they are filed through the Legislature’s online position-letter portal, which lawmakers and their employees can access but the public cannot.

Under the current system, legislative staff provide the letters upon request for individual bills, a process that’s time-consuming and tedious.

CalMatters seeks to post every letter from every lobbyist and advocacy group for every bill on its Digital Democracy database, which is free to the public.

The letters would help Digital Democracy create a more accurate assessment of who supports and opposes each bill in the Legislature.

Without the letters, Digital Democracy can only track lobbyist and other advocate positions through their brief testimony at committee hearings or if their positions are listed in the public bill analyses written by legislative staff.

The Legislature denied CalMatters’ request, made under the Legislative Open Records Act, to get direct access to the position letter portal.

Instead, CalMatters has begun requesting the letters in bulk from the Assembly and the Senate. They have provided some of the letters but long after they are most valuable.

For instance, CalMatters asked for the letters the Assembly received from Jan. 1 to Feb. 10. The Assembly provided them earlier this month.

By then, many of the bills had advanced to the next chamber, been heavily modified or had already died.

Common Cause said that’s a problem. Ordinary Californians and small advocacy groups who don’t have the direct access to lawmakers and their staffers that well-funded, sophisticated lobbying organizations have, limiting their ability to shape legislation.

“Journalists, advocates, and members of the public frequently need access to advocacy materials before hearings and votes occur — not after legislation has already moved forward,” Common Cause said on its website.

Patricia “Pat” Ann Wilsey (Richardson, Lendahl, Taylor, Clark, Werner), 85, passed away on May 9, 2026, in Eureka. Born on June 4, 1940, in Scotia, Pat lived a vibrant and multifaceted life filled with creativity, love and cherished moments with family and friends. Pat was the daughter of Andrew Gerald Richardson and Mildred (Millie) Florence Richardson. She grew up alongside her sisters Gloria Huber and Judith Price. One of her fondest memories growing up was when her father built them a play house and her mother planted a Cecile Brunner Climbing Rose in front of the window that smelled heavenly, every time she caught a whiff of that fragrant rose she would be transported back to her childhood.

Throughout her life, Pat demonstrated a remarkable ability to adapt and thrive wherever she called home. Though she lived in many places over the years, her heart was tied to Cecilville, nestled along the beautiful Salmon River. Cecilville was where Pat and her husband Glenn Wilsey built their home together — a place surrounded by nature’s beauty and the warmth of family and friends. A talented and prolific quilter, Pat poured her heart into every creation. Each quilt she made was a testament to her love for those who received them — crafted with care (and perhaps a touch of humor when nearing completion). She said that no quilt was complete if it didn’t have an “oops” block. She was fortunate to spend the last 5 years creating a vast number of quilts celebrating life events for family and friends while also completing many of her mother’s unfinished projects - The sentiment often expressed in our home was “she who died with the most unfinished projects won”, her daughter is not sure yet who the winner is but it may be a close tie between Pat and her mom Millie. Just recently she was able to work with her niece Julie on a quilt that was started by her sister Gloria over 70 years ago, those were the times that she loved the most by spending time and sharing stories and knowledge.

Pat had an enduring love for gardening, cultivating both food and flowers with equal enthusiasm. Her practical yet thoughtful approach to life made her a cornerstone of support for those around her. Whether cooking up something delicious in the kitchen or engaging in spirited debates around the table, Pat’s presence was always felt deeply by those fortunate enough to share time with her. A lover of games, Pat especially enjoyed winning — a playful competitiveness that endeared her to family gatherings. Her ability to reminisce about shared memories brought laughter and connection to all who listened.

Pat’s legacy is carried forward by her loving family: daughter Andrea Arnold; son-in-law Karl (Buck) Arnold; son Tony Byram; daughter-in-law Lynn Byram; son-in-law Jack Fearing; grandchildren Angela Winogradov, Karl Arnold, Kacey Arnold, Amy Beckley, Tracy Fearing, Kehli Saucier, Gabriel Fearing, Sean Fearing, Erin Tisera, Phil “PJ”, Hillary, Jimmy and Adam; great-grandchildren Ashlyn, Matt, Daniel, John, Cody, Joseph, Eric, Jennifer, Angel, Connor, Ryder, Lane, Whitney, Morgan, Ryan, Olivia, Seamus, Jedidiah, Falcon, Millie, Finnigan, Magdalene, Danny, Lucy and 18 great-great grandchildren. as well as numerous nieces, nephews, cousins and cherished family and friends. 

She was predeceased by father Andrew Gerald Richardson, mother Mildred Florence Tipton (Thornton, Richardson, Walker, Smith), sons Duane and Daniel Lendahl, daughter Sherri Fearing (Lendahl), husbands Bill Clark and Wendell “Glenn” Wilsey, sisters Gloria Huber and Judith Price, brother in law’s Mickey Huber and Elmer “Butch” Price, great-grandson Alexander Winogradov and great-great-grandson Tanner Trolinder.

Pat enjoyed the Easter celebrations spent making hats, painting eggs and taking silly photos with her grandchildren Angela and Dale and the girls, she loved traveling to Placerville and sharing a Thanksgiving feast with grandchildren Amy and Craig and the moments with the family that came to sit around the table and share blessings. Patricia was blessed with many close relationships, she treasured her relationship with Michelle who she considered another daughter, she loved the time they spent cooking and looking up plant names and recipes on the computer. 

A celebration of life will be held on Sunday, May 31, 2026, at 1 p.m. at 1774 Van Eaton Avenue, McKinleyville, where Pat lived for the last five years enjoying the birds and creating quilts. There will be an outdoor service honoring the loving and funny mother, grandmother, great grandmother, great great grandmother, aunt, friend and loved one that we have lost.   We will be honoring her life with a sharing of love and the party that she wanted where we will have great food, jokes and laughter in her memory. Friends and family are welcome. there is limited parking so please ride-share if possible.

Raise a toast to a life lived well — it may not have been perfect but it was honest, funny and the best she could do with what she had. Mom will live forever in my heart and my stories, she was the perfect mother for me and I am so thankful that she was mine.