###

PREVIOUSLY:

• Trump’s Order Won’t Halt California’s Offshore Wind Leases. But Will It Derail the Industry?

###

On his first day in office, President Donald Trump fulfilled a long-held promise to block offshore wind development, issuing a sweeping Executive Order to halt leasing and permitting for new wind energy projects slated on the outer continental shelf. While the ban has sparked widespread concern over the future of wind energy in the United States, it doesn’t target lease areas that are already paid for, including those within the Humboldt Wind Energy Area, located 20 miles west of Eureka.

Those lease areas — along with three other sites off the coast of Morro Bay — were sold to multinational wind energy developers in December 2022 during the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management’s first-ever offshore wind lease sale on the West Coast. Those leases were paid in full shortly after the auction, and there are no pending federal approvals for the proposed projects at this time.

While the ban does not affect existing lease areas, it does direct the Secretary of the Interior, in consultation with the Attorney General, to conduct “a comprehensive review of the ecological, economic, and environmental necessity of terminating or amending any existing wind energy leases,” the order states.

To get a better sense of how the offshore wind ban is playing out on the national level, we called up our North Coast congressional representative Jared Huffman for more information. Our conversation has been edited for length and clarity. 

###

Lost Coast Outpost: Before we get into the topic at hand, can you describe the current scene in Washington, D.C? How are things feeling now that Trump is in office and how does it compare to his first term?

Huffman

Huffman: It is different. It’s off to, obviously, a very rapid start with these executive orders, but the other thing that’s different is that there’s almost complete deference to Trump from congressional Republicans. Under Donald Trump, this has ceased to be a co-equal branch of government — it’s simply an arm of his administration. … Congress is supposed to be a check and balance in our system of government to prevent presidents from turning into kings, right? That was the whole idea, and right now we have a Congress where the majority seems perfectly fine with President Trump just claiming unthinkable authoritarian powers and doing these bizarre and almost laughably ignorant things — proposing to rename the Gulf of Mexico, acquire Greenland, take back the Panama Canal — and these guys are just nodding and smiling. It is strange to watch the transformation of these members of Congress who swore to uphold the Constitution [and] are supposed to be here to exercise their Article I power as an independent branch of government, but it sure looks more like a cult from where I sit.

LoCO: I’d like to focus our conversation on Trump’s crackdown on wind energy in the United States. As I understand, his executive order temporarily halts permitting and leasing for new offshore wind energy projects. What else should people know about the order?

Huffman: In terms of what affects us on the North Coast, the halt of leasing is not that big a deal because our leases have already been held and the leasing rights are already acquired. It’s not very helpful that permitting is paused as well — hopefully, that’s only temporary and the government can get back to doing what it’s supposed to do. I think this will not be the last obstacle the Trump Administration throws in front of clean energy. They hate it because they’re all in for fossil fuels. Wind power and other clean energy threaten the fossil fuel monopoly, so they’re going to do really extreme and overreaching things, but that shouldn’t mean that we allow them to win. I don’t think [this executive order] means the end of our incredibly promising offshore wind project. It simply means we’re going to have to be strategic about how we continue to make progress, and it probably means some delay.

LoCO: In previous discussions with the Harbor Bay Harbor, Recreation and Conservation District’s leadership, I’ve been told that the Trump Administration’s anticipated actions against the offshore wind industry will slow things down, but they’re not likely to lead to a “complete elimination of the industry.” Can you speak to that?

Huffman: I think that’s right. Look, we had years of work ahead of us anyway, all kinds of planning, all kinds of design, decision-making, siting, etc. All of that work can move forward, we just have to think about how we sequence things because we’re entering a four-year temporary alternate reality. 

LoCO: I came across an article in The New York Times that said Trump has directed the U.S. Attorney General and Secretary of the Interior to “explore the possibility of ‘terminating or amending’ any leases that have already been issued.” Can he do that?

Huffman: No, he cannot do that. Let me just demystify right up front: He cannot do that and if he tries to do that there will be litigation. There’ll be takings claims brought forth. I mean, he will create huge financial exposure to the federal government at a time when he claims he wants to cut budgets. It makes no sense whatsoever and this is what’s going to be difficult for a lot of us during the second Trump presidency. A lot of what he says is just going to be wacky, ignorant, baiting stuff, and then some of it is going to be truly dangerous and actionable. It’s important to be able to distinguish between the two — which is not always easy — but in this case, I think you can. I think you can take the revocation of leases off the table.

LoCO: And have you spoken with either of the developers — Vineyard Offshore or Canopy Offshore Wind — about the order against offshore wind?

Huffman: No, not since the firehose of executive orders.

LoCO: Can you also talk about the environmental consequences of this executive order and other proposed actions to double down on oil drilling?

Huffman: Yeah, none of that is a surprise. This is always the Republican playbook, but with this administration, it’s more aggressive than anything we’ve seen before. The last time around, his ambitious offshore drilling agenda ran up against real-world political opposition in places like Florida and I think that is likely to happen again. I mean, people — most people — don’t want offshore drilling off their coast. I’m not surprised that they would propose some of these things, but proposing it and actually doing it are two wildly different things.

LoCO: Can you also talk about Trump’s decision to declare an energy emergency in the United States and how it directly conflicts with his executive order against offshore wind?

Huffman: It’s just extreme cognitive dissonance. Real facts tell us that we are at record levels of oil and gas production, record levels of exports and record profits for this monopoly. In the face of that, [Trump] declares an energy emergency like there’s some kind of a crisis. It’s just absurd on its face, but he’s going to use that very disingenuous emergency declaration to try to invoke a bunch of emergency legal authorities to do even more for his pals in the industry. It’s just so deeply corrupt and at odds with reality, but this is what we’re dealing with, not just on this, but on a host of fronts.

LoCO: As you said, there’s been a firehose of executive orders since Trump took office on Monday and I would imagine you and your colleagues are trying to figure out which one to address first. What steps are Democrats considering to push back on this executive order against offshore wind?

Huffman: If there’s anything about this executive order that actually leads to action, that would try to take away leases or do irreversible things that would set back our interests, there will be lawsuits and other ways to address that. For now, we just have to see how much of this is bluster versus how much of it is real. We won’t know that for some time.

LoCO: Thank you for taking the time to chat today. Is there anything else you want to share with the Humboldt community?

Huffman: No, I think the biggest impact — and it’s real, I can’t sugarcoat it — is the loss of time. In dealing with the climate crisis, you’re fighting against carbon pollution but you’re also fighting against time. We are running out of time to decarbonize before permanent negative climate cycles run away from us, and that’s what’s so distressing about this. We don’t have four years to waste, we’re already behind. And so it just puts that much more pressure on the folks who will have to clean up this mess.

###

The Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation and Conservation District issued the following statement in response to the Outpost’s request for comment on Trump’s executive order:

The Trump Administration has wisely acknowledged that our nation needs additional power generation.  Our ever-rising demand for power is driven by a growing population, an exponential explosion in new AI servers, the increasing popularity of electric vehicles, and other many causes.  Tariffs should lead to more manufacturing in the US, which will further increase the demand for energy.  This demand for more power can be met by a wide range of energy-generation projects, including renewables.  The State of California has committed to 100% renewable energy by the year 2045, which includes several types of solar and wind power projects.  In 2021, the California Energy Commission asked the Humboldt Bay Harbor District to design, permit, and build a modern offshore wind vertical assembly manufacturing port terminal.  The envisioned project will bring a much-needed economic boost to our region, will be a substantial contribution to State’s renewable energy goals, and will provide a wide range of community benefits.  In collaboration with local Tribes, environmental advocacy organizations, other local governments, and many private sector stakeholders, we are striving to deliver a project that will make our community and our nation proud.  Accordingly, we are proceeding with our project to support the State, to deliver options for more power generation, to boost our local economy, and to support our local communities.

Press release from the Eureka Police Department:

On January 23, 2025, at about 9:51 p.m., officers from the Eureka Police Department (EPD) responded to the report of a vehicle vs pedestrian traffic collision that occurred near the intersection of Broadway at Tomlinson Streets in Eureka.

Officers arrived on scene and located the involved pedestrian laying along the side of the roadway unresponsive and with significant injuries. Officers started CPR and continued lifesaving attempts until medical personnel arrived on scene and pronounced the pedestrian deceased.

A member of EPD’s Major Injury/Fatal Traffic Investigation Team responded to the scene to conduct the investigation. Additionally, an EPD Detective and an EPD Evidence Technician responded to assist with the collecting of statements and evidence. The initial investigation indicates weather (fog) and the pedestrian’s actions (walking across Broadway in dark clothing, outside of a cross walk) are believed to be contributing factors causing the collision.

The driver that initially struck the pedestrian stopped and was on scene when officers arrived. The driver is fully cooperating with the investigation and there are no indications that drugs or alcohol played a factor in this collision.

The investigation has revealed that two other vehicles likely struck the pedestrian following the initial collision, after they were already down on the roadway. These vehicles were not located at the scene. EPD would like to speak to the drivers of these vehicles and ask they contact the department.

The decedent has been identified and the Humboldt County Coroner’s office is working to notify next of kin.

This is an active investigation and EPD is asking if anyone witnessed the collision to please contact Officer Jeremy Sollom at 707-441-4060 ext. 1315, or our Criminal Investigations Unit at 707-441-4300.

Press release from Friends of the Dunes:

Friends of the Dunes will initiate controlled burns of piles of removed invasive beach grass on the foredunes at the Friends of the Dunes Humboldt Coastal Nature Center in Manila. These piles were created as part of the removal efforts at the Humboldt Coastal Nature Center, a property owned and managed by Friends of the Dunes.

The controlled burns are scheduled to begin on January 29, 2025, and will continue as conditions allow. All activities will adhere to the guidelines and permits established by the North Coast Unified Air Quality Management District. Friends of the Dunes is committed to conducting these burns only on days when smoke impacts are expected to be minimal, ensuring compliance with air quality regulations.

While efforts will be made to limit smoke exposure, some smoke will be present during the burns. For further details, please contact Justin Legge, Stewardship & Restoration Manager at Friends of the Dunes, located at the Humboldt Coastal Nature Center, located at 220 Stamps Lane in Manila. He can be reached at (707) 444-1397 or via email at justin@friendsofthedunes.org.

All over Facebook this morning is chatter about an attempted kidnapping of a girl at the Bayshore Mall. Internet sleuths believe they have identified the suspect.

However, the Eureka Police Department — via its own Facebook page — says that it is on top of the case, and that the suspect the sleuths have identified is not the suspect.

The department says:

Yesterday morning, officers responded to the report an adult in a vehicle attempting to lure a 16-year-old girl into a vehicle at the Bayshore Mall. During the investigation, officers positively identified the suspect and are actively working this case.

Currently, there are social media posts identifying the alleged suspect. As the individual being posted about is NOT the suspect, we are asking the public to please stop sharing this false information.

So maybe stop doing that. 

President Donald Trump’s ban on new offshore wind leases won’t halt giant wind farms already planned off California’s coast, but industry officials say the policy shift is a blow to a renewable energy industry still working to gain a foothold.

Environmentalists say the moratorium amounts to “kneecapping” California’s offshore wind projects and puts an important source of clean energy in “mortal peril.” The Biden administration had promoted offshore wind as critical to providing cleaner power and reducing climate-warming greenhouse gases.

“I hereby withdraw from disposition for wind energy leasing all areas within the Offshore Continental Shelf,” which encompasses all federal waters off the United States, Trump wrote in an order on Monday. He said it was effective immediately and temporarily prevents “any new or renewed wind energy leasing for the purposes of generation of electricity or any other such use derived from the use of wind.”

The order has no immediate effect on leases already authorized, including two large areas off California’s coast. Trump wrote that “nothing in this” order “affects rights under existing leases in the withdrawn areas.”

In 2022, the federal government leased 583 square miles of deep ocean waters 20 miles off Morro Bay and Humboldt and Del Norte counties to energy companies. Capturing offshore wind energy is considered essential to achieving California’s ambitious goal of electrifying its grid with 100% zero-carbon energy by 2045.

The Trump order also prohibits any new approvals, permits or loans for both land and offshore wind projects until his agencies conduct “a comprehensive assessment,” including the economic costs and effects on birds, marine mammals and other wildlife.

Existing offshore wind leases are not safe from future actions by the new administration. Trump ordered “a comprehensive review” of “terminating or amending” offshore wind leases and ordered his agencies to identify “any legal basis” for eliminating them.

Trump has a longstanding animosity toward all forms of wind energy, and as a candidate he often vowed to stop the turbines. He also has said, without evidence, that offshore wind platforms kill whales. The president reiterated his opposition after his inauguration on Monday. “We’re not going to do the wind thing,” Trump said. “Big ugly windmills, they ruin your neighborhood.”

The potential environmental effects of the California projects are unknown, especially since no other floating wind farms have been built in such deep ocean waters so far from shore. Developers are still studying the feasibility of the technology and must analyze the environmental impacts before gaining state and federal permits.

The technology has its critics beyond the Oval Office, including many residents and local officials in Morro Bay, who worry that the wind farms and onshore development to support the projects will industrialize their coast.

California’s wind farms would contain hundreds of giant turbines, each about 900 feet high — as tall as a 70-story building. While the platforms would mostly be unseen from the shoreline, some may be visible at night in some areas. In addition, the projects will require expansion of ports in Los Angeles, Long Beach and Humboldt Bay for storing, staging and assembling parts.

Making the moratorium one of his first orders of business is an unwelcome signal to an industry reliant on state and federal support. Experts in California say consistent public policy is critical for developers to raise funds to invest in the projects.

Ken Alex, who was the climate change advisor to Gov. Jerry Brown and former director of the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, said offshore wind’s complex and novel technology requires a long-term commitment from the industry and regulators.

“The timeframe for floating offshore wind is longer than other forms of renewable energy, in part because of technological challenges, in part because of environmental review,” said Alex, who is director of Project Climate at UC Berkeley. Any interruption in policy and financial support is disruptive, he said.

“It takes time, it takes resources and it takes consistency. The industry abhors uncertainty.”

Offshore wind developers already have been buffeted by financial troubles: Because of lack of industry interest, the federal Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, which oversees offshore wind projects, canceled a lease sale in the Gulf of Mexico and sold only half of the leases available in the Gulf of Maine last October.

California’s offshore wind projects are in early planning stages but would be part of the state’s goal of producing 25 gigawatts of offshore wind power by 2045, powering 25 million homes and providing about 13% of the state’s power supply.

The areas off California with the strongest winds are far from shore and too deep for traditional platforms, so developers are planning clusters of floating platforms in waters more than a half-mile deep and tethered by cables. 

The depth, distance from shore and new floating technology drive up the costs and complicate an already expensive process. Massive infusions of private and public money will be needed, officials say, underscoring the vulnerability of the industry to Washington’s shifting priorities. 

Alex Stern, executive director of the industry group Offshore Wind California, said that while federal approvals are still required, the California projects will rely on state agencies to shepherd many of the next phases.

 “As an industry we’re focused on what is advancing offshore wind in California, and right now most of that is happening at the state level,” Stern said.

Jana Ganion, Gov. Gavin Newsom’s senior advisor for offshore wind, was unavailable for comment about Trump’s order.

California has been bullish about offshore wind, with multiple agencies expediting reviews and planning. Voters approved a climate bond that included $475 million for offshore wind-related development at California ports and the state’s grid operator last year approved a $4.6 billion plan to build infrastructure to carry offshore wind power to the grid.

Developing offshore wind energy requires dozens of other initiatives working in concert, including upgrading and redesigning ports and harbors and updating and expanding much of California’s aging transmission infrastructure. Approval for the development has been contingent on programs to train and employ residents in local communities and among tribes. The depth, distance from shore and new floating technology drive up the costs and complicate an already expensive process. Massive infusions of private and public money will be needed, officials say, underscoring the vulnerability of the industry to Washington’s shifting priorities. 

Onshore wind power in the United States accounts for nearly 10% of the nation’s electricity. Those installations are largely on private land, led by Texas, Iowa and Oklahoma. Landowners earn money from the projects and the industry has a robust manufacturing and jobs sector.

“This is bad for American workers,” said Kit Kennedy, managing director for power at the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental group. “The growing U.S. wind industry and its manufacturing supply chain are creating quality jobs and growing local economies along our coasts and across the Midwest. This announcement put those investments — and the jobs that go with them — at mortal risk.”

Much of the policy and permitting responsibilities for wind energy fall to the Interior Department. Trump’s orders mean the agency will have to conduct extensive reviews and prepare a report regarding wind energy. 

During his Senate confirmation hearings, Trump’s Interior nominee, former North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum, committed to the current “all of the above” strategy for a diversified energy portfolio and said if existing leases “make sense and they’re already in law, then they’ll continue.”

As a governor and part of the Western Governors Association, Burgum signed on to the group’s Energy Policy Resolution that included a recommendation to continue support for offshore wind projects.

Another of Trump’s first-day executive orders was to open all of Alaska’s federal lands to oil exploration and do away with the “punitive restrictions” that delay or halt drilling. 

Alex of UC Berkeley noted that the same environmental impacts that Trump said he was worried about with wind energy are not taken into account with oil and gas projects.

“This kind of doublespeak is right out of ‘1984,’” he said.

###

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

For days since President Donald Trump announced his intent to travel to Los Angeles to survey fire damage, a question has hung over his planned visit: Will Gov. Gavin Newsom be with him?

Tension between the newly reinstalled Republican president and California’s Democratic governor — longtime political nemeses who nevertheless routinely worked together on disaster recovery during Trump’s first term — exploded alongside the fires that have burned through Pacific Palisades, Altadena and other swaths of the Los Angeles region over the past two weeks. The clash has appeared to put federal support for California at risk, even as Newsom publicly offered an olive branch to Trump.

Furious over the early response to the disaster, Trump has repeatedly railed against the governor he dubbed “Newscum,” spread misinformation about the causes of the fire and suggested that California will not receive the typical federal aid for recovery unless it changes its water policy. Or its forestry policy. Or its immigration sanctuary policy.

Though the governor quickly extended an invitation to Trump to visit Los Angeles, an effort to lower the temperature on the unusually politicized furor surrounding a natural disaster, Newson acknowledged late Thursday afternoon that he had still not heard back from the president, less than a day before his expected touchdown in California.

Excluding Newsom would be a stinging rebuke of the governor, who met with Trump when he traveled to California fire zones in 2018 and 2020. On Wednesday, the president indicated to Fox News host Sean Hannity that he might not offer Newsom the same courtesy this time around: “I don’t know. I haven’t even thought about it,” Trump said.

But Newsom struck an optimistic tone with reporters Thursday, after approving $2.5 billion in fire recovery funds that he hopes will eventually be reimbursed by the federal government. He promised to be at the airport today to greet Trump — even if a spokesperson said his office didn’t yet know which airport. And Newsom said he expected the president would ultimately “do the right thing” for Los Angeles.

“I’m glad he’s coming out here. I’m grateful that the president’s taking the time,” Newsom said. “And I hope he comes with a spirit of cooperation and collaboration. That’s the spirit to which we welcome him.”

It’s common for presidents and governors of opposing political parties to do battle on policy differences and then come together when natural disasters strike, said state Sen. Ben Allen, a Santa Monica Democrat whose district has been badly damaged by the Palisades fire.

“It would be a delicate balance under any president and certainly, it’s more delicate under this president,” he told CalMatters. “It may appear a little messy, and perhaps it is, but it’s also an integral part of our federal system.”

Newsom is at a precarious moment in his relationship with Trump. While he initially positioned California at the forefront of a renewed resistance after Trump won a second term in November, even calling a special session to fund litigation against the incoming administration, Newsom now finds himself dependent on the goodwill of a federal government almost fully under the sway of Trump.

It’s unclear how forthcoming federal assistance will be. Since the outbreak of the Los Angeles fires more than two weeks ago, Trump has depicted them as Newsom’s fault and even demanded that he resign. With the support of many congressional Republicans, the president has also threatened to withhold or condition disaster aid.

“I don’t think we should give California anything until they let water flow down,” Trump told Hannity, a reference to inaccurate claims that Los Angeles lacked water to fight these fires because the state does not send enough water south from Northern California.

Newsom has substantially, though not entirely, pulled his punches against Trump in recent weeks. He largely kept a low profile leading up to the president’s visit, working on fire response from Los Angeles. After the president erroneously complained in Monday’s inauguration speech that the fires were burning “without even a token of defense,” Newsom issued a gentle statement that emphasized “finding common ground and striving toward shared goals” with the Trump administration.

“In the face of one of the worst natural disasters in America’s history, this moment underscores the critical need for partnership, a shared commitment to facts, and mutual respect,” Newsom said.

Yet he also, on social media, slammed several of Trump’s early executive orders on immigration and climate change, then sent an email to supporters deriding the passage from Trump’s inaugural speech as “nonsense” and “insulting” to firefighters.

Meanwhile, the governor’s special session to “safeguard California values” from the Trump administration continues on, with Democrats in the state Senate voting Thursday to advance $25 million for legal fees. Republican lawmakers have lambasted the session as a distraction from wildfire response and an unnecessary poke at the president.

Allen, the senator from Santa Monica, said he understood that Trump is fulfilling his campaign promises to the Americans who supported him, but that California politicians would be derelict if they didn’t push back, because voters had elected them with a different vision for how to run the country.

“We want, and our constituents want us, to cooperate with the federal government to help on the areas of mutual agreement and need,” he said. “The flip side is, we are also part of the loyal opposition.”

Newsom told reporters Thursday that it was important for the state to prepare to fight Trump at the same time that he is courting the president’s help, noting that Trump “already assaulted the Fourteenth Amendment” with his day one executive order challenging birthright citizenship, which California immediately sued to stop.

The governor evoked the “great relationship” he had with Trump during the COVID pandemic, when they spoke nearly every week, and said he did not expect the special session to affect that because it was “nothing personal,” but rather based on “fundamental policy disagreements.”

“This is situational. Don’t color it in any more than it needs to be,” Newsom said. “I’m here for the long haul, to support the president where we can, to defend our values where we must.”

###

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

Joyce Ann Harmon
March 10, 1949 – January 17, 2025

It is with deep sorrow that we announce the passing of Joyce Ann Harmon, of Arcata, who left us on January 17, 2025, at the age of 75. Joyce was born in Eureka on March 10, 1949, to Annie J. Fisher and Vern A. Martin, both of whom preceded her in death. She was raised in Fortuna and lived most of her life in Arcata. Joyce graduated as Valedictorian from Fortuna High School in 1967, later earning a BA in Journalism from Humboldt State University.

On November 22, 1975, Joyce married the love of her life, James E. Harmon, and together they raised two daughters, Ann C. Lunsford (born January 17, 1976) and Jamie M. Boltzen (born July 18, 1978). Joyce’s family was always her greatest joy, and she cherished the time spent with her two granddaughters, Samantha M. Tellez (born January 24, 1994) and Allyson D. Boltzen (born September 7, 2000).

Joyce was passionate about many things in life, including her love for the arts, travel, and spending time outdoors. She loved going to the movies, attending concerts, camping, swimming, dancing, and especially cruising to new places. She also had a deep commitment to her work and her community. Joyce spent 25 years serving as the Secretary at the Mad River Fish Hatchery with the Department of Fish & Wildlife, a position where she became well-known and respected. Prior to that, she worked at Napa State Hospital, Caltrans, and later dedicated her time to In-Home Support Services, where she cared for the elderly and disabled.

A long-standing member of the Arcata United Methodist Church, Joyce served in many capacities over the years, including teaching Sunday School, keeping attendance records, and hosting Coffee Hour. She was also the church secretary for many years, where she made countless contributions to the congregation and its mission.

Joyce is survived by her husband, James E. Harmon, daughters Ann C. Lunsford, her husband, Addison J Lunsford, and Jamie M. Boltzen, granddaughters Samantha M. Tellez, her husband Elijah B Tellez and Allyson D. Boltzen, also Joyce’s brother, James A. Martin. She will be deeply missed by her family, friends, and the many lives she touched over the years.

A viewing will be held on January 31, 2025, from 4 p.m. to 7 p.m. at Paul’s Chapel in Arcata. A memorial service will be held at 11 a.m. on February 1, 2025, at Greenwood Cemetery in Arcata.

###

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