On March 12 — a week after primary day — opponents of Proposition 1 waved the white flag, conceding that Gov. Gavin Newsom’s mental health ballot measure would likely pass.

Yesterday, the anti-Prop. 1 campaign withdrew its concession and revived its efforts. What changed?

For one thing, the vote count tightened: As of late Saturday, Prop. 1 was leading by about 20,000 votes, with 7.5 million ballots counted and some 287,000 left to be tallied, according to the Secretary of State.

And for another, Newsom’s political action committee put out an appeal for volunteers to reach out to Democrats who had their ballots rejected — for mismatched signatures or other reasons — to fix them and get them counted. The training was Sunday.

“Governor Newsom needs you…. The votes are being counted and it is CLOSE. Like, just a couple thousand votes close,” the appeal said.

Prop. 1 opponents called that strategy “sleazy” and “an attempt to manipulate the final vote count by harvesting the votes of only some partisans in certain areas.”

But the foes said they’re launching a similar effort and refocusing their website to help voters confirm their ballots were counted and to assist voters whose ballots were rejected.

“We believe all ballots should be counted,” Paul Simmons, a director of Californians Against Prop. 1, said in a statement. “We know that many Democrats voted against Prop. 1, so the governor’s effort is no slam dunk. If you’re a Republican or independent, we want you to know that your ballot might make the difference in this election. But the governor won’t help you. We will.”

“We don’t know if reviving rejected ballots will change the outcome of this election,” Simmons added, “but if the governor thinks it might, we for damn sure aren’t going to let him have the field to himself.”

The Prop. 1 results would have to get even closer, however, for a recount.

There are no automatic recounts for statewide ballot measures. But a campaign can request one in specific counties — if it’s willing to pay for it. That could be a hurdle for the cash-strapped Prop. 1 opponents if the measure narrowly passes.

There’s another provision in state law that could also come into play: The governor can order a state-funded hand recount of all votes statewide if the official results show a difference between “yes” and “no” votes on a ballot measure of 1,000 votes or less, or 0.00015 percentage points or less. As of the latest vote count, the second threshold is 1,055 votes for Prop. 1.

So if Prop. 1 fails that narrowly, it wouldn’t be a surprise if Newsom uses this provision. Such a recount request would have to come within 36 days of the primary, or mid-April.

###

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

Fortuna resident Steven (Steve) Riddle, age 70, passed away peacefully on Tuesday, March 5, 2024, at his home in the presence of his wife.

Steve was born December 19, 1953, in the Scotia Hospital to Ruby Laurel and Claud Riddle. He lived in Rio Dell until the fifth grade before moving with his mother and siblings to Church Street in Scotia, where he attended Scotia Elementary School. Steve graduated Fortuna Union High School in 1972. He attended College of the Redwoods and also completed a certificate program to earn his Class A license for truck driving.

During his senior year at Fortuna High School, a little Portuguese girl caught his eye. He would watch Maria pass by in between classes and give her a smile, and she would act like she didn’t notice him. As the months passed, she started to finally give him a glance and return his smile. Their first date was that summer after graduation, August 12, 1972, when he came to pick her up. Upon leaving her house, they walked out together and here came her sister, Eva, trooping out to join them. Mr. Costa was not going to let his 18-year-old daughter go on a date unaccompanied. Steve was such a good sport about it, he didn’t complain. Luckily the five Costa sisters were very close.

Steve was content dating Maria for years, until she told him, her dad said they should get married or else she should move on. After six years of dating, the two were married on August 12, 1978.

Again, Steve was content with married life and the freedoms of being a couple. But since they both wanted children, the years were creeping on them. Six and a half years after they married, their first child, Rachelle, was born, with Ryan and Redmond to follow. Steve was delighted and surprised as each baby arrived, not knowing what they were having. Steve was the most nurturing, caring father, hands-on from the time his children were born. His in-laws always commented on how well he cared for his infants and toddlers, just like a mother would. They marveled at how well he adapted to fatherhood, since he was raised without his father.

Steve’s job during high school was working at Bertain’s Laundry in Scotia, running the washers and working on the plumbing with Tom Bertain. It wasn’t until February 1973 that he finally got hired at The Pacific Lumber Co., but not before showing up at the Main Office to see Gary Cook every morning from June 1972 ‘til he got hired. He was persistent and patient, but the day finally arrived. The best and most enjoyable job he had was when he was able to put his Class A license to use and got his first opportunity to drive a dump truck. His dream job was getting on the Town Crew and driving a transfer dump truck with his team: Ken Richardson, Glenn Johnson, and Donnie Viggers. On August 25, 2003, while driving a water truck up in the mountains above Scotia, the brakes failed and he was forced to crash the water truck instead of driving over a cliff, which almost took his life. Due to the extent of the injuries to his left hand and forearm, driving a truck was no longer possible. In 2006, Steve started a plumbing program at Wyotech, a vocational school in Fremont, graduating in 2007 at the top of his class. Shortly after graduating and seeking work, the collapse of the housing market began, making his dreams unattainable. In 2011 while operating a jackhammer drill, his hand was severely injured, destroying any hopes of a career in plumbing.

In 2018, Steve became concerned about difficulty with his speech, which led to a brain scan in August of that year, showing he had a neurological condition. In November of 2018, Steve began extensive testing, continuing through 2019, which led to a referral to UCSF in January 2020 and a referral to their study program. With the Covid shutdown, the study program was placed on hold, depriving Steve the ability to get a diagnosis and the cause of his disease.

Steve loved motorcycles and cars. Everyone knew Steve had always been a big car buff, owning a Honda 90, 150 & 500, a ‘56 Chevy, ‘64 Chevy Impala, ‘67 Chevy pickup, ‘68 Chevy Camaro, ‘72 Heavy Chevy, Chevrolet/GMC trucks, and a VW Bug.

NASCAR and Dale Earnhardt (#3) were his passion and favorite racer, later following his son, Dale Earnhardt Jr. Steve was an avid deer and quail hunter, but since his two sons played youth football on Sundays and High School Football on Friday nights, he placed his hunting on hold until the boys were out of school.

Fishing, tent camping, and 5th wheel trailer camping were a joy to both Steve and Maria. Walking Misha, Steve’s Corgi/Pit mix, was a daily routine every morning and afternoon, until Steve couldn’t stay up with her, making it difficult to walk. Misha was his girl now that his daughter Rachelle had moved away.

Steve was a hardworking, dedicated, wonderful husband and father. His wife and three children were his life, and he was proud of them all.

He is survived by his wife of 45 1/2 years, Maria São Costa Riddle, his daughter Rachelle Riddle (Patrick Knight), sons Ryan Riddle (Kristi MacLiesh) and Redmond Riddle (Kaitlynn Miller), and granddaughter Everly Riddle; sisters-in-law Manuela Enes, Eva Adams (Jon), Natal Chadwell (Clayton) Linda Costa-Franklin (Arnaldo Martins); brothers-in-law Brian Franklin and Joe Enes; brothers Mike Riddle (Donna), Tim Riddle (Lori), Dan Coulter (Lisa); sister Claudia Boothe (Steve); sister-in-law Annie Brodie; sisters Shannon Riddle Gallimore, Megan Riddle Petrich, Kerry Riddle, and Maureen Riddle Killaby; aunt Phyllis Watson; uncle Joe Watson; and numerous cousins, nieces, and nephews.

Steve was preceded in death by his mother Ruby Laurel Coulter, his father Claud (Dodge) Riddle, his siblings Ruth Riddle-Tauscher, Roxanne Riddle-Miller and her husband Skip Miller, and Trey Brodie; his father and mother-in-law, Manuel and Maria C Costa; and his beloved dog Misha.

Steve was a member of Church of the Assumption Parish, in Ferndale. He was also a member of the Portuguese Fraternal Society of America (PFSA), a fraternal organization.

Pallbearers are Jon Adams, Clayton Chadwell, Brian Franklin, Tay Franklin, Joe Renner, and Garvin Mitchell.

A huge thank you to Kaitlynn Miller, who has been an angel of a care provider for Steve during his last few months of life. A thank you to Hospice of Humboldt for their passionate care, Bridget, Rose, Steve, Anna, Lea, and Travis. Thank you to his physicians Dr. Mary DeMay of UCSF, Dr. Melissa McKenzie, and Dr. Ruben Brinckhaus, and to Providence Redwood Memorial to the doctors, nurses, and staff.

A heartfelt thank you to family, friends, and neighbors for the caring phone calls, visits, meals, flowers, and cards.

In lieu of flowers, donations can be made to your favorite charity or Catholic Church of the Assumption Parish in Ferndale for Masses in his name.

Funeral arrangements are under the care of Goble’s Fortuna Mortuary. A public viewing will be held at Goble’s on Thursday, April 4, 2024, from 3 p.m. to 7 p.m. A Rosary and Mass of Christian burial on Friday, April 5, 2024, at Church of the Assumption in Ferndale at 10 a.m., with burial following at Sunrise Cemetery in Fortuna. A celebration of life will be at Fortuna Fire Hall, (Main Station on Fortuna Blvd), following the burial services.

###

The obituary above was submitted on behalf of Steve Riddle’s loved ones. The Lost Coast Outpost runs obituaries of Humboldt County residents at no charge. See guidelines here.

Phillip Leland Tripp Sr., born December 19, 1951, was called home on January 19, 2024. Born in Crescent City, son of Amos and Violet (Donahue) Tripp, he was the youngest of five brothers. Phillip grew up in Klamath-Terwer and often spoke fondly about memories of exploring the outdoors, playing sports with good friends (even setting some Del Norte County sports records in his day), and simple pleasures like swimming, picking berries, and listening to vinyl records. In his stories it was always clear how much he looked up to his older brothers. Many knew Phillip as a strong Karuk dancer and as the “jump in the middle” guy. However, Phillip was also a rather humble person who often worked behind the scenes. He lifted people’s spirits with his witty one-liners as well as his words of wisdom. One of his favorite mottos was “living life by the drop,” a lyric from Stevie Ray Vaughn. Phillip believed in squeezing the most out of every day and every moment, and always encouraged others to “go for it!” He touched many hearts with his warm smile and his strong sense of spirituality.

Phillip was deeply moved by his experience at the Wounded Knee Uprising in 1973, where he said he felt freedom for the first time. There he participated in a sacred sweat lodge ceremony with spiritual leader Wallace Black Elk, and he prayed for the Karuk people and all the tribes of California to once again be full and renewed in the old ways. When he returned, he set out to fulfill this vision with his brothers, and collectively they played an important role in the return of the Karuk Brush Dance. When the Karuk Brush Dance came back to Ka’tim’îin in 1974, the elders that were present recognized this was how it was long ago. During Phillip’s final days he reflected with his family on his spiritual journey, and the following is his truth that he shared with us. He reflected on the sacred sweat lodge ceremony he participated in at Wounded Knee, and the Ghost Dance that he also witnessed there. He shared that the Karuk Tribe also had a Ghost Dance in the 1850s after the genocide and gold rush. His family helped hold the Ghost Dance in the face of great danger, in order to protect the people and the land. He realized how meaningful this experience was to have been able to bridge the connection between the Wounded Knee Ghost Dance and the Karuk Ghost Dance in California. He told us, “They wanted to kill our religion. We are Salmon people; we were salmon people all the way through this region because Alaska all the way down to Mexico had salmon. We believe there was a race of people here before us, that left us our ceremonies before they left Earth. Know that they are leaving out the real history of California for a reason and the salmon is for everybody.” He felt in his heart that his prayers had been fulfilled, and his vision for the future was that our people would only continue to flourish.

Survived by wife Rosemarie Tripp; sons Justin and Phillip Tripp Jr.; daughter Angelica Tripp; brother Leroy (Sue) Tripp; brother David (Jan) Tripp; sister Helen Ann (Pat) Suri; sister-in-law Maria Tripp (Amos’ wife) and many cousins, nieces, and nephews who he loved dearly. Preceded in death by parents Amos and Violet (Donahue) Tripp; brother Amos (Maria) Tripp; brother Brian D. Tripp.

Memorial service will be held on March 30, at Azalea Hall in McKinleyville, starting at 12 p.m. His remains will be interred locally in a private ceremony. Please feel free to reach out to David Tripp with any questions: davidtripp1968@gmail.com.

###

The obituary above was submitted on behalf of Phillip Tripp’s loved ones. The Lost Coast Outpost runs obituaries of Humboldt County residents at no charge. See guidelines here.

Press release from the Humboldt County Sheriff’s Office:

On 3/17/2024, at about 3:21 a.m., the Humboldt County Sheriff’s Office Emergency Communications Center received a call from a resident living in the 1700 block of Noble Ct., in McKinleyville reporting she could hear someone actively breaking into her house and that her power was out.

While enroute to the scene, one of the responding deputies called the 47-year-old female victim who reported she awoke to noises and that her power was shut off and that while fleeing the residence she observed a person dressed in black clothing walk through her yard and enter her garage. She told the deputy she had fled to her neighbor’s house and said that once she arrived at the neighbor’s she observed the person leaving her house and walking toward the area of Heartwood Drive.  

When deputies arrived on scene, they located a male matching the subject’s description in the 1600 block of Heartwood Drive. After a brief foot pursuit and struggle with deputies 30-year-old Stephen Gabriel Alvarez was taken into custody. Stephen Gabriel Alvarez was determined through evidence and witness statements to be the subject who was breaking into the residence. 

Alvarez was transported to the Humboldt County Correctional Facility where he was booked for (PC 459/461(a)) First Degree Burglary and (PC 148(a)(1)) Obstruct/Resist Peace Officer. 

This case is still under investigation.  

Anyone with information about this case or related criminal activity is encouraged to call the Humboldt County Sheriff’s Office at (707) 445-7251 or the Sheriff’s Office Crime Tip line at (707) 268-2539.

Last year, state lawmakers broke from tradition by not including an exception for the California coast in a major housing law.

That deliberate omission came despite opposition from the California Coastal Commission — the voter-created state agency tasked since 1976 with scrutinizing anything that gets built, demolished, dug, divvied up, fixed, tamped down or clear cut within the California Coastal Zone. A stretch of land that grazes the entirety of California’s 840-mile coast, the zone reaches inland from high tide, 1,000 feet at its narrowest and five miles at its thickest.

“Once you start exempting classes of development from the Coastal Act,” Sarah Christie, the commission’s legislative director, warned CalMatters at the time, “there will be no shutting that barn door.”

Sure enough, a small herd of bills now trotting through the Legislature would further erode the commission’s long-guarded authority in the interest of spurring more housing on some of California’s most exclusive, valuable and tightly regulated real estate.

The bills — all by Democrats — take different tacks:

• Exempt from the Coastal Act apartment projects that make use of density bonus law, a policy that lets developers build taller, higher and with fewer restrictions if they set aside units for lower income residents. It’s by San Diego Assemblymember David Alvarez.
• Make the same exception for accessory dwelling units, often known as granny units or casitas. It’s by Encinitas Sen. Catherine Blakespear.
• Force the Commission to more quickly process appeals of locally-approved apartment buildings, also a Blakespear bill.
• Cut a chunk of San Francisco out of the Coastal Zone entirely. It’s authored by that city’s senator, Scott Wiener.

Together they show that many pro-housing legislators have taken heart from last year’s battle for the coast.

“The Coastal Commission and the Coastal Act have been a bit of a sacred cow and that has meant that it has been carved out of a lot of bills,” said Sen. Blakespear. Reevaluating whether that should be the case is “an area of an emerging focus from the Legislature.”

The commission is opposed to Wiener’s bill to redraw the San Francisco coastal boundary unless it’s dramatically amended. While it has yet to take formal positions on the remaining bills, it’s clear they don’t welcome this legislative trend.

“We’re troubled by the number of bills this year that seek to undermine the Coastal Act in the name of promoting housing,” said Coastal Commission Executive Director Kate Huckelbridge in a written statement. “We know from experience that abundant housing and coastal resource protection are not mutually exclusive.”

The commission is likely swimming against the political current. Last year’s apartment boosting bill squeaked through the Assembly’s Natural Resources Committee over the opposition of its chair, Arletta Democratic Assemblymember Luz Rivas.

That committee has a new chair now: Culver City Democratic, Assemblymember Isaac Bryan, whom many expect to be more receptive to housing production bills. Ditto for the Assembly as a whole. The new Democratic speaker, Salinas’ Robert Rivas (no relation to Luz Rivas), has signaled that he wants the Legislature to do more than “chip around the corners” on housing policy.

What needs protection?

In recent years, state lawmakers have passed a slew of bills stripping local governments of their ability to delay housing projects. In most of California now, a developer interested in building most forms of affordable housing or accessory dwelling units need not conduct an extensive environmental analysis, submit to public meetings or win over skeptical elected officials.

But whatever authority local governments have lost, the Coastal Commission has retained. That puts the Coastal Zone, which is largely undeveloped but also includes significant chunks of urbanized beach communities including Santa Monica, Venice, Long Beach, San Diego and Santa Cruz in a separate regulatory universe from the rest of the state.

And for good reason, say the commission and its defenders.

“Sea level rise is a serious threat along the coast and, in particular, in urbanized areas,” said Joel Reynolds, western director of the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental legal advocacy nonprofit. “The Legislature was very aware of the fact that the scope of the (Coastal Act) was going to cover developed areas in addition to undeveloped areas. I think the case for that has only gotten stronger.”

In 1972 voters — concerned that encroaching development was cutting off coastal access for all Californians, and outraged by the 1969 Santa Barbara oil spill — passed an initiative to create the California Coastal Commission. Its rallying cry was “Save our Coast” — a determination to keep California’s shores from becoming a West Coast version of Miami Beach.

Within a few years the Legislature made the commission a permanent agency with broad authority to protect the state’s coastal resources. Those include the natural variety, such as wetlands, estuaries, creeks and the state’s chalky, erosion-prone bluffs, but also human-centric benefits such as public access, cheap accommodations, ocean views, social and cultural diversity, and aesthetics.

Pro-housing advocates argue that the law should apply less rigidly in places where dense development already exists.

“​​A 10-unit mixed income project in Venice Beach simply does not have the environmental salience as the Santa Barbara oil spill,” said Louis Mirante, a lobbyist with the Bay Area Council, which is co-sponsoring the Alvarez density bonus bill. “The Coastal Act is so dubious of housing it harms the environment.”

The environmental case for more coastal construction goes like this: More apartments in downtown Santa Cruz or Santa Monica will allow more people to live closer to the state’s job centers without the need for long commutes and air-conditioned sprawl.

That view represents a break from the kind of environmentalism that birthed the Coastal Act, in which restricting development and democratizing the planning process was seen as the best way to protect Earth. As public concern over climate change has eclipsed that conservationist impulse, a fissure has emerged within both the California and national Democratic coalition between development skeptics and a new coalition of liberal ‘build-baby-build’-ers.

“The commission has very strong muscles to stop things, because that’s most of their job. But their muscles to help things happen are basically non-existent,” said Will Moore, policy director at Circulate San Diego, a transportation and housing advocacy nonprofit that is also co-sponsoring the Alvarez bill. As a result, the commissioners “protect us from a lot of bad things,” he said. “But housing is a good thing.”

He emphasized that the density bonus law, for example, only applies to places already zoned for multifamily housing: “Nobody is going out and building a skyscraper in the lagoon.”

Coastal elites

Just shy of 1 million people live in California’s coastal zone, according to an analysis provided to CalMatters by Nicholas Depsky, a climate change research consultant at the United Nations Development Programme.

That sliver of the state population — less than 2.5% — does not represent the state as a whole. Roughly two-thirds of those coastal dwellers are non-Hispanic whites, according to Depsky’s analysis. That would make the coastal zone roughly twice as white as California’s population.

It’s also an enclave of relative affluence. A UCLA School of Law research paper from 2011 found that neighborhoods just inside the Coastal Zone had lower population densities and fewer children than those just outside of it. The homes themselves were 20% more expensive, even after the researchers added statistical controls for a home’s distance from the beach.

The researchers attributed the difference to the introduction of the Coastal Act and its tighter regulatory scheme on new housing, which “triggered both supply and demand effects that on net have gentrified the area.”

Members of the Coastal Commission and its staff regularly counter that it has never rejected a proposed affordable housing project. In fact, even if rejecting housing projects was the commission’s goal — which the commission stresses is not the case — it rarely gets the opportunity to do so.

In most of the cities that dot the coast, regulatory enforcement has been delegated to local authorities through commission-sanctioned development plans. The public can appeal projects approved by those local authorities to the Coastal Commission itself, but only in designated areas especially close to the shore and other protected waterways.

Those appeals are relatively rare.

Of the 1,261 coastal development permits issued by local governments last year, just 48 were appealed, according to commission data. In roughly two-thirds of those cases, the commission deferred to the local government and declined to review the project. The Commission only denied two of the projects after accepting their appeals.

Commission critics argue that looking solely at the number of appeals ignores all the housing that was reduced, slowed down or saddled with higher costs as it made its way through the regulatory process. They also point to a hypothetical universe of developments that would have been proposed in a more development-friendly regulatory regime but weren’t, out of fear of the Coastal Act.

“I suspect a lot of projects don’t get proposed knowing that there’s going to be an additional delay and additional appeal risk,” said Nolan Gray, research director for pro-development California YIMBY. “We only see the projects where the developer is like, ‘YOLO!’”

A proposed condo development, Pisani Place, in Los Angeles’ Venice neighborhood, is one recent example of a housing project that wasn’t flat-out denied by the Coastal Commission, but died in the face of its regulatory scrutiny anyway.

Despite it being approved by the city of Los Angeles, the Coastal Commission took issue with the designs and overall benefits of the project. The project included affordable units, but they were half the size of the market-rate condos and located partially below the sidewalk

Commission staff noted that the project raised concerns about the “equitable distribution of environmental benefits,” that its various density bonuses were not “the least impactful on coastal resources,” and that the proposed building was “out of character with the surrounding structures because it does not respect the prevailing height or mass of the existing residences.”

Rather than redesign the project under the Coastal Commission’s guidance, the developers withdrew their application this month.

A middle ground on the coast?

Robin Rudisill, co-founder of Citizens Preserving Venice who appealed the project, said the developer never made a compelling case that the project’s use of state density bonus law was consistent with the Coastal Act. She blamed the Los Angeles for approving the project anyway.

“If the city had done its job, this poor developer would have understood the correct regulations along the way and maybe he could have made modifications that would have made things work,” she said.

Current law requires that the Coastal Act and state density bonus law be “harmonized so as to achieve the goal of increasing the supply of affordable housing in the coastal zone while also protecting coastal resources and coastal access.”

What that means in practice — especially when the two statutes often seem to require opposite outcomes — isn’t always easy to say. Rudisill said she knows of a “reasonable” middle ground when she sees it, pointing to a handful of density bonus projects sitting in the planning pipeline for Venice.

“They’re getting a lot of extra units. They’re getting extra height and, you know, some variances and open space and yards and everything,” she said. “But they’re not asking for the max. They’re not getting greedy.”

The current regulatory system allows for a nuanced debate, said Rudisill. “It may take some hard meetings and listening to the community and really understanding the impact,” she said. “That’s why it’s a discretionary decision.”

From the outside, that nuanced debate — which the bills under consideration this year would do away with or severely limit — can look a lot like haggling.

In Santa Cruz, a density bonus project proposed along the San Lorenzo riverwalk was appealed to the Coastal Commission last October. The commission rejected the appeal, allowing the project to move forward, after the developer agreed to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on affordable housing and to construct a series of publicly accessible walkways through the property.

Exempting that project from the Coastal Act would mean “then we wouldn’t be having any of these debates about ‘community character,’” said Lee Butler, the city’s planning director. “But we could also be vulnerable to the scenario where we are seeing density bonus used to preclude public access.

###

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

###

PREVIOUSLY:

• In Coast Central Credit Union’s First Competitive Board Election in Nine Years, a Slate of New Candidates Aims to Boost Member Involvement
• Incumbents Win Re-Election to Coast Central Credit Union Board, Along With One Newcomer
• For the Second Year Running, Coast Central Credit Union Board Election Sees Challenger Focused on Transparency, Greater Member Involvement

###

Press release from Carrie Peyton-Dahlberg:

In the wake of a complaint to state regulators, Coast Central Credit Union recently posted on its website the vote counts from the last two annual elections for its board of directors.

“This is a huge step, coming after months of refusing to disclose these numbers, and I commend the credit union and its board for releasing the vote tallies,” said Carrie Peyton-Dahlberg, who brought the complaint to the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation.

According to the Coast Central website, January 2023 vote tallies for the board of directors were:

• Kelly Walsh: 1,545 votes (54.5%), elected to a 3-year term
• Rees Hughes: 1,359 votes (47.9%), elected to a 3-year term
• John Gladding: 1,271 votes (44.8%), elected to a 3-year term
• James Kloor: 1,141 votes (40.2%), not elected
• Maricela Aceves Wexler: 1,103 votes (38.9%), not elected
• Kassidy Banducci:1,010 votes (35.6%), not elected
• Dane Valadao: 848 votes (29.9%), not elected

According to Coast Central’s website, January 2024 vote tallies were:

Volunteer Board of Directors

• Matt Wakefield: 1,641 votes (73.1%), elected to a 3-year term
• Terry Anne Meierding: 1,600 votes (71.3%), elected to a 3-year term
• Ron Rudebock: 1,520 votes (67.7%), elected to a 3-year term
• Dane Valadao: 1,346 votes (60.0%), elected to a 1-year term for the remainder of a 2023 retiree’s term
• Carrie Peyton-Dahlberg: 1,174 votes (52.3%), not elected

Volunteer Supervisory Committee

• Paula Mushrush: 1,881 votes (83.8%), elected to a 3-year term

Ron Rudebock, chair of Coast Central’s board of directors, explained the credit union’s change of heart in a formal response to the state, which was addressed to Peyton-Dahlberg but emailed to the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation.

“In response to members requests at the annual meeting and in the spirit of enhanced transparency and goodwill, we have taken the additional step of posting the vote totals from the previous year on our website,” Rudebock wrote. “We hope this action demonstrates our commitment to transparency and our dedication to addressing the concerns of our members.”

For more than a year, James Sessa, president/CEO of the member-owned credit union, declined multiple requests from past candidates, their supporters and members of the media to release the 2023 numbers. Among those who asked, and were turned down, were James Kloor, who ran for the credit union board of directors on the “Members Voice” ticket in January 2023, and Peyton-Dahlberg, who ran for the board of directors in January 2024.

In addition, during a question period after the Coast Central Credit Union annual meeting in February 2024, several member-owners asked for more detailed election results, including listing the actual votes received by each candidate, rather than just providing the names of winners. However, Sessa countered that Coast Central does not release vote tallies because it wants all elected board members to be seen as being on equal footing, no matter how many votes they received.

The day after that meeting, on Feb. 23, Peyton-Dahlberg filed her complaint with the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation, asking the state to require that the vote totals be released.

The state notified Peyton-Dahlberg on March 15 via Rudebock’s letter that the vote counts are now released.

The vote totals themselves, rather than just the names of winners, were important for several reasons, Peyton-Dahlberg wrote in her complaint to the state. First, if the tally had been very close, it would have raised questions about how Coast Central handled its procedures for disqualifying votes based on signature discrepancies. Second, the board of directors needed that hard data on how member-owners viewed different candidates and their ideas.

A subcommittee of the board considered both Wexler and Valadao, among others, for appointment to several board vacancies that arose later in 2023. They appointed Valadao even though he received 255 fewer votes than Wexler, who ran on the “Members Voice” slate. They also appointed Wakefield and Meierding, passing up two other opportunities to appoint Wexler.

In her complaint to the state, Peyton-Dahlberg argued that making these appointments without knowing the vote totals of all applicants violated the board’s duty to act in the best interests of its member-owners. That issue was not addressed by the state. In his letter, Rudebock wrote that the appointment subcommittee relies on “a comprehensive understanding of the qualifications and contributions of each candidate and the talent gaps within the board to make informed decisions, rather than solely on the number of votes they received.”

With Coast Central’s written response, the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation has now closed the file on Peyton-Dahlberg’s complaint. It explained: “Please understand that this does not mean your concerns do not have merit. The DFPI provides a service by requiring its licensees to respond to consumer complaints in writing. But, in general, the DFPI cannot intervene on behalf of individual consumers in any particular case. The Department brings consumer protection actions when we find patterns of deception, misrepresentation or unfair business practices of statewide interest.”

The department regulates credit unions and other financial service providers, and Peyton-Dahlberg encouraged anyone having consumer issues with their bank or credit union to turn to it as a possible resource.

She also urged Coast Central member-owners to use their comment cards to ask for further progress, such as publicly announcing board vacancies, revising board election rules so they don’t hinder election outreach, and changing the board appointment process so that future vacancies can be filled in a way that is more representative of community demographics.

“Coast Central is moving in a good direction, including releasing these numbers, putting 2024 election reminders in each branch and making sure that its ballots were sent in clearly labeled envelopes,” Peyton-Dahlberg said. “All of these are big improvements over the January 2023 election, and I hope this is starting a new trend.

 “Bit by bit, if member-owners stay involved, we can encourage Coast Central to move further down this path of listening to the people who own it,” she said. 

Press release from Humboldt Bay Fire:

On 3/18/2024 @ approximately 03:20 Humboldt Bay Fire responded to a reported house on fire on Surfside Drive in the Humboldt Hill area of Eureka. Humboldt Bay Fire responded with 1 Chief Officer, 3 Fire Engines and 1 Fire Truck for a total of 14 professional fire service personnel.

The first fire crew arrived on scene and reported a fire burning in the home. Units quickly went to work to simultaneously search for trapped occupants, remove smoke from the residence, and extinguish the fire. The fire was extinguished in about 45 minutes. It took approximately 2 hours to stabilize the entire incident. After the fire was extinguished Humboldt Bay Fire Department investigators began to determine the cause of the fire, which is still under investigation at this time. PG&E responded and removed the utility hazards.

Total estimated property value saved is $400,000. Damage is estimated at $175,000, and there was no civilian or firefighter injuries.

Humboldt Bay Fire would like to remind everyone that overloading a home with belongings can lead to significant fire danger. This can cause difficulty evacuating in an emergency and if there is a fire it can cause very heavy smoke and flame conditions making an already dangerous problem worse.