###

A large and lively crowd filled the Eureka Adorni Center Wednesday night to watch local men strap on pumps and strut their stuff down the runway, in what some might consider the town’s oldest drag show – the thirteenth annual High Heels for Healing. 

It was the first time that the popular fundraiser, put on by Soroptimists International of Humboldt Bay, returned to Eureka since COVID, and after the few-year hiatus the performers were ready to thrust their hips hard and the ladies, well, they couldn’t wait to make it rain dollar dollar bills, y’all. 

“It’s a great cause and it’s a lot of fun,” Gregg Foster, executive director of Redwood Region Economic Development Corporation, told the Outpost before he hit the stage. “I’ve been doing it since 2012 and it’s great to be back.” 

When asked if he found this type of performance to be similar to drag, Foster, who was sporting a loud 1970s pimp-style costume and black and white spectator pumps, enthusiastically replied “Absolutely! And of course, drag is fun. Drag is cool.” 

Foster was one of more than a dozen local men participating in the event. Some of them, like Foster, were seasoned veterans, while others were walking for their first time, each representing a different walk of life – from rodeo cowboys to business professionals. And whether they sashayed, trotted, danced, gyrated, crawled or shook their booty, each brought their own unique flavor to the runway, all while eagerly accepting money thrown at them or tucked into their shirts or waistbands. 

Sound a little like a strip club? Well, pearl-clutchers need not worry – all the gentlemen’s clothes stayed on and the dancing was only somewhat bawdy. The event was many times referred to as “good, clean fun.” Heck! Some folks even brought their kiddos along to join the festivities. And everyone seemed to be having a ball. 

Plus, it’s all for charity! All the tips for the performers, as well as the tickets for the event and the auction, go to fund the efforts of Soroptimists Humboldt Bay, which helps low-income women and children to achieve their educational and career goals. 

Laura Middlemiss, a Soroptimists board member and previous director, told the Outpost that she was thrilled with the turnout, especially after the event had to take a few years off, and was happy to see the audience having such a good time and giving so generously.

When the event first started 13 years ago, Middlemiss said, the idea was that it would improve men’s empathy for women to have them literally “walk in their shoes.” The men who participated started getting so into it that it naturally evolved into the rambunctious party that it is today. 

“The men in our community are just so supportive and enthusiastic,” Middlemiss said. “And they’re enjoying themselves. It’s lighthearted. It’s really just about having a really enjoyable time.”

And though Middlemiss does understand that playing with the traditional gender roles is part of the spirit of the event, she doesn’t think of the show as drag, which she feels holds its own significant role in the community. 

“I don’t think it’s the same thing,” she said. “I wouldn’t want to diminish the importance or the artistic experience that drag can be.” 

And it did seem that this show lacked some of the choreography, lip-syncing and makeup and costume artistry one would see at a local drag show (no death drops or duck walks here.) But some attendees felt that the similarities were clear, especially when it came to the intention of both types of events.  

Gini Noggle, better known by stage name Jamie Bondage, hosts many local drag and burlesque shows and attended this year’s High Heels for Healing for the first time to see what it was like. Following the show, Noggle said that, though there were some definite differences, she was struck by the similarities. 

And in a time when local drag shows have prompted protests and scorn, and drag show bans are sweeping the U.S., maybe it’s a good time to focus on what makes us the same, rather than what makes us different. 

“What I saw tonight was a fun show with performers having a great time and who were totally supportive of each other,” Noggle wrote to the Outpost. “…We are all in this together. If we’re lucky we’re all in it together for a long time. [We] might as well make it a good time. Go out, see shows of ALL types and keep supporting your local performers and nonprofits.”

Scroll down for more pics of the fun!

###

PREVIOUSLY:

• Blue Lake Rancheria, Employees Reach Union Agreement

###

Press release from the Blue Lake Rancheria:

The Blue Lake Rancheria (“Tribe”) is pleased to announce it has completed an agreement with the UNITE HERE International Union. The Union represents over one hundred hospitality workers at the Blue Lake Casino, Blue Lake Hotel, several restaurants, fuel station, and convenience store, which are among the Tribe’s largest government-owned economic enterprises.

With the ongoing labor shortages in the hospitality, restaurant, and other retail industries, the Tribe views Union partnership as a progressive way to retain employees, to co-design compensation packages with priorities identified by employees, e.g., healthcare, paid time off, retirement plans, and to stay competitive as a preferred employer for those looking for work.

Under the agreement, employees have access to competitive wages that keep pace with costs of living in the region, more paid time off, and benefits that support working parents - all items proposed by Union representatives and employees during negotiations. The Tribe and the Union also have a cooperative labor management process to jointly bring workplace issues to resolution.

As one of the largest employers in Humboldt County, the Blue Lake Rancheria Tribe recognizes the benefits of unionized labor including employee recruitment and retention, and an employment organizing structure designed to be fair and balanced.

###

About Blue Lake Rancheria

The Blue Lake Rancheria, California (BLR) is a federally recognized, sovereign Native American tribe and government located in northwest California. BLR was originally established as a refuge for homeless Indians by Executive Order in 1908. In 1958, during the ‘era of termination,’ BLR was terminated as a Tribe by the federal government. After 25 years of termination, and as a result of the Tillie Hardwick v. United States of America decision, BLR was reinstated as a federally recognized Tribe in 1983. Today, BLR has ~100 acres of trust lands spanning the Mad River in Humboldt County, California, within the ancestral territory of the Wiyot people. For more information please see: https://www.bluelakerancheria-nsn.gov

###

[DISCLOSURE: The Blue Lake Rancheria is a minority owner in the Outpost’s parent company, Lost Coast Communications, Inc.]

###

The Eureka City Council took several actions on Tuesday to further the development of affordable housing in downtown and Old Town.

The action came just one day after Citizens for a Better Eureka announced that it would sue the City of Eureka over its big push to develop affordable housing on downtown parking lots. The group includes several former elected officials and candidates, property owners and business owners. The 32 petitioners claim the City of Eureka “failed to meet the requirements under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to properly assess the environmental impacts of the housing developments planned for city parking lots.”

As of this writing, the group has not filed the lawsuit.

It’s no surprise that Security National Servicing Corporation, a Eureka-based company dealing in real estate acquisition and management, is leading the charge against the city. Earlier this year, the company’s president and CEO Rob Arkley vowed to move his company’s headquarters outside city limits in response to the ​​city’s recent efforts to convert municipal parking lots into affordable housing developments.

This week’s Eureka City Council meeting focused on a cluster of vacant parcels along the city’s waterfront. The three parcels occupy a four-and-three-quarter-acre stretch along the boardwalk between the C and F street plazas. The land is zoned waterfront commercial, which also allows hotels and motels as principally permitted uses. With a conditional use permit, the properties could also include professional offices, warehouses, multi-family units and upper-floor residences.

The city council was tasked with deciding whether or not the city-owned parcels should be declared “surplus,” in accordance with the California Land Surplus Act, to allow the city to lease or sell the properties to make way for affordable housing and mixed-use development.

Several representatives of Security National spoke up during the public comment portion of Tuesday’s meeting. One employee, Allison Holland — Arkley’s daughter — said she could understand that the “city is under significant pressure to comply with the state housing requirements” and supports “finding ways to meet those housing needs,” but said the company “cannot stand by [the city’s] proposal to reshape our downtown in a way that is short-sighted.”

“The waterfront is one of our city’s greatest assets and we need to make sure that it’s safe and accessible for everyone,” Holland said. “While you’re saying that you’ll put retail on the street level and multifamily housing above, there are numerous flaws with your plan.”

Holland

Holland asserted that the waterfront parcels were contaminated, “making it impossible to build housing and retail buildings without major remediation and cost.” Development of the parcels would also impact surrounding wildlife, she said, and obstruct the view of Humboldt Bay. She suggested that the city scrap the plan and allow her employer to purchase the waterfront property and turn it into a park.

“Security National Properties is wanting and willing to buy all three parcels and turn them into a park that will be accessible for all of the residents and visitors to downtown,” she said. “This will further the vision of a beautiful and accessible Eureka waterfront. Let’s turn these parcels into a park and take away the controversies. Please table this agenda item until you heard our full offer and thoroughly assessed the pros and cons of using our waterfront property – the gem of our town – for housing.”

Eureka architect John Ash suggested the city use the parcels for a waterfront hotel. He and his wife, Delores Vellutini, spent years trying to develop a mixed-use project with retail, office and residential space on the site but after a series of setbacks, including a lawsuit and an appeal to the California Coastal Commission, they switched gears and decided to pursue a waterfront hotel project. That, too, failed to come to fruition.

“We got a project that we brought to the city back in 2010 for a Marriott Hotel with 170 units,” he said. “I did some analysis on it at the time and updated it. Assuming a conservative room rate of $150 a night and an average occupancy of 70 percent, the total room revenue for the hotel would exceed $7,590,000 annually. That’s at 70 percent of occupancy. The city’s current [transient occupancy] tax … at 12 percent would [bring in] $911,000 annually … that could be used to solve a lot of challenges for providing housing for the city.”

He acknowledged that the Marriott plan was no longer an option but said, “other hotels would be interested in coming here.”

Speaking shortly after her husband during public comment, Vellutini called the proposal “offensive” and said the development of low-income housing on the parcels would violate the California Coastal Act.

“The California Coastal Commission has the condition that any development or use of waterfront property in the Coastal Zone should be consistent with a Coastal Act’s policies, which include protecting and enhancing public access to and along the coast,” she said. “The Coastal Act defines visitor-serving uses as providing recreational and educational opportunities for the public, such as hotels, restaurants, parks and other similar facilities. Not low-income or [very-low-income] housing … to solve [the city’s] homeless challenges.”

Several other speakers took issue with the fact that the development would host very-low-income to low-income housing, arguing that it would decrease property values and lead to an uptick in crime in Old Town.

“I have three legally permitted Airbnbs in Old Town and I have had many tourists cancel their stay before they even get to my property just from driving in the neighborhood due to feeling unsafe from the issues of transients in the area,” said Tia Hampstead. “I believe these cancellations will increase if very-low-income housing gets put here. … We have so many empty buildings in Old Town due to businesses suffering from this economy but mainly from theft and vandalism, which has gotten worse and most likely won’t improve with the addition of low-income housing.”

And, of course, there’s the issue of parking. Eureka resident Minnie Wolf said she is already “very concerned about the parking situation” in downtown and Old Town. If the waterfront parcels were to be developed, it would only exacerbate existing issues, she said.

Wolf

“I leave if I cannot find a parking place and it’s really, really frustrating,” Wolf said. “If you want to get a burrito from the burrito place near the parking lot on D Street [and] you can’t find a parking place, I guess you just leave because there’s nowhere to park and you can’t get your burrito. … It’s like the city council doesn’t want businesses to survive in Old Town.”

Adam Dick and Dustin Taylor, the owners of Dick Taylor Craft Chocolate, agreed that the city needs more housing but asked the city to reconsider potential development on the parcel that runs parallel to the waterfront next to their business.

“The third parcel that borders the boardwalk to me is very, very different [from the others],” Dick said. “The activities that I see going on there daily are very, very different. I think we have this impression that there’s, like, the riff-raff and the tweakers are all hanging out there, but I see people feeding the birds all day long. I see people walking their dogs all day long. I see FedEx guys taking their lunch breaks there. … Let’s figure out a better way that continues to enhance the user experience down there on the waterfront rather than cutting off a piece of property that I feel like people are already actively using.”

Only a few members of the public spoke in favor of the proposed housing development. Eureka resident and local business owner Jenna Catsos said she would support “any housing projects that [the city] might bring forward.”

“I think everyone understands that we have a housing crisis that we’re facing, and at some point, we need to build housing to fix that crisis,” she said. “We could spend all day coming up with every single little problem that we might see with every single proposal that will come in front of [the council], or we can finally prioritize our friends and neighbors who need this housing.”

Catsos added that “low-income is not a dirty word,” as other speakers had implied. “I think that a lot of us would be alarmed by what the income level is that qualifies as low income,” she said. “A lot of us fall into that category and we all need housing.”

Another resident, Althea Christensen, spoke in favor of mixed-use development on the parcels. “If you say the waterfront should [have] cafes and restaurants and retail stores and, you know, aquatic serving businesses, that’s fine. That can still happen. Just put a floor or two of apartments above them. That’s what this is.”

And if more people live in Old Town, it will make the whole area safer, said Eureka resident Caroline Griffith. “When I lived down there, oftentimes in the evening I would go for walks and it would just be empty, which really feels kind of sketchy and dangerous,” she said. “So having more folks actually living in the area does a lot to help make the community feel more vibrant, safer and more livable.”

Following the lengthy public comment period, Mayor Kim Bergel asked staff to clarify what level of income constitutes low-income and very-low-income. “It’s not necessarily people living at the [Rescue] Mission, is what I’m trying to say.”

According to the State Income Limits for 2022 from the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), the average median income for a single person living in Humboldt County in 2022 is $56,200 per year. A person making $43,650 would be considered low-income. 

“Every year that gets updated and there’s usually a slight increase in the number,” said City Manager Miles Slattery. “Depending on when these are built and when they’re ready for tenants, it will be based on the current median income.”

Slattery

“So, what I’m hearing is … these are people that work in restaurants, people that work in hotels, these are teachers,” Bergel said. “I just wanted to clarify that before we moved on because I heard a lot of talk of negative talk about what this might look like.”

Councilmember Scott Bauer asked staff if the parcels were contaminated, as a few speakers had suggested. Principal Planner Kristen Goetz said there could be an “issue with a diesel spill that happened a number of years ago” on the westernmost parcel, according to a previous environmental site assessment (ESA). However, she said the ESA “didn’t find any significant issues” regarding contamination.

Bauer also asked if the city had received any offers to develop the parcels in the last five years. 

Slattery said he “get[s] calls all the time from hoteliers,” locally and from out of the area, and has had conversations with them about integrating housing into a potential development. “It’s totally feasible and totally can happen,” he said. “Do the finances pencil out? Typically no, but there is that ability to do that. … As council knows, this has been through two previous processes and both of them ended up in lawsuits and didn’t go anywhere.”

“So, by surplussing the property, we’re not precluding those other activities?” Bauer asked.

“No, not at all,” Slattery said.

Bauer also asked why the parcels would be exempt from environmental review in accordance with CEQA. “I know there were some questions about CEQA and, just to kind of clarify to people, surplussing is not really a CEQA event,” Bauer said. “Future activities, like development, will have to go through CEQA, correct?”

“That’s absolutely correct,” Slattery said. “There is a specific exemption when you’re going through the Surplus Land Act process, and that’s the exemption that we’re using for this particular action. But for future development on that property, we will certainly revisit CEQA at that time.”

Slattery added that the Surplus Land Act requires municipalities to promote affordable housing development on unused or underutilized public land. “We can’t just sell it to whoever we want for whatever we think is appropriate,” he said. “If there is a denial of this surplus, we would not be in good standing with the housing element. We could be faced with potential action by the state, which they’ve done most recently with a bunch of cities that have passed legislation that is against housing.”

Councilmember Kati Moulton asked why nothing ever came out of the design charrette process back in 2015. Slattery said the majority of the designs simply weren’t feasible.

“All of the issues concerning buildings being close to the road, almost all of the design charrettes have that but they also have a lot of open space between the buildings and the boardwalk to avoid shading,” he said. “Those things are a high priority [and] listed in the [request for proposals] RFP for [developers] to consider.”

Councilmember G. Mario Fernandez asked about the next steps in the RFP process if the council were to approve staff’s recommendation to surplus the parcels. Goetz said the council would also have to adopt a resolution to authorize the release of the RFP (more on that below). Once that’s done, she said the city will open the RFP and invite respondents to an informational meeting about the process and the city’s priorities for the parcels. The respondents will have 60 days to respond to the RFP, then there will be another 90-day period in which the city can negotiate with the respondents.

“Normally what we would do is the city manager would appoint a review panel to review all of the responses to the RFP and they would make a recommendation to council and then the council would go from there,” she said.

Councilmember Leslie Castellano asked what would happen if the city didn’t like any of the proposals. “Or, let’s say someone does meet [our parameters] but we don’t think it fits the City of Eureka. … What’s our obligation at that point?” she asked.

“That’s part of the 90-day negotiating period,” Slattery said. “We could go through that [process] and there could be a decision that we’re just not happy and then we would still own the property. The property would still be a part of our housing element. We’d still have a requirement to fulfill that part of our [Regional Housing Needs Allocation] and create 95 units, but if it came to that point, we can say negotiations fell out and we’re not proceeding.”

At that juncture, the city could initiate a second RFP process, he added.

Councilmember Renee Contreras-DeLoach asked why the city was required to put 95 affordable housing units on the three parcels. Slattery explained that the city is required to create a certain number of housing units in accordance with the housing element for 2019-2027 and, in essence, previous plans to develop specific properties fell through and the city found itself at a housing deficit. 

Contreras-DeLoach noted that community members don’t seem to object to mixed-use development on the parcel — the big concern, she said, is high-density development.

“You know, 95 units is quite a lot,” she said. “That’s either going to have to sprawl [across] the entire lot, be incredibly small or it has to go up into four stories, or three stories at least.”

“With three acres, if you were to do studios, I think there’s more than ample room,” Slattery said. “Doing it two stories would be available if you used all of that space. If you look at Seventh and Myrtle, there are 37 units there and they’re two bedroom … and that’s maybe on a third of an acre.”

Goetz corrected Slattery and noted that the development has a mix of studios, one-, two- and three-bedroom apartments.

After a bit of additional discussion, Moulton made a motion to approve staff’s recommendation and declare the three city-owned parcels as surplus. Fernandez offered a second and the motion passed in a 4-1 vote, with Contreras-DeLoach dissenting. 

###

The council also approved a resolution to declare the parking lot at Fifth and D Streets, next to the Lloyd building, as surplus to make way for affordable housing. The conversation was much shorter than the waterfront parcel discussion and was approved in a unanimous vote.

###

The last agenda item of the evening was a request from staff to initiate the RFP process for the development of affordable housing on five city-owned sites, including the three aforementioned waterfront parcels, the parking lot at Fifth and D Streets and the parking lot next to Eureka City Hall at Sixth and L Streets.

The conversation focused on many of the same concerns raised during the previous discussion about the waterfront lots, the difference with this item being that it focused on the draft RFP guidelines.

The council went round and round discussing potential restrictions on building height and whether the RFP guidelines should require developers to include a set amount of public and/or open space within the design. 

Castellano strongly advocated for a longer RFP process to provide the respondents with more time to come up with a design. Rather than 60 days, she suggested they provide the respondents with 180 days. She eventually whittled that number down to 120 days.

About halfway through the discussion, Fernandez suggested the council split the item in two and vote approve the RFP for the lots at Fifth and D Streets and Sixth and L Streets because the council’s discussion remained focused on the waterfront lots. He made a motion and Bauer offered a second. 

Castellano asked Fernandez if he would be open to a friendly amendment to the motion that would allow for more housing units to be built on each of the lots. He said yes and the motion passed in a unanimous vote.

The council spent another half hour discussing the guidelines for the waterfront lots. There were a couple of attempted motions and substitute motions that failed. 

Fernandez eventually made a motion to authorize staff to issue an RFP to be opened for 120 days, with 15 points added for 25 percent public space, 15 points for visitor-serving elements on the first and top floors of the development, and another 15 points for design continuity to other Old Town buildings. The motion passed 3-2 with Contreras De Loach and Moulton dissenting.

###

Today HUMBOLDT CONVERSATIONS wraps up a series on the City of Eureka’s efforts to tackle homelessness and the mental health crisis — specifically, the work coordinated by the UPLIFT Eureka program.

Today we get the law enforcement perspective on these efforts with Commander Lenny La France, who leads the Eureka Police Department’s Community Safety Engagement Team, which is charged with responding to many of the city’s calls relating to homelessness and people in crisis. 

Previous episodes in this series included:

• Jeff Davis, the head of UPLIFT Eureka, which serves to coordinate much of the work the city is doing for people suffering from homelessness and mental health impairment.
• Sierra Wood, director of the “Pathway to Payday” program, which teaches job/career skills to city residents from a variety of backgrounds.
• Mental health clinician Jacob Rosen, leader of the city’s CARE program, about providing services to people in crisis

With that: Commander La France. Video above, transcript below.

###

JOHN KENNEDY O’CONNOR:

Well, welcome to another Humboldt Conversation. I’m here now with Commander Lenny La France, who is the Community Safety Engagement … part of the Community Safety Engagement team … that’s quite a long sentence … for the Eureka Police Department.

Commander La France, great to meet you. Thank you so much for talking to us.

LA FRANCE:

Thank you.

O’CONNOR:

Now, you’ve started the CSET, which is a partnership with the City of Eureka’s Uplift Eureka Program and the EPD. When was the program started?

COMMANDER LEONARD LA FRANCE:

The program was created in July of 2018 when we were looking at addressing certain issues along the waterfront in Old Town.

O’CONNOR:

And what is the mission of the CSET program? 

LA FRANCE:

The mission of CSET now has transformed from where it began initially to where it is now. So, it’s really focused on addressing issues of mental health, substance use disorder, and then mental illness.

O’CONNOR:

And it’s really helping the most vulnerable in the community isn’t it, that’s what it’s aimed for.

LA FRANCE:

Yeah, it’s really more of a less policing unit, more of a social service program, but also has the ability, obviously, to enforce laws as well. But it’s much more able to directly connect people with resources in the field and to do much more proactive outreach with folks.

O’CONNOR:

And the main area you’re covering, it seems to be Old Town, the waterfront, city parks as well, but it does actually cover the whole city.

LA FRANCE:

It does. So, initially the goal was to really look at city parks, Old Town and the waterfront. However, as this program kind of blossomed, we looked at more mental illness and mental health issues across the whole entire community. And so now CSET responds to 40 percent of all mental health calls within the city. They respond to people in crisis calls.

O’CONNOR:

We’re going to be talking to Jacob Rosen as well, because that’s another partnership that the city has created. But when I spoke to Jeff Davis from Uplift Eureka, he described the CSET program as being very, very successful — highly successful, I think he says. So what progress has been made in the five years that it’s been running?

LA FRANCE:

So I think a lot of it is just the human connections we’re making with folks that are either on the street or having often going to crisis or mental health issues or want to go to treatment. So the ability to actually directly connect people to from the street right to a rehab facility or from a street into a housing program. That’s been a success for us. I think over the past … since 2018, about 220 plus people directly from street to rehab centers. And then of course with our partner Uplift, which is our outreach side of our sibling unit, they’ve done I think it was 150 people in housing. That’s probably a low number, but we’ve done a ton of folks in housing besides our other programs.

But there’s a lot of other data we collect. So people connect to resources including housing, you know looking at food, clothing, whatever, to really meet those needs and those gaps that are in the community that we just fill until we can send them off to a much larger organization to kind of do the long-term work.

O’CONNOR:

And who are those organisations that you’re partnering with?

LA FRANCE:

So, we work with a lot of people. The biggest one obviously is the county, DHHS. We also work with Betty Chinn, the Mission, Salvation Army, St. Vincent DePaul, or Free Meal. I think there’s 50 partners we work with overall.

O’CONNOR:

And actually a new warming center opened in the city a couple of weeks ago.

LA FRANCE:

There is, yep. So that’s been a project of ours since probably a couple weeks ago. The chief had this idea and handed it over to us within about a week and a half. We had the warming center operational and in partnership with Lifehouse and also with Betty Chinn Day Center. And so, actually opened tonight at Betty’s and it’s been, we’ve had any numbers any between 3 to 12 people staying there. But again, that’s 3 to 12 people that are not on the street when it’s most vulnerable with the weather. 

O’CONNOR:

The weather has been very harsh this year, it’s been very difficult. So how do you see the program developing in the future?

LA FRANCE:

That’s a good question. Our vision is really to have a three and a half prong approach to addressing again the issues of mental health, homelessness, and addiction. We have CARE, which is the mental health component for the city. We have Uplift, which is our homeless outreach team. We want to add a medical component, so either a paramedic embedded with this team who can address simple issues like if someone has a foot injury or wound care, they can address it in the field versus taking an ambulance and sending them over to St. Joe’s, taking them to a bed — which are pretty rare right now, beds. We can address those, and the half prong will be law enforcement, because we’re not always needed, but we are definitely needed in certain times. So it’s a three and a half prong approach.

O’CONNOR:

We had an interview on Humboldt Today with the mayor — actually, over a cup of tea. She brought up homelessness and there was a very surprising reaction from the audience who were saying, you know, homelessness, mental health issues, etc. They’re the problem of the individual. They’re not something that the city should be diverting resources to. I’d really like to get your feedback on that. It seemed very callous to me.

LA FRANCE:

Yeah, I would disagree. I think when you look at issues, some of the biggest issues in this community are correlation is going to be homelessness. But once you peel back the onion more, you see mental health appeal more, you see substance abuse appeal more, you find childhood trauma. And so, of course, that’s just the surface layers. We have to go further back. And there’s lots of correlation. And then, of course, there’s correlated crime as well. So crime, blight. And so we have to address these issues proactively versus saying, hey, it’s not our problem, we can walk away.

O’CONNOR:

And following on from that, some of the criticism was that if people aren’t encouraged to help themselves and the resources are put there, then the situation is just exacerbated again. And it seems a very heartless thing.

LA FRANCE:

I agree. Sometimes you have to some folks that want no assistance at all. Our 2022 survey data It was around 30% said they’re at our homeless individuals that we surveyed said they’re happy with their life. I believe it’s 30%, or somewhere in that range.

So, again, we can’t create that will for them. But the ones that are truly, truly mentally ill, that can’t make decisions for themselves are truly on a daily basis are having trouble with making decisions, we can at least push them in a certain direction or provide services. We can also use as law enforcement officers, and also use the court system if we have to to back door the system to get people to help that they actually need. 

O’CONNOR:

Well, it’s having a great impact. It’s been five years now and obviously it’s having an impact on the street. So, congratulations, and let’s hope for future success. Commander La France, great to meet you. Thank you so much. Thanks for joining us for a Humboldt Conversation and join us for another Humboldt Conversation very soon.

For 22-year-old Henry Sanchez, a 25-cent increase in the bus fare makes a big difference.

It used to be $1.50 to get from his home in Bell Gardens to Cerritos College, where he studies. Now, it’s $1.75 one-way.

“It really sucks that you have to worry about the price going up, while the quality of the services is going down,” he said at the Metro Rail station in Norwalk this week. “And trying to buy a car is harder, even getting a used car. It’s risky.”

Does he think the state should step in to help public transit systems avoid fare hikes? It could help, he said — unless that means higher taxes or the price of other things going up.

Sanchez isn’t alone in his quandary.

Transit agencies across California are grappling with a “fiscal cliff” — a decline in revenue and the end of federal funding that has been a lifeline for the last three years. Without the state stepping in, they say they may have to cut service or increase fares.

That would hit low-income people the hardest, especially those who rely exclusively on transit to get around. Any major changes would also affect commuters, the other regular group of riders.

Ridership — which was already declining as early as 2013 — dropped dramatically when the COVID-19 pandemic began in March 2020 and hasn’t fully recovered. Statewide, monthly ridership dropped from 100 million in February 2019 to about 20 million in June 2020. As of June 2022, the numbers rebounded to about 60 million, but varied by region and transportation mode.

The fares that riders pay not only help keep buses and trains running, but help agencies qualify for state and federal grants. Transit agencies say that the federal funding they’ve received during the pandemic will run out within two years.

Looking ahead, state regulations that phase out vehicles that use gasoline and diesel fuel will also reduce the tax revenue paid to transit agencies, putting more stress on their finances.

The Legislature and Gov. Gavin Newsom are drafting next year’s budget, and to help cover a deficit projected to be as much as $25 billion, Newsom is proposing delays and cuts to some transit expansions and equipment programs. That doesn’t directly impact operations, but it prompted some lawmakers to call for the state to step in with more money — while others are hoping transit agencies will be held more accountable for how they’ve spent funds.

It’s a pivotal moment for not only current services, but for the long-term future of transit in the state.

“This is a moment that is making all the difficulties that we have been having for years in public transportation in the U.S. really kind of come up,” said Giovanni Circella, a program director at UC Davis’ Institute of Transportation Studies.

There’s also the climate angle: California’s transportation sector accounts for about 40% of the state’s carbon emissions.

Getting more people out of their own gas-powered cars is essential to meeting the state Air Resources Board’s goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 48% below 1990 levels by 2030 (for the transit sector, at least 13.5% and as much as 19% for major metropolitan areas by 2035). In 2018, the board adopted a regulation that calls for all new buses to be carbon-free by 2029.

Compared to a car with only a driver, subways produce 76% less in greenhouse gas emissions per passenger mile, light rail systems 62% less, and buses 33% less, according to the U.S. Transportation Department. Those are averages; the environmental payoff from public transit depends on the number of passengers and the type of fuel used..

Public transportation in the United States saved 63 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions in 2018 — the equivalent of taking 16 coal power plants offline for a year, according to a report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.

“A focus on farebox recovery somewhat misses the mark on what transit agencies are actually doing,” said Michael Pimentel, executive director of the California Transit Association, which represents transit agencies. “Efficiency is an important criteria, but so, too, are environmental benefits and making advances on equity.”

To really reap the climate benefits and get cars off the road, California’s public transit systems need to be popular and running efficiently — and that isn’t happening in many places.

Here’s how we got here — and what some suggest can be done.

The problems (and it’s not just money)

Transit agencies rely on a mix of funding sources — federal grants, state funding, revenue from local taxes and passenger fares.

The agencies that rely more heavily on fares are the ones in the most dire situations. That includes Bay Area Rapid Transit, San Francisco’s MUNI and Los Angeles Metro.

BART ridership dropped from more than 118 million in fiscal year 2019 to about 35 million in 2022, according to the agency. In 2019, BART’s passenger fares and parking revenues totaled $520 million, funding 66% of its operations. That number dropped to 12% in 2021, and rebounded slightly last year to 21%, with passenger fares and parking totaling $147 million.

The agency received $1.6 billion through three rounds of emergency federal aid. Initial funding was limited to spending specifically on COVID-19 measures, such as emergency protective gear for employees and covering administrative leaves, but later grants allowed spending on operations. And while that funding has helped restore service to pre-pandemic levels, the system still encounters delays and cancellations, in part due to an ongoing labor shortage.

According to Brian Taylor, director of UCLA’s Institute of Transportation Studies, many transit operators retired or shifted to work with lower health risks, such as trucking. A national survey by the American Public Transportation Association in March 2022 found that retirees made up 24% of all workers who quit, while 45% left for jobs outside of the transit industry.

Taylor said one factor behind the departures is that drivers don’t want to take on the increasing role of policing behavior — first enforcing mask rules and later dealing with growing mental health, drug and homelessness crises showing up on public transit.

Those problems aren’t just keeping transit drivers away. At a legislative committee hearing in March, transit agency officials said the issues are also scaring off riders.

Since Jan. 1, 26 people have died on Metro buses and trains from suspected drug overdoses — already four more than the total deaths from any cause in all of 2022. And serious crimes — such as robbery, rape and aggravated assault — were up 24% compared to 2022.

Safety concerns add to the longstanding issues that discourage people from using public transit: how long trips take, the inconvenience of getting to a station and delays or interruptions.

It doesn’t help that some transit agencies are not being managed very well.

Recent probes of BART revealed conflict-of-interest violations, a BART employee who faked work hours and a $350,000 homeless outreach program with the Salvation Army that got only one person into a residential treatment facility after two years, according to local press reports.

In 2022, the Alameda County Grand Jury found the agency’s board, management and unions engaged in a “pattern of obstruction” against its Office of the Inspector General, which oversaw those probes.

The string of problems prompted State Sen. Steve Glazer, a Democrat from Orinda and a vocal BART critic, to resign from a legislative select committee that is advocating for more state transit funding.

BART, said Glazer, is beset by “a breakdown of all kinds of levels.”

“It’s not just about the trains, it’s a breakdown in their safety, a breakdown in oversight. It’s violations of the law.… it’s fake (security) cameras on trains, you know, massive overtime … the cost overruns, the delays,” he said.

“I’m not supportive of bailing out BART when they refuse to have fiscal oversight through a fully functioning Office of Inspector General,” he added.

In response, BART spokesperson Jim Allison said the agency supports independent oversight, and that officials “learned a lesson” from their contract with the Salvation Army.

“The outgoing inspector general is an expert in finding fraud and abuse and waste. She does not have any experience in terms of operating a railroad,” he said.Allison also said the “fiscal cliff” BART is facing is due to high fixed costs rather than mismanagement. “We’re not going to be able to cut our way out of this financial crisis,” he said. “We just have naturally built-in costs that we need to address to keep the system in a state of good repair.”

Commuters wait for buses to arrive at the Norwalk Green Line Station in Norwalk on April 3, 2023. Photo by Pablo Unzueta for CalMatters

BART isn’t the only agency to come under fire.

Assemblymember Marc Berman, a Democrat from Palo Alto, requested an audit of the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, based on concerns about the agency’s leadership that he said resulted in operations and financial issues.

But not everyone finds the future of public transit in California as bleak.

San Jose-based advocate Monica Mallon disagreed with Berman’s call for the audit, saying that while VTA has handled its finances poorly in the past, it has learned from its mistakes. And no agency should be punished for external factors such as the pandemic, she added.

“If we let agencies fall off this cliff, it’s going to be really hard to get transit back in the future,” Mallon said. “And then everybody’s going to be in traffic and complaining.”

And in Sacramento, Dan Allison, an action team member of Sacramento Transit Advocates and Riders, said Regional Transit’s outlook doesn’t seem as dire as some other agencies’ and has improved service over the years.

The solutions (and it’s mostly money)

Short-term solutions include more state money for “bridge funding” to help transit agencies avoid the “fiscal cliff.”

California’s largest systems receive less state support than other systems of their size nationally, according to an analysis by the nonprofit policy group San Francisco Bay Area Planning and Urban Research Association. In 2019, the state’s largest operators received 5% to 22% of operating funding from the state, whereas large systems in other states received 28% to 50%.

The financial crisis should not come as a shock to the state, according to Eli Lipmen, executive director of rider advocacy group Move LA. “We knew this was coming,” he said. “We’re in a new paradigm where we need to rethink how we fund public transit because it can’t necessarily be funded by a farebox.”

The California State Transportation Agency said it is “aware of the challenges that transit operators are facing as the state transitions to a post-pandemic transit environment” and while Newsom’s budget does not include any money for transit operations, it hopes to continue working toward solutions that “will preserve and improve the state’s transit system and work toward long-term financial stability.”

It’s typically an easier sell for agencies to score funding for expansion projects from the state. But the Legislature could also change the law to temporarily allow some project and equipment funding to be used for operations, as the Legislative Analyst’s Office suggested in its February report.

That doesn’t include shifting any high-speed rail funding, though, because the voter-approved bond measure that funds it can only be used for that purpose.

There’s also the option of local ballot measures to increase funding, but they take time, and voter approval isn’t guaranteed.

The Metropolitan Transportation Commission, which serves nine Bay Area counties, may put a regional transit funding measure before voters in 2026. (That worked in Los Angeles County in 2016, when voters overwhelmingly approved a permanent half-cent sales tax measure expected to raise $120 billion over 40 years).

Buses at the Norwalk Green Line Station in Norwalk on April 3, 2023. Photo by Pablo Unzueta for CalMatters

But just filling short-term funding gaps won’t be enough.

Researchers, lawmakers and advocates agree that the future of public transit is tied to the recovery of downtowns. That means revising zoning and development laws — for example, building housing closer to transit, and easing parking requirements that increase the cost of those units.

In downtown San Francisco, for instance, the office vacancy rate shot up to nearly 28%, and that trend isn’t likely to end soon. One option would be to convert office space into housing, though that has its own set of roadblocks.

Some also call for fixes to the transit funding model, itself.

According to a February report from UCLA’s Institute of Transportation Studies, although populations and mobility patterns have changed since the Transportation Development Act was enacted in 1971, the law and its related programs have kept the same eligibility conditions based on counties and their populations in 1970. The outdated population numbers may also explain why transit agencies have increased in number: three of California’s four largest regions have fewer people per agency than the national average.

At the legislative hearing in February, state Sen. Aisha Wahab, a Fremont Democrat on the transportation committee, inquired about consolidation of transit agencies. UCLA’s researchers also called for better coordination of State Transit Assistance funding, and revamping how agencies are evaluated.

But former U.S. Rep. Doug Ose, who ran in the 2021 gubernatorial recall election, questions why any government should fund a program that “very few people want.”

“We might as well be buying a horse and buggy for everyone,” he tweeted Tuesday. “Public transit is no longer about moving people,” but has “become a jobs program for bus drivers no one needs.”

For transit to be a viable and attractive option, there are also passenger-oriented changes that have been proposed or put in place: easier transfers between different agencies, quicker payment options such as Google or Apple Pay, and door-to-door vans and other “microtransit” options to compete with ride-sharing companies.

Move LA also advocates for free fares for students to “create this next generation of transit riders who can sustain the system going forward,” Lipmen said.

A few agencies have already begun to deploy more police officers or mental health counselors on buses, though some debate the merits of increased police presence. One bill introduced this session would require large agencies to start collecting data on harassment of riders.

Assemblymember Laura Friedman, a Democrat from Burbank and chairperson of the transportation committee, introduced a bill that aims to make sure social service providers that receive state homelessness grants address the needs of homeless individuals using public transit.

She also introduced a bill that creates a task force to research and make recommendations on transit funding.

“We need to reimagine our stations, reimagine how we finance transit and find ways of building in public support,” she said. “It’s past time.”

###

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

It is with heavy hearts that the family of Caleb Zane Pellegrini announce his passing on Monday, February 13, 2023, at the age of 40. The sudden and unexpected loss of Caleb leaves his family and friends saddened over such a tragedy. His absence is felt, and he is truly missed in so many ways.

Caleb was born February 3, 1983 in Eureka, where he lived with his mother, Shannon Pelligrini. At the age of 4, they moved to Willow Creek, where he attended Trinity Valley Elementary School. After graduating 8th grade, he and his mother moved back to Eureka. It was hard for Caleb to say goodbye to his friends, but he looked forward to attending Eureka Senior High School. Caleb made several lifelong friends in high school and graduated in 2001. After graduation, Caleb spent a year at College of the Redwoods before moving to Aptos, where he attended Cabrillo College. He studied psychology with a focus in behavioral therapy and educational services for people with autism. Caleb had a special place in his heart for people with disabilities and was grateful for the opportunity to work with this population. Eventually, Caleb moved to Santa Cruz and worked as a behavioral therapist for children and adults with disabilities.

Caleb absolutely loved Santa Cruz, developing many connections and friendships while living there. He continued to advocate for the autistic community, intolerable of any form of injustice or discrimination. He was a good friend to all of those he met, always willing to help when needed and listen when asked. He was supportive and could be depended on as a shoulder to cry on when a friend was in need. He enjoyed helping people solve problems, and his open mindedness helped him see different perspectives and and innovative solutions. Caleb’s optimistic disposition was magical, able to put a smile on anyone’s face. His emotional intelligence was calming and admirable, and his compassion was easily felt.

Wanting to be closer to his mother and friends, Caleb made a recent move back to Eureka. He was involved with the LGBTQ community here, and spent much of his time volunteering and advocating for Redwood Pride, Queer Humboldt and many other organizations. He valued equality and inclusion. Caleb would want his friends and family to remember that there is power in knowledge — you will become stronger if you are true to yourself and who you really are. Caleb had an immeasurable amount of love to share and truly believed everybody had the right to be free from discrimination.

Those who knew Caleb will remember and treasure his kindness, humor, eternal smile and beautiful soul. He was like a guardian angel during his short time here on earth and his spirit will continue to watch over his family and friends from above. He is deeply and forever missed by many.

Caleb was preceded in death by his beloved Nan (Darlene Pellegrini Robertson) and his fur babies (Chester and ChubChub) May his soul rest in peace and those affected find peace in his absence.

###

‘Pat’ (Donald) Gaskill
February 25, 1933 - April 3, 2023

He passed away peacefully to be with the Lord at the age of 90. His 90th birthday was celebrated with a wonderful party. It was a special day for him and he enjoyed it so much.

He was born in Iowa but made his permanent home in Humboldt County in the late 1950s. He met the love of his life, June, and they were married 55 years.

He served in the military during the Korean War and was stationed in Washington state. He was a logging truck driver and worked for numerous trucking companies throughout the years and Louisiana Pacific Mill for five years. Truckers knew him as “Squirrel” and “Big Hands Pat.” Anyone who met him and shook his hand could not get over the size of his hands, hence the nickname.

He and mom were members of Redwood Vintage Rods for many years. He loved his fast cars and street rods. They were also in the Redwood Country Kickers Dance Club. He was a big man but was so light on his feet and a great dancer. He could sure “cut a rug” with mom. Also a member of the Elks Club.

Dad was a loving husband, father,  grandfather,  great-grandfather, brother in-law and uncle. He was very proud of all his family and loved them wholeheartedly and this includes his brother (from another mother) Doug Gingerich. His coffee shop buddies were special to him also.

He is survived by his wife, June, children Leanne (Jeff) Johnson, Ron Harvey, Patricia Murray Frady, Pamela Nicholas, brother-in-laws, sister-in-laws, numerous grandchildren, great-grandchildren, nieces and nephews.

Pat was preceded in death by Margaret Acorn (mother), Ralph Johnson (father) and Peggy Gaskill Sloan (daughter).

There will be a casual gathering of friends and family Sunday, April 23 from 2 to 4 p.m. at 2134 Hodgson St., Eureka.

###