The speedy processing of building permit applications is not typically considered a popular political cause.

The recent Los Angeles firestorm may have changed that.

Thousands of Angelenos are now desperate to rebuild their homes as quickly as possible. They have the sympathy and focus of elected leaders at every level of state government. And many of them — particularly in well-heeled Pacific Palisades — have pull at city hall.

That’s helped bump the otherwise dull-as-drying-paint politics of permitting policy to the top of many lawmakers’ agendas.

Exhibit A: The L.A. city council voted unanimously last week to consider a building permit “self-certification” program.

Rather than require architects and engineers working on small residential construction projects to submit their plans to the city’s building department and wait — often months, if not years — for the green light, self-certification would allow them to sign off on their own handiwork and start construction immediately. The city would still inspect the projects during and after construction.

Councilmember Nithya Raman, who introduced the motion, said she began looking into the idea well before fires torched thousands of homes around the city. But the politics of permitting has changed in ways that could have effects far beyond the footprints of the fires.

“There is a constituency of people that have been asking for these changes, but now there is an urgency around it that has helped speed this process forward,” she said. “We should definitely be focusing on rebuilding the Palisades, but we should also make sure that rebuilding the Palisades doesn’t slow down construction in the rest of the city, which is already much lower than it needs to be.”

Over the last four years, the median length of time required to get a permit approved to construct a single family home in Los Angeles was nearly eight months, according to real estate data firm ATC Research. For apartment projects, the typical wait was more than 10 months.

The motion the council passed instructed city staff to look into the idea and report back by early March. The council would then have to vote on a specific proposal before anything about the current process changes.

The general concept seems to have at least the interest of Mayor Karen Bass, who asked city staff to look into the idea shortly after the fires started in early January.

The cause of self-certification is the latest, and likely the most radical, example of lawmakers pushing to cut red-tape in the wake of the blazes.

In early January, with the flames still uncontained, Gov. Gavin Newsom directed his own housing department to look into state permitting requirements, building codes and local bureaucratic processes that could be suspended, expedited or removed to speed up reconstruction. Based on those reports, Newsom on Thursday issued an executive order which, among other things, loosened building permit rules to allow homeowners of recently constructed homes to recycle their own plans. The governor’s office refused to release a copy of the report itself when CalMatters asked for it.

San Diego Assemblymember Chris Ward introduced a state bill that would give small building project developers the ability to hire a third-party licensed architect or engineer to sign off on a project’s plans if a city’s planning department is too slow.

Like Raman in Los Angeles, Ward came up with the idea before the fires. But the drive to bring down construction costs and speed up approval times is a goal that “really needs to apply everywhere all the time,” he said in an interview with CalMatters last month. “I don’t want you waiting six months to build a home.”

From outside the halls of government, developers and pro-housing advocates are hoping that, in the wake of disaster, fast-tracked building approval is an idea whose time has come.

“I do think this is starting to light a fire under folks around bureaucratic streamlining reforms,” said Scott Epstein, policy director at the advocacy group Abundant Housing LA.

“Proceed at your own risk”

Los Angeles already allows contractors to go ahead with limited maintenance, heating and air conditioning systems work and roofing without a city-issued go-ahead. Inspections, and any necessary fixes, occur after the fact.

Raman’s current proposal would go much further, allowing builders to start work on entire single family homes without having their plans reviewed. It’s an unusual idea, but not unprecedented even in Los Angeles County.

The City of Bellflower, packed into just six square miles in southeast L.A. County, has been allowing virtually all construction projects to go ahead self-certified for a decade.

If a project architect or engineer is “willing to put their license and their stamp on a set of plans and say, ‘this meets the building code and we’re ready to build it,’ then let’s get out of their way and give them the ability to go start at their own risk,” said Ryan Smoot, city manager.

That risk is considerable. If problems emerge after construction begins, the owner is on the hook to fix them. In practice, that has meant that most projects that go the self-certification route are relatively straightforward.

The aftermath of the Palisades Fire on Jan. 15, 2024. Photo by Ted Soqui for CalMatters

Developers are told to “proceed at your own risk, effectively,” said Smoot. Those without the stomach to do so are invited to go through the standard permitting process and then “don’t complain about it when it takes a little longer to do those reviews than you like.”

In the wake of the fires, Smoot said he welcomes the new attention on Bellflower’s permitting process.

“You got 10,000 homes that are going to need to be rebuilt and 10,000 families that just want to get back to normal life and we have an obligation as local governments to get out of the way as much as possible,” he said. “It is actually, from our perspective, really exciting to see other local and state agencies starting to think the same way.”

“I hate to see it in the context we’re in,” he added. “But the silver lining is maybe we’re rethinking how we do government.”

Building departments from Chicago to New York to Dallas allow a degree of self-permitting in construction projects.

But few in California are willing to put quite so much faith in a project’s architect or engineer, no matter their license or experience. Even in development-friendly San Diego, which has a self-certification option for solar installations and office remodels, letting a developer start construction on an entire new house without the city’s once-over is a bridge too far.

“From my experience, we’ve never seen a brand new building — from ground up — that is a perfect submittal that did not have any health or safety issues,” said Kelly Charles, the city’s chief building official.

Imagine an architect messes up and makes the foundation a little too wide, she said. That doesn’t just hurt the licensed experts and the developer. “I’m a homeowner. I’m waiting for my house. My whole yard is torn up. And now you have to saw-cut concrete,” said Charles. “Taking two feet out of the house is not easy!”

Many builders and architects scoff at the idea that city staff know their trade better than they do.

“Why shouldn’t we be able to self-certify if all the liability rests on us and we’re only using licensed professionals?” said Tom Grable, former chair of the California Building Industry Association. “When something happens in the field we fix it.”

He called the entire pre-construction plan check process “redundant and unnecessary.”

Smoot, in Bellflower, said costly re-dos are exceedingly rare, if only because most developers don’t actually opt for self-certification. In Phoenix, Arizona — which has a similarly permissive self-certification program — uptake is also on the low-end. Evidently builders often prefer to have someone double-check their work.

Both cities also have an audit system in place to give a sampling of project plans an official review.

“Just because a program goes to self-certification it doesn’t necessarily mean that city staff aren’t going to be looking at it,” Jason Blakely, Phoenix’s assistant development director.

How to best speed up permitting?

What might work in a sprawling valley like the Phoenix area or a flat suburb like Bellflower may not work so easily across Los Angeles, with its hillside developments facing seismic and wildfire risk, said Steven Somers, the CEO of Crest Real Estate, which consults with developers to navigate the city’s lengthy building approval process.

“The solution is maybe simplifying the code or outsourcing more reviews to increase bandwidth and staffing,” he said. That’s a better solution than handing regulatory oversight to someone working on the project itself and who may have “a financial motivation to make the process go quicker than it should.”

Councilmember Raman acknowledges the city of Los Angeles still has plenty of questions to answer about how this program would work. She said beefed up oversight and accountability measures would likely be necessary. But whatever the end result, she said, the city should make the approval process faster — both in and outside the still-smoldering burn scars.

With the fire still raging in January, Bass ordered city staff to blitz through post-fire permit applications within 30 days. This week, the city’s Department of Building and Safety turned its West Los Angeles office into a one-stop regulatory shop for rebuilds. What all that extra bureaucratic attention on reconstruction will mean for new proposed housing in other parts of the city is so far unclear.

“What I want to think about as we move forward in Los Angeles,” said Raman, “is not just ways to rearrange the queue, but to actually shorten the queue entirely.”

###

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

Brian Wayne Billings, born July 24, 1985, took his journey home on February 5, 2025.

There was never a day that he wasn’t working. He started working at the local store when he was 17 years old through CIMC, and he continued to work at other places in customer service. He worked at Lucky Bear Casino, Ki:ma’w Medical Center, Joe’s Deli, Straight Arrow, Hoopa Mini Mart, Hoopa Elementary School and the Hoopa Grocery Store. He had a heart for giving and always wanting to help where he could. He was an ordained Assistant Minister for the Hoopa 1910 Indian Shaker Church. He traveled to Shaker churches in Washington, Oregon and California with his beloved Mama. He was always willing to take a ride and enjoyed the time spent cruising.

When he wasn’t working, he enjoyed spending time playing video games, dice and card games with his friends and family. His culture and language were important to him and he continued to share it with those close to him and took pride in the dances. He was a die-hard Dallas Cowboys fan. He was known to many as BS Billings with his quick wit and the ability to keep a straight face even when he knew he was full of it. 

He is preceded in death by his Mama Gloria Billings, Uncle Keith Baldy, Father Floyd Billings Jr., Mother Leandra Billings, and his namesake Uncle Wayne Grant. 

He is survived by his only son Brian “Beans” Billings II, his Grandma Vi Masten, his uncles Oscar “Tyke” Billings (Lori), Richard Billings, Ed Masten, Elrod Masten (Susan), Hank Masten, Thomas Masten, his aunts Terry “Suzie” Hall (Rick) and Debbie Billings-Baldy, his brothers; James “Scuffer” Rickaby (Kristen), Floyd “Cowboy” Billings (Amber); his Sisters; Gina Rickaby-Cote’ (Jeremy), Jacklin Billings, Darcy Padilla (Brian) and Ruby Mularky (Mikey) along with numerous nephews and nieces. 

Pall Bearers: Cowboy Billings, Brian Padilla Jr., Mikey Mularky, Adam Martin, Dana Chisum Jr., Lyle Elvis Baldy Jr., Leroy Baldy, James McCovey, Lance Teodecki, David Ruiz Sr., Ricky Hall, Alex Bristol, Jeremy Cote’, David Ruiz Jr., Darius Ruiz, Thomas Billings, Trystan Billings and Torin Billings.

Honorary Pall Bearers: Oscar “Tyke” Billings, Richard Billings, Ronnie Robbins, Ed Masten, Elrod Masten, Hank Masten, Thomas Masten, Rick Hall, Mike Mularky, Robbie Morrill, Gabe Cervantes, Jody Jackson, Tyson Dempewolf, Infallible Ausenbauer, Warren Tamerius and Anthony Risling, 

There will be a wake at his residence on Telescope Road Friday, February 14, 2025 starting 6 p.m. Funeral Services Saturday February 15, 2025 at 11 a.m. at the Neighborhood Facilities, officiated by Rodney E. Vigil Sr. Burial immediately following to be held at Bald Hill Family Cemetery and Reception will be at the Fire Hall.

Arrangements are under the care of Paul’s Chapel, Arcata.

###

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

###

Back in November, more than 63 percent of Humboldt County voters approved Measure O, aka the “Humboldt County’s Roads/911 Emergency Response Measure,” ushering in a new 1 percent sales tax countywide (including within our incorporated cities).

The measure is expected to generate $24 million per year, and on Tuesday, the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors debated how to prioritize spending those revenues, with First District Supervisor Rex Bohn advocating hard for spending the vast majority — if not all — of it on road repairs, rather than public transit.

“Our roads absolutely suck right now,” Bohn said at one point in the meeting. He said he regularly gets calls from constituents complaining about potholes and the general state of disrepair of county roadways, “but I don’t get any calls on transit.”

Other supervisors — particularly Fourth District representative Natalie Arroyo and Third District representative Mike Wilson — said that while roads should certainly get the biggest chunk of Measure O revenues. public transit initiatives deserve a cut, too.

Such spending decisions will need to be made each year, and Tuesday’s board discussion also focused on reviewing the process for those future deliberations, which will involve oversight and input from an audit committee, technical committees, county department heads and the Humboldt County Association of Governments (HCAOG). 

Way back in July, when the board unanimously agreed to put Measure O on the ballot, it promised to appoint a “Funding Workgroup,” or ad hoc committee, with representatives from the county (including two supervisors, the Public Works director and someone from the County Administrative Office) as well as outside agencies such as HCAOG, the Humboldt Transit Authority and the McKinleyville Community Services District.

The recommendation presented by staff on Tuesday also called for the inclusion of representatives from the the Building and Construction Trades Council of Humboldt and Del Norte Counties and the Humboldt Builders’ Exchange. Wilson questioned this late addition.

“What expertise do those organizations bring to this discussion in terms of how we allocate community funding — prioritizing where transportation dollars get spent?” he asked. “Like, what’s that about?”

County Administrative Officer Elishia Hayes said it’s entirely up to the board, who gets put on this committee, and it will ultimately be up to the board alone to make allocation decisions. The ad hoc committee, which is only scheduled to meet one more time before the first spending decisions are made, will only set broad expectations, she said.

Wilson remained hesitant. 

“I agree with you that the ad hoc [committee] is not necessarily super deep, but it’s still a vibe,” he said.

Fifth District Supervisor Steve Madrone said the group’s directive will be limited to recommending how to split revenues between transit and roads, “nothing more.” By way of example he threw out some hypothetical percentages — 20 or 30 percent to transit, or maybe 60 or 70 percent to roads.

The prospect of giving that much to transit — even hypothetically — appeared to irk Bohn. He noted that local transit agencies have received close to $35 million in grants over the past year and suggested that road repairs should be a much higher priority. 

“I have roads failing everywhere; [Second District Supervisor] Michelle [Bushnell] has roads failing everywhere,” Bohn said, referring to conditions in their respective districts. He argued that the Measure O sales pitch to voters focused heavily on roads. “Our roads are terrible,” he said.

Madrone and Bushnell have been the county’s representatives on the Measure O ad hoc committee thus far. Madrone asked to continue serving in that role, and he described himself as an advocate for both roads and transit. He advocated spending “an appropriate level” of Measure O revenues on transit, suggesting perhaps 20 percent. 

“We got a lot of money to work with,” he said. “We’ll figure it out.”

Wilson said that, unlike Bohn, he has heard constituents advocate for improved public transit, with public polling reflecting that interest. 

Bohn, clearly frustrated, stuck to his guns, saying roads should receive all or nearly all of the funding for at least the next three years. In his view, that’s what voters wanted when they passed Measure O.

“I’m just saying, can we just agree to spend the money where we said we were going to spend it, instead of diverting it?” Bohn said. “What I’m saying is our roads are bad, and I think people jumped on this because our roads are bad.”

Fourth District Supervisor Natalie Arroyo replied, “I am absolutely in favor of the vast majority of this going to road repairs,” though she added that, as both the chair of the Humboldt Transit Authority and the board’s representative for most of the City of Eureka, she’s heard from many people who voted for Measure O because of its inclusion of public transit funding.

Bushnell wound up making a motion to appoint the staff-recommended list of people to the ad hoc committee, though she suggested replacing herself with Wilson as the board’s representatives. The motion passed 4-1, with Bohn dissenting.

Before the vote, Bohn argued his position one more time. “I want transit to be funded … ,” he said, “but our roads are failing, and they’re going to do nothing but get worse if we don’t do anything.”

This might be a good day to check in on the local sewers, quilters, crafters, cosplayers and DIY home decorators in your life. They may be in mourning after news that the Eureka Joann Fabrics is one of the chain’s roughly 500 locations slated for closing. 

Wednesday’s announcement from Joann Fabrics comes nearly a year after the retailer — which was founded in Cleveland in 1943 — declared bankruptcy, citing higher overseas shipping costs and declining consumer demand. 

The 500 Joann Fabric locations scheduled for closure represent more than half of company’s locations. In our region, the Eureka store’s fate is shared by stores in Redding, Chico, Klamath Falls and Grants Pass. The Medford location will be spared for now. 

Joann Fabrics has not given an exact date for when its stores will shutter.

The Fremont City Council gave final approval this week to an ordinance that bans camping throughout the entire city, while also making anyone “aiding, abetting or concealing” a homeless encampment guilty of a misdemeanor.

The aiding and abetting clause has sparked alarm from local outreach workers who worry they could be targeted for helping people living in camps, and experts in homelessness law who say they’ve never seen anything quite like it in California. Council members considered changing that part of the ordinance Tuesday night, but ultimately passed it as-is 6-1.

“Our public spaces belong to the entire community and it’s really not compassionate at all to cede our public spaces to a select few individuals at the expense of everyone else in the general public,” said Councilmember Raymond Liu, who voted in favor. “Families should be able to take their children to the parks, to the libraries, without fear, and all residents should be able to use our public spaces without encountering any unsafe conditions.”

Council members discussed the camping ban at length in a five-hour meeting Tuesday, where nearly 200 people lined up to speak for and against the measure during public comment. It was an unusual amount of fanfare for an ordinance that the city council already passed once earlier this month – Tuesday’s vote was a “second reading,” which typically is just a formality that warrants no discussion.

But the controversy surrounding the ban, which prohibits camping on all sidewalks, streets and parks in Fremont and makes anyone who aids or abets such a camp subject to a $1,000 fine or six months in jail, prompted the City Council to reevaluate the ordinance.

Three council members, plus the mayor, expressed interest either in removing the aiding and abetting clause or adding language to specify that it wouldn’t be used to punish people for handing out food, water and other essentials in homeless camps.

That change seemed likely to go through until minutes before the final vote. But after City Attorney Rafael Alvarado said multiple times that the aiding and abetting clause would target people who help unhoused people set up illegal camps, not people who give out food, council members changed course. Ultimately, they passed the measure as-is.

Changing the language would have forced council members to re-introduce the ordinance, meaning they’d have to go through two more votes. By the time the City Council voted Tuesday, it was almost midnight.

The text of the ordinance doesn’t specify what qualifies as aiding, abetting or concealing a homeless encampment. That leaves some uncertainty as to how the ordinance will be enforced, despite Alvarado’s assurances, UC Berkeley Law professor Laura Riley told CalMatters.

“That might be their stance at the time of adoption,” she said, “but there’s nothing in the language of the ordinance itself that prevents targeting people from doing things as humane as giving unhoused people tarps when it’s raining.”

In practice, local police often determine how they will enforce an ordinance, Riley said. How the Fremont aiding and abetting clause is interpreted could change when the city’s leadership changes, she said.

The city attorney’s statements were small comfort to Vivian Wan, CEO of Abode Services, which provides food, tents, clothing and other services to unhoused people living in camps.

“We worry about the ‘concealing’ portion, as PD/City staff in Fremont have been known to pressure us to share confidential information, including where a participant is staying,” she said in an email to CalMatters. “I think this ordinance may be used to compel such information, breaking the trust with folks that often takes years to build.”

The measure also puts the city of Fremont at odds with the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern and Southern California, which, in a letter to council members signed by several other aid and human rights groups, said the aiding and abetting clause is “patently unreasonable and will expose the City to legal liability.”

More than two-dozen California cities and counties have either passed new ordinances or beefed up old ordinances banning camping in recent months, after the U.S. Supreme Court gave them more freedom to do so. But none of those bans appear to include specific language that makes it a crime to aid or abet a camp.

In a statement to CalMatters, the Fremont city attorney’s office said the aiding and abetting language is nothing new – it’s already illegal in Fremont, as in many cities, to aid or abet any crime. When asked about that by council members during Tuesday’s meeting, Alvarado said even if the new camping ban didn’t have that specific clause, “in theory,” someone could still be penalized for aiding and abetting a homeless encampment.

But Riley said it’s significant that the new camping ban explicitly makes it a crime to aid and abet an encampment – language she’s never seen in any other active camping ban in California.

“This does seem to be going further,” she said. “Because by making it explicitly tied to this section of the code, to me, it signals that there is intent to prosecute under this section.”

Legal experts CalMatters spoke with said this is extremely unusual. No other city, to the best of CalMatters’ knowledge, has attempted to use general municipal code in the fashion this ordinance would.

More than two-dozen California cities passed, strengthened or are considering ordinances that penalize people for sleeping outside, after the U.S. Supreme Court allowed cities to crack down.

###

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

A Kern County baker violated California law when she refused to sell a cake to a lesbian couple for their wedding, a state appeals court ruled this week in a suit brought by the state’s Civil Rights Division.

If the scenario sounds familiar, that’s because it’s central to a series of cases that have for years been shaping the nation’s legal debate over free speech and anti-discrimination laws.

In 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned a Colorado ruling that a baker had violated that state’s nondiscrimination law when he refused to bake a cake for a same-sex couple’s wedding. The ruling was based on the court’s finding that the Colorado civil rights commission handling the case had been prejudiced against the baker’s religious beliefs.

The court in 2023 ruled, also in a Colorado case, in favor of a website designer who opposed same-sex marriage on religious grounds and who was afraid the same state statutes could in theory force her to design a wedding website for a gay couple. That would violate the designer’s First Amendment rights to free expression, the Supreme Court ruled in a decision that LGBTQ rights activists said could open the door to more discrimination in public spaces.

The California decision this week draws boundaries on what counts under a business owner’s right to free expression.

In a statement, California Civil Rights Commission director Kevin Kish praised the ruling for upholding “the longstanding principle guaranteeing all Californians full and equal access to services and goods in the marketplace.”

The case stemmed from the marriage of Eileen and Mireya Rodriguez-Del Rio, who visited Tastries bakery in Bakersfield to buy a cake for their wedding in August 2017.

The couple spoke with an employee and selected a pre-designed plain, white, three-tiered cake that the bakery often sells for various celebrations including birthdays and baby showers, according to court filings. When the couple returned with friends and family for a tasting the following week, Tastries’ owner Catharine Miller refused to sell the cake upon learning it would be served at a same-sex wedding.

Miller is a devout Christian who also refuses to make cakes depicting marijuana use or sexual imagery. She later told the courts she has a bakery policy stating that “wedding cakes must not contradict God’s sacrament of marriage between a man and a woman.”

The couple filed a complaint with the state Civil Rights Division, which sued Miller in 2018. Miller, who is represented by the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, argued her policy was based on her religious beliefs about marriage, not animus toward LGBTQ people.

A Kern County judge sided with her, ruling that Miller’s policy did not violate the state’s Unruh Civil Rights Act because it applies to all customers, and because Miller referred the couple to another bakery that had previously agreed to sell cakes to same-sex couples (but which the Rodriguez-Del Rios had already ruled out).

The state appealed the decision last year, and a three-judge panel of the 5th Appellate District reversed it in a unanimous ruling.

The judges ruled Miller’s policy is not neutral because it could only apply to customers on the basis of their sexual orientation. They also ruled that reproducing a plain cake with no writing or decorations that Miller would have sold to anyone else does not count as being forced to express support for a same-sex wedding.

“Drawing the contours of protected speech to include routinely produced, ordinary commercial products as the artistic self-expression of the designer is unworkably overbroad,” the judges wrote.

Miller, through a spokesperson at the Becket Fund, declined to comment. In a statement, her attorney and Becket Fund vice president Eric Rassbach said Miller would continue to run the bakery while they appeal the decision to the state supreme court.

“This case is not just about Cathy Miller — it’s about protecting the rights of all Americans

to live and work according to their deeply held beliefs,” said another of her attorneys, Charles LiMandri. “We will continue to fight in the courts on Cathy’s behalf to ensure that the freedom to live out her faith through her creative work is upheld and that justice is fully served.”

The case could be primed for more appeals by conservative legal groups that ultimately seek to extend the Supreme Court ruling in the Colorado web designer case and establish exceptions to anti-discrimination laws allowing businesses to refuse services to gay Americans, said Matt Coles, a law professor at UC Law San Francisco.

But he said the California ruling makes important distinctions between designing a wedding website and making a standard cake.

“This was not a great case for them,” Coles said. “The challenge in this case was, how do you draw a line between stuff that’s clearly speech or expression, and stuff that’s clearly not? If what you’re selling is some kind of generic cake, you don’t have 1st Amendment claims.”

###

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

It is with the heaviest of hearts that we announce the passing of Kenneth Lee Rose of Rio Dell. He was known by many names to those who loved him — Baby, Honey BunBun, Dad, Opa, Kenneth Lee, Kenny, Rosebud and Wolfie, to name a few.

Ken was born to Carl and Nancy (Cowart) Rose on December 16, 1969. He was the fifth child and last son born to Carl and Nancy. He grew up in Fortuna and Hydesville, attending what was then known as Town School, Hydesville Elementary, Fortuna High School and East High. Some of his favorite childhood memories were spending time with his brothers and friends on Vancil Avenue in Fortuna, playing in the woods.

In 1984, Ken met the love of his life, Cindi Mock. They spent his freshman year riding around Hydesville and Carlotta on his dirt bike, getting gas at the old Murrish Market before riding on the river bar at the end of Fisher Road, exploring the trails and woods around Martin and Shirley’s, Fox Creek Road and Starvation Flats. They separated when Cindi graduated from high school. When Ken was 16, he and Brenda Beebe became parents to his first son. Ken quit school and went to work as a timber faller. He then went on to work at Humboldt Printing and then Pacific Lumber Company. He married Carrie Stephens in 1991 and they became parents to Ben, Amy and Matthew. After Ken and Carrie divorced, he and Monica Warden had a son together.

Ken and Cindi reconnected after both divorced their spouses and were married on May 3, 2008. They both said it was like no time had passed while they were apart and they picked up their friendship and romance right where they had left off. They liked to share that they were high school sweethearts; they knew God had made them for one another. During their nearly 18 years together, they built a life they both loved. They started a firewood business, Log Dawg Firewood, in 2020. While the rest of the world was shut down, Ken and Cindi spent countless hours in their truck and in the woods making firewood. Some of their best times were spent being surrounded by nothing but trees and God’s creatures.

Although Ken liked to complain that Cindi was crazy and she didn’t have to sing quite that loud in the truck, he always tuned the radio to the oldies station so she could sing along with the songs from the 1970s and 1980s. In the following years, anytime Cindi would get crabby Ken would tell her to get in the truck so he could take her to the woods. He knew it always made her feel better to spend time with him outdoors.

Ken accepted Jesus as his Savior in 2007 and was later baptized at Rio Dell Baptist Church by Papa Pastor (Darrow Sanderson). His was a quiet faith, but he loved Jesus and knew he would see many loved ones again in Heaven someday. Ken was also proud of kicking alcohol and an addiction to opiates that he had been prescribed for a back injury.

Ken passed away suddenly at the age of 55 from a massive gastrointestinal hemorrhage on the morning of February 7, 2025. He was preceded in death by his parents, Nancy and Carl Rose, and his special friend, Andy Crase. He is survived by his adoring and devoted wife, Cindi Rose; his children Kenneth Lee Anderson-Rose, Benjamin Rose, Amy Rose, Matthew Rose (Melissa) and Jared Warden; Cindi’s children which he loved like his own, Molly Buck (Felix), Callie Buck, and Levi Buck; his grandchildren, Lauriana, Nevaeh, Braydon, Teheya, Trae, Bellamy, Braxton, Kaliyah, Kaysen, Natalia, and Lily; his siblings David Cowart, Ronald Rose (Heidi), Steven Rose (Audrey), Brian Rose (Tammy), and June Rose-Castro (Noe); and his in-laws, John and Arlene Mock, Aaron Mock (Ruth), and Ammi Mock (Mark). He also leaves behind nieces, nephews, cousins, and friends who mourn his passing.

There will be a memorial service for Ken on Saturday, March 1 at 11 a.m. at Fortuna Church of the Nazarene, 1355 Ross Hill Road, Fortuna. Family welcome you to attend and share your memories of Ken.

###

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