Denis Raymond Lewis passed away peacefully surrounded by loving family at St. Joseph’s Hospital in Eureka at the age of 71 on January 29, 2024, after a struggle with cancer.

He was born in Montana in 1952 to Richard and Roberta Lewis. He attended McKinleyville High School, where he was a part of the 1970 Championship football team, before he attended College of the Redwoods and was part of their 1970 State Championship football team.

Denis had a deep love for his family and never forgot to show Kathy, his wife of 38 years, and his daughter, Kailee, just how much he loved them. They were the light of his life, and he would do anything for their happiness. He would often be seen hitting the bike trails all around Humboldt with Kathy and he never missed a chance to go grocery shopping with Kailee on Sundays.

An avid athlete, he rode the 100 miles of the Tour of the Unknown Coast, played for the Humboldt Rugby Club for 12 years, and played softball with a soft spot in his heart for the Babe’s One for the Road over 50s league team.

At 6 ft. 4 in., Denis was known as the gentle giant of the kindergarten classroom where he was a teacher’s aide for Ms. Moriarty at Ridgewood Elementary until he retired in 2010. For his “retirement” job, Denis worked as a delivery driver for Babe’s Pizza and Pasta, where he became a pro at folding boxes, driving just a bit too fast and sneaking pepperoni into his pockets for a snack.

Denis will always be remembered for his kindness and his rare brand of friendliness. He will live in our hearts forever and we will treasure every moment that we got to spend with such a great man.

Denis was preceded in death by his father Richard, his mother Bobbi, his brother Ricky and his sister Diane.

He was survived by his wife, Kathy; his daughter, Kailee; his son-in-law, Mike; his brother, David; his sister-in-law, Sue; his brother, Donny; his sister-in-law, Karen; and many other friends and family members.

An informal celebration of life will be held at Babe’s Pizza and Pasta located at 4015 Walnut Dr, Eureka, CA, United States, California starting at 3 p.m. on Sunday February 25, 2024. Please stop by, hang out, and bring your favorite memories of Denis.

###

Two weeks ago, when the California Commission on Judicial Performance announced that it has begun a formal investigation into 19 allegations of misconduct concerning incumbent Humboldt County Superior Court Judge Gregory Kreis, it upended our local judicial primary election, almost instantly transforming Stockton transplant April Van Dyke from a long-shot challenger into a genuine contender, if not the frontrunner.

When Deputy District Attorney Jessica Watson launched a late write-in campaign a week later, it added yet another twist to what has quickly become the most dramatic local race of the season.

While Van Dyke and other local candidates have been answering reader questions over on our LoCO Elections page, we wanted to have a conversation to learn more about her background, her motivations and her campaign for the judicial bench.

In a phone conversation Wednesday afternoon, Van Dyke said she grew up in Napa, living much of her youth in a trailer with her mom (a schoolteacher), stepdad (a mechanic) and older sister. 

Asked what motivated her to pursue law, she recounted a question she posed to her stepfather when she was about 10 years old. 

“I said, ‘Hey, what kind of job could I do where I argue for a living?’” she said.

But there was a deeper impulse, too. 

“I have always felt a great sense of wanting to help people and make the world a better place, and if I have the ability to use my skills to help people, then I’m going to do it,” Van Dyke said. “And so I went to law school with that in mind, and I have represented people who couldn’t afford attorneys my entire career.”

After earning her bachelor’s degree in political science from the U.C. Berkeley and her law degree from McGeorge School of Law in Sacramento, Van Dyke opened her own law office in Stockton and began working as a contract attorney for the County of San Joaquin, representing indigent clients for the Public Defender’s Office.

“I was able to build my practice on those contracts,” she said.

Eventually, the San Joaquin County Public Defender’s Office recruited Van Dyke as an employee, and she worked as a deputy public defender from March of 2015 to April of 2019.

Unfortunately, her tenure in that position was marred by a campaign of harassment from her coworkers over her sexual orientation, according to a 2019 lawsuit she filed against the San Joaquin Public Defender’s Office. The complaint, which was last amended in 2021, says a clique of colleagues repeatedly referred to Van Dyke’s sex life in vulgar and homophobic terms, and management failed to adequately address her complaints.

The suit also alleges that some of these same abusive coworkers belittled a transgendered client in Van Dyke’s presence, which added to her growing fear and anxiety. She started suffering “severe emotional distress” and panic attacks. In 2018, Van Dyke was diagnosed with a work-related stress and panic disorder.

According to the complaint, she experienced weight loss, nausea, depression, anxiety, sleeplessness, headaches, neck aches, fatigue, dizziness and nervousness, yet she was still “able to perform the essential functions of her position with reasonable accommodation.”

The San Joaquin Public Defender’s Office filed several demurrer motions, hoping to get the suit dismissed, but those motions were denied. The case is now at the settlement stage, and Van Dyke said she’s looking forward to putting it behind her.

Asked if she still suffers from anxiety, Van Dyke said, “I think that anyone who’s experienced sexual harassment knows it takes a while to heal from that.” She said she’s on her own “journey of healing” but is doing “really well.”

After leaving the San Joaquin Public Defender’s Office, Van Dyke got a job with the Humboldt County Office of Conflict Counsel and moved with her three kids to this region she calls “super-Northern California.”

“I love it here, with the rivers and the redwoods and the rain – I really do enjoy the rain,” she said. “It was just such a pleasure to come and work for [Supervising Attorney] Meagan [O’Connell]. … It’s just home here now. My kids love their school. They have so much support from their teachers and it’s just it’s just a wonderful, magical place here.”

During Van Dyke’s campaign kickoff speech she repeatedly employed the phrase, “I am not an insider.” Asked why that’s an asset for an attorney and potential judge she replied, “I think it’s important to be a person who can empathize with other people and their everyday experiences.”

She also said she would bring common sense and humility to the bench. 

Her campaign speeches and website also emphasize the importance of working toward equal justice under the law within a system that disproportionately incarcerates people of color. 

“Ever since I was young I had a strong sense of empathy and a strong sense of justice and wanting everyone to be treated equally no matter their station in life,” she said. When she began practicing law, she was shocked by the racial disparity among people who are charged with and convicted of crimes.

She’s seen that disparity locally, too. Black people in Humboldt County are charged at three times the rate of white people while the local Native population is four times more likely to receive a life sentence, she said.

She recounted one case wherein her client, who was Native and Black, was offered a life sentence in a plea deal while his two co-defendants – both white – were offered determinant, or fixed-term, sentences.

“I was the first attorney [in Humboldt County] to run a motion under the Racial Justice Act,” Van Dyke said. That motion eventually allowed her to collect data from California prisons, including what deals defendants from Humboldt County were offered, what sentences they ultimately received and their racial makeup, which is how she learned about the disparities here.

“I don’t think that it can be ignored, and it needs to be addressed and spoken about,” she said.

In a lengthy reply to a reader question about ensuring impartiality and integrity in the local judicial system, Van Dyke addressed this imbalance and called out Kreis, noting that the Court of Appeals recently reversed one of his decisions over his failure to address potential discrimination in the jury selection process.

She has also responded to concerns about her “newcomer” residency status and the lawsuit against her former employer. On Tuesday she published a video to her Instagram page addressing some mean-spirited speculation about the partial facial paralysis she has had since childhood.

Asked how she feels about Watson’s write-in campaign, Van Dyke said she finds it “kind of interesting” considering that she’s mentioned in the Commission on Judicial Performance’s Notice of Formal Proceedings against Kreis. (The document says Watson raised conflict-of-interest concerns in a restraining order case in which Kreis allegedly failed to disclose his friendship or social relationship with attorneys involved. “You [Kreis] did not recuse yourself until DDA Watson said that her office was not comfortable with you handling the case,” the notice says.)

“But this is the democratic process and everyone can run if they like,” Van Dyke added in reference to Watson’s candidacy. “I don’t always agree with her but, you know, she has the right to run in this, what’s turned out to be a very interesting election.”

Asked if she had anything else she wants voters to know at this stage of the campaign, Van Dyke said, “I just really want to be able to make a positive impact on Humboldt County. I want there to be a dedicated mental health court here. I want to create a courtroom as an environment that’s welcoming to everyone. And I just have a dedication to the law and justice.”

PREVIOUSLY: MORE ARCATA ROUNDABOUTS?! Arcata City Council to Vote on ‘Sunset Avenue Interchange Improvement Project’ During Tonight’s Meeting

###

The nightmarish intersections on Sunset Avenue near Cal Poly Humboldt will soon(ish) be replaced by two roundabouts, after the Arcata City Council voted unanimously on Wednesday to approve the U.S. 101 and Sunset Avenue Interchange Improvements Project. 

Before the council took its vote, City Engineer Netra Khatri provided some details and background on the project, which has been in the works for about a decade. Khatri explained that the City – along with Cal Poly Humboldt and Caltrans, which are both partners on the project – discussed other possible solutions for addressing the congested and dangerous intersections, including adding traffic signals, but ultimately found that roundabouts would be the safest and most effective solution. 

In addition to construction two roundabouts on Sunset Avenue – one at the intersection of G Street, H Street and Southbound 101 on/off ramps, and the other at the intersection of LK Wood and the Northbound 101 on/off ramps – the project will also include adding more crosswalks with flashing beacons, additional landscaping and the construction of a 10-foot-wide Class 1 shared bike path for pedestrians and cyclists. Khatri explained that the shared path will eventually connect to the Annie and Mary Trail, a planned trail project that will connect Arcata and Blue Lake via the Arcata- Mad River rail corridor. 

Several community members shared their thoughts during public comment, mostly in enthusiastic support of the project, which they felt was very needed to address the traffic issues on and near Sunset. But some commenters had concerns about the details of the project, including the proposed shared pathway and that the design would require cyclists to merge with traffic at the roundabouts.

Project design from the City of Arcata, edited to highlight the slip lane

Another concern brought up by several people was the inclusion of a slip lane running from Sunset Ave to H Street that would allow vehicles to bypass the roundabout when turning right onto H Street. Colin Fiske of the Coalition for Responsible Transportation Priorities (CRTP) questioned the safety of including the slip lane, which he said would cause people to speed, defeating the purpose of the roundabout. 

“The only reason for [slip lanes] is congestion management, which is not a high priority for the city anymore,” Fiske said. 

Khatri addressed some of the slip lane concerns, saying that the speed limit would be 25 mph, and that the design could be changed to include some speed reduction measures, such as adding additional lights, signage or a raised crosswalk at the intersection.  

Some of the councilmembers also had concerns about the slip lane and bicycle safety, and councilmember Kimberly White said she would really like to see a separate bike lane included in the design. Khatri said that, although a separate pedestrian path and bike lane would be ideal, there isn’t enough right of way space in some sections of the project area to accommodate a separate bike lane and a pedestrian trail. 

White also asked about the overall cost for the project, which Khatri said would be between $17 and $18 Million. The City has currently obtained funding for the design portion of the project, but is still identifying funding sources for construction. Cal Poly Humboldt has agreed to chip in $2.5 million for the project, Khatri said, and the City is in the process of applying for grants. 

Ultimately, the council voted unanimously to approve the project, which will come before the council for another review when the design is 60 percent complete. The goal, Khatri said, is to finalize the design by 2025 and to start construction in 2026.

Closeup of the roundabout designs below:

The Hoopa Valley Tribal Council has sparked controversy across social media in recent weeks, following the council’s decision to initiate proceedings to remove its top elected official, Chairman Joe Davis.

Joe Davis | Image via Hoopa Valley Tribe

During last week’s regular meeting, the tribal council approved a motion to suspend Davis from his duties as chairman, citing allegations of gross negligence, neglect of duty and abuse of power. In the days following its decision, the tribal council has enacted measures to restrict Davis’ access to tribal buildings, allowing entrance only by police escort. The council has also prohibited the Two Rivers Tribune, the tribally-owned newspaper, from printing or posting messages from the embattled chairman.

So far, the tribal council has not been particularly forthcoming about the allegations against Davis. It issued a list of five charges against Davis earlier this month, including failure to supervise tribal staff and departments of the Tribe, repeated failure to follow tribal council directives and policies, failure to maintain the Tribe’s website, and repeated failure to disclose potential conflicts of interest despite advice from legal counsel — but the council has not gone into detail about the alleged actions that sparked the suspension.

“The Tribal Council has not taken this decision lightly,” the council stated in a recent news release. “We have hired independent investigators to assess some concerns we have had with Chairman Davis and have conducted a review of his performance as Chairman of the Tribe. Unfortunately, we believe that he has neglected his duty to the Tribe and committed gross negligence as Chairman. We can’t in good conscience let him continue to abuse his power and authority to the detriment of the Tribe.”

Davis has disputed any claims of wrongdoing. Reached for additional comment on the matter, Davis said the whole ordeal stemmed from a conflict of interest allegation from May 2023 when he and his wife were seeking a business loan from the Hoopa Development Fund. 

“This all started [because] the council accused me of not disclosing a loan that I never accepted,” Davis told the Outpost in a phone interview this week. “I had reached out to the Tribe’s legal counsel [Tom Schlossner] to make sure that I was doing everything right and that I wasn’t in violation of any laws. He simply told me that if I were to accept a loan, I would just need to recuse myself from oversight of that department. However, I never did move forward with accepting the loan, so I didn’t feel it necessary to recuse myself at that time.”

Davis maintained that the tribal council used the incident as an excuse to build a case against him. 

“Since then, the council has been looking for other things to try to add to the [conflict of interest claim] because they knew that I never accepted the loan and they really didn’t have much,” he said. “Some of the other folks [Vice-Chair Colegrove and Councilmember Jill Sherman-Warne] that ran against me in the last election, they were looking for things that they could add on to try to get rid of me.”

The tribal council issued a press release on Feb. 20 accusing Davis of attempting “a hostile take-over” of the Feb. 16 meeting after he took his usual seat on the dais and attempted to lead the meeting after the council voted to suspend him from his duties.

“Not only did the Chairman incite hostility and harassment of Tribal Council members at the meeting, but he is encouraging his supporters to privately threaten and harass Tribal Council members,” according to the news release. “Chairman Davis continues to be suspended from all duties as Chairman of the Tribe and is unauthorized to act on behalf of the Hoopa Valley Tribe.”

Davis emphatically denied the alleged attempt “to usurp power” at the meeting. He maintains that he was seated in the audience during the tribal council’s discussion on his suspension and said he “peacefully” took his seat on the dais after the vote.

“There was no hostility on my part,” Davis said. “I had a large crowd of supporters [in the audience] but … there wasn’t anyone that was hostile, other than one tribal member – a family member of another councilmember – who stood up and began yelling about a personal issue that she had. A lot of people just can’t believe that the council would go this far. … It is defamation of my character to say that I attempted a hostile takeover, because that isn’t true.”

The tribal council took further action against Davis at the beginning of this week, voting to restrict his access to all tribal facilities. Davis claims he was unaware of the action until after he showed up to work on Tuesday morning and received a letter from Vice-Chair Colegrove informing him of the suspension notice.

“[T]he Tribal Council has voted to restrict your access to all Tribal Buildings, effective immediately,” the letter states. “You are not to enter a building of the Hoopa Valley Tribe, or any of its entities, or linger outside a Tribal Building, unless you are pre-authorized by the Vice-Chairman to enter. Pre-authorization may be granted for access for personal services or benefits, including health benefits. Pre-authorization will not be granted for any activities related to duties as Chairman of the Tribe. Upon entering any Tribal Building, you will be escorted by Tribal Police to ensure your safety and the safety of our Tribal employees and members.” 

The letter also prohibits Davis from contacting tribal employees. “If you are in need of any personal services or benefits, please reach out to me and I will assist in coordinating such services or benefits,” the letter states.

Along with the letter, Davis received copies of two polling sheets, which serve as a preliminary voting method to facilitate immediate action on pending matters. One polling sheet informed Davis of his restricted access to tribal buildings. The other prohibited the Two Rivers Tribune “from posting or printing any messages from Chairman Joe Davis while he is suspended from office.”

Eventually, Davis said, the Hoopa Valley Tribal Police and a Humboldt County sheriff’s deputy showed up to escort him off the premises. “They told me that if I agreed to leave on my own they would leave,” he said. “They were basically there to remove me.”

The tribal council’s action against Davis has drawn criticism from members of the Hoopa Valley Tribe, some of whom took to the Hoopa Community Facebook group to voice their support for Davis. 

“How many signatures are needed in order to place our chairman back to his seat so he can finish his term and run again[?]” one commenter asked.

“I want to know what the accusations are against the chairman,” another commenter wrote. “It’s my right as a citizen of this Tribe to know what my council is spending their time doing. If a press release can be made that gives some heavy-handed assertions, then the offenses should also be stated.”

​​The tribal council will hold a public meeting in tribal council chambers at 10 a.m. on Feb. 29 to discuss the allegations against Davis and formally consider his removal from the council. Davis will have an opportunity to respond to the charges levied against him during the meeting. 

“I just ask that the council respect the wishes of the tribal membership who elected me and that they go into hearing with an open mind,” Davis said. “I hope they don’t already have their minds made up. … What they’ve done has been a disservice to the membership.”

Vice-Chair Colegrove and Senior Tribal Attorney Kristen Boyert did not respond to the Outpost’s request for comment ahead of publication. We’ll update this post if we hear back.

Is Ross Rowley the only person in Humboldt who knows what a limerick is? You be the judge.

MEASURE A

There were some pot growers in Humboldt
When prices and profits did tumble
They said let’s grow more, from mountains to shore
The bigger the better, we will not be fettered
Supply and demand be damned.

— Dianne Higgins

We went out to see the night sky
The Pleiades and Venus to spy
When we got there and saw nothing but glare
To the heavens we sent up our prayer
May the hoop houses go bye-bye

— Betsy Watson

There once was a planner who gave not a care
What neighbors and land and rivers could bear
He lets cannabis rule
And now looks a fool
Caught in a twisted and biased affair

— Meighan O’Brien

A forest does not like a cannabis farm
To wildlife and soils they only do harm
They remove food to eat
And places to sleep
Put mammals and birds in a state of alarm

— Patrick Mulligan

Politicians who give in to the fad
Are cowards and cowed by the in crowd
to suport just one percent of those they represent
While the rest of us are thrown under the bus
And the growers threaten to break bad.

— Ken Miller

MEASURE C

County measure named “C” fairly pales,
Compared to Measure “A,” where they rail.
For the Fire Hall’s tax
No one’s grinding an ax
Out in Fieldbrook and in Glendale

— Ross Rowley

SECOND DISTRICT SUPERVISOR

The 2nd’s a race for hobknobbers
Bushnell and McClendon and Roberts
Will they have their own bias?
Up there on the dais
For ranchers, weed farmers or loggers?

— Ross Rowley

ASSEMBLY

Now here’s a fine man name of Myers
To bring salmon back he aspires
He has all our goals
Takes us over the shoals
Vote Myers to get your desires

— Margaret Dickinson

###

OK, Margaret Dickinson also did pretty well.

PREVIOUSLY:

• It’s ELECTION LIMERICK Time Once Again! Please Send Us Your Letters of Support For Local Candidates and Measures, But Only in the Form of a Limerick
• ELECTION LIMERICK ROUNDUP! Here’s the First Batch of Political Poetry Sent to LoCO. We Tried to Be Forgiving.

The city-from-scratch that tech billionaires want to build in Solano County is getting the hard sell, with the backers promising new housing, better jobs and more — promises that will cost in the hundreds of millions, if not billions, of dollars — plus a pledge that county taxpayers outside the new community won’t have to pay for any of it.

The backers call these pledges, contained in a proposed countywide ballot initiative, “guarantees.” They say they’ll be legally bound to honor them.

But skeptical legal experts and local officials dispute the idea that the project’s developers will be obligated by law to deliver on the so-called guarantees. Because the issues would put California in uncharted territory, odds are some disputes would have to be resolved in court.

The Silicon Valley tech billionaires aim to put a nearly 100-page ballot initiative before county voters in November. The group has formed a company called California Forever — whose subsidiary Flannery Associates has spent $900 million to buy 62,000 acres of farmland (about the size of Sacramento) in the area since 2017 — that proposes to build on 17,500 acres of that land (about the size of Vacaville). They plan for the new community to attract an initial 50,000 residents, and eventually up to 400,000, which would double the population of the county.

The company is backed by a group of venture capitalists — including Michael Moritz, LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman, Netscape co-founder Marc Andreessen and Emerson Collective founder Laurene Powell Jobs — to create this new town. They promise, through California Forever and its chief executive, Jan Sramek, to spend a lot more money to build and develop the community. They say it will alleviate the state’s housing crisis, create well-paying jobs and build a walkable community on the outskirts of the Bay Area.

Although the project’s promoters insist Solano County residents outside the proposed community won’t get stuck with any new taxes or fiscal responsibilities, they acknowledge the state of California will. And those state taxpayers, of course, also include all of Solano County’s taxpayers.

“The goal is to be the master developer of this and be a real steward of the land,” Sramek said in an interview with CalMatters last week. He added that the investors in the project are in it for the next few decades at least.

Despite taking part in some contentious town-halls and other public meetings, and suing county farmers they accuse of price-fixing, Sramek and California Forever are courting voters with wide-ranging “guarantees.”

Those promises — whose dollar amounts will gradually increase with the community’s population, reaching the pledged totals at 50,000 residents — include:

• Up to $400 million in down-payment assistance to help Solano County residents buy homes in the new community and new affordable housing
• Up to $200 million invested into the county’s existing downtowns
• Up to $70 million for college, training and educational programs for Solano County residents
• Thousands of new jobs that will pay 125% of the average annual income in the county
• An unknown sum for infrastructure for the new community, such as schools, a transportation system and more

Skeptics abound.

“They can promise they can do a thing,” said Mary-Beth Moylan, a University of the Pacific law professor and expert on California initiatives, who said the promises are not legally binding. “But when you get into things like commitment of taxpayer money, that’s not something they can guarantee.”

Solano County Supervisor Erin Hannigan represents Vallejo, and while she’s not necessarily against the project, she agreed with Moylan. “I think (the promises promoters call guarantees) will falsely entice people to think this is a good thing” when she said there is not enough information for voters to make an informed decision. “Who’s going to enforce it? You can’t put a directive on a municipality.”

Sramek pointed to initiative language that says the community would not be able to begin development without an environmental impact report, and without reaching a development agreement with the county that would incorporate enforcement of the so-called guarantees.

California law does not allow for statutory development agreements to be passed by initiative, per a 2018 appellate court ruling. This proposed initiative refers to a development agreement that is supposed to include many of California Forever’s promises, but the company will still have to iron out details with the county.

California Forever’s backers have up to 180 days to collect 13,062 signatures after they publish the final initiative title and summary in the legals section of print newspapers in the area, said John Gardner, assistant country registrar. The company can’t do that until it gets the initiative title and summary back from the registrar after submitting a revised version of the initiative Feb. 14; the registrar is waiting on county counsel to rewrite the initiative title and summary before passing that back to California Forever. For the initiative to qualify for the November ballot, all other subsequent steps, including validation of the signatures by the registrar and a final approval by the Board of Supervisors, must be completed by Aug. 8, Gardner said.

Ahead of signature-gathering for the East Solano Homes, Jobs, and Clean Energy Initiative — which asks voters to rezone farmland and amend the county’s urban-growth-restricting General Plan — here’s a breakdown of the “guarantees” and a look at a key sticking point: the effect of a new community on Travis Air Force Base.

Taxpayer and smart-growth promises

The initiative says California Forever won’t impose any new taxes or fiscal obligations on Solano County residents outside the new community.

Any costs to the county, including current and future administrative costs, already are being reimbursed by the company, Sramek said.

Bill Emlen, Solano County Administrator, confirmed through a county spokesperson that the company has a reimbursement agreement with Solano County.

But Emlen added that because the project is being pursued through the initiative process, “we are evaluating what additional costs may be recoverable from the project proponents based on county staff time that will be required. Given the scope and scale of the proposal we believe the costs will be significant and there are already costs incurred that have not been reimbursed.”

Other potential future expenses include the cost of law enforcement. Because the new community would be unincorporated, the county sheriff’s office would be responsible — but Sramek said California Forever would pay for those costs.

“We would set up a community facilities district which could also provide services, controlled by the county,” Sramek said, adding that it would be similar to Rio Vista’s arrangement with the sheriffs. Rio Vista Mayor Ron Kott said his city pays the county for 12 full-time sheriff’s deputies.

But some of the planned infrastructure will involve or eventually involve costs to the state — and therefore Solano County residents.

California Forever’s initiative also promises that after the first 50,000 residents, its financial commitments would continue to scale up in proportion to the community’s growth. So if the community doubles, so would the dollar amounts mentioned in the guarantees.

Jobs promise

The initiative says the new community will provide 15,000 new jobs that will pay 125% of the county’s average annual income. That works out to new jobs needing to pay at least $83,850 annually, based on the most recent weekly wage numbers for Solano County from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

But elected officials and others have questioned this so-called guarantee, partly because California Forever has not disclosed which employers are interested in coming to the proposed community, which its backers envision as hosting different types of employers, from small businesses to big ones, from coffee shops to stores. Sramek said he plans to share specific names “between now and November.”

Sramek said the new community will have “the opportunity to bring tech jobs” to the area — not just in software but also in “hard tech” such as advanced manufacturing, aerospace and defense, something akin to what he said Silicon Valley had before it ran out of space and housing in the region became too expensive for manufacturing workers to afford.

Considering the tech-industry backers of the proposed community, “if anybody can make it happen, it would be them,” said Kott, the mayor of Rio Vista, which would be the new community’s nearest neighbor.

Other mayors say there certainly will be construction jobs, especially for the first few years.

“That’s very different from long-term economic-development jobs that could sustain a community going forward,” said Steve Young, mayor of Benicia.

Robert McConnell, mayor of Vallejo, said “labor unions are the biggest supporter of this project,” referring to the fact that California Forever put together an advisory committee that included a few union leaders.

“They can promise they can do a thing. But when you get into things like commitment of taxpayer money, that’s not something they can guarantee.”
— Mary-Beth Moylan, Law professor and ballot initiatives expert, University of the Pacific

But Jon Riley, executive director of the Napa/Solano Central Labor Council, which consists of 48 affiliated unions in the region, said labor has not taken a stance — though he was on the committee, along with other public officials and business leaders. Until the unions take a vote on whether to support the initiative, he said he would not be doing interviews.

The initiative states that if the jobs “guarantee” is not met, the county won’t have to approve any more home development beyond that for the first 50,000 residents.

Hannigan, from the Board of Supervisors, again: “The ‘guarantees’ are tied to progress. It’s hard to hang your hat on it.”

Housing promises

Perhaps the key selling point of the proposed community are the 40,000 to 160,000 new homes that could be built at the edge of the San Francisco Bay Area, a region where places to live are in desperately short supply.

Sramek and other California Forever representatives stress that this isn’t your typical sprawling commuter suburb, and that the town will consist of a dense mix of apartments, condos, town- and rowhouses and backyard cottages, all across a matrix of bike paths and pedestrian-friendly boulevards. This meticulous vision of city life is meant to appeal to design geeks, urbanists and people who spent a lot of time playing SimCity growing up. But the heart of the new town would still be a 48-minute bicycle ride from downtown Rio Vista, the next closest community, according to Google Maps. There aren’t immediate plans to incorporate the city into current public bus and rail networks, as that would require buy-in from regional and state public transportation agencies. In the meantime, the company plans to start with a private shuttle system, California Forever’s planning chief, Gabriel Metcalf, said in a recent interview with the pro-development publication SF YIMBY.

Cattle graze on land where California Forever plans on putting its new city in Solano County, on Feb. 16, 2024. The contentious development would be located between Travis Air Force Base and Rio Vista. Photo by Loren Elliott for CalMatters Credit: Loren Elliott

An exceedingly optimistic projection of how much it would cost to build even just 40,000 units would be less than $10 billion. Both Sramek and Metcalf have said that California Forever isn’t likely to front all of that money, but would instead play the role of “master developer,” in which they build the infrastructure and secure the legal right to build before selling off individual parcels to builders.

Whatever arrangement the company arrives at, building a fully fledged town out of nothing won’t be cheap.

In addition to the pledge to build new homes by the thousands, the billionaire-backed venture is also offering, as one of its “guarantees,” to spend $400 million on affordable housing developments and down-payment assistance for future residents.

What kinds of affordable housing projects will get built and for which types of residents? How will any down-payment assistance grants be divided up and under what terms? Who will be tasked with overseeing this nearly half-a-billion dollar spending bonanza?

That is all TBD.

Sramek said such details would be hammered out through a “community engagement process” and negotiations with the county government, assuming the ballot measure passes. Those negotiations would culminate in a broader development agreement that would spell out the when, where and how of the entire town-building project. Developers regularly enter into such legally binding contracts with local governments over the nitty-gritty of how a project gets built.

That agreement would also dictate some of the terms under which new homes actually get built in the hypothetical new community. But Sramek and the other backers of California Forever have a clear preference for how construction should take place: quickly.

The ballot measure would require the county to approve preliminary applications for development, including those for new housing, within 60 days. That’s blow-your-hair-back-fast, by California development standards.

Then, assuming a project is consistent with zoning and a set of broad design rules, the initiative dictates that the county would have no choice but to approve them — no discretion and no public hearings. The decision would also be exempt from environmental review and any related lawsuits. In housing policy jargon, this approach to development is known as “by-right” or “ministerial” approval, a glidepath standard that “yes in my backyard” advocates have been inserting into state law for specific, favored project types. This would make the entire community a YIMBY-happy oasis of ministerial approval, a complete inversion of the status quo in neighboring San Francisco.

The county and California Forever will be able to tinker with the details of the approval process in a future development agreement. But legally they can only fill in gaps left by the ballot measure. They can’t override it.

“Our goal is that a complying project can be approved in 10 days,” Metcalf said in the SF YIMBY interview. “We’re not looking to have people involved in telling other people what they can build.”

“When I hear ‘guarantee,’ I don’t know how they’re going to guarantee anything.”
— Daryl Halls, Executive Director, Solano Transportation Authority

That vision has already stirred up additional opposition from some local elected officials.

In an interview with the San Francisco Chronicle, Democratic U.S. Rep. John Garamendi, whose district includes the neighboring Travis Air Force Base, expressed concern over the “the inability of the county government to control what goes on” in the new development.

But there may be limits to how much the ballot measure can do to speed up the growth process. Before developers can start dropping homes onto cow pastures, they first need to legally divide the land up into individual parcels — a process known as subdivision.

California courts tend to “give Solano County discretion over subdivision approvals,” UC Davis law professor Chris Elmendorf said in an email. “I don’t think the ballot measure can make subdivision approvals ministerial.”

Translation: He doesn’t think California Forever can streamline every step of the development process with a single ballot measure.

This isn’t the first time private money has sought to build an out-of-nowhere city, not even in California. In the late 1950s the Irvine Company commissioned “starchitecht” William Pereira to design from scratch a city to serve the newest University of California campus in Orange County. Thus: Irvine.

But the history of proposed cities is also littered with extravagant failures, especially in unincorporated Solano County.

An area of land where California Forever plans on building its new city in Solano County. Photo by Loren Elliott for CalMatters

According to the San Francisco Chronicle, in 1913, a wealthy cadre of San Franciscans, including the then-owner of that paper, bought up nearly 100,000 acres of north Bay Area farmland in the hopes of building Solano City — “the most beautiful city in America.” The project went bankrupt before a single house was built.

In more recent history, a San Francisco developer spent the early 1980s trying to build Manzanita, a 2,000-home subdevelopment not so far from the current plot selected by California Forever. Even the pitch made by developer Hiram Woo sounds familiar in 2024: “A self-contained community with families of different income levels living together with a lot of amenities they can enjoy,” he told the San Francisco Examiner at the time.

That project, along with another one nearby, prompted a public backlash from locals worried about sprawl and the loss of agricultural open space. In 1984, voters enacted a county-wide “orderly growth” policy, which requires any new development outside Solano’s seven current cities to receive electoral approval before it can break ground. A year later, the local electorate voted down the Manzanita project by a two-to-one margin.

Four decades later the policy is still in place, which is why California Forever’s vision is in Solano County voters’ hands.

Transportation promise

California Forever also promises in the ballot initiative to pay “more than its proportionate share of costs” to upgrade Highways 12 and 113, the two main ways to get to the proposed community.

Sramek said “proportionate share” will be tied to how much the new community’s residents use those highways, and those terms will be specified in the development agreement.

The initiative also says “future improvements shall be developed with Solano Transportation Authority, Caltrans, and other stakeholders.” That means other costs would be shouldered by local and state taxpayers, because highway projects involve multiple agencies.

The Solano Transportation Authority is neutral on the project, said Daryl Halls, its executive director. But he has questions.

“When I hear ‘guarantee,’ I don’t know how they’re going to guarantee anything,” he said, particularly when it comes to widening or making other improvements to highways, where regional and state partnerships are critical.

“There’s a lot of taking your turn,” Halls said. “We’re competing against 57 other counties for projects.” He also said that highway projects take a lot of time, and involve air-quality concerns, environmental studies and more.

Another agency likely to be involved would be the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, which handles transportation planning and financing for the Bay Area.

“The goal is to be the master developer of this and be a real steward of the land.”
— Jan Sramek, chief executive of California Forever

Rebecca Long, its director of legislation and public affairs, said she read the proposal, which also included a possible rail connection between the new community and the Fairfield-Vacaville Amtrak station.

Long said she saw “no guarantee of a funding stream of this magnitude that could fund these projects. They would have to secure massive discretionary (government) grants, which are not particularly favorable toward highway-widening projects.” In addition, she said if the planned highway-widening were to be funded and approved, “you’re looking at a decade at a minimum to go from designing it to constructing it.”

As for other transportation, the rapid-shuttle program Metcalf spoke of would be made up of buses within the county and financed by California Forever. In the long run, he said such a program could run between Sacramento and the Bay Area.

“We can be a catalyst and primary funder of transportation lines,” Metcalf said on stage at Solano Economic Development Corporation’s annual meeting in early February.

Schools and scholarships promises

Usually, California schools are built with state and local funds, with cities asking residents to approve local bonds that can then be repaid over decades. The question, then, is which will come first, the schools or the taxpayer base of the new community?

California Forever’s initiative says its new community’s schools will be paid for by state school construction programs, school facility improvement grants and other sources.

But Sramek said his plan is for the community to have everything it needs “from Day 1,” including schools. That means “it’s very possible that we will subsidize a school,” he said, then expect to be paid back as the community grows.

In the past few decades, California’s K-12 schools have been financed about 50-50 by the state and local governments, said Jeff Vincent, director of the UC Berkeley Center for Cities & Schools, adding that cities can end up paying more depending on how specialized or fancy a campus might be. Cities also collect developer fees that go toward school construction.

“I suppose it’s conceptually possible they could front the money, then get repaid,” Vincent said, adding that to collect state funding, the new community would have to meet eligibility requirements related to expected number of students.

But even if California Forever fronts the money for construction of a school, it will still need to go through state approvals that could take a long time. From conception to design to construction, two to three years would be an overly optimistic timeline, Vincent said.

He offered rough estimates of how much schools cost to build: $25 million for elementary schools, $50 million for middle schools and $100 million and often more for high schools.

The California Education Department referred CalMatters to the Solano County Office of Education, whose superintendent refused requests to talk with CalMatters for this story. “There are several unknowns and variables at this point, so it feels too soon to speak to the topic,” said Jennifer Leonard, a spokesperson for the county’s education office.

The California Office of Public School Construction also did not return calls for comment.

A separate “guarantee” for scholarships in the initiative says California Forever’s investors will spend $70 million toward college, training and education, whose details are supposed to be included in the development agreement. It’s what Sramek called a “community benefit” that California Forever would grant to existing Solano County residents.

Water and ‘Green Solano’ promises

Sramek said California Forever has secured enough water for the 50,000 initial residents of the proposed community, and maybe even the first 100,000.

The water rights came from the land the company has bought, he said, and are sourced from groundwater and the Sacramento River. The company could buy more water to supplement that, but wouldn’t need it for the first buildout, he said.

The water-supply verification process would not be handled at the state level, said Ryan Endean, a spokesperson for the California Department of Water Resources.

The Solano County Water Agency has not received a proposal to provide water to California Forever, said Alexander Rabidoux, assistant general manager for the agency. If and when it does, the agency’s board would discuss such a proposal publicly, Rabidoux said.

“Do we want to vote for an initiative that will undermine what we’ve been working toward, which is to drive growth and investment into our seven cities?”
— Princess Washington, Mayor Pro Tem, Suisun City

Other officials, many of whom have been dealing with water and drought issues for years, are concerned about the effects on their water supply.

Kott, the mayor of Rio Vista, said he has talked with California Forever about a possible memorandum of understanding about water. “The development they’re proposing is north and west of our city and could affect our water supply,” Kott said.

Catherine Moy, mayor of Fairfield, said “Flannery’s land gets its groundwater from the same sub-basin as Suisun Valley,” which is trying to grow its wine industry. “We need to raise that question quite a bit… the impacts are real.”

The Green Solano “guarantee” commits $30 million toward improving parks and trails, and “supporting Solano’s agriculture economy, including family farms and agricultural workers.”

Sramek said that in the company’s conversations with the community, there is disagreement about where this money might go. It could fund trails, go toward habitat conversation or help young farmers who want to get into the business, he said. California Forever will commit the money and the development agreement could spell out how the money would be allocated, he said.

Greenbelt Alliance, a Bay Area nonprofit that’s dedicated to protecting open space, is among the opponents of the proposed new community. It also belongs to Solano Together, a coalition of opponents to the project, and is collecting funds for a planned competing ballot initiative if California Forever’s initiative qualifies for the ballot.

“It is pretty bold to include a promise to ‘protect and improve open space and agriculture’ in an initiative that simultaneously asks voters to approve development of over 17,000 acres of open space and agriculture,” said Sadie Wilson, director of Planning and Research at Greenbelt Alliance.

Solano County downtowns promise

California Forever’s initiative promises a $200 million investment in the seven existing downtowns of Vallejo, Fairfield, Benicia, Vacaville, Suisun City, Rio Vista and Dixon, proportionate to their populations. Sramek said this would be a commercial investment — meaning the company expects returns — that would involve the company owning and operating buildings in the downtowns around the county.

Some mayors of existing downtowns say the promised investment sounds good, but they don’t know how it would work yet.

“Would it be nice to have another $25 million to $30 million invested in downtown?” asked Vacaville Mayor John Carli. “Sure… but I haven’t heard how Vacaville would get that money.”

Kott, mayor of Rio Vista, is worried about the new community diverting shoppers, and therefore sales taxes, from his town.

“We’re probably going to feel the most effects,” Kott said. “Unfortunately everyone else in the county will be voting for this. I see upsides and downsides.”

Princess Washington, mayor pro tem of Suisun City, said on stage during the Solano Economic Development Corporation meeting: “Do we want to vote for an initiative that will undermine what we’ve been working toward, which is to drive growth and investment into our seven cities?”

But Kott added that California Forever appears to be willing to listen to its neighbors’ concerns, such as when the company added in its plans a park that Kott says will act as a buffer between the new development and his city, which will allow Rio Vista to keep its small-town feel: “If you’re willing to work with them, they’re willing to work with us.”

Concerns about Travis Air Force Base

If approved, the new community would be built between Rio Vista and Travis Air Force Base. That’s important for many reasons.

“Landing and takeoff space is impacted by the project,” state Sen. Bill Dodd, the Democrat whose district includes Solano County, told CalMatters. “There are safety and security problems. Travis is the largest employer and economic driver in Solano County.”

California Forever’s promises, such as down-payment assistance and scholarships, also extend to the base’s residents, according to its CEO’s public statements and the company’s website.

And in response to continued concerns about Travis, California Forever last week submitted a reworded initiative that included designating 4,200 acres as “Travis Compatible Infrastructure,” which would limit the new community’s uses in that area to infrastructure, agriculture and habitat preservation.

Sandy Person, executive director of the Travis Community Consortium — a group of civic and business leaders that advocates for the interests of the base — said she is “not able to comment at this time.” The consortium has said that Travis has a $2.7 billion annual economic impact on the region.

###

Laurene Powell Jobs oversees the Emerson Collective, which has donated to CalMatters. CalMatters retains full authority over editorial content, maintaining a firewall between news coverage decisions and revenue sources.

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

When Mel McKernan moved in with her new roommate Braedon Ellis, they bonded quickly. Every night she would stay up until 1 a.m. just waiting for Ellis to get back from her job so they could watch TV together. McKernan, 19, was a second-year student at Seattle University. Ellis was 20 and working as a Domino’s delivery driver.

“She genuinely was the light of my life,” recalled McKernan, who has since transferred to UC Berkeley. “She had this beautiful purple hair. I felt like that was just an aura that she carried around with her.”

McKernan thought she had made a friend for life. The two young women lived with two other roommates in a beautiful waterfront house in Kenmore, Washington. But behind the walls, a darkness lurked. Their other roommates were addicted to fentanyl, an extremely potent synthetic opioid.

McKernan had braced herself for the possibility of losing a roommate. But she never expected it to be Ellis. Their magnetic connection severed when Ellis overdosed from a combination of drugs that included fentanyl.

“It completely changed my view on opioids,” McKernan said. “Because I was like, this could hit anyone. It can hit literally anyone.”

Braedon Ellis. Photo courtesy of Dionne Waltz

Fentanyl is now the leading cause of drug-related deaths nationwide. After a new wave of deadly overdoses among Californians 15 to 24 started to rise in 2019, lawmakers turned to California’s public colleges and universities to offer life-saving resources to its students.

The Campus Opioid Safety Act, which took effect Jan. 1, 2023, required campus health centers at most public colleges and universities to offer students free Narcan, a nasal spray that can reverse an opioid overdose. Some colleges and universities have since armed students with Narcan, but not all have followed suit.

The rise of fentanyl deaths

Today, when someone in the United States dies of a drug-related overdose, it’s usually linked to fentanyl. That’s a change from 20 years ago, when prescription opioids like OxyContin were the leading killer, according to Theo Krzywicki, founder and CEO of End Overdose, a national nonprofit based in Los Angeles aimed at eliminating drug-related overdose deaths, especially among teens and young adults.

“Fentanyl is a very different drug than OxyContin,” Krzywicki said. “The way people use it has changed.” Because fentanyl delivers a stronger and shorter-lived high than other opioids, people often use more of it, he said, and build up a tolerance to it quickly.

For years, the opioid epidemic hit middle-aged Californians harder, but the new wave brought on a rise in death rates for teens and young adults. By 2021, teens 15 to 19 were five times as likely to die from an opioid overdose compared to 2019. For 20- to 24-year-olds, they were over three times as likely. Rates for adults between 25 and 75 years old, meanwhile, roughly doubled in the same time frame.

Recently, opioid-related fatalities among the state’s young people have started to reverse. While death rates for adults 25 and over continue to rise, rates have declined for people under 25. Since 2021, per-capita rates for opioid-related overdose deaths dropped by over a third for Californians 15 to 19 and 20 to 24.

Rising awareness could be what’s driving the recent decline, according to a statement from the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health. College-aged students increasingly use social media to spread information about the risks of fentanyl and where to find life-saving resources such as Narcan. Young people also tend to have stronger support systems and are less likely to use drugs alone, according to the statement.

Lawmakers require colleges to combat the crisis

Melissa Hurtado, a Democratic Central Valley state senator, introduced the Campus Opioid Safety Act, or SB 367, in February of 2021. She said she chose to target college campuses after hearing story after story of young people overdosing in her district.

“It was just such a serious threat,” Hurtado said. “And it still is.”

State Sen. Melissa Hurtado speaks at a press conference on Oct. 14, 2022. Photo by Larry Valenzuela, CalMatters/CatchLight Local

This January, another law, AB 461, went into effect that added fentanyl test strips to the requirements. The small paper strips can be used by drug users to check if their supply contains fentanyl. Counterfeit prescription pills, made to look like OxyContin or Adderall, often contain fentanyl, according to the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration.

The act requires campus health centers at California State University campuses and community colleges to order free Narcan through a state program called the Naloxone Distribution Project. Schools also must educate their students about preventing overdoses, and let them know where they can find opioid overdose reversal medication. The law “requests” the University of California system to do the same, stopping short of a requirement because of the system’s constitutional autonomy.

At least 100 public colleges in California have Narcan somewhere on campus, according to data from the state distribution project that included a list of all applications from colleges and universities. Although not required by law, some private universities like Stanford also offer Narcan to students.

Every UC and Cal State has ordered Narcan from the state distribution project in the last two years, with the exception of CSU Maritime Academy. However, CSU Maritime said in an email statement that Narcan is available through their student health center.

Fourteen of California’s 72 physical community college districts were not represented in the data, but Narcan could still be on those campuses. Victor Valley College, in San Bernardino County, ordered Narcan through its police department, so the request was categorized as law enforcement. DeAnza College in Santa Clara County received its supply of Narcan from the county health department, according to college spokesperson Marisa Spatafore.

Cal State Bakersfield gets the word out

Hurtado represents much of Kern County, one of the deadliest counties for opioid-related overdoses among young people. In 2022, 15- to 19-year-olds in Kern County fatally overdosed on opioids at a rate three times higher than the statewide rate for the same age group, according to the California Department of Public Health. For 20- to 24-year-olds, the rate was twice as high.

The county is home to Cal State Bakersfield, whose health education department has given out about 60 boxes of Narcan to its students since January 2023. After completing a short online training, students can drop by the campus health clinic to pick up the opioid reversal drug.

Lauren Hedlund, a health educator at Cal State Bakersfield, said her team gets the word out to students through tabling, activities, and flyers. They also bring Narcan directly to classrooms if an instructor requests it. The instructor shows the training video beforehand, then the health education team visits the class to answer questions and hand out Narcan.

“It’s just making sure that I can reach as many students as possible so that they’re aware,” Hedlund said. She added that even if a student never needs the resources, they could know someone who does.

Some colleges lag behind

More than a year after the law went into effect, some colleges have yet to put Narcan in the hands of students. Elsewhere in Kern County, community colleges in Taft, Ridgecrest, and Bakersfield do not have a program for distributing Narcan to students. Bakersfield College is currently working on setting up a vending machine that would stock Narcan, menstrual products, and other health items, according to Marissa Perez, a medical assistant at the college.

In the East Bay Area, Peralta Community College District received Narcan from the state early last year, but until recently, no efforts were made to make it available through the student health center. The district initially distributed the Narcan to its security staff. No Narcan trainings have been held for students, although the safety department held a training this year at an event for college employees.

Students can request a single packaged dose of Narcan through the district’s public safety office, according to a Feb. 14 announcement sent by associate director of public safety Amy Marshall. The email was sent to employees, but not to students. Marshall informed CalMatters via email that the health center received Narcan on Feb. 20. However, the district’s associate vice chancellor of educational services, Tina Vasconcellos, clarified in an email to CalMatters that the Narcan would be for health center staff to use within the clinic, and that they would not distribute Narcan to students.

A spokesperson from Hurtado’s office confirmed that even if a college has Narcan somewhere on campus, the school needs to offer it to students to comply with the law.

UC Berkeley students steer efforts

Crushed after losing her close friend, McKernan dropped out of Seattle University and took a year off college to stay home in Sacramento. Now 21, she’s finding her footing as a transfer student at UC Berkeley, where she majors in social welfare. She’s fervent about spreading harm reduction resources like Narcan, destigmatizing addiction, and addressing the deeper systemic issues that lead to addiction.

First: UC Berkeley End Overdose Co-Presidents Shannon McCabe (left) and Tyler Mahomes (right) pass out free fentanyl test strips at Sproul Plaza on campus in Berkeley on Jan. 23, 2024. Last: A box of Narcan nasal spray at UC Berkeley student organization End Overdose’s table at Sproul Plaza on Jan. 23, 2024. The organization passes out free fentanyl test strips to students, and gives other organizations training on Narcan usage. Photos by Juliana Yamada for CalMatters.

At her former university, McKernan had tried to organize her fellow students around overdose prevention, but struggled to find enough volunteers. So when she saw students from End Overdose’s UC Berkeley chapter handing out fentanyl test strips in Sproul Plaza on a recent afternoon, she asked immediately if she could join, offering to share infographics she’d made for social media.

Before her roommate’s death, she knew her household would benefit from Narcan, but she didn’t find out where to access it in time. “A lot of people, including myself, just learn about it too late,” McKernan said.

Tyler Mahomes, a legal studies major at UC Berkeley, founded the chapter of End Overdose last year. It’s one of the organization’s many college chapters across the United States, where students spread overdose prevention awareness and resources to fellow students. Mahomes’ team brings Narcan directly to fraternities and other student groups, and works with his university to patch holes in their harm reduction efforts. For example, he notified the university when his dorm hadn’t been restocked with overdose safety kits containing Narcan.

The students can even go where the university cannot. Last fall, the chapter volunteered at the Portola Music Festival in San Francisco to hand out Narcan to festival-goers.

Students are receptive to End Overdose’s peer-to-peer, non-judgemental approach. “They don’t see us as this administrative force,” Mahomes said. “We’re students like them […] so they feel very comfortable.”

The approach has already seen some results. According to Mahomes, one student at a frat party recovered from an overdose after someone used Narcan provided by End Overdose.

The spark that went out

Ellis, the purple-haired light of McKernan’s life, left behind her mother and an 8-year-old brother when fentanyl took her life. Her mother, Dionne Waltz, would find out two days later, while driving to pick her son up from school.

Ellis was a “fireball,” Waltz recalled. She still misses her daughter’s kind and generous spirit. When they went out for coffee, Ellis would insist on covering the tab, even paying for the car behind them. Even though she didn’t make a lot of money, she’d always save up to buy her little brother something nice for Christmas.

Two years later, the initial shock has faded. Waltz still grieves her only daughter. But she sees flickers of her spark everywhere: in the sunsets, in the birds, and in anything bright pink, one of Ellis’ favorite colors.

“On the inside there’s that hollow echo all the time,” Waltz said. “I think about her every single day.”

Dionne Waltz and Braedon Ellis. Photo courtesy of Dionne Waltz

When Ellis’ spark went out, another was lit. McKernan vowed not to lose another friend to an overdose. She believes that just starting a conversation about Narcan could save others.

“Because if you’re educated and you’re prepared, it’s so much less likely that you’re going to lose a life to overdose,” McKernan said.

###

Khan is a fellow with the CalMatters College Journalism Network, a collaboration between CalMatters and student journalists from across California. This story and other higher education coverage are supported by the College Futures Foundation.

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