APRIL
Northshore getting ready for fire season
With another dry summer just around the corner and ahead of Community Preparedness Day, the Northshore Fire Protection District partnered with the Northshore Fire Fund and a myriad of other agencies including the American Red Cross, Lake Family Resource Center and the regional California Water Service this spring for a Northshore Ready Fest, a community preparedness event in Lucerne which featured “hands only” CPR sessions and educated the community on evacuation zone codes, Firewise communities and fuel mitigation, among other topics.
According to Shannon Stilwell, president and founder of the Northshore Fire Fund, the purpose of the event, which took place next to the Lucerne Euro Market & Bistro in April, was primarily to educate the community about fire and safety and awareness, home hardening and for residents to get to know some of their local Northshore firefighters and community nonprofits and organizations which offer a great deal of resources for emergency preparedness.
Established in 2019 following the failure of Measures E and N at the ballot box and prior to the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Northshore Fire Fund was established and incorporated into a 501 (c)3 nonprofit organization with the vision to augment funding for the Northshore Fire Protection District, to develop programs that engage the various communities encompassing the Northshore Fire District in Lake County including Lucerne, Clearlake Oaks, Glenhaven, Nice, Spring Valley, Long Valley, Upper Lake, Witter Springs and Blue Lakes (among a few others) and to provide education to residents for a more resilient region.
Replacement costs of equipment and gear can be taxing to local districts Stilwell explained. For example, base replacement costs which would have been funded had Measure N passed include engines which range in price from $100,000 to $400,000, water tenders, utility trucks and other support units and equipment. The district budgets don’t cover additional costs for extraction tools, aging equipment which hasn’t been replaced in years and/or the rising cost of gas.
Stilwell explained that a goal of the Northshore Fire Fund is to help fill the gap between the need for equipment, gear, and technology and the funding firefighting crews have to operate with, serving the approximately 12,400 residents who live within the boundaries of the district. She added that Saturday’s event was in part designed to continue to promote and educate the Zonehaven interactive system for evacuation alerts rolled out by the county last year.
During the Hands-only CPR demonstration sessions conducted by Northshore Fire Protection District personnel, music blared out of speakers because as explained by firefighters and staff, music can save lives and people tend to feel more confident performing Hands-Only CPR and are more likely to remember the correct rate when trained to the beat of a familiar and catchy tune such as “Stayin’ Alive” by the Bee Gees or “Walk the Line” by Johny Cash.
Also on hand were representatives from the California Water Service’s local offices who assisted residents with applications to their Customer Assistance Program designed to help qualifying customers receive a fixed monthly discount equal to 50 percent of their metered service charge. Those who qualify or would like to learn more about the program are urged to email CAP@calwater.com or call their toll-free line at 877-419-1701 to speak to a representative for assistance.
More information on the NFF can be found at their website www.northshorefirefund.org, where concerned residents can also pay it forward and donate to the NFF or contribute at their fundraising events.
—Carmona
California Opens Medi-Cal to older unauthorized immigrants
In April, California was set to open Medi-Cal to older immigrants residing in the state without legal permission.
Unauthorized immigrants over age 49 who fall below certain income thresholds were to become eligible for full coverage by Medi-Cal, California’s version of Medicaid, the federal-state partnership that provides health insurance to low-income people by early May.
Unauthorized immigrants of all ages account for 40% of the state’s approximately 3.2 million uninsured residents. Official estimates put the number of newly eligible people as high as 235,000. Those who sign up will join more than 220,000 unauthorized immigrants ages 25 and under already enrolled in Medi-Cal.
Under current law, all unauthorized immigrants who meet the financial criteria can get limited Medi-Cal coverage, including emergency and pregnancy services and, in some cases, long-term care. But when they sign up for full Medi-Cal, they get comprehensive coverage that includes primary care, prescription drugs, mental health care, dental and eye care, eyeglasses, and much more. That’s no small thing for people who are getting gray.
“This is a key moment when you want to incorporate all these aging undocumented immigrants into the health care system,” said Arturo Vargas Bustamante, a professor of health policy and management at UCLA’s Fielding School of Public Health. If you let their chronic conditions go unattended, he said, they’ll just end up in the emergency room and be more expensive to treat.
He called it “a responsible way of investing.”
As Bustamante points out, it’s no longer the case that immigrants come to work temporarily in the United States and then return to their home countries. They are staying, raising families, and growing old in this country. And unauthorized immigrants play an important role in the labor force, paying an estimated $3.2 billion in state and local taxes a year in California and $11.7 billion nationally. Nobody benefits if they’re too sick to work.
While it would take time to roll out the new benefits, the task would be made easier by the fact that the vast majority of unauthorized immigrants who will become eligible for full coverage are already signed up for limited Medi-Cal benefits — so the state has contact information for them.
The Department of Health Care Services, which administers Medi-Cal, was working with county officials, consumer advocates, and the state health insurance exchange, Covered California, to reach eligible immigrants. It has published notices with frequently asked questions in multiple languages. And the agency has an “older adult expansion” page on its website, available in English and Spanish.
The California Pan-Ethnic Health Network, sponsored legislation, AB 2680, which aimed to direct $30 million to community groups to conduct outreach and enrollment for people in underserved communities who are eligible for Medi-Cal. Separately, the network was seeking an additional $15 million specifically for unauthorized adult immigrants, says Monika Lee, a spokesperson for the organization.
Even as advocates and health officials spread the word about the new eligibility rules, they expected to encounter deep distrust from immigrants who vividly remember the Trump administration’s public charge rule, which stoked fear that applying for public benefits might harm their immigration status or even lead to deportation. With the upcoming elections at the time, many feared those days were not entirely in the past.
The Department of Health Care Services and other resources are available to help you or a loved one learn about the new Medi-Cal benefits for older immigrants, including how to sign up and how to choose a health plan and provider.
The Health Consumer Alliance (888‑804‑3536 or www.healthconsumer.org) provides free consultations and has offices across the state. It also has a fact sheet — available in English, Spanish, Vietnamese, and multiple other languages — that explains the Medi-Cal expansion to older adults. It provides contact information for enrollment, whether through your county welfare office, Covered California, or your local community clinic.
The Latino Coalition for a Healthy California (916-448-3234 or www.lchc.org) offers a toolkit and fact sheets in English and Spanish. The advocacy groups Health Access and the California Immigrant Policy Center have put out a joint FAQ in English and Spanish.
—Wolfson
MAY
Politics and pandemic fatigue doom California’s COVID vaccine mandates
In January, progressive California Democrats vowed to adopt the toughest COVID vaccine requirements in the country. Their proposals would have required most Californians to get the shots to go to school or work — without allowing exemptions to get out of them.
Months later, the lawmakers pulled their bills before the first votes.
One major vaccine proposal survived, but faced an uphill battle. It would have allowed children ages 12 to 17 to get a COVID-19 vaccine without parental permission. At least 10 other states permitted some minors to do this.
Democrats blamed the failure of their vaccine mandates on the changing nature and perception of the pandemic. They said the measures became unnecessary as case rates declined earlier this year and the public became less focused on the pandemic. Besides, they argued, the state wasn’t vaccinating enough children, so requiring the shots for attendance would shut too many kids out of school.
Political pressure from business and public safety groups and from moderate Democrats — along with vocal opposition from anti-vaccine activists — also contributed.
Other states also largely failed to adopt COVID vaccine requirements this year. Washington, D.C., was the only jurisdiction to pass legislation to add the COVID vaccine to the list of required immunizations for K-12 students once the shots have received full federal authorization for kids of those ages. A public school mandate adopted by Louisiana in December 2021 was rescinded in May.
The most popular vaccine legislation was to ban COVID vaccine mandates of any kind, which at least 19 states did, according to the National Academy for State Health Policy.
In California, the landscape shifted radically in just a few months. In January, a group of progressive Democrats unveiled eight bills to require vaccinations, combat misinformation, and improve vaccine data. Two were sweeping mandates that would have required employees of most indoor businesses to get shots and added COVID vaccines to the list of immunizations required for schools.
“It’s important that we continue to push for vaccine mandates the most aggressively we possibly can,” state Assembly member Buffy Wicks (D-Oakland) told KHN in early 2022. She was the author of the workplace mandate bill.
But the legislation imploded almost immediately.
In March, Wicks’ worker vaccine mandate proposal died. It was strongly opposed by firefighter and police unions, whose membership would have been subject to the requirement.
“I don’t think the anti-vaxxers carry much weight in Sacramento with my colleagues,” Wicks said. “They’re a pretty insignificant part of the equation.” The public safety unions “are the ones that carry the weight and influence in Sacramento,” she said.
California Professional Firefighters and other public safety groups argued in written opposition to the bill that mandates would interfere with their ability to negotiate employment requirements with their employers. “To summarily remove these bargained policies with a blanket mandate sets a dangerous and demoralizing precedent,” wrote the group, which represents 30,000 firefighters.
Schools were also supposed to be subject to a strict vaccine mandate.
In October 2021, Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom announced that California would become the first state to require shots for schoolchildren starting in July 2022. That deadline was pushed back to at least July 2023.
And Newsom’s order came with a loophole that would allow parents to opt their kids out by claiming a “personal belief” exemption.
In January, when California routinely topped 100,000 new cases a day, lawmakers introduced legislation to prohibit personal belief exemptions for COVID vaccines — those are not allowed for any other required childhood vaccines.
Again, they soon backed off, saying the vaccination rate among kids was so low that shots shouldn’t be required until they were broadly available in pediatrician offices.
About 60% of eligible Californians were fully vaccinated then and had received a booster shot, while only 35% of kids ages 5 to 11 had received their first two doses, according to the California Department of Public Health. Boosters were approved for children in mid-May.
Cases continued to rise statewide. The rate of positive COVID tests had been as high as 7%, its highest level since February — and likely an undercount because of the people who were testing at home and not reporting results.
Outreach and public information are critical, said Dr. John Swartzberg, a clinical professor emeritus of infectious diseases and vaccines at the University of California-Berkeley School of Public Health. But if those were paired with a mandate, he said, the state could vaccinate and protect many more children. “In businesses that mandate vaccines, it works pretty well,” Swartzberg said. “And in schools, in particular, it works very well.”
Pro-vaccine activists who vowed to have a greater presence in the California Capitol this year also thought mandates would dramatically boost vaccination rates. But as reality set in, they shifted their focus to boosting funding for vaccination and pushing surviving bills across the finish line.
“Yes, we do need vaccine requirements, and, yes, they do work,” said Crystal Strait, who lead the pro-vaccination organization ProtectUS. But she acknowledged that the situation had changed since January and said her group had to change with it: “We can’t be as simplistic as just a vaccine requirement.”
Newsom’s state budget proposal included $230 million for vaccine outreach and $135 million for vaccine distribution and administration.
Generally, vaccine mandates are popular with the public. According to a March survey from the Public Policy Institute of California, 57% of Californians favored requiring people to provide proof of vaccination to go to large outdoor gatherings or enter some indoor venues like bars and restaurants.
—Rachel Bluth
JUNE-JULY
Lawmakers OK budget, despite ‘crappy’ parts
Rebates ranging from $200 to $1,050 became one step closer to landing in millions of Californians’ pockets after state lawmakers in marathon night floor sessions passed a record-breaking $300 billion budget plan for the fiscal year beginning in June.
Though heated and hours-long, the sessions were in many ways perfunctory: The supermajority-Democratic Legislature was all but guaranteed to sign off on the budget deal Gov. Gavin Newsom, Senate President Pro Tem Toni Atkins and Speaker Anthony Rendon.
Unsurprisingly, Senate Democrats rejected for the umpteenth time a Republican proposal to amend the budget to suspend California’s gas excise tax, which was scheduled to increase Friday by nearly 3 cents per gallon.
Republicans were expected to introduce the same amendment in the Assembly.
One of the most controversial measures approved was a sweeping energy trailer bill that — as part of a contingency plan to avoid power shortages and rolling blackouts as California transitions to clean energy — could give PG&E millions of dollars to extend the life of the controversial Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant while also significantly expanding the authority of the state Department of Water Resources and prolonging the use of gas-powered plants.
Amid the budget debate, lawmakers also sent a pile of gun control bills to Newsom’s desk, including one to ban the sale of firearms on state property, one to crack down on ghost guns, one to block companies from advertising certain firearms to minors, and another — inspired by Texas’ abortion ban — to give private Californians the right to sue manufacturers, sellers and distributors of certain illegal firearms and to collect at least $10,000 in civil damages per weapon.
—Hoeven
Tens of thousands of Californians in limbo as eviction protections end
Eviction protections for tens of thousands of California households waiting in line for payments from the state’s multibillion-dollar rent relief program expired in June.
Since September 2020, the Legislature has passed and Gov. Gavin Newsom has signed four laws shielding tenants who were unable to pay rent due to COVID-19 from eviction. The most recent extension shielded tenants through June 30 who had applied for rent relief from the state’s $5 billion program by the March 31 deadline but had yet to hear back or receive payments. Those tenants could be brought to court by their landlords.
Debra Carlton, chief lobbyist for the California Apartment Association, said they had asked their members not to take their tenants with pending applications to court.
The state Department of Housing and Community Development, which administers the program through a contractor, did not respond to multiple interview requests.
The rent relief program has paid more than $3.8 billion to 329,000 households, according to the state’s public data dashboard. More than 28,000 initial applicants and 57,000 people who reapplied had not yet heard back, according to PolicyLink, which has been reviewing weekly program data from the state through Public Record Act requests.
Horne LLP, a Mississippi-based accounting firm that specializes in disaster relief, is being paid a total of $278 million to distribute $4.5 billion of the federal rent relief funds, according to a contract renewal dated April 1 that CalMatters obtained through the Public Records Act on June 17.
But there was a silver lining for tenant advocates. A key portion of the now expired law was the preemption of more stringent local measures against eviction, many of which went effect, including in Los Angeles County.
The state faced at least two lawsuits over the program from tenant advocates, who argue it has denied funding to qualifying tenants and isn’t covering the amount of rental debt originally promised.
More than 135,000 people — or nearly a third of all households — who applied for rent relief had their applications rejected as of June 17, according to data CalMatters obtained from the housing department through the Public Records Act. That number spiked as the program wound down. The lawsuit, which cited the same set of data, said tenants were receiving little to no explanation for their denials, which made it difficult to contest the final decision.
—Tobias
AUGUST
Supervisors discuss implementation of meth treatment program
The Lake County Board of Supervisors discussed the implementation of a methadone treatment program from Behavioral Health Services. They also considered a special item from Sheriff Martin regarding the purchase of new patrol vehicles.
During closed session the board appointed Mireya Turner, current Interim Community Development Director, to the permanent position. Turner had been interim director since August 13 when Mary Darby suddenly resigned. Prior to that position Turner served as Community Development’s Deputy Director, and spent three years prior to that in Mendocino County. Turner facilitates the newly formed Cannabis Task Force.
At the meeting Sheriff Brian Martin sought the approval of the purchase of seven 2022 Ford Explorer police pursuit vehicles totaling $340,500. Martin noted their current vehicle fleet had aged out and is in need of major repair. He added that this year had been rather difficult placing bids for fleet vehicles.
Coinciding with Sabatier’s proclamation of August 31 as International Overdose Awareness Day, Behavioral Health Services Director Todd Metcalf and Deputy Director April Giambra shared a presentation regarding a new contract with the New Life Clinic and Narcotic Treatment Program located in Ukiah.
—Carboni
