Lookout Santa Cruz

Esta traducción fue generada utilizando inteligencia artificial y ha sido revisada por un hablante nativo de español; si bien nos esforzamos por lograr precisión, pueden ocurrir algunos errores de traducción. Para leer el artículo en inglés, haga clic aquí.

El Hospital Comunitario de Watsonville podría recibir cierto alivio financiero en las próximas semanas gracias a una legislación dirigida a ayudar a hospitales en crisis económica.

El Proyecto de Ley de la Asamblea 108 (AB 108), firmado por el gobernador Gavin Newsom el jueves, es una medida presupuestaria de emergencia que asigna casi 25 millones de dólares para apoyar a hospitales públicos y sin fines de lucro que estén “experimentando dificultades financieras inmediatas y significativas.”

La medida busca estabilizar a un pequeño número de hospitales del estado que, de otro modo, no podrían pagar sus deudas antes del 1 de julio. Para ser elegibles, los hospitales deben tener menos de 10 días de efectivo disponible, haber agotado otras opciones financieras y contar con más de la mitad de sus pacientes inscritos en programas públicos, como Medi-Cal o Medicaid, o no tener seguro médico, según el proyecto de ley.

El Hospital Comunitario de Watsonville cumple con esos criterios.

El senador estatal John Laird, defensor del proyecto, declaró a Lookout que los 25 millones de dólares se distribuirán entre los hospitales seleccionados según sus necesidades. Laird, quien actualmente preside el Comité Senatorial de Presupuesto y Revisión Fiscal del estado, dijo que existen planes para proponer una asignación adicional de 200 millones de dólares en el presupuesto estatal 2026-27 para apoyar a hospitales en dificultades.

Laird indicó que podrían pasar algunas semanas antes de que los hospitales seleccionados reciban los fondos, pero afirmó que trabajará con la oficina del gobernador para acelerar la distribución del dinero.

“Estos hospitales son proveedores esenciales de atención médica en comunidades que a menudo tienen pocas alternativas,” dijo Laird en un comunicado separado. “La AB 108 proporciona un salvavidas inmediato para ayudar a mantener operando servicios críticos de salud mientras la Legislatura continúa trabajando en soluciones más amplias y de largo plazo.”

El director ejecutivo del Hospital Comunitario de Watsonville, Stephen Gray, declaró a Lookout por correo electrónico que la aprobación de la AB 108 representa una “potencial victoria clave” para el centro médico, ya que brinda la oportunidad de solicitar subvenciones a través del programa de préstamos para hospitales en crisis, del cual el hospital ya se ha beneficiado anteriormente.

“Esto es de importancia crítica para el hospital mientras enfrentamos desafíos fiscales provocados por retrasos en el financiamiento y recortes a nivel federal,” dijo Gray.

El último año y medio ha traído importantes desafíos financieros para el Hospital Comunitario de Watsonville. En enero, el hospital reportó una pérdida cercana a los 23 millones de dólares en 2025 tras reducciones en el financiamiento estatal y federal, junto con una disminución en el número de pacientes.

Gray declaró previamente a Lookout que el hospital generó 137 millones de dólares en ingresos en 2025, cifra que estuvo 35 millones por debajo de lo esperado. Añadió que el hospital logró ahorrar 9 millones de dólares en su presupuesto de gastos mediante recortes en suministros y una contratación de personal más eficiente.

El hospital espera perder entre 4.5 y 10 millones de dólares en los próximos tres años, principalmente debido al proyecto republicano de reconciliación presupuestaria aprobado el verano pasado, que redujo casi 1 billón de dólares en fondos para los reembolsos de Medicaid de los que dependen los hospitales públicos.

“Si calificamos para esto y logramos recibir parte de esos fondos, sería un gran impulso para nosotros”, dijo el presidente de la junta directiva del hospital, Tony Nuñez.

Nuñez afirmó que el Hospital Comunitario de Watsonville atraviesa actualmente una situación financiera difícil y está tratando de recuperarse. “Al menos [los fondos] nos ayudarían a seguir avanzando en esa recuperación,” dijo Nuñez.

El verano pasado, la dirección del hospital comenzó la búsqueda de una posible alianza con proveedores regionales de atención médica, como CommonSpirit Health (administrador del Hospital Dominican de Santa Cruz), Sutter Health y UC San Francisco, para ayudar a gestionar las operaciones diarias del hospital.

Según Nuñez, la búsqueda de un socio financiero sigue en marcha, y la junta directiva debería recibir una actualización sobre el proceso en su próxima reunión a finales de mayo.

El Hospital Comunitario de Watsonville también sufrió un golpe financiero a finales de 2024 cuando fue víctima de un ciberataque, lo que provocó retrasos en el envío de facturas y en la recepción de pagos de compañías aseguradoras y pacientes. El personal del hospital tuvo que trabajar con expedientes en papel durante varias semanas.

El hospital tuvo que utilizar dinero de su fondo de emergencia, que ya era limitado cuando se creó el distrito de salud en 2022 tras la compra del hospital a una empresa con fines de lucro. El hospital apenas acaba de recuperarse del impacto financiero de ese incidente.

The post El Hospital Comunitario de Watsonville podría recibir alivio financiero temporal gracias a una nueva legislación estatal appeared first on Lookout Santa Cruz.

Following the approval late Thursday of a state bill aimed at helping financially troubled hospitals, Watsonville Community Hospital could expect some financial relief to help weather its ongoing challenges.

By Dan White

Kendra Baker, co-founder of the Penny Creamery and The Picnic Basket, is this year’s UC Santa Cruz Distinguished Humanities Alumni Award recipient, an honor that highlights a career shaped by the study of language and culture.

“I’m truly honored—and a bit surprised!—to receive this award,” Baker said. “UC Santa Cruz  played a formative role in my life, so being recognized by the Humanities Division feels especially meaningful. It brings up a deep sense of appreciation for my time there.”

Baker will receive the award at the Celebrating the Humanities event on Wednesday, May 27th from 5:30 – 7:30 p.m. at the Merrill Cultural Center. This is an event honoring excellence across the Humanities Division, from undergraduate award recipients to faculty, alumni, and experiential learning fellows.

“Kendra Baker’s career demonstrates how a humanities education can inform entrepreneurship, creativity, and community engagement in deeply tangible ways,” said Humanities Dean Jasmine Alinder. “Her work shows how humanistic training can move beyond the classroom and into the world, creating spaces that connect people, culture, and place.”

Throughout her career, Baker has come to see food as a form of art that is creative, expressive, deeply rooted in human experience, and closely connected to the humanities. 

“Working as a chef and restaurateur allows me to engage with craft, storytelling, and connection in a tangible way,” Baker said. “My experience in the Humanities Division fostered curiosity and adaptability, both of which have been invaluable. Phonetics, semantics, and syntax were certainly lessons in problem-solving, and I still encounter real-life puzzles every day!  More importantly, UC Santa Cruz helped shape how I think about building something that reflects values and creates meaningful, shared experiences.”

Baker didn’t come to UC Santa Cruz with plans to enter the food world.  She began as a chemistry major, with little interest in cooking or agriculture, before an encounter with the university’s farm program shifted her perspective. 

Seeing firsthand how food is grown—and the environment and community surrounding it—sparked a new way of thinking about food as something expressive and interconnected.

She eventually moved into language studies, focusing on Italian and Spanish.  Those experiences, she said, helped her recognize food as a powerful cultural language—one tied to identity, place, and human connection.

“While my path may not appear linear, and didn’t always make sense while I was on it, my degree in language studies ultimately shaped the direction I took and who I am today,” Baker said. 

Through the program, Baker studied in Italy and later traveled and worked in other parts of the world. 

“Those experiences revealed how central food is to culture, identity, and community,” Baker said. ‘It was during that time that I fell in love with food as a meaningful way to bring people together, and as a way for me to contribute.”

After graduating, Baker began working in Santa Cruz kitchens, including Gabriella Café in downtown Santa Cruz, an early leader in sourcing ingredients directly from local farms. She later pursued formal culinary training on the East Coast and refined her craft in both the United States and France, where she trained in pastry making and developed an appreciation for the precision and discipline behind it.

Her career took her through several high-profile kitchens including the MIchelin three-starred restaurant Manresa in Los Gatos before she returned to Santa Cruz to start her own venture. In 2010, she and Zach Davis co-founded The Glass Jar, launching The Penny Ice Creamery, which opened in a former hair salon and quickly gained a following for its seasonal flavors and commitment to local ingredients. 

Baker and Davis got a taste of national fame after they recorded a heartfelt YouTube video, thanking President Barack Obama and Congress for passing the Recovery Act, which helped make their vision into a reality. 

In the video, they tell the story about wanting to open a shop that made “really great ice cream from scratch; the kind of ice cream that Thomas Jefferson, George Washington and Ben Franklin used to enjoy.” Because of the Recovery Act, they were able to secure a $250,000 small business loan.

That YouTube spot had an impact far greater than anything they could have predicted. Vice President Joe Biden called Baker and Davis to thank and congratulate them, and told them he would come to Santa Cruz when he could to try their ice cream. 

Shortly afterward, Baker and Davis ended up flying to Washington, D.C., to sit with First Lady Michelle Obama during the State of the Union address. The visit was surreal, to say the least, especially when the ice cream impresarios were riding in a motorcade speeding through the city with sirens blaring all around them.

Ice cream lovers celebrated The Penny Creamery for being one of the few ice cream shops in the nation that makes its own base from scratch, rather than relying on a pre-made base bought from other companies.  Baker and Davis also received a high-profile mention in the New York Times column, 36 Hours. 

Since its foundation, The Penny Creamery has expanded to seven locations – five in Santa Cruz county and two in Santa Clara County. The Penny Creamery also participates in two farmers markets and countless events throughout the year.

The Picnic Basket, a cafe located close to the Santa Cruz Beach Boardwalk, opened soon after the success of the Penny Creamery, expanding Baker’s vision into an informal restaurant rooted in community and place, with a focus on local ingredients.

Baker’s college experience also instilled in her a deep appreciation for engaging with creative disciplines, from music, literature, and poetry to the visual arts, which continue to inform and inspire her work.

“The Penny and The Picnic Basket are as much about people, storytelling, and community as they are about food,” Baker said.  They celebrate and reflect the uniqueness of Santa Cruz, its people, its flavors, and everything that makes it what it is.”

The post The language of flavor: Entrepreneur Kendra Baker’s journey from linguistics to local eats appeared first on Lookout Santa Cruz.

Top 10 exciting job opportunities in Santa Cruz County – Apply today!

Are you searching for your next career move in Santa Cruz County? Look no further! We’ve curated a list of the top 10 job opportunities recently posted to our job board, spanning various industries and roles. Whether you’re a recent graduate, seasoned professional, or someone seeking a fresh start, Santa Cruz has something to offer for everyone.

1. Shop Manager at The Penny Ice Creamery
2. Short Term Camp Bus Driver at Camp Ramah in Northern California
3. Forest Stewardship Manager at Sempervirens Fund
4. Project Manager 1 at MYNT Systems
5. Residential Community Service Supervisor at UC Santa Cruz
6. Finance Coordinator (Temporary) at Central California Alliance for Health (the Alliance)
7. Residential Community Service Supervisor at UC Santa Cruz
8. Principal Financial Analyst at UC Santa Cruz
9. Director of Product Success (National) at Lookout Local
10. Pediatric Dental Office Manager / Financial Coordinator at Alison K Jackson Children’s Dentistry

Why work in Santa Cruz County?

Santa Cruz County boasts a vibrant community, picturesque surroundings, and diverse career opportunities. From academic roles at UC Santa Cruz to impactful positions in healthcare and local government, the perfect place to support both your professional growth and work-life balance.

Ready to take the next step?

Apply for these exciting job opportunities in Santa Cruz County today!

FIND MORE ON THE LOOKOUT JOB BOARD >> Looking to hire? Build your team with us

• List your open positions: Amplify your job listings to reach engaged Santa Cruz County job seekers – post your job today.
• Save with job bundles: Purchase a job board bundle of 4 or 8 listings and save 25%. Redeem your jobs anytime. Bundles never expire. Get Your Bundles Here.
• Exclusive discounts for Marketing Partners: Are you a Lookout Marketing Partner? Contact your representative today to access your exclusive discount.

Questions about the job board? Reach out to Brittany at brittany@lookoutlocal.com.

The post 10 Hot Jobs in Santa Cruz County: Week of May 8 appeared first on Lookout Santa Cruz.

California families welcoming newborns will soon receive hundreds of free diapers before leaving the hospital under a first-in-the-nation program announced Friday by Gov. Gavin Newsom.

Candidates from all of the Santa Cruz city races on the June primary ballot joined a Lookout forum on Thursday evening at Hotel Paradox, at times grilling each other on the issues.

The forum began with District 4 Santa Cruz City Council candidates Hector Marin and incumbent Scott Newsome, then continued to the mayoral race, where Ami Chen Mills, Ryan Coonerty, Gillian Greensite, Chris Krohn and Joy Schendledecker took to the stage, and concluded with District 6 city council candidates Gabriella Noack and incumbent Renee Golder. 

ELECTION 2026: Read more local, state and national coverage here from Lookout and our content partners

The candidates spoke about a breadth of issues, including homelessness, development, hurdles to local business and the city’s budget. About 200 people were in attendance.

District 4 city council District 4 City Councilmember Scott Newsome (left) and his challenger, Hector Marin. Credit: Kevin Painchaud / Lookout Santa Cruz

Newsome, first elected in 2022, said he’s most proud of working to restrict rent hikes at the St. George Apartments in downtown Santa Cruz, where dozens of low-income residents faced displacement in 2024. Marin, however, criticized Newsome and the city council for later rescinding the ordinance in a settlement with the building’s owner. Newsome responded by saying that the settlement essentially did what the ordinance would have accomplished.

Marin said that if elected he would push for rent stabilization and development tailored to locals first. He said he’d also hold more town halls to foster transparent conversations with constituents. He said his top spending priorities would be mental health services for unhoused residents and better salaries for essential workers.

“Right now, we have a housing crisis where the wages are not matching the current housing costs,” he said. “We want to ensure that we increase those living wages for our city workers, for our educators, for our police officers and for our firefighters.”

Newsome said the city budget is balanced and “looking good.” He said he would focus on investing in roads, coastal infrastructure and safer streets — and would aspire to do so without cutting anything from the budget. He didn’t specify how that would be accomplished.

To support local businesses, Marin wants to invest in grants for downtown businesses and use state and federal programs so more businesses can open in the area. He also said he’s in favor of improving traffic calming measures and e-bike safety on downtown streets. 

Newsome said that 21 businesses have opened downtown in the past 15 months, and that the city needs to keep promoting an environment for that to continue. 

Newsome also said that the vacancy rate downtown is only about 8%, and added that Marin supported a tax on businesses with receipts of $1 million or more, whether or not they’re profitable: “That will result in a lot more vacant storefronts downtown,” he said.

Marin responded saying that Newsome has approved many “disruptive developments” throughout downtown and that he has not stood up to corporate developers, which Marin said he would do if elected. Newsome said homelessness is the biggest issue he hears from residents, and while homelessness is reportedly down in the city, he said the city still has to increase shelter capacity and provide necessary services.

Newsome asked Marin how he supports affordable housing despite opposing the downtown library project and the real estate transfer and parcel tax, passed as Measure C in November. Marin said that he supported a number of fully affordable housing projects such as Pacific Station North and the Santa Cruz City Schools workforce housing project on Swift Street. He claimed Newsome is supported by external corporate interests and that he’s selling the city to those developers.

Santa Cruz mayor From left: Santa Cruz mayoral candidates Ami Chen Mills, Joy Schendledecker, Chris Krohn, Gillian Greensite and Ryan Coonerty. Credit: Kevin Painchaud / Lookout Santa Cruz

Development was a major topic of focus in the mayoral forum. Schendledecker said the city has not built enough in the past, and while it has work to do to catch up, she thinks the city needs to push back against developers who say more affordable housing in projects doesn’t make sense. She said smaller and mid-sized developments are better for most places in the city.

Krohn said there are too many luxury apartments and not enough affordable units, referring to Pacific Avenue as becoming a “Wall Street.” He wants to hold a town hall meeting to see how people feel about development.

Greensite said there’s “no question” there is overbuilding in the city, and that the city needs to slow the pace of development. She also said that affordable housing should go to local workers, and that it needs to be spread throughout the county.

Coonerty said that focusing development downtown would make it easier for people to live close to transit and workplaces. But he agreed that some projects along the corridors proposed by local firm Workbench are “way out of scale.” He also added that UC Santa Cruz needs to add more of its own housing, and said a current lawsuit between the university and the city “hopefully” will force the school to build more. Krohn supported the lawsuit against the university, and added that the school needs to either build on campus or accept fewer students.

Chen Mills said the city is building too much, but recognized the housing crisis. She urged the need to balance building with the concerns from locals. She also advocated for a town hall for people to discuss design elements and objective standards for new projects.

The candidates clashed on some issues. Coonerty said it’s “head-spinning” that Schendledecker advocated for getting rid of single-family zoning in a KSQD interview, despite wanting to maintain community character.

Schendledecker replied that, given that people can already divide their lots, single-family zoning is already effectively gone, adding that it was also “racist and classist.” She said Coonerty has taken money from developers and worked as a consultant to developers, and the other four candidates have not.

On homelessness, the candidates also diverged somewhat. Greensite said she believes plenty of unhoused residents deserve help and housing, but that some “give the whole community a bad name.” She said if they don’t take shelter or treatment that’s offered, she would not tolerate public camping. Coonerty also said that it is “immoral and unacceptable” to have people living in streets and parks and that, similarly, if people don’t take resources offered to them, the city should use other tools like conservatorship or the Community Assistance, Recovery and Empowerment (CARE) Courts, which would be a new court system to get people with psychotic disorders into state-sponsored treatment.

Chen Mills said the city has to work with the unhoused community to understand what they need for stability rather than “judging people who are currently unhoused.” Schendledecker said that not everyone can get into a shelter, and that they need space for healing and treatment. 

Krohn said that any replacement for day services, which homelessness nonprofit Housing Matters closed in April, should be spread out in multiple locations. He also expressed doubt that the city has successfully reduced homelessness.

One thing the candidates did largely agree on was that too much of the city budget goes to managerial and administrative positions. Krohn, Schendledecker and Greensite all said the city needs to cut perceived bloat at the top of some departments, while Chen Mills said she’d focus on funding the National Guard Armory shelter. Coonerty said he wants to create a dashboard that shows exactly what’s going on in the city with metrics such as crime rate, the number of businesses permitted and the unhoused population before setting a budget.

Throughout the evening, there was attention on Coonerty and what his opponents see as corporate and real estate backing, as well as a proximity to big tech and promotion of surveillance, like automated license plate readers. That came through when the candidates asked each other questions. Schendledecker asked Coonerty about what programs have led to progress in homelessness and which he would cut; Krohn asked him about his consulting for developers, donations from the real estate industry and how he can represent Santa Cruzans who want to see public oversight of development; and Chen Mills asked him to justify his general support for automated license plate readers.

Coonerty said he does believe that many homelessness programs in the city and county are good, but that the city needs to get people through the system more efficiently and that there needs to be an alternative for those who do not accept treatment services. To Krohn’s question, he said that he worked on projects he felt were good for the community, like a hotel downtown and student and faculty housing on Delaware Avenue, but he will not do any consulting should he win the mayorship. On license plate readers, he said that he holds the same view as the current council, which is to exit the Flock Safety contract, but be open to the technology if the city can find one that fits the city’s values.

Coonerty asked Krohn, Chen Mills, and Schendledecker why they support encampments in the city when voters are against them. Krohn said that once an encampment near Highway 1 and Gateway Plaza was broken up, unhoused residents dispersed throughout the city rather than having a centralized place to go, but that Coral Street is “an abomination.” Schendledecker said she won’t “punch down” and blame unhoused people for their issues, while Chen Mills said she is more in favor of managed or semi-managed shelters throughout the city where people can stay, rather than unsupervised encampments.

District 6 city council District 6 City Councilmember Renee Golder (center) and her challenger, Gabriella Noack, with Lookout moderator Jody K. Biehl at left. Credit: Kevin Painchaud / Lookout Santa Cruz

The final forum was by far the most cordial. In fact, Golder told Noack she would have helped her had she not been running herself. 

Regarding UC Santa Cruz housing demand, Noack – a senior at the university – said she noticed that the new student family housing on campus is both expensive and largely unoccupied, despite the university having many unhoused students. She said she wants the university to do a better job of revamping and maintaining its existing housing. 

Golder said there needs to be more housing on campus, and that the city needs to collaborate with the university rather than fall into an adversarial relationship.

Golder said she’s proud of the reduction in street homelessness the city has seen during her service term. She said she’d prioritize workforce housing and advocate for converting old buildings into condos to give people a path to ownership.

Noack said that should she be elected, she’d put more focus on localized labor as a requirement for new building projects, and that the city needs to be careful about who influences its decisions. 

“I think it’s very important to give that platform to grassroots movements, to nonprofits over development companies, over real estate unions that oftentimes have too much say in local politics because of how they donate money and who they have personal connections with,” she said.

Noack said she knows she’d be a young councilmember, but believes that gives her some advantages. She has experience teaching technology and has grown up understanding tech’s impact on society, both good and bad. A child of open adoption, she is in contact with two families, one upper-middle class and another “generationally disenfranchised,” giving her a unique perspective on a wide range of issues.

Golder said she’s worked to make sure the city understands how children are affected by its decisions. As the principal of Bay View Elementary School, she believes she has her “finger on the pulse” and understands people of all ages.

The two candidates agreed that making sure local workers are getting paid sufficiently to live and work in the city is a budgetary necessity: “Santa Cruz has thousands of employees working every day to keep our city functioning, and we need to protect them,” said Golder.

Noack asked Golder what advice she would give her, and what might be her biggest weakness if she is elected. Golder said, while not necessarily a weakness, a challenge would be establishing strong relationships with people in the community as a young person who has not lived in Santa Cruz for long.

Golder asked Noack to name five businesses in the district, their biggest challenges and how she would support them. Noack named Companion Bakeshop, saying the owners struggle with high operating costs and high employee turnover due to housing instability. She said she would advocate for tiered property taxes based on the number of properties an entity owns. She said that would target corporations and create a tax pool to fund small businesses.

Have something to say? Lookout welcomes letters to the editor, within our policies, from readers. Guidelines here.

The post Santa Cruz candidates discuss the city’s most pressing issues in last forum before primary appeared first on Lookout Santa Cruz.

A local federal lawmaker is co-sponsoring a bill focused on safeguards for new energy storage systems. The legislation is expected to be introduced Friday.

U.S. Rep Jimmy Panetta, whose congressional district includes parts of Santa Cruz County, wants the Department of Energy to conduct research on energy storage systems and develop better safeguards in the wake of the January 2025 Moss Landing battery plant fire. 

The proposed legislation, co-authored by Rep. Pat Harrigan, a Republican from North Carolina, would direct the federal energy agency to explore what causes battery storage systems to fail, and to recommend preventative measures to reduce the risk of fires like the one that erupted at Moss Landing. 

“As we continue to move towards renewable energy, we must ensure that the corresponding and critical technology is safe and secure,” Panetta said in a media release. 

While state public utility commissions have authority over and responsibility for energy-production safety, this legislation would allow the federal government to mandate testing and development requirements for battery storage systems, Panetta said. 

The bill would authorize $30 million per year, starting in 2027 through 2031, for the research. The National Institute of Standards and Technology and the U.S. Fire Administration would work together to develop better testing methods for energy storage equipment. 

Locally, community concerns about battery storage have only intensified following the massive blaze in Moss Landing. For the past year and a half, residents in south Santa Cruz County have been protesting a proposed battery storage project at 90 Minto Rd. outside Watsonville. That project is now going through the state, rather than the county, for approval. 

“The Moss Landing fire underscored the urgent need to strengthen safety standards for battery energy storage systems nationwide,” state Sen. John Laird said in the media release. “California has taken important steps at the state level, but federal partnership is essential to advancing research, improving coordination with fire officials, and developing stronger testing and safety standards.” 

Have news that should be in Lookout Briefs? Send your news releases, including contact information, to news@lookoutlocal.com.

MORE LOCAL COVERAGE

The post Panetta to introduce new legislation Friday aimed at ensuring battery storage systems are safer appeared first on Lookout Santa Cruz.

This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for its newsletters.

As COVID-19 tore through California, Jennifer Hark Dietz had a decision to make. The state was making perhaps its biggest push ever to get people off the street, offering up billions of dollars for cities and organizations like hers to turn old motels into new homes.

It was risky. The Homekey program came with up-front cash and a promise to move fast and cut red tape. But it also meant taking on old buildings with little vetting, which had the potential to put a developer in a deep financial hole.

At first the gamble paid off. In just a few months, Hark Dietz’s nonprofit, People Assisting The Homeless, was housing people in the old 40-room Hollywood Orchid Suites in Los Angeles. She called it “a “shining light” for what seemed possible with the radical new program. 

But then came a pale pink Travelodge in the suburb of Gardena. The city of LA had already bought the motel for $9 million, and Hark Dietz said her team didn’t have a chance to vet or tour the site. They’d seen only online photos and basic inspection reports before they took it over in December 2020. A city consultant estimated that it would take about $50,000 to start moving people into the roadside motel. 

“Of course,” she said, “we know now that’s not the case.”

More than five years and nearly $3 million later, the motel — which turned out to need all new windows, plumbing and electrical, among other issues — was still vacant earlier this year. There was plywood over some of the windows, and someone graffitied a ghost on one side. 

The boom-or-bust results in Los Angeles underscore how little is known publicly about a generational project with a high price tag and even higher stakes. Some projects were huge successes. Others were total failures. Dozens remain stuck in limbo. CalMatters found there’s been little public accountability for any of it.

Launched by Gov. Gavin Newsom in the summer of 2020, Homekey awarded more than $3.8 billion to local governments to convert motels and other buildings into homeless housing, thrusting many local governments into a new role running multimillion-dollar real estate projects. Cities and counties could hire outside contractors to help or do the work themselves, skipping some of the usual building process for the sake of speed.

It was unlike anything the state had ever done, largely because it sprang from desperation. Homekey launched during peak COVID, five months before vaccines were available, and after cities had already moved thousands of unhoused people into motels through Project Roomkey, another Newsom program. But those rooms were temporary, and officials were scrambling to prevent a mass exodus back to the streets.  

With Homekey, local officials across the state bought and gutted Motel 6s, Best Westerns and roadside inns. They got more creative as the program evolved: Tiny homes sprouted in Silicon Valley, and Santa Cruz retrofitted an old dentist’s office. In Southern California, housing took shape in a former Tri-Delt sorority house, an earthquake-stricken church and a hostel that once served as a refuge for Japanese Americans returning from World War II internment.

Live Oak Apartments in Ukiah offers its residents access to common spaces, such as a community garden and meeting rooms for visitors. Credit: Manuel Orbegozo for CalMatters

“What we’re doing here today is multiples of what any state in American history has committed to address this crisis of homelessness,” Newsom said at a 2021 news conference announcing a major Homekey expansion. 

The program came with little built-in oversight. Earlier this year, state lawmakers killed a bill to audit Homekey. No state agency has publicly analyzed the program in detail to find out what’s working and what’s not.

The challenge now: A new and more complex phase is already underway with up to $2 billion from the voter-approved Proposition 1 mental health bond. But no one has publicly accounted for how many of the program’s original projects stalled out and how many succeeded.

To find out what happened, CalMatters filed more than 100 public records requests with cities and counties that were awarded Homekey funds. We asked for key details on 250 projects announced through the end of 2024, covering all but a handful of projects for which less public data was available. Those state and local records — along with dozens of visits to Homekey sites, plus interviews with people who built and lived in them — create a first-of-its-kind window into how it all played out.

Among our findings:

• Homekey made producing housing simpler. But it came at a cost. Homekey provided billions of dollars in housing funding up front, allowing some developers to sidestep the usual webs of investors and lenders and finish much faster than normal. But fewer funders also means less oversight. With rushed vetting, some projects got bogged down in delays, blown budgets or worse. At least one Homekey developer was forced out of business by an unwieldy project. Another is facing fraud charges.
• When Homekey worked, those involved stress that it really worked. Nearly 13,500 people now live at Homekey sites, according to the state Housing Department. For small and rural communities, such as Glenn County, the program provided crucial cash for their first-ever homeless housing. Officials from Mendocino County to Ventura say they were able to stabilize people longer term by adding stronger ties to public services and extra investment in resources such as counseling.
• Those successes magnify the opportunities squandered. Projects involving about 3,000 homes — roughly 1 in 5 promised by the program — weren’t finished as of the end of last year. Another 2,000 units have people living in them on a temporary basis but haven’t been converted into permanent housing, the program’s main goal. In 10 instances involving 500 more units, the state publicized grants that later were canceled or that never materialized because local officials or developers backed out.
• A lack of transparency raises familiar questions about the program’s future. State officials stress that they have extended deadlines and improved vetting for the program’s latest bond-funded iteration, Homekey+. But they refused to publicly provide details about that vetting process. And as homeless services providers have long warned, there remains no guaranteed state funding to keep existing or planned Homekey projects going. 

new pym.Parent('pym-cm-embed', 'https://calmatters-graphics-homekey.netlify.app/summary', {});

Yes, many Homekey projects opened late or over budget. But, officials emphasize, they still opened.

Newsom said he considers the program a “phenomenal success.” 

“We’re talking about hundreds and hundreds of projects all across the state of California that they’re trying to manage and organize and operate,” he said when CalMatters asked about it at a recent news conference. “And I imagine each one of them brings its own opportunities and own challenges as we move forward and implement at a scale we’ve never implemented in the state’s history.”

Taryn Sandulyak knows that better than most. The Bay Area developer thought Homekey might be her big break, but it ultimately put her out of business. She sees a fundamental mismatch at the heart of the program. It wanted high quality, high speed and low budgets. 

“You can only have two of those,” Sandulyak said. “You really can’t ever have three. That’s the issue with Homekey, is they give you not quite enough money to do it, and they want you to do it really, really fast and really, really well.”

The chasm between Homekey successes and failures isn’t a simple, one-size-fits-all story. But it does provide an outline of what it will take to make good on California’s big effort to finally make a dent in its homelessness crisis. 

‘Failing was not an option’

On the west side of Ventura, just as the surf town creeps up into the hills toward Ojai, sits what used to be one of the city’s worst nuisance properties: a nearly 100-year-old apartment building once known, in a nod to local drug slang, as the “Booyah Mansion.” 

The city’s housing authority, Ventura Housing, cobbled together enough money in 2019 to buy the building. But it didn’t have enough cash to fix all 300-something code violations at the crime-ridden property — until Homekey came along. 

“We had some scary stuff go on here,” said Karen Flock, Ventura Housing’s real estate development director. “This property failing was not an option.”

Now known as El Portal, the 29-unit apartment complex today serves as a lifeline for a mother with 9-year-old-twins, one with severe autism. It’s a refuge for a woman who lived for six years in a city-funded Tuff Shed. Another neighbor still keeps his shopping cart from the street in his apartment as a reminder of what he’s been through, and why he can never go back.

Cynthia Gomez, 60, at her home in El Portal apartments in Ventura. Gomez, who was formerly homeless, now lives in a studio apartment. Credit: Julie Leopo-Bermudez for CalMatters

Ventura and other cities and counties that were able to pull off Homekey projects relatively on time and on budget credit a variety of factors for their success. Some grantees provided services themselves rather than contracting them out, better integrating public resources. Others raised extra money for on-site social services or worked closely with first responders to head off concerns about crime and stabilize residents.

Jeffrey Lambert, CEO of Ventura Housing, said the crucial thing was realizing early that Homekey money alone isn’t nearly enough. Instead, the city combined it with other public and private funding, staffing and resources. Projects that failed or got stuck in limbo often fell apart after they ran out of money.

“Homekey works,” Lambert said, “because of all the stuff added on top of it.”

window.addEventListener("message",function(a){if(void 0!==a.data["datawrapper-height"]){var e=document.querySelectorAll("iframe");for(var t in a.data["datawrapper-height"])for(var r,i=0;r=e[i];i++)if(r.contentWindow===a.source){var d=a.data["datawrapper-height"][t]+"px";r.style.height=d}}});

For housing researchers such as Ryan Finnigan, deputy director of research at UC Berkeley’s Terner Center for Housing Innovation, the real strength of Homekey was not the building minutiae. It was the attempt to challenge the state’s status quo of painstakingly slow housing development while people keep pouring onto the streets.

“If we’re not willing to try a new approach,” he said, “then we’re not going to learn as much about how we can be more creative, how we can work with more urgency than the current systems.”

As fraught and full of delays as the construction process can be, getting a project completed is often just the first hurdle for Homekey. Once a project opens its doors, it typically needs significant resources in addition to the state funding. Mendocino County credits much of its project’s success to extra services for residents, which aren’t paid for by the state grant, said Megan Van Sant, a senior program manager for the county who oversees the Homekey site. 

At the former Best Western hotel now known as Live Oak Apartments, there’s a therapist on retainer for tenants, plus a dog trainer paid to work with problem pets. Both try to help residents resolve any issues that come up before they escalate into grounds for an eviction.

To provide those extras, the county runs the project itself, rather than contracting with an outside service provider as many Homekey projects do. Two county staffers work full-time inside the building, using their connections to do everything from enrolling residents in Medi-Cal to pairing them with mental health services.

All that is expensive. 

“I think the state should continue to support these projects,” Van Sant said. “The state asked communities to do these projects, and they cost more to do well than what you can earn in rent.”

Resident Sherry Collins inside her room at Live Oak Apartments in Ukiah. Credit: Manuel Orbegozo for CalMatters

Sherry Collins, 66, moved into the project three years ago, at a time when she was terrified of what would come next. Her husband had died, her health was failing, she couldn’t work, and she couldn’t afford to keep living in her cabin in the tiny coastal city of Fort Bragg. 

Now she feels like she’s home. Collins decorated the window of her room with little red and pink hearts and adopted a kitten with extra toes, whom she named Mr. Handsome. She continues to deal with health challenges after losing a leg to diabetes about a year ago. The building has only four units accessible for people with disabilities, making it a challenge to accommodate everyone, but one recently opened up for Collins, where she can more comfortably shower. 

“They have been awesome to me,” Collins said. “They’re more like family.”

Never-ending projects

For Sandulyak, Homekey was too good to refuse. 

Five years earlier she had co-founded Firm Foundation Community Housing, which helped Bay Area churches turn their parking lots and backyards into tiny homes for homeless residents. 

Homekey was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to dramatically scale up that vision by using millions in state funds to house dozens of people in Vallejo. It would be the small nonprofit’s most ambitious project by far.

Sandulyak never suspected that by applying for Homekey, she had doomed her organization.

Firm Foundation was awarded $12 million in 2022 to build a 47-unit modular apartment building called the Broadway Project. Over the next four years, nearly everything that could go wrong did. 

Some problems had nothing to do with Homekey. The general contractor went bankrupt, and the nonprofit tapped to operate the facility squabbled with the city, leaving the project in limbo for a year. The state wouldn’t let Firm Foundation pick a new partner to run the housing, which Sandulyak says further delayed the opening.

Other problems were directly related to Homekey. By design, the program forced cities to take a much more hands-on role with housing development than they were used to. Vallejo wasn’t prepared for that responsibility. It fumbled its attempt to get a key federal grant and failed to set up important safeguards that protect affordable housing projects from financial risks. 

Soon, Sandulyak had $2 million in bills and no way to pay them. With construction three-quarters done, the project ran out of money. Firm Foundation was forced to stop work.

It became such a nightmare that the Vallejo City Council asked for an independent audit to find out what went wrong and why. The audit blamed both the city and Firm Foundation for allowing the project to run out of money before it was finished. Firm Foundation vastly underestimated the project’s cost, and the city bungled efforts to secure additional funds.

In some ways, the audit found, the very nature of Homekey helped set the project up for failure. 

One big problem was the timeline. Homekey required projects to finish construction within one year of their award, and to move people in 90 days after that. To meet those deadlines, Firm Foundation created budgets before the architectural drawings were even done, contributing to serious cost underestimates, the audit found. 

The audit also found a lack of oversight at the Broadway Project, which it said is typical of Homekey projects. Normally, a single affordable housing project uses funding from multiple sources, including the city, the county, the state, federal funds, tax credits, private banks and more. The more funders and investors, the more eyes watching and holding the developer accountable. With Homekey, the city applying for the grant typically takes on all those risks by itself, the audit found. 

The official ribbon cutting at the grand opening of Broadway Village in Vallejo on March 5. Credit: Nathan Weyland for CalMatters

On a recent Thursday morning, Sandulyak gathered with city officials and her construction partners in front of a crowd to celebrate what they, at times, had thought would be impossible: The Broadway Project was finally open. Behind them rose the terracotta-colored wall of the sleek, new, modular apartment building. A red ribbon waited in front of them.

On the count of three, Sandulyak helped Vallejo’s assistant city manager snip the ribbon. The crowd cheered.

The project ended up coming in two and a half years late and 70% over budget. Despite those setbacks, the audit found it still cost less per unit and was built more quickly than the region’s average affordable housing project.

At right, Firm Foundation Community Housing Executive Director Taryn Sandulyak at the grand opening of Broadway Village in Vallejo on March 5.
Credit: Nathan Weyland for CalMatters

But it cost Sandulyak everything. She laid off three of her four employees, and she plans to lay off the last one and dissolve her organization. The nonprofit is still on the hook for more than $1 million in unpaid bills related to the project.

Despite her pride in the finished building, Sandulyak wonders how much more housing her nonprofit could have built — if only she’d never applied for Homekey.

Still, 52 people now have somewhere to call home.

“I’m unshaken in my belief that that is worth it,” Sandulyak said.

One of those people is 62-year-old Terrence White, a former refinery worker who was forced into early retirement by an injury and can’t afford market-rate rent. Now, he pays $294 a month and finally has his own place.

“It feels wonderful,” he said.

The Homekey gold rush

During the frantic first two years of Homekey, when many experienced affordable housing developers were sitting out the untested new program, an L.A. company called Shangri-La Industries stepped in to help fill the void. It scored nearly $115 million in contracts to build 500 homes for homeless Californians in cities from Salinas to San Bernardino. 

But a federal indictment and a separate civil lawsuit allege that millions in state funds instead went to fund a lavish lifestyle for the company’s chief financial officer. 

Among the charges attributed in court records to Shangri-La’s former CFO, Cody Holmes: $46,000 in monthly rent for a Beverly Hills house with a pool. Designer gifts for a girlfriend, including a $127,000 diamond necklace and a $111,000 crocodile Birkin bag. A $5,000-a-month lease on a Ferrari Portofino. Another $53,000 for Coachella passes, and $44,000 for flights on private jets. 

All this while many of the desperately needed motel rooms sat empty. 

Homekey set a low bar for contractors to qualify: They had to have worked on at least two affordable housing projects that included at least one homeless tenant. 

Shangri-La easily cleared that hurdle. But had any state or local officials done more digging, they might have seen warning signs.

Shangri-La’s construction business was sued twice for breach of contract in 2018 and 2019, court records show, after two firms alleged that it failed to pay them. The company was also a contractor on a troubled L.A. veteran housing project, where records first reported by KCRW show Shangri-La partners sold the property to themselves, increasing the project’s budget by $8 million. 

With Homekey, federal prosecutors allege that Holmes “knowingly submitted fake bank records” to the state Housing Department to boost Shangri-La’s credentials —  financial claims that state officials apparently failed to verify with the banks. Holmes has pleaded not guilty, and an attorney representing him declined to comment. 

As the company took on the Homekey projects, property records show that entities connected to Shangri-La or its partners paid around $13 million for actress Milla Jovovich’s Beverly Hills mansion, adding to a portfolio that included a $7 million oceanfront home in Long Beach purchased two years earlier. 

In a separate civil fraud case, state prosecutors allege in court records that Shangri-La went behind the state’s back and took out undisclosed loans on the Homekey buildings, giving up control of the sites and violating their contract with the state. That became a major problem when the company defaulted on the loans. 

For several of the properties, no one had filed crucial paperwork to ensure that they remained affordable housing. After the buildings ended up in foreclosure, some were scooped up by companies with no commitment to homeless housing.

Homekey contracts tasked local officials with vetting projects and reviewing contractors’ organizational documents, budgets and other key details. But records show state officials also reviewed Shangri-La’s financials, and once they paid out the Homekey money, they failed to verify that paperwork was completed to restrict the buildings to affordable housing.

The state Housing Department and several local governments that hired Shangri-La for Homekey projects declined to comment, citing ongoing litigation. 

Andy Meyers, the former CEO of Shangri-La, acknowledged in an interview that he had “a lack of control” over his company. He has sued Holmes for fraud. He also blamed the local and state officials. 

“My CFO had a lot of wrongdoing,” he said. “But it was a confluence of events that caused each project to go bad.”

Meyers said officials’ failure to file the proper affordable housing restrictions, which were also required by his lender, triggered a financial disaster that led his company to default on some of the properties. On two projects that Shangri-La did open in San Bernardino and Salinas, he estimated that the company incurred around $11 million in unexpected costs.

“We have spent so much money following their guidelines and following their timetables,” he said, “and they never followed their guidelines or timetables.” 

Monterey County Supervisor Chris Lopez rallied support for a Homekey project in his hometown of King City. He thought Shangri-La made sense for four projects in the county, since it had already opened one Homekey site in Salinas. 

But it didn’t take long for constituents to start asking why rooms were sitting empty behind chain-link fences. 

“The longer it went on without seeing any movement, the flag started to get raised,” Lopez said. “I was starting to hear less and less communication and more sort of finger pointing.”

Local officials like Lopez had to start from scratch, raising millions more dollars to revive the projects as encampments swelled. It took 10 different deals totaling $16 million to open the King City project in March, three years behind schedule.

The full trail of Shangri-La’s deceit stretches from the state’s agricultural heartland to the edge of the Southern California desert. A $27 million Thousand Oaks hotel project sits abandoned today, robbing a region of 77 homes while it had a decade-long housing waitlist. Another $16 million project scrapped in Salinas would have provided 58 homes. Officials still plan to salvage 200 homes in other parts of Monterey County. The only two Shangri-La projects that stayed open during the legal battle, two motels in Southern California, were full of people who were plunged into messy foreclosure disputes.

The Quality Inn & Suites building, a former Shangri-La project, stands vacant in Thousand Oaks on Feb. 26. Credit: Julie Leopo-Bermudez for CalMatters

Carrie Harmon, San Bernardino County’s director of community development and housing, said in an email that “the county entered into this effort in good faith, relying on representations that later proved to be inaccurate.” 

Even some of those whose Homekey projects went well say they’re not surprised that things went sideways. In Mendocino County, Van Sant said the state’s oversight was limited to quarterly progress reports. Once the money was spent, the state stopped asking for any information at all.

“They gave us a bunch of money, made us do some paperwork, and then they’re out of here,” Van Sant said.

For Colleen Robinson, public officials’ failure to see the red flags with Shangri-La was life-changing. 

Robinson, now 62, survived years on the street after losing her job and fleeing a bad relationship. The All Star Lodge in downtown San Bernardino was her chance to start over. Shangri-La did manage to renovate and open that project in late 2022.

Two years later, the bank foreclosed. Because no one had put the affordable housing restriction on the property, the new owner told Robinson and other tenants that it was going to quadruple the rent. She said the new owner neglected the building; weeds and stray cats reclaimed the parking lot, police sirens blared, and neighbors died with little explanation. 

“This would give hell a run for its money,” Robinson said.

Harmon said the county was still trying to buy the building and figure something out, but Robinson didn’t wait around to see how the saga ended. On a Thursday in February, she packed up and boarded a Greyhound bus for Iowa, where one of her children lives.

Homeless veterans still waiting An unfinished motel conversion in the Encino neighborhood of Los Angeles on Jan. 27. The project is expected to finish more than a year after the original deadline, city records show.

Some Homekey projects still haven’t opened. 

Santa Cruz County has three badly delayed Homekey projects, one of which will be more than four years late when it is slated to finally be finished at the end of next year. For that project, the county obtained more than $6 million to convert rustic vacation cabins under a grove of redwood trees into housing for homeless veterans. The state initially set a completion deadline of 2023, but the project ran out of money before it crossed the finish line, forcing construction to stop. 

There were many reasons why, but one stands out: underestimating the cost, said Robert Ratner, director of Santa Cruz County’s Housing for Health division. 

The developers had never undertaken a project this large, and that inexperience contributed to the budgeting error, Ratner said. But so did the design of Homekey, which capped what the state was willing to pay per unit at about half what it takes to build affordable housing in some parts of California. 

The idea was that projects would be cheaper because they were converting existing buildings, while also cutting out extra layers of bureaucracy that add time and expense. That led developers to low-ball budgets, which came back to bite them when the savings weren’t as great as anticipated, Ratner said. 

Once the budgeting error was made, neither the state nor the county caught it, Ratner said. The county assumed that the state would scrutinize all Homekey applications and throw out any that didn’t seem viable, Ratner said. But it appears that in reality, the state was relying on the counties to do that vetting.

Santa Cruz County had little experience analyzing whether a construction project was adequately budgeted. Typically, the county relies on other funders, such as construction lenders and tax credit investors, to do that job. But those investors weren’t present here. 

When asked whether he and his colleagues had done their due diligence to make sure the projects were realistic, Ratner was straightforward. 

“I would say no,” Ratner said. “I can’t say yes with a straight face at this juncture.”

Other projects just never happened. 

A $14 million Homekey award was supposed to help breathe new life into the Hotel Travelers, a rundown, century-old building in Oakland’s Chinatown, as housing for people returning from incarceration. But once the developer got a look at the building, that plan fell apart. An inspection revealed such severe issues with the building’s construction that the developer determined it would be “morally untenable” to proceed. Oakland returned the grant.

In total, CalMatters found at least 10 cases where a Homekey award was announced, only for the grantee to later withdraw their application, return or redirect the money, or have the state claw it back. Some instances had more public explanation than others. 

City officials in Fresno voted down their own project. Long Beach was unable to come up with a suitable location for $2 million worth of brand-new tiny homes left sitting in storage. Projects in Marin and Mariposa counties evaporated when real estate deals fell through, and the state rescinded its grant for a project in Salinas after a nonprofit partner pulled out.

Newsom’s legacy and a financial cliff

Despite the vastly different outcomes at Homekey projects around the state, there’s no plan for a comprehensive audit to see what worked and what didn’t — a decision that raises the question of whether the state has done enough to grapple with Homekey as it forges ahead with the new version of the program, Homekey+.

Earlier this year, lawmakers nixed a public accounting proposed by Assemblymember Leticia Castillo, a Republican from Corona.

“While the program has expanded housing options, critical questions remain about its long-term impact and cost-effectiveness,” a summary of Assembly Bill 505 said. “It is unclear how many Homekey-funded units remain occupied after one year, how many individuals successfully transition to stable, long-term housing, and whether Homekey’s cost per unit is competitive.”

The bill was never publicly debated. It died in January.

The state did do one audit of multiple homeless services programs in 2024. It didn’t get into Homekey delays or what actually happened to people living in the buildings, but it analyzed the costs of eight projects. Based on that small sample, the auditor concluded that Homekey was “likely” cost-effective, with an average cost of $144,000 per unit, compared to the hundreds of thousands of dollars more it can cost for new construction in California.

The challenge is that when Homekey plans fell short of ambitions at job sites around the state, the consequences were often murky. In extreme cases, where cities acknowledged that projects failed to materialize, the state has clawed back grants. But usually, the main penalty for blown deadlines or other missteps is that the state might hold it against a local government or developer the next time it applies for funding — a dynamic that provides no public transparency.

Gary Wish stands outside El Portal apartments in Ventura. Credit: Julie Leopo-Bermudez for CalMatters

What happens next will be left up to a new state housing agency set to be launched this summer, the California Housing and Homelessness Agency. That effort is expected to include a new development committee to “provide centralized, coordinated guidance to state housing policy and funding decisions.”

For now, the state’s Housing Department maintains that it “monitors each project closely” if issues arise or deadline extensions are granted. Even with widespread delays, the agency maintains that “Homekey has helped build more and faster.”

The state said it is learning as it gives out the new Homekey+ funding. After seeing so many projects miss the one-year deadline, the state doubled the timeline for new construction to two years. Homekey+ projects that serve veterans now can propose bigger budgets for new builds, potentially addressing the issue of under-budgeted projects running out of money. 

Officials also said they’re scrutinizing applications more closely now, including looking carefully at whether applicants are budgeting enough funds for their proposed projects, said California Health and Human Services Secretary Kim Johnson. 

“We are improving our own vetting process, if you will,” she said during a recent news conference, “to ensure these projects are successful in delivering.” 

The state’s housing department maintains that Homekey accomplished a major feat: building thousands of units despite a global pandemic, labor shortages, supply chain issues and other challenges.

“It is tremendously rewarding to see so many vulnerable Californians housed so quickly, and to have voters expand the successful Homekey model to house and support veterans and others facing behavioral health challenges,” Assistant Deputy Director Cari Scott said in a statement.

As the state’s housing policies shift, there’s one big question left for people like Van Sant in Mendocino: Will there be enough money to keep Homekey projects running?

Most of the projects have a pay-as-you-go model, versus standard 10- or 15-year affordable housing financing — a calculation that leaves a financial cliff looming for thousands of Homekey homes.

“If [Homekey] is going to be a long-term, permanent, successful program,” Van Sant said, “I think the state’s going to have to find a way to find some ongoing funding for it.”

Data reporters Erica Yee and Kate Li contributed to this story.

Have something to say? Lookout welcomes letters to the editor, within our policies, from readers. Guidelines here.

The post Did Newsom’s $3.8 billion hotels-to-housing program pay off? We filed 100 records requests to find out appeared first on Lookout Santa Cruz.

Esta traducción fue generada utilizando inteligencia artificial y ha sido revisada por un hablante nativo de español; si bien nos esforzamos por lograr precisión, pueden ocurrir algunos errores de traducción. Para leer el artículo en inglés, haga clic aquí.

Un legislador federal local está copatrocinando un proyecto de ley centrado en establecer medidas de seguridad para nuevos sistemas de almacenamiento de energía. Se espera que la legislación sea presentada viernes.

El representante federal Jimmy Panetta, cuyo distrito congresional incluye partes del condado de Santa Cruz, quiere que el Departamento de Energía lleve a cabo investigaciones sobre los sistemas de almacenamiento de energía y desarrolle mejores medidas de protección tras el incendio ocurrido en Moss Landing en enero de 2025.

La legislación propuesta, redactada conjuntamente con el representante Pat Harrigan, republicano de Carolina del Norte, ordenaría a la agencia federal de energía investigar qué causa las fallas en los sistemas de almacenamiento de baterías y recomendar medidas preventivas para reducir el riesgo de incendios, como el que se produjo en Moss Landing.

“A medida que continuamos avanzando hacia las energías renovables, debemos asegurarnos de que la tecnología correspondiente y esencial sea segura y confiable,” dijo Panetta en un comunicado de prensa.

Aunque las comisiones estatales de servicios públicos tienen autoridad y responsabilidad sobre la seguridad en la producción de energía, esta legislación permitiría al gobierno federal exigir requisitos de pruebas y desarrollo para los sistemas de almacenamiento de baterías, dijo Panetta.

El proyecto de ley autorizaría 30 millones de dólares anuales, desde 2027 hasta 2031, para la investigación. El Instituto Nacional de Estándares y Tecnología y la Administración de Incendios de Estados Unidos trabajarían conjuntamente para desarrollar mejores métodos de prueba para equipos de almacenamiento de energía.

A nivel local, la preocupación de la comunidad sobre el almacenamiento de baterías solo ha aumentado tras el enorme incendio en Moss Landing. Durante el último año y medio, residentes del sur del condado de Santa Cruz han estado protestando contra un proyecto propuesto de almacenamiento de baterías en 90 Minto Rd., en Watsonville. Ese proyecto ahora está siendo evaluado por el estado, en lugar del condado, para su aprobación.

“El incendio de Moss Landing subrayó la necesidad urgente de fortalecer las normas de seguridad para los sistemas de almacenamiento de energía con baterías en todo el país,” dijo el senador estatal John Laird en el comunicado de prensa. “California ha dado pasos importantes a nivel estatal, pero la colaboración federal es esencial para avanzar en la investigación, mejorar la coordinación con los funcionarios de bomberos y desarrollar estándares de prueba y seguridad más sólidos.”

The post Panetta presentará nueva legislación destinada a garantizar que los sistemas de almacenamiento de baterías sean más seguros appeared first on Lookout Santa Cruz.

This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for its newsletters.

Katie Porter is taking her L’s in stride. 

The Democratic former congressmember from Orange County released an ad this week addressing her lowest moment so far in her race for governor: a video showing her yelling at a staffer who came into the frame of her Zoom interview, telling her to “get out of my f–king shot.”

The video came out in October on the heels of another viral video in which Porter argued with a reporter and threatened to walk out of an interview. 

Porter was widely panned as being unable to control her temper. She took a hit in the polls and hasn’t climbed back since. 

ELECTION 2026: Read more local, state and national coverage here from Lookout and our content partners

In the new ad, she references it: “Now, will you please get out of my shot?” she says lightheartedly with a crowd of laughing, whiteboard-wielding supporters behind her.

It’s a risk for her campaign, designed to show Porter can make fun of herself and isn’t avoiding talking about her perceived weaknesses. If the yelling incident was the worst thing about her, the ad suggests, there’s not much to be afraid of.

But it’s also a reminder that she doesn’t have much to lose in the final weeks of a race that has largely passed her by. 

Last fall, Porter, a UC Irvine law professor, was one of the more recognizable names in the field, with national liberal accolades for refusing corporate donations, flipping a Republican congressional seat in the 2018 blue wave and for grilling CEOs in Congressional hearings. 

But the progressive, who supports single-payer health care, free child care and college tuition and higher taxes on large corporations, has struggled to sustain a liberal base. Many coveted factions of the state’s Democratic establishment, including major labor unions, have coalesced around former U.S. Health Secretary Xavier Becerra, billionaire Tom Steyer or, at one point, now-disgraced former Rep. Eric Swalwell. 

Addisu Demissie, a Democratic strategist who ran Gov. Gavin Newsom’s 2018 campaign and his successful campaign against a recall in 2021, said he’s surprised Porter hasn’t won more Democratic support after Swalwell’s exit a month ago. In polls, voters have instead flocked to Becerra while Sacramento power players like Planned Parenthood of California, SEIU, the California Medical Association and the California Teachers Association have split between him and Steyer.

The videos “arrested any momentum she may have had,” Demissie said. “That matters in a race like this, where fundraising matters and elite opinion certainly matters. I think that has hamstrung her.”

Now, Porter is the only woman left in a crowded field of eight, apparently losing the race based on personality. Her fundraising over the past four months has been lukewarm, with campaign donors giving her just under $3 million — less than she raised in the second half of last year. 

To experts, it shows voters and political insiders continue to hold female candidates to higher standards than men. 

“One thing that has hurt her is evidence of her anger coming out,” said Sacramento State University professor Kimberly Nalder, who researches gender and politics. “There’s this perception that women should not exhibit anger, but it’s perceived as strong when men do it.”

Porter tries calculated restraint

The videos were particularly damaging for Porter because they appeared to confirm longtime speculation that she’s a harsh boss and a “scold.” 

She’s repeatedly asked about them during forums and debates. One political strategist told CalMatters Porter could secure the “angry woman vote” but not much else. 

Porter has said the incidents captured on video were mistakes, that she apologized to the staff member she yelled at and that they continued to work together. She told the San Francisco Chronicle that the staffer recently sent her a text expressing support. Last month, the Washington Post reported, 30 former staffers signed an open letter calling the videos “a caricature built from a few clips on a bad day.” The letter’s organizer, Maine congressional candidate Jordan Wood, did not respond to an interview request made to his campaign. 

In recent weeks she’s sought to more directly counter the temperament questions. During two televised debates in the past two weeks, she made calculated displays of restraint, holding back several times as the other candidates — all men — squabbled around her, and, at times, interrupted her.

“I can’t believe that on a stage with 30 minutes of interrupting and bickering and name-calling and shouting and disrespect for everyone up here who’s stepping into public service, that anyone wants to talk about my temperament,” she said during a debate Tuesday night on CNN. 

“You are actually interrupting them, too,” Republican candidate Chad Bianco retorted, though Porter had waited for the moderators to call on her. 

In an interview last month, Porter would not say whether she thinks sexism has stalled her, but said as the only woman in the race, and a single mother of three, she relates to voters. 

“I can’t really comment on how every voter thinks about everything,” she said. “Women understand better what it’s like to push the shopping cart, what it’s like to have to write that check for that permission slip. Those are decisions that I’ve made. I think I have an ability to relate to Californians precisely because I’m a mom.”

Progressives have questions

She’s also struggled to attract solid liberal support as she appeared to vacillate on key progressive issues.

In Congress, Porter was a vocal supporter of “Medicare for All,” but last year she told Politico that single-payer health care was unrealistic for California. 

The proposal is estimated to cost the state nearly $400 billion and would need federal approval — a non-starter with President Donald Trump. Yet supporting single-payer remains a progressive rallying cry, and a litmus test for the left. 

During the state Democratic Party convention this spring, Porter reversed herself again and resumed her support for single-payer.

Democratic gubernatorial candidate Katie Porter speaks during The Western Growers California Gubernatorial Candidate Forum in Fresno on April 1. Credit: Larry Valenzuela / CalMatters

She also raised eyebrows by courting the support of billionaire crypto executive Chris Larsen, who is spending his money this year fighting proposals to raise taxes on the wealthy. He donated to Porter’s campaign last year before revoking his support in March when she endorsed a San Francisco ballot measure to raise taxes on corporations with highly paid CEOs. Larsen, who supports Republican Steve Hilton, declined to comment through a spokesperson. 

And she shocked labor leaders last month when she criticized the state’s agricultural overtime law. In a room full of farmers in Fresno, she got applause for saying regulations like the law that grants farmworkers overtime after eight hours each day “don’t make sense.” Growers have tried for years to overturn or limit that law; early studies have found many have responded by cutting workers’ hours and hiring other contractors. 

Lorena Gonzalez, president of the California Labor Federation, which has jointly endorsed Porter, Steyer and former Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, said, Porter had previously given the federation a different answer about farmworker rights. 

The comments prompted a flurry of weekend phone calls with union leaders before Porter clarified on social media that she supports the eight-hour workday.

“It was an educational experience for her,” said Gonzalez, who said she agrees Porter has been judged too harshly on temperament as a female candidate. “You can’t just be told something by business and just change your position on something, especially without coming and talking to us.”

Labor groups were also perplexed earlier this year when an independent political spending group supporting Porter’s candidacy received a $150,000 donation from Uber, which also gave to Hilton and a group supporting Swalwell. In response, the California Teamsters, which has endorsed Porter but opposes autonomous driving that Uber supports, withdrew its own $100,000 contribution. The union spent that money on its own ads supporting Porter.

A spokesperson for the political action committee, Danny Kazin, would not answer questions about who was directing the PAC’s activities. Uber spokesperson Zahid Arab did not respond to questions about the PAC or explain why the company supported Porter. 

Porter denied that soliciting support from business has hurt her standing with progressives. 

“I will talk to every Californian, every union, every business, every nonprofit, every entity, every local leader,” she said. “The job of the governor is to listen and to learn and then to make good decisions. I think it’s important that I’ve been talking to entities, including some that I haven’t had the chance to work with before.”

In the meantime, many progressives — even those who previously backed Porter — have flocked to Steyer. Assemblymember Alex Lee, a Cupertino Democrat, was one of Steyer’s earliest progressive backers in the race. Two years ago, he supported Porter in her quest for a U.S. Senate seat but said Steyer won him over this year campaigning against “the corporate status quo.”

“I have no regrets endorsing Katie Porter for the U.S. Senate where I think she would’ve been a great senator,” Lee said in a text message. 

Steyer previously opposed single-payer but in December became a vocal proponent, earning him the endorsement of the Nurses Association. The state’s two major teachers unions also back him and SEIU jointly endorsed him and Becerra.

“It’s disappointing to me that some organizations and people that I really respect are not supporting Katie and are supporting Steyer,” said Sal Rosselli, president-emeritus of the National Union of Healthcare Workers, a longtime Porter backer. 

Rosselli said he anticipated some of Porter’s perceived weaknesses and said it’s good that “she’s not so tight in Sacramento.” He said he hopes Porter’s new ad addressing the video would help turn things around.

“If a guy did that, this would not be happening, in terms of that reaction,” he said.

Have something to say? Lookout welcomes letters to the editor, within our policies, from readers. Guidelines here.

The post For the lone woman left in the California governor’s race, it’s all about ‘temperament’ appeared first on Lookout Santa Cruz.

This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for its newsletters.

In the race for oversight over California’s budget, the two main contenders are an incumbent with three years of experience and a challenger who is set on exposing fraudulent and wasteful spending.

Democrat Malia Cohen has served as controller (aka California’s chief accountant) since 2023, and has raised more than $1.2 million for the race to keep her seat. She oversees spending for a state with a budget of nearly $350 billion and one of the world’s largest economies. It’s her job to make sure the state spends wisely and efficiently. 

ELECTION 2026: Read more local, state and national coverage here from Lookout and our content partners

As the governor and the Legislature hash out a budget deal for this year, Cohen has urged caution, saying higher-than-expected spending “reinforces the need for restraint.”

Cohen also has improved the state’s ability to deliver a key financial report that was chronically late for years. Cohen made up the backlog by releasing four reports in two years, and she told CalMatters that the upcoming report (called the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report) will almost be on time — late a mere two months, compared to the years others were delayed.

While running for office in 2022, Cohen told CalMatters she planned to scrutinize the state’s homelessness spending and take a critical look at the Employment Development Department and the Department of Motor Vehicles. A 2024 report by the state auditor found that California fails to adequately track its homelessness spending.

Cohen did not meet those campaign promises. She said that’s because the state auditor had already looked at those agencies. Instead of duplicating that work, she decided to focus on improving some internal functions of the state’s financial arm. She’s in the midst of ongoing efforts to modernize FI$Cal — the information technology system that manages the state’s finances — and the system that pays state employees.

“The bottom line is that I do believe that Californians deserve to know where their money is going,” she said. “So that’s what I’m working to do.”

Cohen’s main challenger, Republican Herb Morgan, has promised to pick up the slack he says his opponent has dropped. Like Cohen promised in 2022, Morgan said if elected, he will carefully scrutinize the state’s spending on homelessness. He wants to create a system where every time a state-funded nonprofit pays for anything, that transaction goes into a state database. Then, he said, he’ll use AI to monitor those purchases and flag anything suspicious. 

As an example of how state spending can be transparently tracked, a public dashboard on his website logs his campaign donations in real time. He had raised $367,000 as of the end of April. 

Morgan acknowledged he’s an outlier as a Republican running in a state historically dominated by Democrats. But he believes voters will look at both candidates’ qualifications instead of voting along party lines. 

“I don’t care where you are on the social spectrum, 99% of us are fiscally responsible,” he said. “It doesn’t mean cutting spending. It doesn’t mean defunding. It just means being responsible with our money. And that, I think, appeals to all political ideologies.” 

Also running is Meghann Adams, a Peace and Freedom Party candidate. A school bus driver who lives in San Francisco’s Tenderloin neighborhood, she is president of her union and manages its finances. If elected, Adams promised to expose corporate landlords that drive up rent prices, analyze the cost of imposing a single-payer Medi-Cal system and divest state investments from companies that support Israel’s war against Gaza. 

She had raised $16,000 as of the end of April.

Have something to say? Lookout welcomes letters to the editor, within our policies, from readers. Guidelines here.

The post A look at the top candidates vying to be California’s controller appeared first on Lookout Santa Cruz.

This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for its newsletters.

California K-12 schools have come a long way over the past 20 years, but according to an exhaustive overview of the state’s school system, further progress may require tinkering with a long-entrenched form of school governance: local control.

That’s among the conclusions of the much-anticipated Getting Down to Facts report released Thursday, a 1,000-page undertaking written by more than a hundred K-12 education researchers.

“We’re in a much better place than we were,” said Linda Darling-Hammond, president of the State Board of Education and one of the report’s authors. “But we need a coherent governance system if we’re going to continue to progress.”

The Getting Down to Facts reports, published every 10 to 12 years, are large-scale reviews of California’s K-12 system – what’s working, what’s not, and how lawmakers should respond. For this report, researchers looked at everything from special education staffing to school closures to overhauling high schools. The report is based on extensive data analysis and interviews with hundreds of superintendents, principals, school board members and parents. 

The report’s timing is important because the state’s K-12 school system is at a transition point, said Susanna Loeb, an education professor at Stanford who is among the lead authors of the report. 

The political landscape is changing in California, with voters electing a new governor and state superintendent of public instruction this November. Artificial intelligence is expected to drastically change the way students learn in the coming years. And the state is finally emerging from the COVID-19 pandemic, which upended learning for nearly all of California’s 5.8 million public school students.

Lack of consistency and accountability

For at least a century, California has had a convoluted system of school oversight, with the governor, Legislature, state superintendent and state school board all sharing policy-making authority. Local school districts have wide leeway to adopt those policies to suit the unique needs of their students. That system was further strengthened more than a decade ago when the state shifted the bulk of funding decisions to local districts through the Local Control Funding Formula.

But that’s left big gaps in student performance and questions over who’s accountable for what, according to the report. 

“California has invested a lot in education and there are instances of real excellence,” Loeb said. “But we haven’t been very good at scaling it so there’s consistency across the state.”

Transitional kindergarten, expanded after-school programs and community schools are a few new programs that have led to big improvements, according to the report. Low-income students especially have benefited from these initiatives. For example, low-income students who attended TK scored higher in math and reading in third and fourth grade, especially if they attended well-funded elementary schools, researchers found.

Big investments, big improvements

In the mid-2000s, California schools were in a sorry state. They ranked near the bottom nationally in nearly every metric. That was the impetus for the first Getting Down to Facts report in 2007, which aimed to stop the downward slide.

The state has almost doubled per-pupil spending since then, when factoring for inflation, and now ranks well above the national average. Because of the Local Control Funding Formula, which allocates more money to districts with larger numbers of high-needs students, there’s more equitable funding than existed in the past, the report noted.

California students are scoring significantly higher in reading and math than they did two decades ago, even when accounting for pandemic setbacks and even as the percentage of English learners, low-income students and other high-needs students has grown.

“Over the past two decades, the state has adopted stronger standards and assessments, made school funding more equitable … and improved achievement scores, especially in reading,” researchers wrote. “These changes have not solved California’s educational challenges, but they have left the state better positioned than it was fifteen years ago to pursue broader and more ambitious goals for students.”

Solutions and ideas

Concentrating more power with the state could bring some accountability and transparency, help narrow the achievement gaps and ensure that all districts are adopting programs that have shown promise, researchers said. For example, the state could require districts to adopt curricula that have been successful, hire more tutors or counselors, or expand after-school programs.

Some of that power shift may happen soon. Gov. Gavin Newsom recently proposed moving most of the state superintendent’s duties to the State Board of Education, whose members are appointed by the governor. This won’t solve the problem entirely, but it’s a good start, Darling-Hammond said.

The report also suggested improving conditions for teachers and administrators. The state needs to do a better job recruiting and training teachers and making sure they stay in the profession. It also needs to reduce paperwork for administrators, who spend far too much time filling out forms that are redundant and of little use.

“California has strong foundations, ambitious goals, and visible examples of what richer and more coherent educational experiences can look like,” researchers wrote. “The central challenge is whether state policymakers (and others) can connect policies, supports, and institutions into a system that delivers those opportunities consistently for students.” 

Have something to say? Lookout welcomes letters to the editor, within our policies, from readers. Guidelines here.

The post What’s holding back California students? A new report urges stronger state oversight appeared first on Lookout Santa Cruz.

Over the past few years, Lookout In the Classroom has offered free access to our local news coverage to Santa Cruz County’s high schoolers, high school educators and college students.  We’ve also visited classrooms and held workshops for high school educators covering pertinent topics, such as elections and the role of journalism in society. 

The goal has been to get students engaged with different aspects of learning and local current events, connecting lessons directly to students’ lives. 

This January, we were able to launch the next phase of Lookout’s education initiative – Lookout for Teachers. Alongside this is the ability to offer free memberships to middle school teachers, as well. At the start of 2026, we partnered with educators at Santa Cruz’s Mission Hill Middle School to create a plan for our first middle school visit. 

Sallie Corbin and Christy Fairbairn, two science teachers at Mission Hill Middle School, were working with their seventh graders on a climate change research and outreach project. The students were encouraged to investigate not just the cause and reality of climate change, but also to think about possible solutions and how they could help others understand the threat. 

Corbin and Fairbairn acknowledged that climate change can be confusing to talk about, even for adults. They reached out to Lookout, hoping to collaborate on a classroom visit tailored to supplement the seventh grade climate change unit. 

We discussed what would be most helpful and meaningful for the students and developed a lesson plan with a focus on science communication. Corbin wanted her students to understand that a crucial part of science is the ability to communicate it to others. This is especially important regarding climate change, where the scientific complexity of the topic, misinformation and politicization have muddled some Americans’ understanding of the facts. 

Our lesson plan covered why local journalism matters, since science itself doesn’t necessarily create change, but clear communication can. Climate change isn’t isolated science, but a human story with broad implications. 

In about an hour of discussion, we helped students identify effective science storytelling and understand the journalistic process – information-gathering, interview techniques, the value of talking to the people affected/interested, how to decide what to include and how to consider one’s audience. 

Cassidy Beach, a master’s degree student in science communication at UC Santa Cruz and an intern with Lookout, was on hand to  share her knowledge as a science communicator. Beach has experience teaching a wide range of ages via previous roles in seasonal outdoor education and community programming, with audience consideration remaining constant throughout her experience. 

“It’s interesting how you have to engage different parts of your brain depending on who you’re speaking to,” she said. “The core goals of science communication stay the same, but the approach can vary a lot depending on both the message and the background of the audience.” For example, Beach noted using hands-on activities and visual analogies for some, and more technical aspects connected to everyday experiences for others. 

“At the end of the day,” she said, “it’s really about making complex scientific ideas relatable, meeting people where they are and building on what they already understand.”

We left Mission Hill inspired and optimistic, refreshed by the students’ engagement and enthusiasm to participate, hopefully having also equipped them with some research and writing fundamentals to use in their upcoming climate change projects. 

Not long after, we were invited back to Mission Hill to view the student projects at their Climate Change Symposium. Some were more nervous or hesitant than others, but they all displayed creativity and innovation. In addition to the papers they wrote, they communicated scientific ideas through a wealth of media and modalities. There were interactive games, sculptures, comic books, news anchor-style videos and more. 

Beach reflected: “It was fascinating to see how each student used their own skills and creativity to create a project that felt genuine to them. Every student we spoke to really lit up when talking about their work. That’s what learning science should be about: getting people curious, engaged and excited about their own ideas and discoveries.”

These first two middle school visits – visits where students are able to learn, be curious and put their knowledge and curiosity to practice – are prime examples of the type of community-building Lookout hopes to keep doing and growing with. 

You can find more information about Lookout’s educational resources here and reach out to coordinate a class visit of your own here. 

Ava Salinas is a student at UC Santa Cruz and an intern at Lookout Santa Cruz through the Humanities EXCEL program led by the UC Santa Cruz Humanities Division with strategic support from The Humanities Institute.

The post Connecting climate science and storytelling at Mission Hill Middle School appeared first on Lookout Santa Cruz.

In Santa Cruz County, there’s a new approach that prioritizes community support to help families, led by the Child, Youth & Family Well-Being Partnership. 

The Child Youth & Family Well-Being Partnership brings together County agencies and nonprofits to provide coordinated mental health, social and family support services with a focus on preventing crises, supporting education and strengthening families. Historically, state and federal child welfare mandates have required agency and nonprofit staff who are concerned about a child’s well-being, to take a “report-first” approach about concerns. The partnership is collaborating on a shift from this historic “mandated reporting” model to include a more prevention-focused “community supporting” approach.

This shift focuses on prevention to provide a more compassionate and effective system for everyone involved. It can help families access resources such as housing, food or childcare before intervention becomes necessary. The initiative aims to reduce fear, shame and stigma associated with asking for help, all while building trust and making resources more accessible. 

A Spanish version is available here.

In Santa Cruz County and across California, over half of reports made to the child welfare hotline do not meet the legal threshold for abuse or neglect. However, many at-risk families still need support. 

The effort to support families began decades ago. Since 2000, California’s statewide child welfare system has shifted from responding after harm occurs to providing early intervention so children can remain safely at home whenever possible. This approach uses data, accountability and a stronger focus on family-based care. More recently, the emphasis has expanded to prevention, equity and community-based resources that address basic needs, mental health, and connection before crises occur. 

There are tangible and clearly beneficial impacts. By investing in early, family-centered support and preventing unnecessary family separation, the County has seen foster care numbers steadily decline — from 198 children in 2000–2001 to just 43 in 2024–2025. Locally, the movement is intended to build trust, reduce stigma and strengthen community support networks across Santa Cruz County. This enhanced focus on prevention and early connection centers the work by the County of Santa Cruz Human Services Department’s Family & Children’s Division to help families access the resources they need before challenges become crisis.

And this is just the beginning. 

Child, Youth & Family Well-Being Partners is working to connect families with community-based support services such as housing, food, childcare and mental health resources. A key goal is to keep families together by linking them to the right resources at the right time. To help deliver the message that “needing help is OK,” The Child, Youth & Family Well-Being Partners initiative encourages trained professionals to connect families with United Way Santa Cruz County’s 2-1-1 program for support services.

Instead of automatically launching an investigation when abuse or neglect is suspected, trained professionals are encouraged to explore supportive options, when appropriate, that address the root causes of family stress — many of which stem from poverty and limited access to basic needs.

Even when a report is not required, families may need help. The 2-1-1 program is available to connect families to services such as:

• Food banks and meal programs
• Housing resources
• Parenting support and education
• Substance use and mental health services
• School and community-based resources

Learn more at https://211santacruzcounty.org/ 

Join us in making a difference in children and families lives. Support early. Care when it matters most. Access materials, learn more and get help at https://santacruzhumanservices.org/FamilyChildren/ChildWelfareServices.

The post Families sometimes need extra support — and asking for help shouldn’t feel scary appeared first on Lookout Santa Cruz.

With the weekend nearly here, check out things to do around Santa Cruz County with a recommendation from Lily Belli and a specially curated list from Lookout’s BOLO events calendar.

This post is updated throughout the day to reflect the latest incidents. It was last updated at 7:31 a.m..

Here’s what’s happening on the roads this morning…

▼︎ new incidents

Road incidents as of 7:30 a.m. on May 7

• On the morning of May 6, there were major traffic delays at 11570 Highway 9 in San Lorenzo Valley because of road and weather conditions. Drivers were stuck in traffic for up to 45 minutes with very little movement. Some people confronted a construction crew in the area. Law enforcement and Caltrans were called, and one-way traffic control was put in place. The incident involved several vehicles, and there were concerns about how traffic was being managed.
   
• A lane on westbound SR-152 at Clifford Drive/Ohlone Parkway in Watsonville and Pajaro is closed for asphalt paving. The closure is expected to last until July 3.
   

Disclosure: Traffic incidents are partially generated by artificial intelligence. We are constantly working to improve the accuracy and quality of our AI-generated content. However, there may still be errors or inaccuracies. If you have any questions or concerns, please contact us.

The post Thursday morning traffic: Major delays on Hwy 9; SR-152 lane closed for paving appeared first on Lookout Santa Cruz.

Live Oak School District celebrated the first full harvest year of its campus farm, which produced 4,800 pounds of organic fruits, vegetables and herbs used in school meals and educational programs across seven schools. The project, built on a former baseball field, combines nutrition, hands-on learning and food access, with students helping prepare fresh meals while the farm also donates surplus produce to local families.

Parent advocate Mads Realmuto and graduating Pajaro Valley High senior Eriberto Estrada have announced campaigns for the Pajaro Valley Unified School District board, challenging incumbents Misty Navarro and Daniel Dodge Jr., respectively, in the November election.

Have something to say? Lookout welcomes letters to the editor, within our policies, from readers. Guidelines here.

As Santa Cruz County families face crushing housing costs, strained healthcare, childcare burdens and climate anxiety, we are constantly told there is not enough money. Yet Congress can still move billions for war with barely a pause.

That is why my vote in the race for our congressional representative (District 19) comes down to a simple moral principle: Public money should fund life, not death.

ELECTION 2026: Read more local, state and national coverage here from Lookout and our content partners

The U.S.-Israel war with Iran has made that trade-off impossible to ignore. Analysts estimate the opening phase consumed roughly $900 million per day, with later estimates rising closer to $1 billion to $2 billion per day, even as Washington advances a $1.5 trillion Pentagon budget request.

Those billions come from the same treasury that says there is no money for affordable housing, clinics, teachers, wildfire resilience or dignified jobs.

Martin Luther King Jr. named this moral crisis in his 1967 speech “Beyond Vietnam,” warning that a nation spending more on war than on “social uplift” is approaching “spiritual death.” Santa Cruz County residents feel this reality in tangible ways: The missile launched abroad returns home as unaffordable rent, delayed mental healthcare, neglected schools and climate vulnerability.

Journalist Chris Hedges, in “America: The Farewell Tour,” has similarly described how the costs of empire return as the “cannibalizing of democracy and human flourishing” — abandoned communities, collapsing health systems and ecological strain. That same equation is visible here when Washington can always find money for bombs but hesitates over Pajaro Valley housing, drought resilience or clean-energy infrastructure.

That is why I support Sean Dougherty’s campaign and oppose Rep. Jimmy Panetta.

Dougherty’s message — “for the many, not the money” — speaks directly to the material crises people in Santa Cruz County are living through. His platform calls for cutting military spending and reinvesting in universal healthcare, affordable housing, climate action and labor protections.

Panetta’s record reflects a different set of priorities. He has received significant financial support from pro-Israel advocacy networks and the arms industry, and his legislative record consistently aligns with expanding U.S. military commitments abroad.

In a recent mailer that reads like campaign advertising, Panetta presents his position in bold terms: “END THE WAR NOW, the mailer reads, in all capital letters. The postcard states that it was “paid for by official funds authorized by the House of Representatives,” a designation typically reserved for constituent communication rather than campaign messaging, raising questions about how such materials are used and presented to voters.

Yet it remains unclear how Panetta would vote if new war authorization were sought. His support for H.Res. 1099 reaffirming Iran as a leading state sponsor of terrorism reflects continued alignment with a hawkish posture. Between 2022 and 2024, Panetta introduced or co-sponsored multiple bills — including the STARS Act, the DEFEND Act, the MARITIME Act and the LINK Act — which deepened military coordination among the United States, Israel and Abraham Accords partner nations.

The Abraham Accords have become a central pillar of U.S. regional strategy. Critics argue that this framework prioritizes normalization and security integration while sidelining Palestinian rights, entrenching long-term militarization rather than resolving underlying conflict.

Since Oct. 7, 2023, Panetta has maintained consistent support for Israel’s “right to defend itself.” He backed $31 billion in military aid packages in 2024 and has supported continuation of the annual $3.8 billion U.S. military commitment to Israel.

While he later co-sponsored the West Bank Violence Prevention Act, he has not supported measures such as the Block the Bombs Act (H.R. 3565), which would place conditions on weapons transfers, or H.R. 2411 to restore U.S. funding to United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) for humanitarian relief to Gaza. Panetta is out of sync with our county’s Democratic Central Committee, which has backed both measures.

Panetta’s record shows consistent support for Israel’s military campaign, which the United Nations and genocide scholars have described as marked by devastating civilian loss and suffering. Directing billions toward war instead of human needs runs counter to international law, to the priorities of many constituents, and to the principle that public money should fund life.

His foreign policy positions extend beyond the Middle East. He has co-sponsored legislation to designate the Frente Polisario in Western Sahara as a terrorist organization and supported efforts to expand U.S.-Philippine military ties that critics say undermine the spirit of the Philippine Human Rights Act.

Unhae Langis. Credit: Unhae Langis

Panetta’s record also intersects with domestic free speech concerns. He co-sponsored the Israel Anti-Boycott Act and supported H.R. 9495, a counterterrorism-related bill that civil liberties groups warned could give the federal government broad authority over nonprofit organizations, potentially chilling advocacy and dissent. Even as the U.S. spends billions of our children’s money to take the lives of other people’s children, Panetta’s support for the ENLIST Act and the SERVE Act, which broaden eligibility for military service and expands military recruitment in high schools, extending the reach of militarism into young people’s lives. Even as the U.S. military that he so vigorously supports is the world’s largest institutional greenhouse gas emitter, Panetta presents himself as “a steward” of our majestic Monterey Bay – as he did at the April 25 Veterans Hall community meeting on offshore drilling. 

But every bomb approved abroad is money not invested in housing, mental healthcare, education, climate resilience or clean infrastructure here at home. This is the moral budget choice shaping daily life in our community.

I want the next billions to go toward homes, schools, a clean environment and dignified work — not bombs.

That is why I’m voting for Sean Dougherty.

Unhae Langis is a writer, former teacher and activist focused on peace, economic justice and climate transition in Santa Cruz County.

The post Fund life, not death: Rep. Jimmy Panetta votes for military spending – Sean Dougherty better aligns with local values appeared first on Lookout Santa Cruz.

This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for its newsletters.

Two years ago, Chiefer Danks of Rosedale, who works in agriculture, believed the former president would stabilize the economy and make life more affordable again as it was under his first administration. But more than a year into the second Trump administration, Danks isn’t pleased with how things have changed. 

Like Danks, many California Latinos feel betrayed by the president’s campaign promises to promptly lower costs and keep the U.S. out of foreign military entanglements — both of which ring hollow as gasoline and grocery prices surge due primarily to Trump’s unpopular war in Iran.

They’re also frightened and outraged that Trump’s second administration has targeted Latino residents — both those here illegally and legally, even U.S. citizens — with violent immigration raids and deportations, separating families in the process. 

“I thought he was going to make America great again,” said Danks, 31, as he stood waiting for his wife in El Mercado Latino, a hub for Latino-owned family businesses in the heavily Hispanic neighborhood of East Bakersfield. “He didn’t follow through on his words.”

Husband and wife Chiefer Danks and Lorena Herrera at the Mercado Latino Tianguis shopping center in East Bakersfield. Credit: Larry Valenzuela / CalMatters

Public opinion polls and off-year elections have pointed to Latinos reversing their historic 2024 rightward shift toward Trump. And according to a new CalMatters review of 2025 election data, that trend also applies to last year’s special election on redistricting — which Democrats successfully framed as a referendum on Trump.

The analysis of voting results from 57 of California’s 58 counties found that Proposition 50, Gov. Gavin Newsom’s plan to gerrymander the state’s congressional districts in Democrats’ favor, vastly outperformed Vice President Kamala Harris’ 2024 presidential campaign in precincts where the majority of voters are nonwhite. 

The trend was most striking in precincts where the majority of ballots were cast by Latino voters. “Yes” on Prop 50 gained about 30 percentage points compared to Harris’ performance against Trump a year earlier, according to CalMatters’ analysis. 

CalMatters’ findings provide some of the clearest quantitative evidence yet that the Latino rightward shift toward Trump in 2024 was more a blip than a permanent realignment, a nationwide trend that has so far been captured by state and national polling, focus groups and anecdotal evidence. 

Voting “Yes” on Prop 50 was a way for Latinos to channel their pent-up frustration with the Trump administration, said Ben Tulchin, a San Francisco-based Democratic pollster who has conducted several surveys and focus groups with Latino swing voters. 

“These Latinos, even the ones who voted for Trump in 2024, were pissed off at him,” Tulchin said. “They feel deceived by Trump and his promises.”

The failure to deliver on economic promises has sown mistrust and bitterness, but Latinos also have felt unfairly targeted by the administration on multiple fronts, including changing the name of the “Gulf of Mexico” to the “Gulf of America,” the high tariffs on goods coming from Mexico and of course the immigration crackdown, Tulchin said. 

Danks’ mother-in-law, a green card holder, used to run a fruit stand on a street corner in their neighborhood. But she shut down the business after raids by federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) ramped up last year. 

A person organizes their merchandise at a booth at the Mercado Latino Tianguis shopping center in East Bakersfield. Credit: Larry Valenzuela / CalMatters

“Being Hispanic, and you know, even being a U.S. resident, she doesn’t feel safe,” said Lorena Herrera, Danks’ wife, who lives in the U.S. on a work visa. “Nobody’s really safe in this country now. It’s really sad.”

Democrats hope they can capitalize on this anti-Trump frustration among Latinos as they work to flip control of one or both chambers of Congress in November. The road to the U.S. House majority likely runs through California, where Latinos could play a decisive role in at least two toss-up seats — one in the Central Valley and the other in San Diego. 

But while a strong showing for Prop 50 might confirm dissatisfaction with the GOP and the Trump administration, it doesn’t necessarily mean those voters will support Democrats — or vote at all. 

Interviews with nearly a dozen Latinos in the Central Valley who are eligible to vote highlighted the deep-rooted skepticism of all politicians that often keeps many eligible voters on the sidelines. Even Danks, despite his dissatisfaction with life under a Republican-controlled federal government, did not vote in last year’s special election on Prop 50 and said he probably would not vote in the midterm elections later this year. 

“Was Prop 50 an indicator of anything ideological or a return home? Nope, not even one little bit,” said Mike Madrid, a conservative political consultant who studies Latino voter behavior. “They’re rejecting the party of power that is not prioritizing their economic concerns.”

Cost of living is ‘getting out of hand’

Since Prop 50 passed last November, the Trump administration has only become less popular with Latino voters, national polling shows, as costs continue to rise for essentials like groceries, utilities and especially gasoline given the ongoing war in Iran.

Gas prices on display at a station in Bakersfield on April 15. Credit: Larry Valenzuela / CalMatters East Bakersfield. Credit: Larry Valenzuela / CalMatters People walk through the parking lot of Superior Grocers in Tulare. Credit: Larry Valenzuela / CalMatters

“It’s getting out of hand,” said Gabriel Gracia, 31,of Tulare who operates a small commercial cleaning business in Woodlake, about 25 miles northeast. All that driving adds up to about two tanks of gas per week — which has risen from about $60 to nearly $85. 

“Everything is too expensive,” echoed Monica Rodriguez, 31, another Tulare resident who spoke with CalMatters on a recent afternoon as she walked into Superior Groceries to pick up some ingredients for the chicken larb she was cooking for dinner. 

Her family sticks to chicken and pork when they do eat meat, she said, because they often can’t afford beef. She bought a used Honda Fit for its fuel-efficiency since gas prices are so high and she has to drive across town twice a day to take her two sons to and from school. 

Rodriguez even said she had considered having a third child since she’d always wanted a daughter, but the cost of diapers, baby formula and other essentials were so high that she decided against it.

Monica Rodriguez outside of Superior Grocers in Tulare. Credit: Larry Valenzuela / CalMatters

Despite her frustration with the cost of living, Rodriguez hasn’t voted recently, sitting out both the 2024 presidential election and the special election on Prop 50. But she said she might vote in this year’s midterm elections if she can get her sister to help her fill out her ballot. 

“I should vote, but I don’t because I be stressed out,” Rodriguez said, explaining that she doesn’t always understand who’s running for which office and how to fill out her ballot.

Gracia, who also spoke to CalMatters on his way into Superior Groceries, said he voted for Trump in 2024 because it was “a choice between bad and worse.” He didn’t like how the United States was viewed as a “weak country” under President Joe Biden, and he believed the economy would be better under Trump like it was the first time he was in office. 

“His first term was good, so I figured, you know, his second term would be just as good too,” Gracia said. “They sold lies to us, basically. That’s what they do.”

Despite his frustrations, Gracia said he still would’ve voted for Trump since the GOP’s tax policies are friendlier to small business owners like himself. He did not vote on Prop 50 and said he supports Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco for governor.

Prop 50 energized the Democratic base

While Prop 50 served as an outlet for anger for some voters, it also spurred additional turnout among Latino Democrats who found themselves uninspired by Harris’ 2024 campaign.

“I just didn’t have someone who I could say I resonated with,” said Angel Jimenez, 23, a second-year animal science student at Bakersfield College. 

Randy Villegas, a candidate for the 22nd Congressional District, speaks with students before a candidate forum at Bakersfield College on April 15. Credit: Larry Valenzuela / CalMatters

Jimenez said he was so uninspired by the field that he did not vote for president in 2024. As a former supporter of Bernie Sanders, Donald Trump was “definitely not” the candidate for him. Jimenez had considered Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for his environmental platform, but ultimately decided he wasn’t viable. And he didn’t like how Democratic Party leadership anointed Harris as Biden’s replacement before the public had a chance to weigh in.

But when Jimenez heard about Prop 50 and Democrats’ message of fighting back against Trump and Republican redistricting efforts in Texas, he was eager to level the playing field. 

“They were gaining an unfair advantage,” Jimenez said of Texas. “I was in favor of evening it out again.”

Jimenez spoke to CalMatters after an on-campus candidate forum for the 22nd Congressional District. Democrat Randy Villegas, who is endorsed by both Sanders and the progressive Working Families Party, was the only candidate who showed up. After the forum, Jimenez signed up to volunteer with the campaign and also inquired about internship opportunities.

Jimenez, who leans more liberal, said the conflict in Iran and how it affects cost of living and affordability will be key factors in how he decides to vote this year.

“The war right now is definitely something that has everything unstable,” he said. “Job security could be affected. The economy in general is being affected.”

Have something to say? Lookout welcomes letters to the editor, within our policies, from readers. Guidelines here.

The post Latinos in California are mad at Trump. Their votes for Democrats’ gerrymandering show it appeared first on Lookout Santa Cruz.