LAKE COUNTY, Calif. — The Avenue of Flags, which each year honors the memories of Lake County’s veterans on Memorial Day, is looking for volunteers for this year’s event.

William Asher, president of the Avenue of Flags, is preparing for the Memorial Day commemoration, which takes place on Monday, May 29.

Flags will be put up at the Lower Lake Cemetery as well as in Kelseyville and Lakeport, Asher said.

Asher said volunteers are needed to meet at 7 a.m. at the Lower Lake Cemetery on Memorial Day to put up flags as well as to transport them to Kelseyville and Lakeport and then back to Lower Lake.

The flags will be taken down at 3 p.m. that day.

For more information or to volunteer, call Asher at 707-900-1652 and leave a message.

Email Elizabeth Larson at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Follow her on Twitter, @ERLarson, or Lake County News, @LakeCoNews.

Senate Majority Leader Mike McGuire, Chair of the Joint Committee on Fisheries and Aquaculture, or JCFA, as well as Lake County’s representative in the state Senate, is gearing up for Wednesday’s hearing in the State Capitol focused on California’s burgeoning offshore wind industry.

This hearing will explore how to expedite the deployment of green energy while protecting the interests of California’s fishing fleet and ensuring coastal environmental safeguards remain in place.

For the first time, the hearing will bring all sides of the issue together for a groundbreaking discussion that will feature representatives from federal and state agencies, tribal leaders, offshore wind industry representatives, representatives from the fishing fleet, labor leaders and environmental organizations.

Presenters will focus on why offshore wind energy is essential to the State's green energy future and energy supply, the need to incorporate fish and wildlife in the development process, and how wind energy can be compatible with the protection of California’s fisheries.

“This first-of-its-kind hearing will bring all sides of the offshore wind discussion together, ensuring the State can expedite the deployment of this valuable energy resource while protecting the interests of California’s storied fishing fleet and guaranteeing coastal environmental safeguards,” said Sen. McGuire. “It’s critical to have these voices at the same table as we develop the road map for offshore energy, healthy oceans and a thriving fishing fleet to coexist here in the Golden State.”

The hearing begins at 2 p.m. Wednesday, May 17 in the State Capitol Swing Space, 1021 O Street, Room 2100. The public is welcome to attend the hearing.

The hearing will be livestreamed via the Senate website.

For more information about the hearing, visit the committee website.

 

Public school superintendents are having a moment, and for many of them, the moment is neither super nor what they intended.

During the last several years, tense school board meetings where superintendents were fired erupted in Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Oregon, South Carolina and Virginia.

Contributing to this tension are politically divisive issues that many school superintendents have had to navigate over the last three years, including the teaching of race, book bans and providing access to athletics and bathrooms for students who identify as transgender.

Within this tense environment, a recent study found that nearly 40% of superintendents reported being threatened or feeling threatened on the job. And, 63% of superintendents reported feeling worried about their mental health and well-being over the past two years.

But while superintendents are feeling the heat, policymakers are unable to accurately determine the impact of pressure on superintendent well-being, performance and willingness to stay on the job.

In fact, the U.S. Department of Education does not collect such data on superintendents, and a nationally comprehensive, annually updated superintendent database has never existed.

As an education researcher who studies superintendents, I decided to create the data set myself by collecting data, one district at a time.

New insights into superintendent turnover

Since 2019, my research team has dedicated as many as 400 hours each year to collect the names of superintendents of nearly all traditional public school districts in the United States.

And for a newly published research study in the academic journal Educational Researcher, I conducted a comprehensive, national analysis of superintendent turnover in over 12,500 public school districts since 2019.

My analyses revealed an increase in turnover of nearly 3 percentage points – from 14.2% between 2019-20 and 2020-21 to 17.1% between 2021-22 and 2022-23. More than one out of every three states (37%) had a turnover rate greater than 20% between the last two school years.

A superintendent change occurred at least one time in 35% of districts nationwide, and 6% of districts experienced two or more turnover events.

Though we are unable to determine the exact cause, my research also shows that districts serving larger proportions of students of color were significantly more likely to experience superintendent turnover.

This finding is especially troubling given that frequent churn of leadership can disrupt a school district’s stability and culture, ultimately impacting students’ academic performance.

The role of gender

Superintendent turnover rates vary tremendously across states and districts.

Town and suburban districts were significantly more likely to experience superintendent turnover than urban and rural districts. New research suggests that contentious politics may contribute to superintendent fatigue.

Sixty-five percent of suburban superintendents, for instance, agreed or strongly agreed that school board meetings have become more contentious, compared to 55% of urban superintendents and 47% of rural superintendents.

My research also revealed that superintendent turnover rates for men increased at nearly twice the rate of that for women.

The turnover rate for men jumped 3.2 percentage points, from 13.8% to 17.0%, while the increase for women was 1.8 percentage points, from 15.3% to 17.1%.

Though the jump in turnover rate for men could have narrowed the superintendent gender gap, the gap barely budged. Among districts that experienced turnover, very few hired a new superintendent who was a different gender than their prior superintendent.

As it is currently, the ratio between male and female superintendents nationally is 3-to-1. In some states, that ratio is as large as 8-to-1.

There are also differences in the characteristics of districts where superintendent jobs turned over.

Among districts led by men, those that experienced turnover had significantly larger proportions of students receiving free or reduced price lunches, students of color and students classified as English language learners

Women-led districts that experienced turnover had significantly smaller proportions of students classified as English language learners and students receiving free or reduced-price lunches.

Moreover, districts that experienced superintendent turnover involving either a man or woman with larger proportions of white students were consistently more likely to hire a man to be their next leader.

Why superintendent data matters

This research only begins to fill an expansive void in our basic understanding of American superintendency.

Currently, the most commonly referenced data or reports on superintendents come from the American Association of School Administrators; the RAND Corporation, a nonprofit research institution; and the ILO Group, a women-owned national education strategy and policy firm.

These sources do provide valuable insight into the superintendency.

For example, ILO Group’s analyses show that half of the nation’s largest 500 districts have experienced superintendent turnover since March 2020.

Based on a survey of 222 district leaders, the RAND Corporation found that 13% of superintendents planned to leave their position after the 2020-21 school year.

Yet, this source is quite restricted in what it can reveal about superintendent turnover due to low response rates, small samples and respondent anonymity that does not allow superintendents to be linked to districts.

Additionally, the RAND surveys asked about superintendents’ intentions to leave their current position, a measure known to be largely inaccurate for determining actual turnover.

Due to the limitations of existing data, divergent claims have emerged of both “projected normal turnover rates” and a “mass exodus” of superintendents.

Some states are making an effort to support the collection and analysis of data on superintendents. However, states often make it incredibly challenging for researchers, for example, by charging a substantial fee for data access – in some cases as much as $10,000 a year.

Having this data would provide a timely, comprehensive picture of the superintendency – not just a brief snapshot of a few superintendents at a point in time. Moreover, national, longitudinal superintendent data would allow for deeper examination of the contributors to and consequences of superintendent turnover.

If ensuring some teachers and students are not disproportionately at risk of undesirable superintendent churn, sustained support for and efforts to collect and analyze national longitudinal superintendent data must be prioritized.

Rachel S. White, Assistant Professor of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies, University of Tennessee

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

LAKEPORT, Calif. — The Lake County Sheriff’s Office said it has arrested a woman for murder following a fatal stabbing early Tuesday morning.

Melinda Fred, 39, has been arrested in the case, according to a report from Lt. Luke Bingham.

Bingham identified the murder victim as Christopher Aaron Burrows.

At 4:40 a.m. Tuesday, the sheriff’s office received a 911 call reporting a person had been stabbed on Red Feather Lane in Lakeport, Bingham reported.

Bingham said sheriff’s deputies responded to the area and located Burrows lying on the ground with a stab wound.

Deputies immediately began lifesaving measures until the arrival of paramedics. However, Bingham said Burrows ultimately succumbed to his injuries and was pronounced deceased at the scene.

Bingham said deputies secured the scene and requested the assistance of the Lake County Sheriff’s Office Major Crimes Unit, which responded and assumed the investigation.

After conducting a lengthy investigation, several interviews and review of surrounding video surveillance, Bingham said investigators questioned Fred and arrested her for murder, Bingham said.

Bingham said Fred was booked into the Lake County Correctional Facility for first-degree murder and assault with a deadly weapon that was not a firearm.

The Major Crimes Unit is asking anyone with additional information regarding this investigation to contact Det. Dean Preader at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or 707-262-4231.

LAKE COUNTY, Calif. — The Clearlake City Council this council is set to reconsider awarding the contract for the city’s 18th Avenue project.

The council will meet at 6 p.m. Thursday, May 18, in the council chambers at Clearlake City Hall, 14050 Olympic Drive.

The meeting will be broadcast live on the city's YouTube channel or the Lake County PEGTV YouTube Channel. Community members also can participate via Zoom or can attend in person. The webinar ID is 859 5455 1871.

One tap mobile is available at 16694449171,,85954551871# or join by phone at 669 444 9171 or 720 707 2699.

The agenda can be found here.

Comments and questions can be submitted in writing for City Council consideration by sending them to City Clerk Melissa Swanson at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

To give the council adequate time to review your questions and comments, please submit your written comments before 4 p.m. Thursday, May 18.

Each public comment emailed to the city clerk will be read aloud by the mayor or a member of staff for up to three minutes or will be displayed on a screen. Public comment emails and town hall public comment submissions that are received after the beginning of the meeting will not be included in the record.

At Thursday’s council meeting, there will be a presentation of May’s adoptable dogs and on the pavement management plan, and proclamations declaring May 2023 as California Tourism Month and Safe Boating Month.

Under business, the council will consider entering into a contract with Argonaut Constructors for the 18th Avenue Improvement Project in the amount of $4,632,295 and
authorize the city manager to approve up to 10% for additional unforeseen contract amendments.

The project will connect 18th Avenue to Highway 53, crossing the city’s former Pearce Field airport property.

The council previously had awarded the project on April 6, 2023, but the action was later rescinded due to a delay from the funding source, specifically, the California Transportation Commission.

On the meeting's consent agenda — items that are considered routine in nature and usually adopted on a single vote — are minutes of the January, February and March meetings; approval of Resolution No. 2023-21 authorizing the road closure for the Dam Road Extension/South Center Drive Bike/Project; receive and file the minutes of the April 12 Lake County Vector Control District Board meeting; approval of a leave of absence without pay through June 7 for Maintenance Worker II Johnny Miskill; adopt Resolution No. 2023-22 for a lease with Dell Financial Services for computer workstations for administration departments; adoption of Resolution No. 2023-22 for the fifth amendment to the fiscal year 2022/23 budget.

The council also will hold a closed session to discuss labor negotiations regarding the Clearlake Middle Management Association and for conference with legal counsel regarding a case of existing litigation, Koi Nation of Northern California v. City of Clearlake, et al., Lake County Superior Court.

Email Elizabeth Larson at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Follow her on Twitter, @ERLarson, or Lake County News, @LakeCoNews.

LAKE COUNTY, Calif. — While storm damage repairs are still underway in the Mendocino National Forest, officials have lifted closure orders regarding off-highway vehicles and the Deer Valley campground.

The forest reported that the off-highway vehicle and Deer Valley campground closure order (Order No. 08-23-02) on the Upper Lake Ranger District are lifted effective at 9 a.m. on Tuesday, May 16.

Agency and volunteer crews have been clearing trails after severe storm damage this winter. Fire-killed and fire-injured trees may continue to fall, so riders should be prepared and exercise caution.

Road access remains limited across the forest due to storm damage, though some temporary fixes are in place for emergency vehicles.

“Last week Lake County Department of Public Works crews completed temporary repairs to Elk Mountain Road (County Road 301) to provide quicker response time for first responders in the event of an incident,” said Upper Lake District Ranger Frank Aebly.

“This temporary fix is for emergency vehicles only,” said Aebly. “To access the OHV trail system or Deer Valley Campground, the public will need to take the longer alternate route via Potter Valley (Mendocino County Rd 240 / Lake County Rd 301). The gate above Middle Creek Campground will remain closed and locked.”

The public can also access Deer Valley campground and the trail system via Forest Roads 16N01 and 16N30 out of Sam Alley, but these roads are very narrow in many places and only drivable with a high-clearance, four-wheel drive vehicle. Officials advise the public not to haul trailers up these roads.

A timeframe for the permanent repair to Elk Mountain Road is not yet available. Officials ask the public to obey all posted signs and never drive around barriers or locked gates.

Alerts and conditions in the Mendocino National Forest are available online.

More than half of the nation’s citizen, voting-age population (CVAP) voted in 2022 — the second highest turnout for a congressional election in two decades.

The 52.2% voter turnout was just 1.2 percentage points lower than in 2018 (53.4%) and significantly higher than in 2014 (41.9%) and in 2010 (45.5%).

Despite lower turnout in 2022 than in 2018, the share of voting-age citizens who were registered to vote was 69.1% — the highest registration rate in a midterm election since at least 2002.

As a result, turnout as a share of those registered to vote in 2022 was down 4.4 percentage points from 2018 (Figure 1).

The newly released data are based on the Voting and Registration Supplement which surveyed non-institutionalized civilians about their voting and registration behavior in the 2022 congressional elections.

Due to the nature of survey responses, these estimates may differ from administrative reports and estimates from other data sources but provide a unique look at the characteristics of American voters.



Why did many who registered not vote?

The most common reasons reported for not voting in 2022: “Too busy, conflicting work or school schedule” (26.5%); “Not interested, felt my vote wouldn’t make a difference” (17.6%); and “Illness or disability,” (12.5%) (Figure 2).

The share that reported being “too busy” to vote did not change significantly from 2018 (Figure 2).

However, more registered nonvoters said they “forgot to vote” in 2022, up 2.2 percentage points from 2018. Those who said they were “not interested, felt my vote wouldn’t make a difference” also increased by 2.1 percentage points from 2018 to 2022. These increases did not differ statistically from one another.



The shares of White non-Hispanic and Black non-Hispanic registered nonvoters who were too busy to vote were not significantly different (Figure 3).

But these groups were less likely to report being “too busy” than Asian non-Hispanic and Hispanic nonvoters (these two groups’ rates also did not significantly differ). The share of “other race, non-Hispanic” voters who were too busy was not statistically different from any other group’s share.

The Census Bureau has asked registered nonvoters why they did not vote after every election since 1996, and from 1972 to 1980 before that.

A new voting supplement visualization, Questions on the Voting Supplement of the Current Population Survey (census.gov), shows how the survey questions have changed over time.



How did people vote?

The share of voters who voted early, by mail or a combination of both in 2022 remained high for a midterm election following record high rates in the 2020 presidential election (Figure 4).

Of those who voted, 49.8% used these voting methods — 10 percentage points higher than in 2018 (39.8%) and 18.7 percentage points higher than in 2014 (31.1%).

Nearly a third (31.8%) of all U.S. voters cast ballots by mail, up 8.6 percentage points from 2018 but down 11.2 percentage points from 2020.



Almost half (47.1%) of all voters voted early. While this was 20.4 percentage points lower than the early voting rate in 2020, it was 9.3 percentage points higher than the early voting rate in 2018.

The use of early and mail-in voting varied by race and ethnicity (Figure 5):

• Two-thirds (66.7%) of Asian non-Hispanic voters used these voting methods — the highest rate across race and ethnicity.
• A majority of Hispanic voters (58.1%) voted either early or by mail.
• White non-Hispanic (48.3%) and Black non-Hispanic voters (46.0%) — the lowest rates among all race/ethnic groups.



Geography of voting

There was significant variation in the 2022 turnout of registered voters at the state level (Figure 6).

For example, in Colorado 85.0% of registered voters cast their ballots, among the highest rates in the nation. In contrast, registered turnout in West Virginia was 61.4%.

In the South, Georgia stood out with 82.0% of registered voters voting — the highest turnout in the region.

Voting method also varied greatly by state because state mail-in and early voting laws differ (Figure 7).

The highest rates of early and mail-in voting were in Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon and Washington, where 95% or more of those who voted did so by mail, before Election Day or both. (While rates were higher in Oregon and Washington, neither Oregon and Washington or Colorado and Hawaii differed statistically.)

The lowest rate of early and mail-in voting was in Alabama (3.6%). Other states with low (12% or lower) rates: Connecticut, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma and New Hampshire (rates in these states did not differ statistically).

Tables with additional information about voters are available.

Note: More information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error and definitions is available in the technical documentation. All comparative statements in this story have undergone statistical testing, and, unless otherwise noted, all comparisons are statistically significant at the 10 percent significance level.

Jacob Fabina is an economist in the Census Bureau’s Social, Economic, and Housing Statistics Division.

 

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved the world’s first vaccine to prevent the respiratory infection RSV, short for respiratory syncytial virus, on May 3, 2023. The new shot represents six decades of starts and stops in the hunt for a vaccine to curb one of the most common winter respiratory viruses. RSV leads to around 14,000 deaths in older adults every year and can cause severe illness in infants and children as well.

The vaccine, called Arexvy, made by the biopharmaceutical company GSK, is approved for use in adults ages 60 and over. Now that it is FDA-approved, it must still be endorsed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, a move that’s expected in summer 2023.

The Conversation asked Annette Regan, an epidemiologist and vaccine specialist, to discuss the significance of the first vaccine against RSV and the other RSV vaccine candidates that are in the pipeline.

1. How does the new vaccine protect against the virus?

The vaccine targets a protein known as RSV F glycoprotein, which is found on the surface of the virus. The F protein enables the RSV virus to enter host cells.

By stimulating antibodies against this protein, the vaccine should protect against infection. Clinical trial data suggests this is the case, since Arexvy was 80% effective at protecting against RSV-related disease and 94% effective at protecting against severe disease.

The vaccine also includes an adjuvant, a substance that helps amplify the effect of the vaccine by boosting the immune system’s response.

2. When and for whom will it be available?

The RSV vaccine has been developed for and tested in adults age 60 and older. While the FDA has approved the vaccine – which means it has deemed it safe and effective – the shot will not be administered by health care professionals until it is reviewed by an independent expert group coordinated by the CDC called the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practice, which makes vaccine recommendations to the CDC.

The committee’s recommendations will cover how the vaccine should be used – including the ages at which the vaccine should be given – the number of doses needed, the time between doses and precautions and contraindications.

The committee is expected to meet in June 2023 to make a recommendation on the new RSV vaccine, after which the CDC would officially endorse it. The vaccine could be rolled out to the public as soon as late summer 2023, well before the typical RSV season, which usually starts in the fall and peaks in winter.

It’s hard to say what the committee’s recommendation will be. It could recommend the vaccine for all adults 60 and older, or a subset of older adults. While the clinical trial showed the vaccine was 81% effective among adults ages 60 to 69 and 94% effective among adults ages 70 to 79, it was only 34% effective among adults 80 and older. Given the lower efficacy for adults ages 80 and older, the committee could place an age cap on the recommendations.

3. Why has the first RSV vaccine been so long in coming?

A vaccine against RSV has been in the works for decades. One problem that has plagued vaccine manufacturers is the difficulty of identifying an antigen – the piece of the virus that the vaccine targets – that doesn’t change, or shape-shift. The F protein of the RSV virus is notorious for changing its shape once it fuses with a host’s cell.

In 2013 and 2014, the National Institutes of Health worked out how to “freeze” the F protein into a fixed shape before fusing with a cell so that a vaccine could target it well. This was a game-changer that allowed the development of effective vaccines using this target.

In addition to challenges in identifying a good antigen, there were earlier setbacks. Early attempts to create an inactivated RSV vaccine in the 1960s were stalled after they caused an enhanced form of RSV disease. Children who had never had RSV before and received the vaccine experienced very severe illness when they encountered the virus in the community, and two children died. This tragic outcome sidetracked vaccine development for decades, as researchers needed to investigate the cause and ensure that the problem wouldn’t occur again for future vaccines.

4. What other RSV vaccine candidates are coming down the line?

In addition to Arexvy, many other promising RSV candidates are under development, some of which are likely to become available later this year or in early 2024.

The next RSV vaccine under review with the FDA is Pfizer’s RSV vaccine. It is similar to the recently approved vaccine except that it has no adjuvant and is bivalent, meaning that it targets both RSV A and RSV B – the two strains of RSV. This vaccine is meant not only for adults ages 60 and older, but also for pregnant people – with the aim of protecting young infants through maternal antibodies.

Data from a phase 3 clinical trial – the last stage of clinical trials before a company would apply for a license – shows that when given during pregnancy, the Pfizer vaccine was 82% effective in protecting infants less than 3 months old against severe RSV infection. The FDA will be making a determination on the Pfizer vaccine for older adults later in May 2023 and for pregnant people in August 2023. The CDC advisory committee is scheduled to discuss vaccine recommendations in October 2023, making this the likely next possible vaccine available.

A few other biopharmaceutical companies have developed alternative RSV vaccines, some of which are in phase 3 clinical trials. For example, Moderna has an mRNA vaccine against RSV with promising preliminary results. Regardless of which companies make it to the finish line next, it is clear that in the near future there will be a variety of new tools to help protect against RSV infection.

Annette Regan, Associate Professor of Epidemiology, University of San Francisco

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Stable births, fewer deaths and a rebound in foreign immigration slowed California’s recent population decline in 2022, while Lake County’s number of residents dipped slightly, according to new data released by the California Department of Finance.

The state’s population is estimated at 38,940,231 people as of Jan. 1, 2023, the Department of Finance reported.

Over the same period, statewide housing growth increased to 0.85% — its highest level since 2008.

The report found that all but 12 of the state’s counties lost population, with Lake County, at a loss of 0.9%, being among the top 10 counties for the largest amount of lost population.

The report shows Lake County’s population declining over the year from 67,421 to 66,800.

The city of Clearlake’s population declined from 16,545 to 16,364, or 1.1%, while the city of Lakeport saw a 0.8% decrease, from 5,008 to 4,967 residents. The population of the balance of the county dropped from 45,868 to 45,469, or a 0.9% reduction.

California added 123,350 housing units on net, including 20,683 accessory dwelling Units — or ADUs — to bring total housing in the state to 14,707,698 units.

In Lake County, housing units saw a slight increase of 0.2 countywide, increasing from 34,294 to 34,354 units.

In Clearlake units increased by just one, 7,623 to 7,624, for a 0% increase. Lakeport increased from 2,501 to 2,508, or 0.3%, while the remainder of the county saw a 0.2% increase, from 24,170 to 24,222 units.

New construction represents 116,683 housing units with 63,423 single family housing units, 51,787 multifamily housing units, and 1,473 mobile homes.

The 0.35% population decline for 2022, roughly 138,400 persons, marks a slowdown compared to the recent decline during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Between 2021 and 2022, California’s population decreased 0.53% or 207,800 persons, due mainly to sharp declines in natural increase and foreign immigration.

For 2022, natural increase — the net amount of births minus deaths — increased from 87,400 in 2021 to 106,900 in 2022. Births decreased slightly from 420,800 in 2021 to 418,800 in 2022, while deaths declined gradually from 333,300 persons in 2021 to 311,900 persons in 2022, respectively.

Foreign immigration nearly tripled in 2022 compared to the prior year, with a net gain of 90,300 persons in 2022 compared to 31,300 in 2021. While foreign immigration to California has nearly returned to pre-pandemic levels, natural increase has not rebounded. Total births remain low due to fertility declines; while deaths have eased gradually from their pandemic peak, they remain elevated.

With slower domestic in-migration and increased domestic out-migration likely the result of work-from-home changes, declines in net domestic migration offset the population gains from natural increase and international migration.

The report contains preliminary year-over-year January 2023 and revised January 2021 and January 2022 population data for California cities, counties, and the state.

These estimates are based on information through Jan. 1, 2023.

Significant changes over the year include:

• Population growth slowed but remained positive in the interior counties of the Central Valley and the Inland Empire, while most counties saw declines, including every coastal county except San Benito (0.2%).
• Only two counties had growth above a half of a percent: Madera (0.6%) and Yuba (0.6%), due to housing gains. The next largest in percentage growth were San Joaquin (0.4%), Merced (0.4%) and Imperial (0.4%) counties.
• Forty-six of the state’s fifty-eight counties lost population. The 10 largest percentage decreases were: Lassen (-4.3%), Del Norte (-1.3%), Plumas (-1.2%), Santa Cruz (-1.0%), Marin (-1.0%), Tehama (-1.0%), Napa (-1.0 %), Lake (-0.9%), Monterey (-0.8%) and Los Angeles (-0.8%).
• The state’s three most populous counties all experienced population loss: Los Angeles declined by 73,293 persons (-0.75%), San Diego by 5,680 persons (-0.2%) and Orange by 14,782 persons (-0.5%).
• The top five cities where housing production drove population growth include: Paradise (24.1%) in Butte County, Lathrop (11.1%) in San Joaquin County, Duarte (6.6%) in Los Angeles County, Wheatland (4.6%) in Yuba County and Shafter (4.3%) in Kern County.

County housing highlights include:

• Yuba had the highest housing growth (2.3%) of all counties, followed by: Placer, Butte, Madera, San Joaquin, Yolo, Alameda, San Benito, Merced and Imperial.
• Twelve counties gained housing at or above 1.0%.
• One county lost housing: Mariposa due to a wildfire in 2022.
• Ranked by net housing gains, Los Angeles (19,556), San Diego (7,034), Oakland (4,005), San Francisco (2,823), and unincorporated Riverside County (2,106) added the most housing units in 2022. 
• Larger densely populated urban areas built most of the multifamily housing throughout the state. Los Angeles led the state gaining 12,074 multifamily units, comprising 61.7% of their net housing growth, followed by San Diego (4,568 for 64.9%), Oakland (3,880 for 96.9%), and San Francisco (2,573 for 91.1%).
• Conversely, single family housing is more likely to be built farther inland in typically more suburban cities. Cities with a high proportion of single family growth include: Roseville (100% single family), Santa Clarita (100% single family), Fresno (91.7% single family), and Irvine (71% single family).

Also of note in the report:

• 356 cities lost population, while 125 gained population and one had no change.
• Of the 10 largest cities in California, only three gained population: Sacramento had the largest percentage gain in population (0.2%, or 1,203) followed by Bakersfield (0.2%, or 882) and Fresno (0.1%, or 599).
• Accessory dwelling unit production increased by 60.6%, with the state adding 20,638 ADUs in 2022.
• Group quarters represent 2.4% (926,000) of the total state population. This population includes those living in college dormitories (269,000) and in correctional facilities (168,000). In 2022, California’s group quarters population increased by 11,000 people or 1.2%. The college dormitory population grew by 16,000 (6.2%). Correctional facilities declined in population in 2022 by 4,200 people (-2.5%) across federal, state and local facilities. As college dormitory populations continue to return to a post-pandemic normal, several jurisdictions saw significant gains in population due to this population. The city of Arcata in Humboldt County grew by 4.1% due to a 45.1% increase at Cal Poly Humboldt. The city of Marina in Monterey County grew by 2.5% due to a 12.6% increase at California State University at Monterey Bay.

State prisons are generally located in remote areas; as a result, increases or decreases can account for significant changes in their respective area populations. For example, prison declines led to population decreases in Susanville (-9.5%) in Lassen County, Calipatria (-5.6%) in Imperial County, and Crescent City (-4.4%) in Del Norte County.

LAKE COUNTY, Calif. — The Board of Supervisors this week will consider a request from the Registrar of Voters Office to opt out of a requirement to list supporters and opponents of measures on the ballot.

The‌ ‌board will meet beginning ‌at‌ ‌9‌ ‌a.m. Tuesday, May 16, in the board chambers on the first floor of the Lake County Courthouse, 255 N. Forbes St., Lakeport.

The‌ ‌meeting‌ ‌can‌ ‌be‌ ‌watched‌ ‌live‌ ‌on‌ ‌Channel‌ ‌8, ‌online‌ ‌at‌ ‌https://countyoflake.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx‌‌ and‌ ‌on‌ ‌the‌ ‌county’s‌ ‌Facebook‌ ‌page. ‌Accompanying‌ ‌board‌ ‌documents, ‌the‌ ‌agenda‌ ‌and‌ ‌archived‌ ‌board‌ ‌meeting‌ ‌videos‌ ‌also‌ ‌are‌ ‌available‌ ‌at‌ ‌that‌ ‌link. ‌ ‌

To‌ ‌participate‌ ‌in‌ ‌real-time, ‌join‌ ‌the‌ ‌Zoom‌ ‌meeting‌ ‌by‌ ‌clicking‌ ‌this‌ ‌link‌. ‌ ‌

The‌ ‌meeting‌ ‌ID‌ ‌is‌ 992 8581 4784, ‌pass code 979559.‌ ‌The meeting also can be accessed via one tap mobile at +16694449171,,99285814784#,,,,*979559#.

All interested members of the public that do not have internet access or a Mediacom cable subscription are encouraged to call 669-900-6833, and enter the Zoom meeting ID and pass code information above.

In an untimed item, the board will consider a resolution electing not to list supporters and opponents for county city, district, and school measures on future county ballots.

The report from Registrar of Voters Maria Valadez explains that Assembly Bill 1416, passed by the State Legislature in 2022 with an effective date of Jan. 1, 2023, adds a requirement for statewide measures that a listing of the supporters and opponents of measures be listed on the ballot label or that a similar description be provided on the ballot.

“The bill gives counties the option of printing the list of supporters and opponents of local measures on the ballot,” Valadez said.

“Opting into the additional printing will result in cost increases for ballot production, printing, and postage. Including the supporters and opponents will increase the length of the ballot and potentially the number of ballot cards,” she wrote. “In addition, it could increase the possibility for electioneering and promotion of candidates who may be on the ballot and are also signers of the measure.”

Valadez said the requirement also would put the Registrar of Voters Office in the position of accepting or denying abbreviations of supporters/opponents that may not be clear due to the maximum character limit — 125 characters each — and in turn may result in challenges to perceived unfair determinations.

She said Elections Code section 9170 allows for a mechanism to opt out of printing the list of supporters and opponents of local measures.

“At this time, a majority of California counties have already opted out of this requirement or have indicated that they will be doing so in the future, including our neighboring counties. Remaining consistent with our neighboring counties who share districts with Lake County would be beneficial to voters who would receive identical information on the ballots,” Valadez said.

Valadez’s office is encouraging the board to accept the resolution and take the same action to opt out.

Also on Tuesday, the board will meet the pet of the week, and present proclamations for National Safe Boating Week, California Peace Officers’ Memorial Day, National Police Week, the 130th anniversary of the old Community Methodist Church in Middletown and Mental Health Matters Month.

The full agenda follows.

CONSENT AGENDA

5.1: Adopt proclamation of recognition of the 130 year old Community Methodist Church in Middletown.

5.2: Adopt proclamation recognizing May 2023 as Mental Health Matters Month in Lake County.

5.3: Adopt proclamation designating the week of May 20, through May 26, 2023, as National Safe Boating Week in Lake County.

5.4: Approve Board of Supervisors minutes for April 25, 2023, and May 2, 2023.

5.5: Second reading, adopt ordinance amending Chapter 5, Section 6 of the Lake County Code, adding Section 6.25 relating to exempt agricultural building permitting for temporary hoop structures for commercial cannabis.

5.6: (a) Approve a side letter to Lake County Employee Association Oct. 21, 2021, to June 30, 2025; (b) approve a side letter to Lake County Safety Employees Association Oct. 21, 2021, to June 30, 2025; (c) approve a side letter to Lake County Correctional Officer Association; (d) approve a side letter to Lake County Deputy District Attorney Association Oct. 21, 2021, to June 30, 2025; (e) adopt resolution amending Resolution 2021-122 establishing salaries and benefits for employees assigned to Confidential Unit, Section A, for Oct. 21, 2021, to June 30, 2025; (f) adopt resolution amending Resolution 2021-123 establishing salaries and benefits for employees assigned to Confidential Unit, Section B, for Oct. 21, 2021, to June 30, 2025; (g) adopt resolution amending Resolution 2021-124 establishing salaries and benefits for management employees for the period from Nov. 1, 2021, to June 30, 2025; (h) and authorize the chair to sign.

5.7: A) Adopt resolution approving the application for the Land and Water Conservation Fund for the acquisition of property for public outdoor recreation use in Cobb; B) adopt a resolution approving the application for grant funds from the Habitat Conservation Fund Program for Public Recreation Facilities in Cobb.

5.8: Adopt resolution expressing support for the Middletown Days Parade and events, and temporarily authorizing a road closure, prohibiting parking and authorizing removal of vehicles and ordering the Department of Public Works to post signs.

5.9: Adopt resolution expressing support for the Lower Lake Daze Parade and Street Fair, and temporarily authorizing a road closure, prohibiting parking and authorizing removal of vehicles and ordering the Department of Public Works to post signs.

5.10: Adopt proclamation designating May 15, 2023, as California Peace Officers’ Memorial Day and May 14 to 20, 2023, as National Police Week in Lake County.

5.11: Adopt resolution revising the Fiscal Year 2022-2023 Adopted Budget of the County of Lake by canceling reserves in Fund 266 CSA #6 Finley Water System O & M Reserve Designation, in the amount of $30,000 to make appropriations in the Budget Unit 8466, Object Code 784.18-00 Maintenance — Buildings & Improvements, for the permanent repair of the Finley water mainline.

5.12: Approve request to waive 900 hour limit for extra-help water resources ramp monitors Wayne Moore, Anthony DeBolt, John MacDonald, Robert Dragness, Al Acrey and Lenard Christensen, and the two ramp monitor coordinators Edwin Scotton and Robert Valdez.

TIMED ITEMS

6.2, 9:07 a.m.: Pet of the Week.

6.3, 9:08 a.m.: Presentation of proclamation designating the week of May 20 through May 26, 2023, as National Safe Boating Week in Lake County.

6.4, 9:09 a.m.: Presentation of proclamation designating May 15, 2023, as California Peace Officers’ Memorial Day and May 14 to 20, 2023, as National Police Week in Lake County.

6.5, 9:10 a.m.: Presentation of proclamation of recognition of the 130 year old Community Methodist Church in Middletown.

6.6, 9:11 a.m.: Presentation of proclamation recognizing May 2023 as Mental Health Matters Month in Lake County.

6.7, 9:15 a.m.: Presentation on discharge of accountability.

6.8, 10:15 a.m.: Consideration of presentation of Lake County Food Production Program Concept.

UNTIMED ITEMS

7.2: Consideration of resolution of the Lake County Board of Supervisors, State of California, electing not to list supporters and opponents for county city, district, and school measures on future county ballots.

CLOSED SESSION

8.1: Conference with legal counsel: Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Gov. Code section 54956.9(d)(2), (e)(1) — One potential case.

8.2: Conference with legal counsel: Existing litigation pursuant to Gov. Code sec. 54956.9 (d)(1) — FERC Project No. 77, Potter Valley Hydroelectric Project.

8.3: Public employee appointment pursuant to Gov. Code Section 54957(b) (1): Interviews for Behavioral Health director; appointment of Behavioral Health director.

8.4: Public employee appointment pursuant to Gov. Code Section 54957(b) (1): Interviews for Child Support Services director; appointment of Child Support Services director.

8.5: Conference with labor negotiator: (a) County negotiators: S. Parker and P. Samac; and (b) Employee Organizations: LCDDAA, LCDSA, LCCOA, LCEA, LCSEA and LCSMA.

Email Elizabeth Larson at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Follow her on Twitter, @ERLarson, or Lake County News, @LakeCoNews.

LAKEPORT, Calif. — The Lakeport City Council this week will consider a contract to replace hundreds of city signs and a resolution seeking state funding for city road projects.

The council will meet at 6 p.m. Tuesday, May 16, in the council chambers at Lakeport City Hall, 225 Park St.

The agenda can be found here.

The council chambers will be open to the public for the meeting. Masks are highly encouraged where 6-foot distancing cannot be maintained.

If you cannot attend in person, and would like to speak on an agenda item, you can access the Zoom meeting remotely at this link or join by phone by calling toll-free 669-900-9128 or 346-248-7799.

The webinar ID is 973 6820 1787, access code is 477973; the audio pin will be shown after joining the webinar. Those phoning in without using the web link will be in “listen mode” only and will not be able to participate or comment.

Comments can be submitted by email to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. To give the city clerk adequate time to print out comments for consideration at the meeting, please submit written comments before 3:30 p.m. on Tuesday, May 16.

The council on Tuesday will present proclamations for Police Week, Safe Boating Week, the 50th anniversary of Mendocino College, California Tourism Month and Building Safety Month, will present a certification of police canine and handler, and receive a presentation on the Pavement Management Program.

Public Works Director Ron Ladd will ask the city to award a $85,336.56 public works contract to Square Signs LLC dba Front Signs.

Ladd’s report explained that the project is the result of the County Wide Sign Inventory Plan completed by consultant TJKM in November of 2019 under the direction of the Lake Area Planning Council.

“The plan included a complete inventory of all signs citywide with retroreflectivity standards evaluated for conformance with the California Manual for Uniform Traffic Control Devices. The plan provided a list of all signs that failed to meet the standards and were recommended to be replaced,” Ladd said.

Ladd said the project consists of the replacement of 574 signs throughout the city limits that were included in the replacement recommendations from the County Wide Sign Inventory Plan. “Signs include street name signs, guide signs, object markers, stop signs, regulatory and warning signs.”

Also on Tuesday, Ladd will present a proposed resolution approving the City of Lakeport SB 1 Project List for fiscal year 2023-24 and direct staff to submit to the California Transportation Commission.

The projects Ladd staff proposes for the funding are the South Main Rehabilitation Project, which includes the replacement of curb, gutter and sidewalk to meet current Americans with Disabilities Act standards on both sides of the road, and pavement mill and fill from Lakeport Boulevard to the southern edge of the intersection of South Main Street and First Street, as well as miscellaneous roadway maintenance activities from Lakeport Boulevard to 20th Street.

The council also will receive a presentation from the chief building official on the city’s weed abatement program.

On the consent agenda — items considered noncontroversial and usually accepted as a slate on one vote — are ordinances; minutes of the regular council meeting on May 2; approval of application 2023-014, with staff recommendations, for the 2023 Sponsoring Survivorship Walk/Run; authorize the cancellation of the regular meeting of July 4; and receipt and filing of the third quarter report from the Community Development Department.

Email Elizabeth Larson at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Follow her on Twitter, @ERLarson, or Lake County News, @LakeCoNews.

 

Heavy downpours and a thick snowpack in the Western mountains and Upper Midwest have put communities in several states at risk of flooding this spring – or already under water.

Flooding is the costliest type of natural disaster in the U.S., responsible for about 90% of the damage from natural disasters each year. It happens almost every day somewhere in the country.

Yet, much of the aging infrastructure meant to protect U.S. communities is in bad shape and, in some cases, failing. The American Society of Civil Engineers gave the nation’s dams, levees and stormwater infrastructure a D grade in its latest report card, in 2021.

Help is coming. Congress authorized billions of dollars for infrastructure projects under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act in 2021. But there’s a problem: New infrastructure planning frequently relies on historical flood patterns for its benchmarks rather than forecasts of changing risks as the climate warms.

We study flood risks and mitigation strategies as civil and environmental engineers. As federal funding for infrastructure rolls in, communities run the risk of spending millions of dollars on systems that weren’t built to handle the flood risks ahead.

Infrastructure is failing

Much of the nation’s flood control infrastructure was designed for 20th century storms and flooding. And in many cases, stormwater systems, levees and dams are now approaching the end of their useful life, or are already well beyond it.

The nation’s river levees are 50 years old on average. Retention ponds are meant to last 20-30 years on average. Stormwater systems are also aging, and retrofits in cities like Chicago and Philadelphia are getting expensive.

Midland, Michigan, saw the risks in 2020 when heavy rainfall caused the Edenville Dam, built in 1925, to collapse. The rush of water overwhelmed a second downstream dam, creating a disaster that drained two lakes and damaged or destroyed more than 2,000 homes. The dams’ owner had lost its hydropower license for the Edenville Dam two years earlier, in part for failing to widen its spillway for safety.

Increasing damage like this has pushed federal flood insurance costs higher – more than three times higher in parts of coastal Louisiana and Florida under the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s new risk-based premiums, newly released FEMA data show. At the same time, many of the people most at risk are low-income families who can least afford the costs of recovery without help.

Old data won’t protect against future flood risk

The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the most significant U.S. infrastructure law in recent years, includes $55 billion in new spending for water infrastructure – money that is making its way to communities. But that’s barely an eighth of what the American Society of Civil Engineers estimates is needed for drinking water, wastewater and stormwater infrastructure improvements.

And another problem arises when the money arrives.

Often, new infrastructure is designed using historical data, such as past high-water marks and storm intensity, to determine future flood risk. However, climate change is moving those baselines.

Years of satellite observations have shown that, globally, both extreme wet and extreme dry conditions have increased in extent, duration and severity. A warming atmosphere can hold more moisture, leading to stronger downpours. As heavy precipitation intensifies, more frequent and severe flooding events have hit the U.S.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency currently estimates that approximately 13 million Americans – around 4% of the population – live in 100-year flood zones, meaning the area has at least a 1% chance of flooding in a given year. But FEMA’s maps often overlook smaller streams that frequently run through heavily populated areas.

Federal flood maps also take years to update. Many still rely on decades-old data and fail to consider the rising risks from climate change. That can lead to complacency for community leaders and residents – until it’s too late.

There are alternatives that communities can use to help align their planning with a more likely future.

Researchers working with the nonprofit First Street Foundation developed some of the first U.S. flood maps that account for future flood risk at the local level. They estimate that climate change alone will increase flood damage in the U.S. by 26% by 2050 and expand into areas that rarely saw severe flooding in the past. With people continuing to build in high-risk areas, the costs and number of people at risk rise even higher.

What can communities do?

Protecting communities starts with changing the status quo, including incorporating climate change into infrastructure planning and developing innovative policies for better flood management.

Stopping construction of new homes in flood-prone areas can help avoid future damage and the need for expensive infrastructure, though political pressure and housing shortages can make these measures difficult.

Buyouts of flood-prone homes to prevent rebuilding are expensive and slow, but they have been used in over 1,100 counties in almost every state to avoid repeated flooding. In some cases, moving away from coastlines and riversides is the only option. Known as managed retreat, it is gaining interest, particularly in communities at risk from sea level rise, but it’s also controversial. Success largely depends on whether the effort is community-led.

Nature-based solutions, such as bioswales, wetlands and rain gardens, can be relatively affordable methods to help capture and absorb rainwater, reducing the amount of runoff that flows into rivers and exacerbates flooding.

But for many communities to remain unchanged, building and maintaining large-scale infrastructure will be necessary. Designing structures like levees or seawalls so they can be expanded or raised in the future is one strategy that can ultimately save money.

Innovative and sustainable funding mechanisms will likely be needed to support flood resilience efforts. One option is establishing local dedicated funds to finance flood resilience initiatives, supported by government grants, private donations and small local taxes. Managed well, these funds could invest in long-term solutions and sustainable land practices that can reduce the frequency and severity of flooding.

Many communities are making an effort, often pushed by residents lobbying officials to prioritize flood initiatives and investments designed to stand up to the future. Changes won’t happen overnight, but taking proactive measures and supporting innovative solutions will benefit communities in the long run and is the fiscally responsible thing to do.

Antonio Arenas Amado, Assistant Professor of Civil, Construction and Environmental Engineering, Iowa State University and Lu Liu, Assistant Professor of Civil, Construction and Environmental Engineering, Iowa State University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.