Blog Archives

April 29 – May 12, 2026

Highlights this week:

Greensite… tackles the “we need more housing” question… Steinbruner… BESS… 3CE… SB1078… Hayes… Don’t Look Back! State Parks Forward? Patton… Get Rich Now, Or Else… Matlock… …reform… hatchets… rogues… term out.|. drama queen… legacy… band aid… just a dinner… Eagan… Subconscious Comics and Deep Cover … Webmistress serves you… A Killing in Cannabis… Quotes on… “Jury Duty”

...

“HELP” opens at the Del Mar August 11, 1965. This was almost exactly one year before their final concert at the Candlestick. Has there ever been such fan support for any group, any music in history?

photo credit: Covello & Covello Historical photo collection.

Additional information always welcome: email photo@brattononline.com


If you want to pitch in to
keep this work of passion going,
we are ever so grateful!

...

Dateline: May 3, 2026

BRATTON ON THE AIR ON KSCO RADIO! With blessings of Bruce’s daughters, Bratton Online contributors are now also going to be on the local KSCO radio air waves. The station owner, Mr. Michael Zwerling, invited Bratton Online contributors to have a one-hour program on Fridays, 6pm-7pm, to provide greater diversity in programming and engage more listeners. We are all for that!

The program goes live Friday, May 8 and will be a regular program. Tune in and join the conversation! Find AM 1080 or FM 104.1 on your radio, or you can listen online – on your computer, phone, or tablet. Click to listen, or download the app!

Jellies to study/relax/work to! Put this on, fullscreen – or stream to your TV – and have it on in the background while you get things done! I find that I can be very productive with this kind of stuff, or with high-powered techno… What’s your favorite “git ‘er done” music? 🙂

The inaugural program will feature Becky Steinbruner as host, introducing the new program, a tribute to Bruce Bratton (who did radio himself for years and years!), and talking about local issues including County Budget woes, and whatever you want to call in and discuss!

Call 831-479-1080

Other BrattonOnTheAir hosts will include Grey Hayes and Thomas Leavitt, with Gillian Greensite joining in later. Who knows, maybe we’ll even have guests?

JURY DUTY. Growing up in Sweden, all I knew of juries was from television. We don’t have “a jury of your peers” in Sweden. Many other countries don’t, so we’re not unique that way. Anyway, the whole system has always intrigued me. I get sent jury summonses, despite not being a citizen, and that doesn’t exactly inspire faith in the system… My partner, Brian, got a jury summons in January this year, and it became clear fairly early that he was on track to get on the jury. The judge said something pretty profound, in my opinion. He said, and I paraphrase, “I know many of you are thinking about how to claim hardship and not get on the jury, and I would like you to think about how to get on the jury instead. For our system to work, we need to not have juries that only consist of retired and independently wealthy people. If it’s not actually a hardship, but rather just an inconvenience to you, then do your civic duty.”

It is a weird system, to me. It is also, I know now, very hard and emotionally draining to be on a long trial, nevermind a murder trial, because unlike when you’re having a hard day at work, you can’t come home and decompress and talk about it! The trial Brian was on for all of February and part of March was the trial of final defendant in the Tushar Atre murder that happened in Santa Cruz in 2019. A book about it came out recently, A Killing In Cannabis, and there’s an interview with the author as my video this week.

Now I turn you over to our intrepid contributors. Happy Mother’s Day!


~Webmistress

...

PANTHEON. Netflix. Series. (8.5 IMDb) ****

What if the threat isn’t AI? What if it’s UI: uploaded intelligence. Human brains destructively scanned, living only in the cloud. “Pantheon” explores this idea as exquisite, real science fiction. Not cheesy animated sci-fi melodrama, but a genuine exploration of love, grief, immortality, endless simulations, conspiracies, global politics, and so much more.

The animation is restrained, there to serve the story rather than distract from it. The characters are rich, not cardboard cutouts, whether good or bad. No supervillains. No Mary Sues.

It’s a dense story, so if science fiction concepts tend to lose you, this may not be for you. But if they don’t, this absolutely deserves a watch.
~Sarge

STRANGER THINGS – TALES FROM ’85. Netflix. Series. (5 IMDb) ***

Stranger Things exits stage left…then pops back out for one more bow.

Set between seasons 2 and 3, this animated take brings back the core crew without sanding things down for kids. It’s not anime or cheap knockoff – dipping their pens in the Spiderverse/Arcane inkwell, with a creative, stylized look. It’s also more focused than the later live-action seasons, trimming most of the adults and zeroing in on the kids. Best of all, Will Byers actually gets to be a character instead of a punching bag, helped by the addition of Niki, an Amazonian punk rocker who connects with him over their shared outsider status. The recast voices are a little jarring at first, but you should settle in. Rough reviews aside, it’s worth a watch.

~Sarge

STRANGER THINGS (final season). Netflix. Series. (9.3 IMDb) ****

Final season, and once again Will Byers gets absolutely brain-fracked. For the uninitiated: Stranger Things is steeped in the early ’80s, following a quartet of young teens (I was all of 20 when it’s set) doing the usual – playing D&D, blasting a killer soundtrack, biking everywhere unsupervised… and occasionally getting snatched by nightmare creatures from the Upside Down, a vine-choked mirror of their hometown.

They cross paths with Eleven (Millie Bobby Brown), a runaway lab experiment with psychic powers and a deep love of Eggos. From there: more Upside Down lore, bigger and nastier villains, government conspiracies, a mall food court leveled, peak ’80s fashion, coming out, and a truly unfair amount of trauma for poor Will. Season 5 breaks up the cast in teams who each have their own stories – this season Linda “Sarah Conner” Hamilton pops up to give Vecna a run for his money as a “big bad”. Mike’s little sister gets dragged into things, and his mom finally gets to shine as a badass. It neatly cleans up all the loose threads. It’s both satisfying and a little sad to see it end – but no worries, the Duffer Brothers already have more Strangerverse on the way. Worth a watch.

~Sarge

PROJECT HAIL MARY. In theatres. Movie. (8.4 IMDb) ***-

This is hard-science sci-fi that blends in laughs without undercutting the tension. Ryan Gosling – somehow I’d never really noticed him before, sort of Arthur Davrill – plays Ryland Grace, a middle-school science teacher turned astronaut, who wakes up alone on a spaceship light-years from home with zero memory of why he’s there. Slowly, he pieces together that Earth’s survival literally hangs on him – and then he meets an alien whose planet is in just as much trouble. Cue the odd-couple science team: two species, zero common language, and enough physics to make your head spin. Gosling is charmingly competent, the alien is nicely alien (not just a guy in a weird forehead prosthetic), and while the story feels a lot like The Martian, it’s a solid high-stakes ride. I enjoyed it, even with the odd shortcomings. Running 2:36, it didn’t really lag. Definitely worth a watch.

~Sarge

THE PITT. Hulu, Max. Series. (8.97 IMDb) ***-
Noah Wyle is back in the ER… can George Clooney be far behind?

Set in a brutally busy Pittsburgh ER, a grizzled Wyle leads a rotating pack of residents, interns, and students through near–real-time shifts (one episode = one hour, one season = one day). The writing is sharp, the characters click, and the show pulls no punches on nudity or bodily damage—approach with caution, but it’s worth it. Season two is still rolling out weekly. Now with more ICE!
~Sarge

SCARPETTA. Prime. Series. (5.9 IMDb) **-

This series is about a noted Medical Examiner (Kidman) investigating a murder tied to a string of killings from 25 years ago.

Wait—no. It’s about sibling rivalry that apparently has no expiration date (Kidman/Curtis).

Then again, it’s about the adult niece of a Medical Examiner who can’t let go of her deceased wife and builds an AI replacement.

Any one of these might’ve made for an interesting series—just not all at once. Good cast, so-so mystery, and way too much going on. Pick a lane.

~Sarge

A MURDER BETWEEN FRIENDS. Prime. Movie. (3.5 IMDb) ***-

Half a point for being in focus. Joan Collins fronting for a series – at least according to the end card. Six… “people,” I guess… reunite at an Airbnb “castle” owned by a legendary mystery writer, played by Joan Collins. One of them ends up floating in the hot tub. That’s about it.

Everyone treats Joan Collins as a full-blown Mary Sue: “You’re a great mystery writer – we should all listen to you.” What does she actually do? Watch security cameras that most of the cast already know about, while they continue misbehaving anyway.

It’s embarrassing to watch, especially since I’m reasonably sure she bankrolled it. Not worth a watch. Stand well back. Mind the gap. Go watch “Agatha Christie’s 7 Dials” on Netflix.

~Sarge

THE LAST KIDS ON EARTH. Netflix. Series (1hr pilot). (7.2 IMDb) ***
This largely bloodless animated series began with a pilot-style special and ran for two seasons. It’s based on the children’s book series by Max Brallier, with character designs inspired by the illustrations of Douglas Holgate.

The story follows orphan Jack Sullivan as he adjusts to life after an invasion of extra-dimensional monsters and a zombie apocalypse. He soon bands together with a scrappy group of kids who missed the evacuation – along with a loyal monster-dog – forming their own ragtag survival team.

Aimed primarily at the 8–12 crowd, the show still has enough sharp humor and creature-feature flair to entertain adults. The voice cast includes Nick Wolfhard (brother of Finn), Mark Hamill, Keith David, Catherine O’Hara, and Rosario Dawson. Worth a watch – with or without your kids.
~Sarge

Sarge, aka Jeffery Sargent, cut his teeth on the Golden Age of Hollywoood on TV and with regular trips to the Sash Mill. Film classes then, at Cabrillo with Morton Marcus, broadened his scope – he found he preferred Keaton over Chaplin, and Akira Kurosawa was his Yoda. Sarge spent 15 years working in Special Effects, on everything from Starship Troopers to Battlestar Galactica. He is a staunch geek who has a weak spot for Cozy Mysteries and loathes “Reality” shows. While he doesn’t care for the unrelenting banal horror of “True Crime”, he licks his lips over a twist like the end of Chinatown.

Email Sarge at JeffLSargent@gmail.com

...

May 6, 2026

If You Want Me on the Other Side of the Podium go to greensite4mayor.org

In an April 14th Opinion piece in Santa Cruz Lookout, Don Lane writes, “As voters consider housing in the months ahead, the most important step is not choosing a side—it’s understanding the issues and getting the facts right.” I heartily agree with his statement about getting the facts right.  If you get the facts right and understand the issues, one side has clearly got its facts wrong and is misleading the community into accepting housing growth as a solution to rising rents.  Housing growth may be making things worse.

Don Lane argues that gentrification is not caused by the new housing we see rising above the skyline downtown, along the river and soon to be along Water St. and Mission St. He says it is a result of the slow growth movement from the past 40 years which created a housing shortage. Santa Cruz pro-housing YIMBY members at every public hearing claim that we have built no housing in the past 40 years; that what we see rising today is just catch-up. This is simply not accurate.

If you research the US Census, you will see that there have been 11,000 housing units built in the city of Santa Cruz in the last 40 years; 79% more housing than existed at that time. This is not nothing. If you claim it is “not enough” how are you measuring that?  There is probably a bottomless pit of demand to live in this city.

UCSC doesn’t figure in Don Lane’s calculations, but it should. About fifty percent of UCSC students choose to live off campus in any given year. Forty years ago, there were 6,000 enrolled UCSC students; now there are close to 20,000. That increase in numbers represents a significant increase in student demand for off-campus rental housing. Rather than blaming slow growth for the current high price of housing, a more accurate statement is that significant housing has been built in the city over the past 40 years, along with continued growth at UCSC.

Will building more and making it easier to build lower the price of housing? Most likely not. A February 2026 study from Economists at the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco and the National Bureau of Economic Research, authored by Schuyler Louie, John Mondragon and Johannes Wieland found the following: “Our conclusions challenge the prevailing view of housing markets and suggest that relaxing regulatory supply constraints may not affect affordability.”

Their research, studying the years 2000 to 2020 found that “higher income growth predicts the same growth in house prices, housing quantities and population regardless of the estimated housing supply elasticity.” The same conclusion applied to rents. In other words, it is not housing supply, or limited supply that leads to increased prices for housing; it is the income of the people moving into the housing that determines the cost of housing. If you’ve lived in Santa Cruz long enough you’ve seen this happening in real time.

The mistaken belief that the cost of housing is a supply problem leads decision makers into risky territory. Since the state-required housing numbers (RHNA) are larger at the market-rate end, the cost of housing and rents will continue to rise as more people with bigger incomes move into Santa Cruz. The Area Median Income has already risen 25% in a three-year period.  More people moving into the new six and eight story housing puts a strain on all infrastructure. City staff acknowledge that new housing in the long run will raise the cost of city services, or in their words “are a net negative fiscal impact.”  Don’s claim that new units reduce the pressure on the older, more modest homes, opening them up for younger families is not based on data and side-steps the higher-income issues raised in the research. Older, more modest homes are priced above a million dollars.

What about affordable housing? Housing advocates state without evidence that such housing is going to local workers. If local means workers in the city of Santa Cruz, the city has no such data. The 90% figure they quote for Santa Cruzans moving into recently built affordable housing is a county-wide statistic.

Sonnenfeld and Roeth urge that all new housing projects that meet objective standards be ministerially approved “by-right,” which means no public hearings, with staff approval only. This includes projects at heights of six or eight stories, some of which will go deep into existing neighborhoods. They regard public hearings and impact fees as constraints on the building of more housing units. Their position is at odds with the research. More market-rate housing attracts more people with higher incomes which means the cost of rents and housing remain high.

The more you build, the worse it gets for lower income workers and residents. Affordable rents are based on the AMI and that keeps rising. Time to re-evaluate the “we need more housing” assumption and its impacts.

Greensite4Mayor.org
Gillian Greensite is a long time local activist, a member of Save Our Big Trees and the Santa Cruz chapter of IDA, International Dark Sky Association  http://darksky.org  Plus she’s an avid ocean swimmer, hiker and lover of all things wild.

...
ANOTHER SALES TAX COMING YOUR WAY IN NOVEMBER

If State Senator Laird’s SB 1078 makes it through the Assembly and is signed by the Governor by this August, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors plans to approve placing a new Sales Tax measure on the November ballot. The SB 1078 is an urgency measure that would become effective immediately to allow the Board’s rapid action in August to pose a ballot measure that would allow the County to waive a sales tax cap of 2% imposed by the Transaction and Use Tax Law. It is co-authored by Assemblymembers Dawn Addis and Gail Pellerin.

Second District Supervisor Kim DeSerpa testified to the State Senate on April 8, 2026 in support of this bill. She claimed it is necessary to keep the Watsonville Hospital from closure and would help save many residents’ CalFresh and MediCal benefits that HR 1 threatens.
SB 1078: Transactions and use taxes: County of Santa Cruz. | Digital Democracy

The bill passed in the Senate, and now is before the Assembly.

BUT IS THIS AN EMERGENCY?

Following along on the issue above, when the County CEO Nicole Coburn and County Budget Officer Marcus Pimental (who also serves on the Pajaro Valley Health Care District Board of Trustees), presented the draft 2026-2027 Draft County County Budge on May 5, some on the Board of Supervisors questioned why the CEO did not want to declare a “fiscal state of emergency”? The bleak outlook projected $23 Million deficit, but claiming a “balanced budget” only due to withdrawing $43 Million from the County’s Reserve Fund. The Board has set a Reserve Fund Goal of 15%, but the CEO’s actions to rob that “rainy day account” would result in a 10.4% Reserve level. That would be enough to fund two pay cycles of County workers.

Supervisor Cummings pointed out that if the County did declare a fiscal state of emergency, it would require all contracts to be re-opened, but would help support the future half-cent sales tax planned for the November ballot.

Do you see how this chess game is shaping up???

Meanwhile, Supervisor Koenig stated that he felt instead of adding 6 new analysts to the OR3 staff and salary load, it would be better to spend the money replacing culverts and addressing deferred maintenance of County infrastructure.  He also pointed out that the proposed plan by County Parks to begin charging for parking at County Parks is not a good idea when there is such a maintenance problem at many parks…such as broken play equipment and $90 Million in deferred maintenance projects.

When questioned about the massive Law Enforcement Dept. budget, CEO Coburn admitted that the County is seeing an unusually large number of law enforcement staff on leave, many of whom have been on leave for a very long time. “We will need to look into that before June budget hearings,” she said.

Last year, the County’s CAO Carlos Palacios took the unprecedented action to convince the Board of Supervisors to approve a $90 Million bond debt for the County, to address storm repair and other emergency debt obligations not yet reimbursed by FEMA. Mr. Pimental said the County has a special account set up to deposit FEMA monies that is used to pay that annual $3 Million debt service. He answered Supervisor DeSerpa’s question about reimbursement levels by saying the County has been receiving about $10-$12 Million a year, and does get applied to the debt principle as well.

Deputy CEO Elissa Benson noted the County will receive about $10 Million in CDBG grant money for culvert work…but who knows when or where that work would happen.

Budget hearings are scheduled for June 10 at the new South County Government Center (500 Westridge Drive, Watsonville) and on June 11 in the 701 Ocean Street Government Building basement (the massive remodel of the 5th Floor Chambers is still not done). The Final Budget hearing on June 24 is at a location yet to be determined.
Search – PrimeGov Portal

The County entered FY 2026-27 budget development facing a projected General Fund deficit of $23.2 million along with additional cost pressures including federal policy changes such as H.R.1, with forecasted deficits exceeding $67 million in subsequent years absent corrective action. Balance is achieved through shared departmental restraint, a countywide hiring freeze, the elimination of a net 57.88 vacant positions, targeted revenue increases, and the strategic use of $43.0 million in one-time resources from General Fund reserves and department trust funds. There are no proposed reductions in force resulting in the layoff of current employees.

SUPPORT THE VETERANS

The Veterans filled the Board room on May 5 to testify in support of returning the Veterans Service Office to an independent department, rather than being sat upon by the County Health Services Department (HSD), and micro-managed to the harm of effectively serving the County’s 20,000 Veterans. The large group had to sit through the County Budget presentation, but at least was the second Regualr Agenda item, rather than the last, as had happened on January 27, 2026.

Why does it make sense to the County administration to tie the hands of the Veteran’s Service Office? The claim is that 31% of the Veterans also receive other social services administered by HSD. “We have some questions about that data and would like to evaluate that more carefully,” said Veterans Dave Ramos and Dean Kaufman.

For now, the Board approved the MOU between the County HSD, CEO and Veterans Service Office to continue building trust and examining data and solutions. They will submit quarterly reports to the CEO…and hopefully the Board and the Public.

Supervisor Justin Cummings added an amendment to the motion to require a report to the board at the February mid-year Budget Hearings in 2027, rather than waiting until May, 2027.

Good idea.

3CE POWER PAYS BIG BUCKS TO STAFF

How can it make any sense to add another layer of administrative bureaucracy to your power bill, adding 91 employees and salary levels of top executives at nearly half-a-million dollars, and purchasing multiple properties for new offices (e.g. Soquel Village area)?

Take a look and think about it

GCC : Central Coast Community Energy Authority (2024) < < Special Districts

3CE STAFF MADE A $5.7 MILLION MISTAKE

The 3CE staff failed to let their Policy Board know until a couple of weeks ago that the number of applications for solar / battery reimbursements had skyrocketed beyond the $3 Million budgeted for the reimbursements until the amount to re-pay people was nearly $5.7 Million.  Staff knew of the situation in January, 2026 but did not freeze new applications, did not notify the 3CE Board, and failed to change the website applications to alert new project owners that money might not be available.

At a Special Meeting on April 20, 2026, staff recommended that the Board simply let the people know that the fine print of the application states that “terms can change”, and not reimburse the people. A few solar installation contractors testified that some customers had already spent tens of thousands of dollars to design and build projects, based on the assurance that 3CE would reimburse them.

After great deliberation, the Board decided that the threat of bad press and customers opting out as 3CE customers would not look good, so voted to find the extra $3.7 Million to make good on the agency’s promises.  
Policy Board of Directors, April 20, 2026

One really has to wonder about the inner workings of this mysterious agency that holds 94% of the County’s electrical rate payer accounts, pays big bucks to alot of staff, purchases lands for new offices (in Soquel) and is pushing our County to parallel their 2030 goal of 100% renewable energy.

Seriously consider Opting OUT of 3CE. Their agency supports and is waiting in the wings for permitting of the large lithium Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS) project in Watsonville’s working class neighborhood, unconcerned of the known risks of flammable explosions emitting toxic hydrogen fluoride gas.

3CE Opt out

Many people who have opted out of 3CE report their utility bills decreased markedly.

EPA REPORTS ON MOSS LANDING VISTRA FIRE CLEAN-UP WORK

Moss Landing Vistra Battery Fire Response: Response Timeline | US EPA

Here is what the Monterey Bay Air Quality Control Board discussed on February 18, 2026 meeting:

Air Monitoring staff installed four Clarity PM 2.5 sensors at the Vistra battery plant
earlier this month. These sensors were installed at the facility’s property line to prepare
for the possibility of a fire during the facility clean-up. Data from this localized
monitoring will be available to the community in the event of a fire. The sensors are
paid for through a contract with Vistra.

Monterey Bay Air Resources District; BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING AGENDA

It is curious that the Board elected Santa Cruz county 4th District Supervisor Felipe Hernandez to chair the Board, even though he never showed up at the meeting.

TRUST THE LOCAL SCIENTISTS

In contrast to the Vistra-funded consultants who have argued “there is nothing to see here” in heavy metal contamination following the January 16, 2926 Vistra Battery Fire in Moss Landing, the local scientists have impartial data that local government officials should heed. Presented March 17, 2026 to the Monterey County Board of Supervisors, take a look at this good information and ask Santa Cruz County and Monterey County Boards of Supervisors to receive regular updates from this group:
Dr. Kerstin Wasson EMBER presentation 3-17-26

Also take a look at this interview with Dr. Michael Hogan, California Arts & Sciences Institute

WILL THE TRIBES REALLY HAVE A VOICE?

The California Energy Commission (CEC) is holding an IN-PERSON ONLY meeting on May 12 in Cabazon, CA to hear the opinions of the Central Southern Tribes regarding impacts of clean energy policies and energy independence.

Will the CEC listen to their voices?

On March 17, 2025, the CEC issued an Order Instituting an Informational Proceeding (OIIP) on Tribal Affairs and Tribal Energy Sovereignty. Chair David Hochschild is the Lead Commissioner, and Commissioner Noemí Otilia Osuna Gallardo is the Associate Commissioner for the OIIP. The OIIP (also called proceeding) is in alignment with the March 2, 2023 CEC Resolution Committing to Support Tribal Energy Sovereignty, which was adopted in alignment with Governor Gavin Newsom’s executive order N-15-19 (EXECUTIVE ORDER N-15-19), where he issued an apology to California Native American tribes for the violence against tribes committed by the state and established the Truth and Healing Council

Lithium batteries, commonly used in large-scale battery energy storage systems (BESS) projects is not only flammable and hazardous, but is also NOT clean energy. Consider the plight of the Native People at Thacker Pass: One Native Group’s Fight to Protect Sacred Land From Destructive Lithium Mining | First Nations Development Institute

Write the Monterey County and Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors and ask that the Draft BESS Ordinance not allow lithium BESS projects at all.

MAKE ONE CALL. WRITE ONE LETTER. ATTEND A PUBLIC HEARING AND SPEAK UP ABOUT WHAT MATTERS TO YOU AND YOUR NEIGHBORS.
DO JUST ONE THING THIS WEEK AND MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE.

Cheers, and Happy Mothers Day,
Becky

Becky Steinbruner is a 30+ year resident of Aptos. She has fought for water, fire, emergency preparedness, and for road repair. She ran for Second District County Supervisor in 2016 on a shoestring and got nearly 20% of the votes. She ran again in 2020 on a slightly bigger shoestring and got 1/3 of the votes.

Email Becky at KI6TKB@yahoo.com

...
Don’t Look Back! State Parks Forward?

Press is rolling unveiling what might seem like a ‘new’ initiative, obscuring and ‘moving on’ from some really UGLY past issues with California State Parks. But, hey- we all want to move on, keep moving forward…especially those with criminal records or histories of abuse.

Parks Forward: a brief history

The origin of the Parks Forward initiative was a crushing blow in 2012, an event that should make every Californian, especially those dedicated to natural areas access and conservation, doubt whether the California Department of Parks and Recreation can be trusted. Some may recall the closing of many State Parks supposedly due to budget shortfalls, which some of us recognized at the time as being a political ploy to pressure the California legislature into increasing Parks’ budget. Sure enough, ‘fiscal irregularities’ (as stated euphemistically in Parks’ subsequent report) were discovered, but only after the panicky scuttling of thousands of volunteers, non-profit organizations, and private donations to keep parks from closing down. Many nonprofits made good money from this fundraising boon, which also cemented their cache with the public.

The Bigger History

The State Parks corruption boondoggle in 2012 needs to be put into context with a larger history for a wholistic understanding of the situation. Since its inception, State Parks has been the recipient of lands purchased by private organizations. It has been typical that ‘conservation’ organizations use private donor funds to purchase properties while lobbying for public bond initiatives earmarked in such a way that they profit by subsequently selling those properties to the State. This process violates all sorts of legal and moral codes such as illicit 501(c)3 lobbying, private organizations setting State priorities, adding land to an agency already unable to manage the lands it holds, etc. Conservationists recognize that purchasing and ‘setting aside’ land for ‘protection’ is the relatively easy and affordable first step- the real work is sustaining species on those lands in perpetuity. For a while, recognition of these ‘irregularities’ put a halt to adding more land to the State Parks system.

Santa Cruz County Parks History

Much of that ‘bigger’ history is reflected in what has been occurring in Santa Cruz County where a disproportionate percentage of land is owned by State Parks. State Parks General Planning processes were successfully challenged for Castle Rock State Park, Nisene Marks State Park, and the Gray Whale Ranch addition to Wilder Ranch State Park. In each instance, private organizations were instrumental in transferring land to State Parks while State Parks was unable to either plan for or manage those properties in alignment with California law. And yet, each park welcomes visitors, pouring funding into private businesses at the expense of biodiversity protection and visitor experience. Henry Cowell State Park and the State Park beaches at Cotoni Coast Dairies were opened and remain highly used without any planning, whatsoever. The General Plan for Wilder Ranch State Park, a mecca for mountain bikers, does not allow mountain biking and private recreational businesses openly operate mountain biking concessions. Yet, Parks rangers have been ordered not to enforce prohibitions against either mountain bikers or their unpermitted concessions.

The ‘New’ Parks Forward Initiative

Surrounding Earth Day 2026, there has been much press about the Parks Forward initiative. One might even think it was ‘new.’ More new parks were added to the network of State Parks and some parcels were added to expand certain existing State Parks. In some cases, the press releases note property was ‘donated’ and in other cases, the situation is far opaquer. Nowhere in the press releases is there any mention of species conservation- it is all coached in ‘more access.’ Both access and conservation are expensive to do correctly, are not being done correctly in any State Park currently, and are conflicting uses with vast tradeoffs that go unanalyzed by Parks’ mandated General Plans and concomitant ‘carrying capacity analysis.’

Symptoms Make Sense

This new roll out of “Parks Forward” is quite predictable given public amnesia, popular myths, and the level of oversight from the Parks Forward Commission. Apparently, the public has forgotten about the origins of the Parks Forward initiative: if citizens remembered, there would be some acknowledgement in the many press releases. Overriding the grave concerns of the past is a fervor for more public access to natural areas. The myth, echoed by everyone touching this new version of the Parks Forward initiative, is that ‘more people accessing more natural areas is good for conservation.’ This balderdash flies in the face of science and common sense. The logical conclusion of this thinking is that if every human accessed every last piece of nature then every species would be conserved…the opposite is true. But, conservation organizations want to make money from donors and State politicians want to look successful, so enter the echo chamber of the deeply mistaken myth, which is doing permanent damage to the potential for wildlife conservation in California.

It is amazing to me that there is a Parks Forward Commission with smart people allowing such misguided endeavors to continue within State Parks. Perhaps they, too, accept the mythology. The symptoms of their complicity were present many years back when the Commission swallowed the poison of the progress report in year 2 of their formation. That report includes ‘four strategic focus areas’ with no metrics for success and two incredibly tiny ‘natural and cultural pilot efforts underway,’ which likewise have no metrics for conservation success. The apparent acceptability of these puerile efforts to the Commission point to an inability of the Commission to provide substantive oversight and input into the broken State Parks system.

Ask, Please

With the unveiling of new parks and new land ‘protections,’ we must ask: is there any additional funding for long term stewardship for biodiversity conservation, or are these new areas merely to continue the silent death of species to the overwhelmingly poorly managed public access/private inurement money machine?

Has California State Parks apologized to the People for the lies and manipulation it promulgated in 2012? Does that apology include details of what they will do to change this sordid past? Can we identify specific individuals who were responsible for those actions? Is there new management? Or, is this situation much like that exposed by the Epstein situation, where the abusers are still in charge? Abusers – is that too much to say? Well, in this case the victims do not have voices and will never speak out…the wildlife will simply go away while the abusers will vocally claim victory with their empty promises of conservation alongside public recreation and access to natural areas.

Grey Hayes is a fervent speaker for all things wild, and his occupations have included land stewardship with UC Natural Reserves, large-scale monitoring and strategic planning with The Nature Conservancy, professional education with the Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve, and teaching undergraduates at UC Santa Cruz. Visit his website at: www.greyhayes.net

Email Grey at coastalprairie@aol.com

...

Tuesday, April 28, 2026

The picture above is associated with a column by Tim Higgins. His column appeared in The Wall Street Journal on January 20, 2026. Online, the title of Higgins’ column read this way: “Why The Tech World Thinks The American Dream Is Dying.” The title on the print version, I suggest, was a little more inflammatory:

Tech World Says Get Rich Now, Or Else

I am reacting to that print version headline.

The essence of what Higgins is saying is that there is a good argument, which must be taken seriously, that “the current artificial intelligence boom will be the last chance to get rich before artificial intelligence makes money essentially worthless.”

Presumably, those who are already rich, and the “tech bros” who are getting rich on the current A.I. boom, will be just fine. However, what about the rest of us poor schmucks? Well, the implicit lesson is found in that print version headline. You had better get rich now – or else! The door on “rich” is closing!

This idea, of course, is contrary to what we have all been told from time immemorial. Our faith, largely justified by past experience, too, is that new technologies ultimately make everyone better off. That “rising tide” we have always heard about will lift all boats.

Higgins doesn’t, completely, say that there is going to be a fundamental change. But he takes that headline I quoted pretty seriously. Here is how he ends his column, citing to a tech entrepreneur who predicted, last year, that “the mother of all tech booms is coming.” Here is what he said, by way of advice, just following that quote:

Get Some While You Can

I am somewhat dubious about the value of the A.I. developments that are driving massive investments right at the moment – and I don’t necessarily believe that there is no stopping A.I.. The massive (and negative) impacts that giant data centers are having on the natural environment, the environment that sustains all life on the planet, makes me think that this may be a “pride goeth before a fall” moment.

However, let’s assume that A.I. will proceed to “take over” our lives, making everyone almost totally dependent on it, and upon the infrastructure that makes it all possible. If that might turn out to be true, it probably does make sense to pay some attention to Higgins’ warning.

Upon reading Higgins’ column, and thinking about the question, I had two immediate reactions. First, being “rich” doesn’t mean that a person’s life is going to be either “better” or more satisfying. Being “poor” is a different story. If I don’t get “rich,” I am not going to pout. If A.I. makes us “poor,” however, so my grandkids won’t get medical care, a good education, or enough to eat – and if the advent of A.I. means that my family members and all our friends won’t have a roof over their heads (all these things going along with being “poor”), I am going to be very upset.

In fact, I think that what Higgins is suggesting is that missing the A.I. boom will, essentially, make huge numbers of people truly “poor,” and that talking about how missing the A.I. boon might foreclose a person’s chance to be “rich” is just trying to put a positive spin on things. If it does turn out to be true that if you don’t end up being “rich” then you are going to be “poor,” and plunged into poverty, then we ought to be doing something to stop what’s happening, as opposed to trying to figure out how to become individually “rich.”

This brings up the second thought I had. Higgins column focuses on the “individual.” The column doesn’t provide any sense of our collective ability, perhaps, to make everyone “rich.” In truth, we are not just a collection of individuals, we are “in this together.” If A.I. is going to increase productivity, and cut costs, and produce economic benefits, then society at large, which includes all of us, should be the beneficiary.

In order to make that idea work out in real life, of course, those who are not likely to become individually rich need to get organized, and start making rules that will insure that everyone benefits from the new technologies that are coming.

That means “politics.” That means, to alter the headline I have quoted, that the following admonition is the advice we need to follow:

Get Organized Now, Or Else!

Gary Patton is a former Santa Cruz County Supervisor (20 years) and an attorney for individuals and community groups on land use and environmental issues. The opinions expressed are Mr. Patton’s. You can read and subscribe to his daily blog at www.gapatton.net

Email Gary at gapatton@mac.com

...
JIM CROW GAVEL, COURT CROWNING, BREAK GLASS

Well, they finally did it last week! And you can’t say it came out of nowhere. It’s only the “culmination of a decades-long effort that’s the logical result of a broken system that needs reform,” says Brian Tyler Cohen. He says that the Supreme Court’s taking a hatchet to the Voting Rights Act was depressingly unsurprising, because of course they would — since this court has pretty much declared their fealty to Trump over the Constitution. In Cohen’s opinion, it was a foregone conclusion. Even with the ideal situation of Democrats ensconced in the three branches of government, being able to enact a new Voting Rights Act, the current 6-3 court will be there, hatchets at the ready. So “we have six unelected judges in robes deciding that Black voices are unconstitutional, segregation by map, Jim Crow with a gavel,” says Louisiana Congressman Cleo Fields.

Cohen proposes that to restore democracy, and to overhaul the judicial system, the Supreme Court needs reforms that are based on principle, not politics, in order to have legitimacy or public support. “If any subsequent reforms are to stand a chance at surviving, we cannot leave in place a rogue branch of government with the power to strike down anything that doesn’t comport with its far-right ideology. The first reform should be to expand the Court, in line with the principles that determined the number of justices in the early years of the republic,” adds Cohen.  He recounts historically, the initial six justices to reflect the six federal courts; the year 1807 saw an additional justice added when a seventh circuit court was added. The court grew to nine with the addition of two circuit courts in 1837, and today there are thirteen federal court circuits with no ensuing changes in the court makeup. Cohen believes the Supreme Court should reflect the size of the country and the scope of its legal challenges, as it did over a century ago.

A second reform proposed by Cohen, also supported by 75 percent of Americans according to a PRRI survey in 2025, are term limits for the court justices. He sees a term of eight years which would allow newly elected presidents to choose their own nominees regularly, reducing the opportunities for procedural delays, which occurred with President Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland in 2016, his final year in the White House. In Cohen’s view, the regular flow of new appointments would help remove the national drama from each nomination by diluting the novelty of each new appointment.

USA Today poll in 2024 shows support by 76 percent of Americans, for the establishment of an enforceable code of conduct, which would empower a panel mandated to investigate allegations of wrongdoing and impropriety. The panel should be given the power to force the recusal of justices in cases where they have personal ties, and even go so far as to remove justices in cases of conduct unworthy of the Supreme Court. A final Supreme Court reform would be to retire any justice over age seventy, regardless of who appointed them. The interpretation of the Constitution that judges “shall hold their Offices during good Behavior,” has given lifetime appointments to court appointees, but there are other considerations — a retired justice could be moved to a lower court and still stay within a constitutional framework.

The Pew Research Center discloses that public support for retiring all public officials over a certain age has widespread consensus, in particular for elected offices, but also for the Supreme Court, with Democrats being in the upper echelons of the poll. The only age specified by the Constitution requires that presidential candidates must be thirty-five years of age. A mandatory retirement of seventy years of age would lead to four immediate vacancies on the current Supreme Court: three conservatives (AlitoRoberts & Thomas) and one liberal (Sotomayor), leaving all three Trump judges. It has been almost a century since President Franklin Roosevelt attempted to expand the high court (termed ‘packing’ back then), a plan which Congress defeated, and since that time no changes have been attempted. Included in FDR’s plan as he struggled to get his New Deal revivals during the Great Depression, was to retire justices at age seventy, and if they refused, he would be able to add an additional justice until the court reached fifteen members. Despite the Congressional defeat, time was on his side, because within five years, seven of the nine justices were appointed by him.

Cohen warns, “Today’s Supreme Court has weakened itself by its political activism, repeatedly disregarding the Constitution and its code of conduct. It is populated by older justices at a time when the American people are yearning to reform the status quo. If we want to revive our democracy, we need to revive our Supreme Court. If that seems extreme, consider an alternative that is already upon us: a Court that undermines the very Constitution it’s supposed to uphold. This week’s ruling on the Voting Rights Act was not a one-off. It’s the logical endpoint of a decades-long effort to disenfranchise minority voters and minority representation to an absolute minimum. The three longest-serving conservative justices on the court right now have a combined 75 years on the bench. This is their pet project. They own it. And the other three conservatives, all Trump appointees, are comparatively young and spry. Without court expansion, we’re stuck with this right wing majority for another couple of decades at least. We need to normalize ourselves to the idea of court expansion, so that when we have power, we don’t waste our time negotiating what we should be doing, but rather spend our time doing it.”

Pema Levy writes in Mother Jones that the high court’s gerrymandering decision, in Louisiana v. Callais, against the Voting Rights Act is hardly a “mere tweak,” or as Justice Alito characterized it, a “humble update.” Levy terms the 6-3 opinion a “counter-revolution” against Section 2 of the 1965 act, which requires that people of color have an equal opportunity to elect representatives of their choice, taking us back to the dark days when Black and brown voters in many states cast meaningless ballots. Since the original enactment, the reversal of previous diluted, powerless and gerrymandered votes, resulted in Southern states sending Black representatives to Congress, state legislatures, and local political bodies, with Congress repeatedly defending and continuing the protections. In last week’s diminution by the court, Justice Kagan chided the majority for downplaying the gravity of its decision, by laying “the groundwork for the largest reduction in minority representation since the era following Reconstruction.”

The Robert’s Court has been slowly dismantling the Voting Rights Act since 2013, and Levy sees this recent action as the final nail in the coffin, improbable that any plaintiff will ever be able to avail themselves of the law’s protections. By elevating permission to conduct partisan gerrymandering above voting rights, Black voters become dispersed, lacking any ability to elect a representative of their choice — wasted votes again! Kagan writes, “For how else, the majority reasons, can we preserve the authority of States to engage in this practice than by stripping minority citizens of their rights to an equal political process? And with that, the majority as much as invites States to embark on a new round of partisan gerrymanders.” The majority does not dispute this — it’s a damning silence that tacitly admits just how sweeping is this decision.

Quickly responding to the Supreme Court decision was Louisiana’s Republican governor Jeff Landry, as he suspended his state’s US House primaries to allow lawmakers to draw up a new congressional map. No matter that early voting was set to begin, with some absentee ballots already cast, the executive order states that the primaries are “suspended for the duration of the May 16, 2026 and June 27, 2026 election cycles and until July 15, 2026 or until such time as determined by the Legislature,” the legislature then to follow instructions to “pass legislation to enact new congressional maps.” Outraged and alarmed, Joel Payne of MoveOn Civic Action charged that, “Republicans are colluding in broad daylight to try to rig the election and silence Black voters. The MAGA court made their decision to gut voting rights just in the nick of time for Louisiana Republicans to postpone the scheduled primaries to slice and dice voting maps to pick and choose voters of their liking.

Heather Williams, president of the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee said, “Even in ruby red states, Republicans see the writing on the wall that voters will hold them accountable for soaring costs this November, which is why they’re rigging the system to dodge accountability — the mission to transform the landscape of state legislative power has never mattered more.” The Washington Post reported that Governor Landry notified Republican US House candidates that he planned to suspend the Louisiana primaries, with The Post noting that one or two more GOP seats could result in the midterms from his delay. Democracy Docket’s Marc Elias responded by saying, “What is happening in Louisiana right now is both a redistricting power grab and a dry run for authoritarian election subversion this fall.

US House Speaker Mike Johnson voiced support for the new congressional maps, but Landry’s order is already facing legal action from state residents. “These harms are not speculative. They are imminent: early in-person voting commences on Saturday, May 2, 2026. They are irreparable: once an election day passes, no monetary remedy can restore the franchise,” warns one lawsuit. Voting rights group Fair Fight Action analyzed that Democrats could redraw anywhere from 10 to 22 additional congressional seats for their party in time for the 2028 elections if they push hard enough with redistricting in seven blue and swing states. “Democrats have a clear path to neutralize this GOP power grab if they want to take it,” says Max Flugrath, senior communications director of Fair Fight Action. “This is the ‘break the glass in case of emergency’ moment for American democracy.

Twenty-two House seats across seven states may sound like a heavy lift,” says Flugrath, “but our analysis shows it’s well within reach if blue-state governors and legislatures squeeze every potential seat out of the maps. What’s more, much will be decided by how hard Democrats push.” But they are gearing up with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries telling Politico that Democrats will seek gerrymanders at minimum in New YorkColoradoMaryland and Illinois. None of this should have to happen, though Democrats have gerrymandered themselves, but Republicans went full throttle after capturing many state legislatures in their 2010 midterm rout.

The Democrats position has been that neither side should gerrymander, attempting to model an alternative path with independent redistricting commissions, and with federal legislation ending gerrymandering for both sides, believing that it disrespects the opposition’s voters and allows lawmakers to insulate themselves from accountability. But if Republicans make good on their threats, the choice for Democrats will be stark: push forward, or perish. No matter if Republicans don’t like it — this is the world they wanted, and it is now they who are now inflicting it upon their rivals. “The arc of the moral universe doesn’t bend toward justice unless we bend it,” says Bryan Fair of the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Satirical writer, Andy Borowitz, followed up recent news from the English crown with his Borowitz Report: “A visibly shaken Donald J. Trump told reporters on Thursday that the arrest of Andrew Mountbatten of Windsor set a dangerous precedent of pedophiles facing consequences. ‘King Charles released a statement where he said no one is above the law,’ he said. ‘That was a horrible thing to say.’ Calling Andrew’s arrest ‘disgraceful,’ Trump said it had made him ‘rethink the whole idea of becoming king. If you can be a member of the royal family and still get arrested, what’s the point of having a crown?’ he said. ‘You’re better off just having your own Supreme Court.‘”


[Last week’s piece below… ~Webmistress]

MOTIONLESS PICTURE, MINIMIZATION, RUMBLE RUBBLE

The lead up to last Saturday’s White House Correspondents’ Dinner had garnered much commentary by a diverse press corps, many choosing to boycott the event with Donald Trump’s first attendance as president. The decision to abandon the tradition of inviting a comedian to roast the attendees because of the thin-skinned snowflake of a leader, and enlisting mentalist Oz Pearlman for entertainment, prompted Jimmy Kimmel to do his own scathing alternative ceremony on the Thursday preceding the main event. As he explained on his show, his substitute presentation would consist of some jokes and commentary that a comedian might do if “the trembling drama queen who’s scared of comedy” might hear under accepted circumstances. Video footage shows Kimmel standing behind a podium as he delivers quips to an audience full of photoshopped politicians and celebrities, saying, “Look at you, all dressed up in formal wear, dresses, tuxedos. I haven’t seen this much black since every page of the Trump-Epstein Files.” The comedian addresses President Trump with: “I’m happy you decided to stay, Mr. President. And don’t worry if we bruise your ego — it will only make your hands look less disgusting. By the way, in the unfortunate event that our president has a medical emergency tonight, do we have a doctor in the — I mean, I’m sorry. Do we have a Jesus in the house? I always confuse them, too.”

click here to continue (link expands, click again to collapse)

Dale Matlock, a Santa Cruz County resident since 1968, is the former owner of The Print Gallery, a screenprinting establishment. He is an adherent of The George Vermosky school of journalism, and a follower of too many news shows, newspapers, and political publications, and a some-time resident of Moloka’i, Hawaii, U.S.A., serving on the Board of Directors of Kepuhi Beach Resort. Email: cornerspot14@yahoo.com
 

...

Each week, I will feature a selection of interesting and historically significant places in Santa Cruz County from the 1986 edition of Donald Thomas Clark‘s wonderful book, “Santa Cruz County Place Names: A Geographical Dictionary“, published by the Santa Cruz Historical Trust.

   “Nuggets” If I find something topically relevant, but not necessarily directly related to the week’s selection, you’ll see it under the Nuggets heading. Note: for reasons of brevity, sources are usually dropped when I reproduce an entry. You can always email me if you’re curious, or, even better, buy a copy of the book!

Dateline: May 3, 2026

Recently, I talked a little about the prospective town of Folger (one of many prospective real estate development efforts that never fully materialized), named after the San Francisco coffee/business magnate. Santa Cruz also had a local Folger family (no idea if there was a relationship) after which a local canyon in the Watsonville area is informally named. The persistence of informal names like this, long after the original rationale is no longer relevant, fascinates me (see previous entry on Rob Roy Junction for another example). There’s a whole thread of un/barely documented history in these names, passed down from one generation to the next.


What actually caught my attention about this entry was the elided comment about Peter Folger running a local “skating rink”. The idea of late Victorian/early Edwardian Americans zooming around a roller skating rink is irresistibly fascinating to think about, especially being a chid of the 1980s when roller skating was a big thing and rollerblades were invented. Apparently, roller skating was a huge thing in the late 1800s after roller skates became affordable due to mass production. See this article from the London Science Museum, [Wonderful Things: Roller Skates, 1880], for more information on that. The Santa Cruz Public Library has an old article from the Register-Pajaronian, [Skating a long time Watsonville tradition], talking about the history of roller skating rinks in Watsonville dating back to before 1900.

Folger Canyon

According to Jerome Alexander, that canyon shown as unnamed on the Watsonville East Quadrangle (USGS:17) as trending from the summit of the Santa Cruz Mountains in a southwesterly direction immediately to the west of and parallel to Casserly Ridge is known locally as Folger Canyon. Origin undetermined; however, Ed Martin in his 1873 Directory of the Town of Watsonville mentions “Peter Folger [who ran a skating rink at that time] has a snug little farm well improved of 200 acres on the former Rancho Salsipuedes” and the map listed below shows the lands encompassing the gulch were owned in 1908 by Clara Folger.

Thomas Leavitt is the husbandy thing to our illustrious webmistress. A resident of Santa Cruz (now part time) since 1993, his interests include history, technology, and community organizing. He started the world’s first self-service web hosting company, WebCom, located at 903 Pacific in May of 1994. He’s been part of too many community organizations to mention, and ran for City Council in the early aughts.

Email Thomas at ThomLeavitt@gmail.com

...

“Jury Duty”

“Getting out of jury duty is easy. The trick is to say you’re prejudiced against all races.”
~Dan Castellaneta

“Political systems are run by self-selecting politicians. We don’t draft people; it’s not jury duty.”
~P. J. O’Rourke

“I vote and I do jury duty.”
~Christopher Hitchens

“It’s rare to find someone excited over jury duty. If they’re out there, I’ve never met them. Not a one. When the summons for jury duty arrives in the mail, how many people scream, ‘Yes!’ and run to clear the calendar? None. Our first and only reaction is, ‘Oh, no,’ quickly followed by, ‘How can I get out of this?'”
~Regina Brett

“Serving jury duty is a fascinating little slice of life, with its motley crew of personalities.”
~Nina Garcia

A KILLING IN CANNABIS. This is an interview with the author of a book about a murder that took place in Santa Cruz in 2019. The sentence for the last of the perpetrators was just handed out, and, fun fact, my partner Brian was on that Jury for over a month!

If you are interested in the book, here’s a link that lets you buy it, and not on Amazon! (Full disclosure: it’s my shop on Bookshop.org, where you can set up curated book lists and have sales benefit local bookstores.)


COLUMN COMMUNICATIONS. Subscriptions: Subscribe to the Bulletin! You’ll get a weekly email notice as soon as the column goes online. (Anywhere from Monday afternoon through Thursday or sometimes as late as Friday!), and the occasional scoop. Always free and confidential.

Direct questions and comments to webmistress@BrattonOnline.com
(Gunilla Leavitt)

...

Deep Cover

Posted in Weekly Articles | Leave a comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *