Soul Sweets The Dessert House Brings its Boba-Filled World to Scotts Valley

Chase Park defines Soul Sweets The Dessert House as an Asian-style dessert and Boba tea hang-out spot. Following a stint running a Boba shop on the Las Vegas Strip, Park moved to the area and opened a sushi restaurant. But he decided that his heart was in Boba, so he opened Soul Sweets two years ago in Scotts Valley. Their signature Boba teas are fresh-brewed to order, with tapioca pearl flavors like lychee, mango, and pineapple. They also offer popping Boba that explodes with juice in your mouth. It doesn’t stop with Boba. Park serves up a host of wildly unique—and delicious—treats. Favorites include Taiyaki, a Japanese fish-shaped waffle filled with red beans, chocolate and custard, and scratch-made, Asian-style soft-serve ice cream with brown sugar and cookies and cream toppings. Soul Sweets is open daily from noon-8pm. Park spoke about Boba’s rising popularity and customers’ love for the sensory experience he provides.   

Why do you think Boba has become so popular?

CHASE PARK: Because it’s all about fun. It’s not just a drink, because you get to drink and eat at the same time. Boba comes in many different flavors, and the texture is like a soft, chewy fruity-flavored jelly. It also contains less caffeine than coffee, and tea caffeine is different too. And we also have non-caffeinated options as well. I’m a coffee person, but it has a limited variety, and tea just has so many more options and flavors and is much more versatile. 

How does Soul Sweets’ ambience delight the senses?

It’s friendly and welcoming, and when you come in, you smell Taiyaki and juicy fresh fruit and fresh tea scents too. For music, we play K-Pop such as BTS and Black Pink and many others. Visually, it’s very clean with clean tables and counters, and it’s a cute design with bright lights and big TV menus. It’s an open-bar concept where you can see everything we do, and everything is made right in front of the customer. Everything is customizable.

222 Mount Hermon Road, Ste. K, Scotts Valley, 831-454-8172; soulsweets831.com.

Chef Damani Thomas Continues to Elevate Oswald’s Menu

When was the last time you sighed over an appetizer of calamari fritti? Maybe the last time you dined at Oswald. Glistening and surrounded with zesty sauces of aioli, salsa verde and ketchup, these light-as-clouds calamari morsels ($17) began a terrific al fresco dinner at the downtown landmark last Thursday. Diners filled the interior while Melanie and I enjoyed the street sights and sounds from an outdoor table, warmed by heatlamps, as we chose wines from one of the most interesting by-the-glass lists in town. We asked to try a few of the wines, and were brought pours to sample. A light Tornatore Etna Bianco ($14) from Sicily, bearing a lyrical freight of volcanic nuance. A nice big AR Guentota Malbec ($12) made perfect sense with Melanie’s choice of lamb, and a complex Domaine Olivier Hillaire Côtes-du-Rhone married its grenache and syrah ingredients to full effect ($12). I knew it would make a fine partner to the pork dish that I was about to order.

Tanuki cider braised pork belly was encircled by cannellini bean puree and brilliant roasted purple cabbage, the perfect flavor partners to the unctuous and irresistible slab of tender pork ($35). Fork tender, rich with its own surrounding pillow of fat, this is a dish I love and Chef Damani Thomas does it to perfection. I’ll bet some people hear the words “pork belly” and imagine something that’s mostly fat. They would be wrong. The tender shreds of interior meat have been insulated by the white fat as it cooks, much like a confit. The result is incomparably succulent flesh, which one removes from the layer of quilting before consuming.

Melanie chose a beautiful wide bowl of curry braised lamb ($35) on a bed of creamy polenta—a brilliant pairing—and strewn with bits of lemony, garlicky gremolata for even more flavor power. We indulged with baguette and butter. Why not?

At meal’s end, we shared a deeply comforting yet sophisticated dessert of almond custard torte ($14), in which an addictive creamy almond interior was wrapped in a buttery turban of pastry crust, then topped with vanilla ice cream and a scattering of toasted almonds. A small bowl of coffee reduction accompanied the almond creation, which Melanie added to each of her bites. My fork kept attacking the almondy interior of the torte, which tasted like a masterclass in marzipan—only lighter and creamier. Bravo! Oswald, 121 Soquel Ave., Santa Cruz. Open Wed.-Sat. from noon to 3pm, 4-8pm, til 9pm on Fri. and Sat.

High Pie

I popped into the very spiffy new 11th Hour Coffee last week—an utterly transformed Kelly’s—and enjoyed a textbook double macchiato. But not all by itself, because there in the display case was a fresh slice of pumpkin pie, made by Kelly’s, calling my name. Nothing beats pie and coffee on a foggy morning, and the visit gave me time to admire the gleaming, handcrafted interior of 11th Hour, filled with wood and rock-work benches and counter trims, plus botanicals including a ceiling-high fig tree right in the center of the coffeehouse. But seriously, the pie! Always one of the very top pumpkin pies, this one from Kelly’s kitchen was fabulous. Creamy, rich, with balanced spices and tender crust, this is the pumpkin pie you want, and deserve ($4). Go get some immediately. Go more than once. This is pie that gives pie its street cred.

Laili Update!Laili emailed to tell me that the downtown Mediterranean favorite has reopened after its long hiatus, for takeout and delivery only, Wed-Sat 4-8pm. The restaurant dining room and patio will reopen for seating in a few weeks. We have missed Laili’s splendid cuisine and welcome them back. Orders can be placed on the website at lailirestaurant.com.

Capitola Leaders Pen Letter Opposing Draft Assembly Maps

Local representation at the state level could shift based on proposed redistricting maps that would divide Monterey Bay. 

The new maps, released by the California Citizens Redistricting Commission, would split the 29th Assembly District currently overseen by Mark Stone. The northern reaches of Santa Cruz County, including the cities of Santa Cruz and Scotts Valley, the North Coast and the San Lorenzo Valley would be in one district. And Capitola, Live Oak and Rio Del Mar would be in a new district that includes coastal cities as far south as Paso Robles and San Luis Obispo.

The Capitola City Council discussed the proposed maps at a special meeting on Nov. 18. Councilwoman Kristen Petersen said the maps would place Capitola with jurisdictions that face different challenges and concerns than the small coastal city, a move that could pit Capitola’s interests against larger cities.

“When the districts are that big geographically, that means our representatives have a lot more geographic space to consider,” said Peterson. “When it comes to which cities need funding and which cities need their attention, a small city like Capitola will be at a disadvantage.”

Every 10 years, jurisdiction at the local, state and federal levels are redrawn based on census data so that each district has roughly the same population and say in legislation that could affect its residents. The U.S. Congressional, State Senate and State Assembly districts are all currently being redrawn. Originally, Santa Cruz was separated from Monterey Bay’s congressional and state senate districts, but that was rectified on the maps released on Nov. 10.

“Santa Cruz City and Capitola, being in the same county, face a lot of similar issues, and we work to ensure the preservation of the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary,” said Peterson. “We have a great history of working together to address these with our state senators and assembly members and congressional representatives.”

At the special meeting, the Capitola City Council voted to send a letter asking the California Citizens Redistricting Commission to redraw the Assembly districts. The Santa Cruz City Council will be voting to approve a similar letter in opposition to the draft maps at its council meeting this week.

Certification of the new maps is due Dec. 27.

UC Housing Crunch Worsens

By BY RYAN LOYOLA AND  SINDHU ANANTHAVEL, CalMatters

Zarai Saldana expected to kick off her senior year at UC Merced from a brand-new apartment where she’d already signed a lease. Instead, the transfer student spent the first two weeks of the school year shuttling from hotel to hotel. 

Construction delays had held up the opening of Merced Station, the private student apartment complex where she’d planned to live, leaving more than 500 of UC Merced’s 9,000-plus students without housing. 

In hotel rooms paid for by the university, Saldana and her roommate took turns studying or eating on the one desk. With no kitchen, she couldn’t prepare food. And because the hotels had to make room for non-student guests who already had reservations, she said, the university assigned her to three different hotels in a span of 11 days. The constant moving affected her studies.

“I didn’t start off as well as I hoped I would,” she said. “I started falling behind.”

Saldana eventually found a room to rent off campus. But her experience reflects that of thousands of students across the UC system who were eager to return to campus life this fall after a year of online learning during the pandemic and found themselves scrambling to find housing. Unable to secure dorm rooms or afford pricey off-campus apartments, some ended up in unconventional housing — local hotel rooms. 

At least four UC campuses offered a hotel option, providing temporary relief to hundreds of students. But the financial support that went along with them varied from campus to campus. And for many students, finding more permanent, affordable housing remains elusive, even as the end of fall quarter nears.

A long-standing problem

Affordable housing has long been an issue for California’s public universities. In 2020, 16% of UC students lived in hotels, transitional housing or outdoor locations because they didn’t have permanent housing, according to a report from the state’s Legislative Analyst Office. Though the UC system has added about 20,000 more beds across its 10 campuses since the 2015-16 school year, there were still more than 7,500 students on waitlists to get on campus housing during Fall 2021, the LAO found

The pandemic exacerbated UC’s housing crunch. Administrators said uncertainty around whether instruction would be in person or online created a last-minute rush of students applying for housing after those decisions were made. To keep campuses COVID safe, some set aside beds for quarantining students who become infected and lowered density in dorms, meaning fewer beds were available. And in coastal cities like Santa Cruz and Santa Barbara, students found themselves facing housing markets that were transformed by the pandemic. Besides camping out in hotels, some resorted to other extreme measures to counter the high cost of living, including couchsurfing and commuting long distances. 

The UC Merced students who were living in hotels have since moved into apartments or on-campus housing, said Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs Charles Nies. But UC Santa Barbara, UC San Diego and UC Santa Cruz have also turned to hotels to house students.

As of Nov. 16, there were 280 UC Santa Barbara students staying across 10 different hotels contracted by the university, Mario Muñoz, associate director of Residential and Community Living, said during a Nov. 16 town hall meeting. That’s down from roughly 350 earlier in the quarter after some students were able to secure housing elsewhere. 

University officials said that students in hotels are paying $26 per day, the equivalent of a double-occupancy space in university-owned apartments, and the school is covering the remaining $175 per day.

Fifth-year student Sarah Hamidi said she started searching for housing in June, after the university announced it was returning to in-person instruction. But she was put on a waitlist and told that residence halls and apartments were already full. And she couldn’t find housing in the nearby communities of Isla Vista and Goleta. 

One week before school started, Hamidi received an email from the university offering a room at Ramada by Wyndham, and took what she saw as her only option. She commutes to campus by car, cooks some of her meals in an instant pot and orders from DoorDash for the rest.

The housing struggle came on top of an already frustrating end to her college experience. She recently learned she couldn’t finish her chosen major because of a low grade in one class. When she signed the housing contract, she said, she cried. 

“This is my last year at UCSB,” she said. “I couldn’t believe that was my situation.”

UCSB senior Madeline Castro is paying $750 out of pocket per month for a room at the Pacifica Suites. She has her own space with a king-sized bed, a little mini fridge and microwave, and a desk, but says she finds herself feeling lonely. 

“The whole point of coming to college is to have the roommate and fun experience, right?” Castro said. 

Initially, students faced a December deadline to either find housing elsewhere or pay the hotel price on their own. Castro said she was having trouble saving for a deposit, and searching for a place in Santa Barbara’s punishing housing market left her “super stressed.”

The plight of students in hotels became a rallying point for Food Not Bombs, a local mutual aid collective, which organized a Nov. 5 rally calling on the university to extend the hotel contracts. Hundreds of students attended, spurred by backlash against a campus housing proposal dubbed “Dormzilla” in press reports and social media.The proposed 4,500-bed building, Munger Hall, has been criticized for its design, which includes windowless dorm rooms. 

At the Nov. 16 town hall, Muñoz said the university is planning to extend hotel contracts into the winter quarter for those who need them. 

“At this point, we are looking to prioritize moving the students who are in hotels into campus housing. Our intent is that anyone who is currently in a hotel will receive an offer of either campus housing or an extended hotel contract into the winter quarter,” Muñoz said. 

While UC Santa Barbara is subsidizing the cost of hotel rooms for students, and UC Merced paid the entire bill plus shuttle service and grocery store cards, students who resort to hotel living at UC San Diego must pay their own way.

Four Marriott hotels near La Jolla offer UCSD students discounted rates for long-term stays, and a university spokesperson estimated about 20 students were staying there. 

For example, students can book a room at the Residence Inn San Diego Del Mar for $169 per night. But even that discounted rate works out to about $5,000 per month. UCSD spokesperson Leslie Sepuka said the university does not pay students’ hotel bills, but they can apply for a one-time subsidy to cover part of the cost through the school’s Basic Needs Hub. 

While hotels might be nice for the amenities, they’re not a feasible option for low-income students and those who don’t get financial support from their families, said UCSD sophomore Kida Bradley. 

“It’s like putting a Band-Aid on a bullet wound,” Bradley said. Instead, she and another student involved in UCSD’s student government drafted a proposal to administrators calling on them to provide more on-campus emergency housing and allow couch-surfing in dorms.

UC Santa Cruz is also using 60 rooms at a local Best Western to house graduate students.  

The monthly rate of $2,700 includes continental breakfast. Students pay what traditional on-campus graduate student housing costs — $1,247 a month — while the university subsidizes the rest. Like other students housed in hotels, the graduate students have nowhere to cook meals.

Rojina Bozorgnia, a UCSC senior and vice president of external affairs of the Student Union Assembly, said the hotel is a good option for students who currently can’t find housing, but it’s not a long-term solution. 

“It’s not really a sustainable way to deal with the housing crisis,” Bozorgnia said. “It’s a very short-term solution to a problem that we haven’t addressed in a long-term fashion.”

University of California Student Association chair Josh Lewis said that this year’s student housing crisis is unprecedented. Students left communities during the pandemic, Lewis said, and landlords took on new tenants.

“Those landlords [are] now trying to take predatory approaches to recovering from COVID by drastically upping rent as rent protections are ending in some of our UC campus cities,” he said.

California lawmakers are looking for solutions. They committed $500 million to student housing in this year’s state budget  — a figure that experts say pales in comparison to the need. 

An Assembly subcommittee on education finance recently held a hearing to discuss how the state can further support California’s public colleges and universities to build affordable student housing. Assemblymember Kevin McCarty (D-Sacramento), the subcommittee’s chairman, said most college administrators have told him they want to create more campus housing because it’s a low-risk business proposition with a captive market: students.

“If you build it, they will literally come, because they’re there anyway,” McCarty said. 

But campuses’ concerns about taking on too much debt, environmental regulations and community opposition have all contributed to slowing the pace of construction. UC officials have advocated for lawmakers to create a permanent revolving loan fund with zero percent interest that colleges can borrow from.

In the meantime, Hamidi, the UC Santa Barbara student, is still unsure of her plans for the rest of the school year. She’s applied for university housing for winter quarter. She said if she doesn’t receive a contract, she’ll continue to stay in a hotel.

For Castro, winter quarter looks more promising. She recently secured a spot in the university apartments off campus, after being put on a priority list. But she’s aware that many of her fellow students are still unhoused.

“I feel relieved now, but not everyone has that,” she said.

Loyola and Ananthavel are fellows with the CalMatters College Journalism Network, a collaboration between CalMatters and student journalists from across California. Marnette Federis contributed reporting. This story and other higher education coverage are supported by the College Futures Foundation.

Watsonville Redistricting Committee Probes Maps, Incumbency Rules

WATSONVILLE—The Watsonville Community Redistricting Advisory Committee is closing in on its final recommendations to the Watsonville City Council for how the city’s district lines should be redrawn.

Every decade following the release of census data, jurisdictions must adjust their district lines to account for possible shifts in population from one area to another. This is done to ensure that all elected districts and communities remain as equally represented as possible in local government.

In Watsonville’s case, that means that the boundaries of the city’s seven districts could shift as the City Council tries to account for the changes the city has undergone since 2011, and the possible growth it will see in the near future.

The committee, a seven-member group appointed by the City Council that since September has met in public sessions, is tasked with poring over census data to determine how communities of interest—a group of residents with a common set of concerns that may be affected by legislation—can best be represented over the next 10 years. It must also try to balance the city’s population between districts.

The committee on Thursday saw the first set of draft maps created by a third-party demographer and has two more meetings—Nov. 30 and Dec. 9—to determine its final recommendations.

Proposed plans

Five plans were presented to the committee Thursday.

Three maps were prepared by demographer Michael Wagaman based on the committee’s requests from previous meetings, and two maps were submitted to the committee.

One of the submitted maps is from committee member Maria Isabel Rodriguez, who was appointed by City Councilman Francisco “Paco” Estrada. The other submitted map came from City Councilman Lowell Hurst, though his plan is largely incomplete and only asks for changes to District 3, which he currently oversees.

Rodriguez’s map proposes massive shifts in every district. It prioritizes unifying communities of interest under one district such as some Clifford Avenue apartment complexes and the suburban communities off of Ohlone Parkway. Her plan, she said, would move Landmark Elementary School from District 1 into District 4, making sure that every district had an elementary school.

A big concession of her plan, she admits, would be Pajaro Valley High School moving from District 4 to District 3. Rodriguez, who teaches U.S. Government at PVHS and lives in District 4, said that move is necessary to empower communities of interest. 

“When I think about gerrymandering, I look at the map of Watsonville and I say, ‘you want to understand what gerrymandering is? Look at the shapes of this map,’” Rodriguez said in an interview after the meeting. “I just think, ‘who drew these maps? And for what purpose?’”

The committee spent much of its time trying to make small changes to the so-called “Green Plan,” a map prepared by Wagaman that proposes small changes and aims to keep populations between districts as equal as possible.

Most on the committee said that making minimal changes in this decade’s redistricting would be best because of a possible undercount in last year’s census, which experts say was largely impacted by the pandemic and rhetoric from the Trump administration.

Toward the end of the discussion, Rodriguez questioned the committee’s overall goal. Was it to keep populations of the districts relatively equal, address concerns about communities of interests brought forth to the committee or take into account the possible undercounts in various districts? 

Committee member Felipe Hernandez said that the group’s role was to weigh all three factors equally, while considering that last year’s census data might not be accurate, especially in District 1 and 2, which have traditionally been difficult to count.

“People are thinking, ‘let’s count the numbers right 10 years from now,’” Hernandez said. “I think that’s where the thought comes from [to keep] status quo.”

After the meeting, Rodriguez said that she believes every district was undercounted during the census, and that the committee should not be afraid of moving around the lines to protect and unite communities of interest that are currently split between two districts.

“I just feel like it’s OK if we redraw the district,” she said. “We don’t have to maintain the status quo, and we can still maintain a [population distribution] that’s respectable.”

Incumbency policy 

Rodriguez’s map also sparked a discussion among the committee about whether incumbency can be a consideration for the group while determining its recommendations. Hernandez, a former District 1 City Councilman, said that Rodriguez’s proposed changes would move his successor, Eduardo Montesino, out of the district.

“I don’t know if it’s an issue to take a councilmember out of their district,” Hernandez asked.

Wagaman said that he has not yet accessed data regarding City Councilmembers’ residencies, so the possible move of a councilmember from one district to another has not been factored into the proposed maps.

Special counsel Tom Willis said that, according to Assembly Bill 849, also known as the FAIR MAPS Act, a councilmember who is moved out of their district during redistricting will have the ability to finish out their term. Alternatively, they can also run for office in their new district if that seat opens before the end of their term.

As Hernandez continued to ask about how redistricting could affect upcoming Watsonville City Council elections, committee chair Daniel Dodge, Sr. interjected to bring the conversation back to what is allowed under the FAIR MAPs Act and Watsonville’s charter. 

“I want to be able to keep the meeting focused on the facts and the details so we don’t get in all hypotheticals that might appear in the Pajaronian or something,” Dodge said, drawing chuckles from his fellow committee members.

Public participation 

Only four people talked during the public comment portion of Thursday’s meeting, and two of them were City Councilmembers: Rebecca Garcia and Hurst. 

Dodge in an interview after the meeting said that low turnout has been the case at the committee’s three previous gatherings, including forums in October at Ann Soldo and Starlight elementary schools.

“I’ve never seen, across the board, less participation from groups in the redistricting process, and by that I mean community groups,” Dodge said. “It’s rather scary because this is an opportunity to look at things … When you have councilmembers that are the only ones that are making comments at these meetings, then you have to assume that maybe a great shakeup of the way we do things, maybe it’s not the right time.”

Garcia during public comment peppered Wagaman and Willis with questions, including one inquiry about whether they had data on registered voters per district.

Wagaman said that he did have data on registered voters in each district, but that he has not looked at that data during this process and he would only bring it forward if asked by the committee.

“I would like to have that data,” Garcia said.

Pedro Castillo, a community activist and UC Santa Cruz professor of history emeritus, asked whether voter turnout would be considered a criterion in the redistricting process. 

“It’s just about equal population. It says nothing about equal voters and who votes and who doesn’t right?” Castillo asked. “So in one district they can have 5,000 registered voters and another district it can have 200, but that’s not a criteria, correct?”

Answered Wagaman: “Correct, it’s not one of the specified criteria under state, federal or your local ordinance.”

Garcia clarified that she only wanted to see the data and not for it to be considered by the committee as a factor for their decision-making.

“I would just like the information,” she said after a back and forth with Castillo.


To see the current draft maps, contact the committee or submit a draft map, visit cityofwatsonville.org/2193/Redistricting.

METRO CEO Alex Clifford Announces Departure

Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District (METRO) CEO Alex Clifford on Friday announced that he is leaving the agency effective Jan. 21.

Clifford will be CEO of the San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD), he announced.

The announcement came six months after the METRO Board of Directors approved a three-year contract extension and a salary increase for Clifford.

Clifford says he was not looking to leave METRO when a recruiter from the Stockton-based agency contacted him. He says he liked the terms of the contract they offered.

“I’ve had a great stay here for over seven and a half years,” he says. “I’m really excited about the many things the board, the staff and I have been able to accomplish. We’ve done some really great things, and I have a lot of pride in being associated with this agency.”

Since Clifford started with METRO, he helped resolve a $6.3 million structural deficit that had the agency fretting about possible bankruptcy.

He also touted the completion of the Judy K. Souza Operations building, and the upgrades to the METRO service Center in Santa Cruz, and upgrades to the transit center in Watsonville.

METRO has also launched the agency’s first zero-emissions electric bus service under Clifford’s leadership, with plans to increase the number of busses. It has also passed Measure D and replaced 32 out of 68 aging busses.

All of the accomplishments Clifford touted, he says, came thanks to his “dream team leadership team.”

“I will very much miss them,” he says.

The announcement came as a surprise to the Board of Directors, who spoke glowingly of Clifford.

“I’m deeply saddened that we’re losing Alex Clifford as CEO,” said Director Bruce McPherson, also a Santa Cruz County Supervisor. “He’s done a phenomenal job for the past seven years.”

Director Jimmy Dutra, also Watsonville’s mayor, praised Clifford for his ability to improve the agency’s finances.

“We were in really bad shape,” he said. “But through your leadership, which a lot of times people weren’t happy with because of the tough decisions you have to make as a leader, you were able to get us into the strong position we are today.”

Director Mike Rotkin said that Clifford managed to improve METRO, despite flagging support for public transportation.

“(The deficit) seemed impossible to overcome,” he said.  “That’s due to Alex’s knowledge of this industry and the ability to make these things happen in a way that really serves the public.”

Clifford’s time with METRO was not without controversy. His contract extension in May was opposed by two unions—Sheet Metal Air Rail Transportation (SMART) and Service Employees International Union (SEIU)—whose members cited what they said was Clifford’s unwillingness to work with the unions. Clifford says his decision to leave was not influenced by these assertions, or on any contract concerns.

The RTD Board of Directors unanimously approved Clifford’s appointment on Nov. 19.

Clifford says that part of his goals with the new agency will be to develop its system of zero-emission busses.

House Narrowly Passes Biden’s Social Safety Net and Climate Bill

By Emily Cochrane and Jonathan Weisman, The New York Times

WASHINGTON — The House on Friday narrowly passed the centerpiece of President Joe Biden’s domestic agenda, approving $2 trillion in spending over the next decade to battle climate change, expand health care and reweave the nation’s social safety net, over the unanimous opposition of Republicans.

The bill’s passage, 220-213, came after weeks of cajoling, arm-twisting and legislative legerdemain by Democrats. It was capped off by an exhausting, circuitous and record-breaking speech of more than eight hours by the House Republican leader, Rep. Kevin McCarthy of California, that pushed a planned Thursday vote past midnight, then delayed it to Friday morning — but did nothing to dent Democratic unity.

Groggy lawmakers reassembled at 8 a.m., three hours after McCarthy finally abandoned the floor, to begin the final series of votes to send one of the most consequential pieces of legislation in half a century to the Senate.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi opened the final push with what she called “a courtesy to” her colleagues: “I will be brief.” She then put the House’s actions in lofty terms.

“Under this dome, for centuries, members of Congress have stood exactly where we stand to pass legislation of extraordinary consequence in our nation’s history and for our nation’s future,” she said, adding, the act “will be the pillar of health and financial security in America.”

The bill still has a long and difficult road ahead. Democratic leaders must coax it through the 50-50 Senate and navigate a tortuous budget process that is almost certain to reshape the measure and force it back to the House — if it passes at all.

But even pared back from the $3.5 trillion plan that Biden originally sought, the legislation could prove as transformative as any since the Great Society and War on Poverty in the 1960s, especially for young families and older Americans. The Congressional Budget Office published an official cost estimate Thursday afternoon that found the package would increase the federal budget deficit by $160 billion over 10 years.

The assessment indicated that the package overall would cost slightly more than Biden’s latest proposal — $2.1 trillion rather than $1.85 trillion.

It offers universal prekindergarten, generous subsidies for child care that extend well into the middle class, expanded financial aid for college, hundreds of billions of dollars in housing support, home and community care for older Americans, a new hearing benefit for Medicare and price controls for prescription drugs.

More than half a trillion dollars would go toward shifting the U.S. economy away from fossil fuels to renewable energy and electric cars, the largest investment ever to slow the warming of the planet. The package would largely be paid for with tax increases on high earners and corporations, estimated to bring in nearly $1.5 trillion over 10 years.

Savings in government spending on prescription drugs were projected to bring in another $260 billion, although a scaled-back measure to allow Medicare to negotiate drug prices for some medications was estimated to save only $79 billion, far less than the Democrats’ original $456 billion proposal would have.

“This bill will be transformational, and it will be measured in the deeper sense of hope that Americans will have when they see their economy working for them instead of holding them back,” Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Md., the House majority leader, said Thursday during what was supposed to the closing debate.

The fact that the bill could slightly add to the federal deficit did not dissuade House Democrats from proceeding to vote for it, in part because the analysis boiled down to a dispute over a single line item: how much the IRS would collect by cracking down on people and companies that dodge large tax bills.

The budget office predicted that beefing up the IRS with an additional $80 billion of funding would bring in just $127 billion over 10 years on net. That is far less than the $400 billion the White House estimates it would bring in over a decade, both through enforcement actions and by essentially scaring tax cheats into paying what they owe.

The legislation is moving through Congress under special rules known as reconciliation that shield it from a filibuster, allowing Democrats to push it through over unified Republican opposition in the Senate.

It is a key piece of Biden’s domestic policy agenda, paired with a $1 trillion infrastructure package the president signed into law this week. Its path to Friday’s vote was arduous, from midsummer to deep autumn, with negotiations pitting liberal lawmakers against centrists and House Democrats against senators.

Democrats in the Senate and House had hoped to reach agreement on a final bill before either chamber voted, but that plan was ditched weeks ago amid persistent infighting.

And from the beginning, Republicans — who made it clear they could never support a package of the scope and ambition Biden had proposed — were cut out of the reconciliation talks. While some Republicans voted for the infrastructure measure, they unanimously opposed the expansive social safety net package, arguing that it would constitute a “socialist” encroachment of the federal government into every aspect of American life, and would exacerbate rising costs across the country.

McCarthy, the minority leader, took advantage of the House’s so-called “magic minute” — a custom that allows leaders to speak without time constraints when they are granted their minute of floor time.

He held the floor well into Friday morning, railing for more than eight hours against the bill and the Biden administration, breaking the record for the longest consecutive House speech set by Pelosi in 2018 before he concluded at 5:10 a.m. Some Democrats pointedly walked out before he began to speak, and at times interrupted his speech against the bill with boos, heckles and jeers.

“Every page of all this new Washington spending shows just how irresponsible and out of touch the Democrats are to the challenges that America faces today,” McCarthy said during his diatribe, which appeared designed more to rally his Republican base behind a message for the midterm elections in a debate that had been scheduled to last just 20 minutes.

But just hours later, Democrats filed into the chamber, joking about the lack of sleep. And if Democrats feared the political consequences, it was not evident from the final tally, which reflected support among those from the most competitive districts.

The only Democrat who opposed the bill, Rep. Jared Golden of Maine, did so after raising concerns this month about the inclusion of a provision that would generously increase the federal tax deduction for state and local taxes paid, from $10,000 a year to $80,000.

The action — after months of time-consuming maneuvering over the bill — was fueled in part by an eagerness among lawmakers to wrap up their work and leave Washington for their weeklong Thanksgiving recess. It came about eight months after Biden unveiled the first part of his domestic policy agenda, and after several near-death experiences for the package that have exposed deep divisions within his party.

The vote showed remarkable Democratic unity, given the struggle to get to it. A group of moderate and conservative holdouts, wary about the size of the bill, had held out for an official estimate before they would commit to supporting it.

But after the release Thursday of section-by-section assessments from the Congressional Budget Office, the official fiscal scorekeeper, most were swayed. White House officials met privately with the group Thursday evening to walk them through the administration’s analysis and the budget tables, according to a person familiar with the discussion.

“While I continue to have reservations about the overall size of the legislation — and concerns about certain policy provisions that are extraneous or unwise — I believe there are too many badly needed investments in this bill not to advance it in the legislative process,” Rep. Stephanie Murphy, D-Fla., a key centrist, said in a statement announcing her vote.

For Democrats, the bill is perhaps the last significant opportunity to push through their domestic policy ambitions: an array of environmental provisions, federal support for education and child care, and the fulfillment of a longtime campaign promise to tackle the soaring cost of prescription drugs.

“Now, it’s going to be just telling our story — that’s the challenge,” said Rep. Richard E. Neal, D-Mass., the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, as staff carried fresh cups of coffee into his ceremonial office. “We’ve got make sure that people understand which party came through, and we really did.”

The legislation is all but guaranteed to change in the Senate, where two Democratic centrists, Sens. Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, have yet to explicitly endorse it. In an evenly divided Senate, a single defection could sink its passage, and Democrats will have to maneuver the bill through their own internal divisions and a rapid-fire series of politically difficult amendments that could upend the bill.

Democrats must also ensure that the entire plan adheres to the strict rules that govern the reconciliation process and force the removal of any provision that does not have a direct fiscal effect. Those rules have already forced the party to abandon a plan to provide a path to citizenship in the bill for immigrants in the country illegally.

The Senate parliamentarian, the arbiter of those rules, has yet to issue guidance for their latest proposal to provide temporary protection from deportation for millions of migrants who are long-term residents of the United States.

Other elements of the plan may also shift because of objections from individual senators. Manchin, in particular, has raised a variety of concerns, including to four weeks of federal paid family and medical leave and a push to include a fee on emissions of methane, a powerful pollutant.

And Sens. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., who is chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, and Michael Bennet, D-Colo., have rejected a House provision to generously increase the federal tax deduction for state and local taxes paid, which would primarily benefit wealthy homeowners who itemize their deductions. Instead, they and other senators are discussing an income limit to curtail who could take advantage of the increased deduction.

The provision would raise a cap imposed by Republicans in their 2017 tax law, which Democrats from high-tax states like New York, California and New Jersey, have denounced as punitive for their constituents. While some Democrats have publicly complained about its inclusion, several lawmakers in the New York and New Jersey delegations had established it as a requirement for their votes.

Democratic leaders have suggested that the Senate would move to pass the legislation before the end of the year, despite a number of other pressing fiscal deadlines piling up in December.

This article originally appeared in The New York Times.

Ag Commissioner Releases Annual Crop Report

SANTA CRUZ COUNTYThe 2020 Crop Report for the County of Santa Cruz has been released, detailing the region’s agricultural commodities during one of the most challenging years on record.

The Crop Report is presented each year by Agricultural Commissioner Juan Hidalgo through the Department of Weights and Measures, in accordance with the provisions of Section 2279 of the California Food and Agricultural Code. It represents estimated acreage, yield and gross values of products grown in Santa Cruz County. 

The total gross production value of Santa Cruz County agricultural commodities for 2020 was $636,032,000, representing an increase of 1.7% from 2019. Gross production yield and value is influenced by factors such as weather, labor and the marketplace. 

A number of issues influenced local agriculture in 2020, from Covid-19 to unusually hot temperatures and devastating wildfires. 

“At the start of the pandemic, we really didn’t know where things would go,” Hidalgo said. “We weren’t sure what to expect.”

Berries once again came out on top, with strawberries remaining the number one crop in Santa Cruz County despite a slow kickoff at the start of the pandemic. Strawberries’ estimated value was about $193,911,000, with raspberries trailing at $139,934,000. Berries saw an overall increase of 6.4% compared to 2019, representing 60% of total gross production.

“We were really surprised and happy to see that the losses in our industry were minimized, to a certain extent,” Hidalgo said. “Berries increased and veggies did OK, too. To be able to see an increase in any way during a pandemic is a very good thing.”

Returns from vegetable crops were only slightly less than in 2019, with an overall value of $89,462,000 compared to $94,636,000. Lettuce crops led the rest at $25,357,000.

Vegetable production was stabilized in part by consumers buying more directly to cook at home, Hidalgo said, instead of going out to eat at restaurants.

“There was a definite transition from most leafy veggies grown for restaurants shifting to retail,” he said. “We were glad to see a lot of support from the community; they supported local agriculture. Plus, federal and state funding made a big difference.”

Areas that did not fare well were cut flowers and greens. Hidalgo says this is mostly due to events such as graduations, weddings and memorial services being canceled. Apple production was severely impacted by the late summer/early autumn 2020 heat waves, with close to 50% losses. Wine grapes suffered due to smoke taint and some burning from various wildfires, including the CZU Lightning Complex in the Santa Cruz Mountains.

According to Hidalgo, it is estimated by Cal Fire that about 80,000 acres of timber also burned—including large swaths of Christmas tree farms—equalling to about $345 million losses to the industry.

“It is a loss that will be felt for decades to come,” Hidalgo explained, “since only [a certain] amount of timber can be harvested every year.”

In a press release sent out with the report, the commissioner emphasized that the figures presented in the report do not include costs such as labor, land preparation, irrigation, pest management, transportation, cooling, marketing, equipment, regulatory costs or individual operation losses. 

They also do not reflect the total contribution of agriculture to the county—farm employment and other services add “significant value and benefits to the local economy.”

“It’s so important to recognize our ag workers and growers in the area,” Hidalgo said. “They really saved our communities. They stepped up. They were essential workers from the beginning; without them our community would have been in a much worse situation. We honor their tremendous efforts and sacrifice in these scary and challenging times.”

Judge Temporarily Halts Pajaro Levee Cleanup

[This story has been updated from an earlier version. — Editor]

PAJARO—A federal judge has granted a temporary restraining order filed by an attorney representing dozens of people living in the Pajaro River levee against a planned cleanup organized by Monterey County officials.

Anthony Prince, general counsel for the California Homeless Union/Statewide Organizing Council, on Wednesday morning filed the injunction in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. 

The motion claims the planned cleanup of the levee at the border of Monterey and Santa Cruz counties poses a “heightened risk of great bodily harm to hundreds of unhoused men and women,” and that officials have not provided alternative shelter to the people who they are asking to leave the riverbed.

Prince, who represented the people living in Santa Cruz’s San Lorenzo Park in a federal lawsuit against the city of Santa Cruz that was dissolved earlier this year, in an email on Wednesday said the case has been assigned to Magistrate Judge Susan van Keulen. 

He said Thursday morning that a hearing was scheduled for Monday, and that all work at the levee must halt until then. 

Monterey County Sheriff’s Chief Deputy John Thornburg said that all work stopped Thursday after they were told the temporary restraining order was granted.

Monike Tone, a plaintiff in the injunction and the president of the Pajaro/Watsonville Homeless Union, said that the people staying at the levee received notice on Nov. 10 that they had to vacate the area before 8am Wednesday, when the cleanup of the levee organized by the Monterey County Water Resources Agency would begin.

Tone patrolled the area on a bike on Wednesday morning as about eight Monterey County Sheriff’s patrol cars accompanied a handful of vehicles from a landscaping company contracted for the three-day job.

There were about a half-dozen people that were protesting the cleanups at various locations along the levee.

Four people were arrested Wednesday, including three who were dressed in black from head to toe. They were taken into custody for obstructing and delaying a peace officer after they stood in the way of patrol cars trying to access the levee. They were transported to Monterey County Jail where they would likely be booked and released, Thornburg said.

They were not among the people who were staying in the levee, Thornburg said.

As workers moved through the levee removing the encampments on the riverbed, people from Cal State Monterey Bay’s Center for Community Health Engagement (CSUMB CHE) raced from camp to camp to provide the people in the levee with storage containers for their belongings.

They also offered them a voucher for a stay at a Monterey County hotel to help them transition into a possible permanent housing option, says Josh Stratton, a representative from Monterey County 2nd District Supervisor John Phillips’ office. 

Stratton, who was helping hand out the storage containers Wednesday, said that CSUMB CHE employees had conducted outreach to the people in the levee leading up to the cleanup. 

“We didn’t want to show up today and say ‘you have to leave,’” Stratton said. “People have been given notice. Whether they feel like they’ve been given adequate notice is a subjective opinion, but we have given notice [and] we provided assistance.”

But Tone said that the assistance provided by the county would ultimately not help people staying in the levee find long-term housing. The hotel vouchers the county gives out, she says, only house people for about two weeks, and many of the service providers included in an informational packet handed to people in the levee are at capacity.

Because of this, Tone argued, the county cannot evict the people staying in the levee under Martin vs. Boise, a case in which the U.S. Ninth District Court of Appeals ruled in 2018 that outdoor camping in public spaces cannot be criminalized unless the individuals are given an alternative shelter option.

“This isn’t a cleanup,” she said. “It’s a clean-out.”

But Thornburg on Wednesday said the county was in compliance with that court case thanks to agreements with at least two hotels that provide shelter for people experiencing homelessness.

“It might not be a house down on Main Street but it’s a place to go. [We also provide] all the assistance and put people in contact with all the people that can help those that want [help],” Thornburg said. “That’s probably one of the keys, is they have to want the help as well. We are doing the best we can. Unfortunately, sometimes when we come down here it looks like we’re the bad guy here.”

Stratton says that the cleanups are essential to maintaining the levee to prevent possible flooding—a chronic issue that has for decades plagued Pajaro and Watsonville and devastated those communities. He also said that, on top of polluting the waterway and creating wildfire hazards, people staying there have dug “significant” holes into the levee that could ultimately compromise it.

“The last thing we want to do is have [the levee] fail,” Stratton said. “We have to do this. This is a life and safety public health issue … hopefully, people will realize that this isn’t the proper place to set up camp and to dig holes.”

Pajaro Valley High Teachers to File Staff Shortage Complaint

WATSONVILLE—A group of teachers from Pajaro Valley High School is planning to file a complaint with their school, citing an ongoing teacher shortage they say causes a threat to student health and safety and makes their jobs untenable.

The teachers filing the Williams complaints say the shortage—they say there are nine unfilled positions while the district claims the number is seven—has left many students without a permanent teacher. Several students whose classes don’t have a teacher simply go to the cafeteria or the library, where they are monitored by a staff member.

Teachers who spoke publicly during Wednesday’s Pajaro Valley Unified School District meeting said that many students are frequently seen wandering aimlessly during class time.

The district has a shortage of 20 teachers, with the majority heaped on Pajaro Valley and Watsonville high schools at eight each, says Pajaro Valley Federation of Teachers President Nelly Vaquera-Boggs. 

“These are students in the final years of public education and do not have a teacher of record,” she said.

Williams complaints stem from a 2000 class-action lawsuit, in which Eliezer Williams on behalf of 100 students in San Francisco County sued the State of California and the state’s Department of Education. The suit alleged that the agencies did not provide adequate instructional materials, qualified teachers and safe facilities.

The resultant Williams settlement legislation mandates that school districts must annually submit to inspections of their facilities and availability of textbooks and instructional materials that align to current standards, as well as a number of teacher misassignments and vacant teacher positions.

In the district’s annual Williams report on Wednesday, an investigation of PVHS by four committee members from the Santa Cruz County Office of Education (COE) shows that the school was short seven teachers. That information, the report shows, has been sent to the COE. A representative from that office did not respond to a request for comment by press time.

Vaquera-Boggs says that the district is trying to recruit teachers, but added that such efforts are stymied by what she and other teachers say is low pay compared to surrounding districts of similar size.

“So the district has not had any luck filling the vacancies we have,” she said. 

PVFT and PVUSD are in contract negotiations for the current 2021-22 school year. They will discuss subsequent years in future negotiations.

Vaquera-Boggs expressed concern that PVUSD has “sunshined” teachers’ health and welfare benefits for the ongoing negotiations, meaning that district officials plan to bring that item to the bargaining table.

“We’re working with the district on trying to be proactive, and for us, we believe that part of that is ensuring that our salary and our total comp package is a viable and attractive package for potential applicants,” she said. “It’s very disheartening that the district would not fully want to negotiate salaries, that they want to focus on attacking our health benefits.”

PVHS social studies and history teacher Sandino Gomez says that the school’s most dire issue is staffing, which he says stems from inadequate pay.

“If we’re not investing in the teachers that are teaching our students how can we expect our students to succeed,” he said.

Gomez acknowledges that the district offers a good medical benefit plan, but said that should not be used as a bargaining chip in negotiations.

“That shouldn’t be used as a justification to not have adequate salaries, because health care benefits do not pay the bills, they don’t put food on the table and they don’t pay the rent,” he said. 

Once the district has received the complaints, it must address the concerns, says PVUSD Assistant Superintendent of Human Resources Alison Niizawa.

This can mean either an immediate solution, or evidence that one is being sought, she says. 

For the staffing shortage, for example, the district can show that it is actively trying to recruit teachers. For book shortages, the district can show that it has ordered the books, Niizawa said.

“We look at what’s feasible for the district to do and we offer a response,” she said. “(The teacher shortage) is challenging nationwide. It’s definitely not for lack of trying.

“We have to show we are doing our due diligence to correct things that are brought to our attention.”

Soul Sweets The Dessert House Brings its Boba-Filled World to Scotts Valley

Owner/Boba aficionado Chase Park’s goal is to offer customers a multi-sensory experience

Chef Damani Thomas Continues to Elevate Oswald’s Menu

oswald's santa cruz
Plus, 11th Hour Coffee’s debut, Kelly’s unmatchable pumpkin pie and Laili reopens

Capitola Leaders Pen Letter Opposing Draft Assembly Maps

The new maps, released by the California Citizens Redistricting Commission, would split the 29th Assembly District currently overseen by Mark Stone

UC Housing Crunch Worsens

Uncertainty around whether instruction would be in person or online created a last-minute rush of students applying for housing

Watsonville Redistricting Committee Probes Maps, Incumbency Rules

Watsonville Community Redistricting Advisory Committee is closing in on its final recommendations to the Watsonville City Council for how the city’s district lines should be redrawn

METRO CEO Alex Clifford Announces Departure

Clifford's announcement comes six months after the METRO Board of Directors approve a three-year contract extension and a salary increase

House Narrowly Passes Biden’s Social Safety Net and Climate Bill

Over the next decade, $2 trillion will be used to battle climate change, expand health care and reweave the nation’s social safety net

Ag Commissioner Releases Annual Crop Report

The 2020 Crop Report for the County of Santa Cruz details the region’s agricultural commodities during one of the most challenging years on record

Judge Temporarily Halts Pajaro Levee Cleanup

Anthony Prince, general counsel for the California Homeless Union/Statewide Organizing Council, filed an injunction with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

Pajaro Valley High Teachers to File Staff Shortage Complaint

They say the ongoing teacher shortage is a threat to student health and safety and makes their jobs untenable
17,623FansLike
8,845FollowersFollow