California
Another California county declares racism a public health crisis
FILE ART- A scultpure in Santa Rosa. (Photo by George Rose/Getty Images)
SANTA ROSA, Calif. – Racism is a public health crisis.
That was the resolution passed Tuesday by the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors, which joined dozens of other California jurisdictions, and hundreds nationwide, in declaring racism responsible for disparities in access to health care and worse health outcomes for Black and other underrepresented Americans compared to white Americans.
The resolution also outlined steps to take to combat the crisis. It comes roughly four years after the COVID-19 pandemic brought to light multiple health disparities in the United States and across the Bay Area, and nearly four years to the day of the killing of Breonna Taylor by police officers in Louisville, Kentucky.
Several high-profile killings that year of Black Americans by police officers, including Taylor, Ahmaud Arbery in Georgia and George Floyd in Minnesota brought attention to health outcomes influenced by structural and institutional racism, including racial profiling in multiple areas of American life that impact physical and mental health and can shorten lives.
A 2016 study from the peer-reviewed medical journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America showed that white medical students still believe racist myths about Black patients, including believing they feel less pain and have other biological differences that they do not.
A more recent study from researchers at the Stanford University School of Medicine showed that disparities in rates of hypertension, pre-eclampsia and anemia were the result of bias in the medical community. Even when education and economic status are equal, Black Americans receive better health care when being treated by a Black medical professional because of bias from white medical professionals, according to the study.
In Sonoma County, the county’s health department zeroed in on the fact that Black residents have an average lifespan at birth of 10 years less than white county residents, among other disparities.
Supervisors passed the resolution unanimously after an impassioned and at times emotional speech from Health Services Director Tina Rivera. She noted during her presentation that she was the only Black person who was the head of a county department, which made the effort more challenging.
She said living and working in Sonoma County as a Black woman was “extremely difficult.”
“This is probably the single most important presentation I make before you today,” Rivera told the board. “Because this is not just a presentation. I believe it’s a call to action.”
Following the presentation, three angry, aggrieved white men spoke separately during the public comment period, denouncing the resolution and the county’s anti-racism efforts to improve its health care system. Supervisor Chris Coursey said the men helped prove why the resolution was needed.
Rivera, during her presentation, said silence in the face of this challenge would not serve the county’s goals of implementing antiracist policies to reduce harm from institutional racism.
“Today I stand with those who have felt ignored and erased and abandoned and abused. And I stand with those who, like me, have suffered discrimination, microaggressions, bigotry, physical, mental and emotional harm,” Rivera said.
Besides informing the board that Black Sonoma County residents live an average of 71 years, compared to white residents, who have a life expectancy of 81.6 years from birth, the presentation included data from the 2021 Portrait of Sonoma County report that spotlighted multiple disparities.
Among them, it said that over 13% of Latino adults and over 10% of Native American adults living in Sonoma County have at least a bachelor’s degree, compared to 41.5% of white adults.
Sonoma County Black and Hispanic or Latinx children are about 2.5 times more likely to live in poverty than white children. People of color, especially Black and Native American residents, are overrepresented in the county’s unhoused population, according to the county’s data.
Black people are more than twice as likely not to have health insurance and Hispanic or Latinx people are four times more likely to be without health insurance than white people in the county.
“These outcomes are the result of centuries of laws, policies, and systems that disadvantage people of color,” Rivera wrote in her report to the board. “They contribute to poorer health outcomes within these communities because they prevent people from gaining access to the programs, services, resources, and opportunities they need to live and thrive.”
The resolution included eight areas for the county to focus on, including investing in learning and leadership programs to help change the county’s organizational culture and ensuring the county’s workforce reflects its population.
The resolution directs the county to create a Health Equity Action Plan, Community Health Assessment, and a Community Health Improvement Plan focusing on structural racism.
Staff across departments will identify best practices to promote racial equity in community and internal county services.
The resolution also calls on the county to advocate for and prioritize more allocation of resources and funding to antiracist goals and the needs of communities of color.
Other actions include better collection of data, youth engagement, and working with community partners already involved in combating the effects of racism.
In 2018, Milwaukee County in Wisconsin was the first jurisdiction in the United States to declare racism a public health crisis. Similar declarations have been made by 265 organizations and jurisdictions around the country, with at least 39 in California, including Sonoma County.
California
California bill to block registered sex offenders from local office rejected by Senate committee
FRESNO, Calif. (KFSN) — California bill aimed at preventing registered sex offenders from holding local elected office was halted Tuesday after a Senate committee declined to advance the measure without changes opposed by its author.
Assembly Bill 2753, introduced by Assemblywoman Esmeralda Soria in February, would have prohibited anyone who is or has been required to register as a sex offender from running for local elective office.
“This issue is critical. We have heard loud and clear from the community that we must do something,” Soria said.
The proposal came to a stop in the Senate Elections Committee, where lawmakers argued the bill’s restrictions were too broad.
California’s sex offender registration system is divided into three tiers. Tier 1 offenders are generally required to register for 10 years, Tier 2 offenders for 20 years and Tier 3 offenders for life.
According to Soria, committee members proposed limiting the bill to Tier 3 offenders. She rejected those amendments, arguing that the legislation should apply more broadly.
“For this not to be the law today, where we’re banning people that have committed some of the most horrific crimes against children, against other people, you know, and we have survivors out there, I think it’s a disservice,” Soria said.
The bill had attracted significant support before reaching the Senate. It was backed by the Fresno City Council and passed the Assembly floor in April.
Fresno City Council President Nelson Esparza traveled to Sacramento to testify in favor of the measure and said he was disappointed by the outcome.
“I call it really a gut punch for our community, and what we had experienced here, and sort of the upheaval… I don’t think we want that to happen again here at Fresno,” Esparza said.
Esparza referenced controversy earlier this year involving registered sex offender Rene Campos, who sought a seat on the Fresno City Council but ultimately did not qualify for the ballot.
Opponents of the bill argued that candidacies should be decided by voters rather than restricted by law.
“It should be a decision made by the voters, so a person should not be barred from running for office and let the voters make the decision that makes the most sense for them,” said civil rights attorney Janice Bellucci.
With the committee declining to move the bill forward under its current language, efforts to enact the proposed restrictions have stalled for now.
Copyright © 2026 KFSN-TV. All Rights Reserved.
California
Billionaire tax measure heads to California’s November ballot, with Kern County watching
BAKERSFIELD, Calif. (KBAK/KBFX) California voters will face a high-profile “billionaire tax” measure on the November ballot, a proposal supporters say would raise new revenue, but critics warn could push some of the state’s wealthiest residents to leave.
If passed, the measure would impose a one-time 5% tax on California billionaires living in the state as of Jan. 1, 2026.
Tal Eslick, owner of Vista Consulting, said, “I think there is this effort, especially on the part of progressive state leaders, to somehow, you know, go after billionaires or maybe even the trillionaires that may exist in the future.”
Billionaire tax measure heads to California’s November ballot, with Kern County watching (AP Photo/Jeff Chiu, File)
Political analysts say a proposal like this could encourage some of California’s wealthiest residents to relocate, potentially taking investment and business activity with them.
Eslick said, “And for that matter, they can come back occasionally to visit and do a little bit of business, but live in a state that is a little more accommodating for them from a tax standpoint.”
Questions have also been raised about what the impact could be for Kern County if billionaires leave the state.
Sherod Waite, CEO of Moneywise Guys, said, “It’s questionable how much revenue would actually be generated from the tax and how much revenue would be lost from those people exiting the state. It’s questionable. It’s a gamble.”
Waite said billionaires leaving could reduce state revenue that could be used in Kern County.
Billionaire tax measure heads to California’s November ballot, with Kern County watching (AP Photo/Jeff Chiu, File)
“Think of all the support services that the state offers to the entire state, including us here in Kern County, that are paid for by tax dollars,” he said.
Gov. Gavin Newsom has been outspokenly against a state wealth tax and is instead proposing a national tax policy that would tax anyone with a net worth of $100 million.
Newsom said, “It’s time for a national billionaire’s tax and a new social contract. Just think of this, just ten percent of people own 2/3’s of the nation’s wealth.”
Eslick said Newsom’s position can be difficult to square.
“It’s a naturally confusing sort of position to be opposed to the tax in California but be supportive of it at a national level. But I think that’s him walking a treacherous political road,” he said.
Billionaire tax measure heads to California’s November ballot, with Kern County watching (AP Photo/Jae C. Hong, File)
In a statement regarding the measure, Assemblyman Stan Ellis said in part, “This would hurt Kern’s energy, Agriculture, manufacturing, and working families through lost investment, fewer jobs and unstable state funding.”
California
Southern California residents say HOA made them take down American flags
WASHINGTON (TNND) — Residents in a neighborhood in Southern California said that their homeowners association has threatened to fine them if they don’t take down the American flags displayed outside their homes.
Amy and Chris Cooke and their neighbor Terri Collins live in San Marcos, which is located in San Diego County.
They said that they could potentially face a $100 fine if they keep the flags displayed outside their homes, according to the Daily Wire.
“I’m not taking my flag down,” Collins said. “They can fine me, $100, $200, $1,000, I’m not paying it.”
Collins said that the neighborhood is very patriotic because it is located close to the former Miramar Navy Air Station.
She said that “all the Top Gun pilots lived here.”
The neighbors said that ever since President Donald Trump won the 2024 election, the HOA has enforced the rule about flags.
“Once the members allow use of a common property by an owner to express what is essentially a political or affiliative view in a flag, other owners will want to do the same and the common area will degrade,” a letter from the HOA reads.
Homeowners were told that flags displayed in “exclusive use” areas like backyards.
An HOA attorney told the Daily Wire HOAs “count on the fact that homeowners don’t know better and might be scared.”
BE THE FIRST TO COMMENT
“I would tell these people to stand firm and under no circumstances should they remove that flag,” he told the outlet.
-
News5 seconds agoWoman survives falling 1,500 feet down Mount Shasta
-
Los Angeles, Ca1 hour agoMan dies after violent solo crash in Sherman Oaks
-
Detroit, MI2 hours agoPriority Waste CEO shares progress on plan to fix disruptions, delays across Metro Detroit
-
San Francisco, CA2 hours agoThe San Francisco Church That Holds America’s Secrets
-
Dallas, TX2 hours agoCrews battle large fire at Pilates studio in Uptown Dallas, officials say
-
Miami, FL2 hours agoalaïa clads first miami boutique in pink mosaic tiles, from interior to facade
-
Boston, MA2 hours ago
Looking for a lodging adventure? Beat the heat at a floating B&B. – The Boston Globe
-
Denver, CO2 hours agoLavender festival, Tennyson Street Fair and more free and cheap things to do in July