How to resolve AdBlock issue?
Refresh this page
How to resolve AdBlock issue?
Refresh this page
Lake County News,California
  • Home
    • Registration Form
  • News
    • Education
    • Veterans
    • Community
      • Obituaries
      • Letters
      • Commentary
    • Police Logs
    • Business
    • Recreation
    • Health
    • Religion
    • Legals
    • Arts & Life
    • Regional
  • Calendar
  • Contact us
    • FAQs
    • Phones, E-Mail
    • Subscribe
  • Advertise Here
  • Login

News

California Department of Fish and Wildlife finalizes State Wildlife Action Plan 2025

A bat is monitored as part of the White-Nose Syndrome Response Project. Photo courtesy of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 

The California Department of Fish and Wildlife, or CDFW, has announced the State Wildlife Action Plan 2025 update is complete.

It can be found at the CDFW State Wildlife Action Plan, or SWAP, web page. 

California’s SWAP, which is mandated by Congress and updated at least every 10 years, provides a comprehensive wildlife conservation strategy that is achieved through various conservation projects executed statewide.

Public and tribal input significantly shaped the plan. In March 2025, the SWAP Team held two public webinars, four conservation partner meetings, and two inter-tribal listening sessions. 

In conjunction with these meetings, a public draft review generated over 160 comments from nearly 20 organizations, tribes, and the public.

Since 2005, CDFW and partners have implemented SWAP conservation strategies with funding support from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife’s State Wildlife Grant, or SWG, program, which has awarded CDFW with nearly $71 million since 2000. This year marks the SWG program’s 25th anniversary.

CDFW uses SWG funds to develop and implement its SWAP and to support wildlife conservation projects across the state. 

Funded projects must support strategies outlined under SWAP, whether it’s to benefit a species or to implement a SWAP goal or conservation strategy. 

This funding is critical to species that aren’t protected and non-game species that often lack adequate funding sources.

Conservation efforts benefitting from SWAP and SWG funding include the White-Nose Syndrome Response Project, established to monitor California’s bat population for the deadly disease that could wipe out entire colonies of these small mammals; bats play a critical role in protecting agricultural lands from pests. 

Another SWG funded project has successfully established a new population of Unarmored Threespine Stickleback fish in Southern California; this unique species’ range has been significantly reduced due to human development. These and other conservation highlights can be found on CDFW’s SWAP web page.

At its heart, SWAP is a non-regulatory blueprint to conserve California’s fish and wildlife, and their habitats. It combines the latest science and conservation priorities with recommended actions and tools. 

SWAP 2025 includes updated information on the current health of California’s fish, wildlife and plant resources. 

Explore SWAP 2025 to learn about CDFW’s conservation tools, as well as habitat and wildlife monitoring efforts.

Questions about SWAP can be directed to the CDFW SWAP Team at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. 

Estate Planning: Inherited assets and estate planning by married people

Dennis Fordham. Courtesy photo.
California is a community property state that recognizes both community and separate property assets.

Assets that are inherited by a married person are separate property (i.e., owned and controlled by the inheriting spouse alone) unless it is commingled (e.g., money deposited into a joint account) or re-titled (e.g., real property) to include the married person’s spouse.

If so, the other spouse can acquire a community property or separate property interest in the inherited separate property asset. Such inherited assets may be a difficult issue when a married couple does estate planning.

Most married people do a single joint living trust into which they transfer their real property and non retirement investment accounts, especially the assets that they acquired together from marital earnings. Often that means the surviving spouse inherits all, or almost all, the deceased spouse’s share of the trust estate.

However, a married person’s inherited assets may require an exception, especially when the asset is co-owned with siblings (or other family) or when the married person has their own children from a prior marriage.

Inherited assets co-owned by siblings may be excluded by the siblings when doing their joint estate planning with their spouses. That is, the siblings themselves may either expect or agree to keep their own undivided share in co-owned inherited property exclusively within the family bloodline (i.e., excluding their spouses and any step children).

Consider siblings who inherit co-ownership in a family real estate or a family business. Such assets are regarded by the siblings as special assets for personal or economic reasons. The siblings may agree that such assets stay in their family bloodline. Perhaps each sibling does the necessary estate planning to ensure the outcome. Alternatively one or more siblings may be undecided and do nothing. Indecision can lead to unintended outcomes.

Consider the sibling who keeps an undivided fractional ownership interest in real property outside of their joint husband and wife living trust. The sibling’s accompanying will may likely leave everything outside the trust (excluding any retirement and bank accounts that pass automatically to death beneficiaries) to the couple’s joint trust. If so, the surviving spouse may have to probate the deceased spouse’s will to claim the real property interest, thus partly defeating the benefit of their probate avoidance joint living trust. 

Moreover, the deceased sibling’s share may now perhaps, depending on the trust’s provisions, go to their surviving spouse who may then co-own the special assets with in-laws; thus also undoing the siblings’ agreement. Alternatively, a sibling may do no estate planning at all, in which case their surviving spouse and children jointly inherit their separate property assets, perhaps by probate.

If a married person has separate children whom they did not raise as minors, they often want their own children (and not step children) to inherit separate property, including inheritances, that they did not purchase with their spouse. That may entail the married person establishing a separate property trust to exclude their spouse from inheriting or controlling such assets. The separate property trust may provide possible lifetime benefits to the surviving spouse and either immediate or eventual distribution to the children, as drafted.

Alternatively, the assets may be included within the joint trust as the contributing spouse’s separate property assets. Such assets may pass at the contributing spouse’s death to that spouse’s own children (bypassing the surviving spouse), may be distributed to the children (of the contributing spouse) subject to a life estate for the surviving spouse, or else may be held in further trust for the lifetime benefit of the surviving spouse, with distribution to the children at her death.

What outcome is attained depends on whether or not appropriate estate planning and proper administration of the estate planning occur. The estate planning must be drafted in contemplation of what its eventual administration will require and mean at that time for those concerned.

The foregoing discussion is not legal advice.

Dennis A. Fordham, attorney, is a State Bar-Certified Specialist in estate planning, probate and trust law. His office is at 870 S. Main St., Lakeport, Calif. He can be reached at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. and 707-263-3235.

Space News: ‘Baby’ planet photographed in a ring around a star for the first time

This artist's concept depicts a close-up of the protoplanet WISPIT 2b accreting matter as it orbits around its star, WISPIT 2. Image: NASA/JPL-Caltech/R. Hurt (IPAC).

Researchers have discovered a young protoplanet called WISPIT 2b embedded in a ring-shaped gap in a disk encircling a young star. 

While theorists have thought that planets likely exist in these gaps (and possibly even create them), this is the first time that it has actually been observed.

Researchers have directly detected — essentially photographed — a new planet called WISPIT 2b, labeled a protoplanet because it is an astronomical object that is accumulating material and growing into a fully-realized planet. 

However, even in its "proto" state, WISPIT 2b is a gas giant about 5 times as massive as Jupiter. This massive protoplanet is just about 5 million years old, or almost 1,000 times younger than the Earth, and about 437 light-years from Earth. 

Being a giant and still-growing baby planet, WISPIT 2b is interesting to study on its own, but its location in this protoplanetary disk gap is even more fascinating. Protoplanetary disks are made of gas and dust that surround young stars and function as the birthplace for new planets. 

Within these disks, gaps or clearings in the dust and gas can form, appearing as empty rings. Scientists have long suggested that these growing planets are likely responsible for clearing the material in these gaps, pushing and scattering dusty disk material outwards and greeting the ring gaps in the first place. 

Our own solar system was once just a protoplanetary disk, and it's possible that Jupiter and Saturn may have cleared ring gaps like this in that disk  many, many years ago. 

But despite continued observation of stars with these kinds of disks, there was never any direct evidence of a growing planet found in one of these ring gaps. That is, until now. As reported in this paper, WISPIT 2b was directly observed in one of the ring gaps around its star, WISPIT 2. 

Another interesting aspect of this discovery is that WISPIT 2b appears to have formed where it was found, it didn't form elsewhere and move into the gap somehow. 

The star WISPIT 2 was first observed using VLT-SPHERE (Very Large Telescope - Spectro-Polarimetric High-contrast Exoplanet REsearch), a ground-based telescope in northern Chile operated by the European Southern Observatory. In these observations, the rings and gap around this star were first seen. 

Following these observations of the system, researchers looked at WISPIT 2, and spotted the planet WISPIT 2b for the first time, using the University of Arizona's MagAO-X extreme adaptive optics system, a high-contrast exoplanet imager at the Magellan 2 (Clay) Telescope at Las Campanas Observatory in Chile. 

This technology adds another unique layer to this discovery. The MagAO-X instrument captures direct images, so it didn't just detect WISPIT 2b, it essentially captured a photograph of the protoplanet.    

The team used this technology to study the WISPIT 2 system in what is called H-alpha, or Hydrogen-alpha, light. This is a type of visible light that is emitted when hydrogen gas falls from a protoplanetary disk onto young, growing planets. This could look like a ring of super heated plasma circling the planet. This plasma emits the H-alpha light that MagAO-X is specially designed to detect (even if it is a very faint signal compared to the bright star nearby). 

When looking at the system in H-alpha light, the team spotted a clear dot in one of the dark ring gaps in the disk around WISPIT 2. This dot? The planet WISPIT 2b. 

In addition to observing the protoplanet's H-alpha emission using MagAO-X, the team also studied the protoplanet in other wavelengths of infrared light using the LMIRcam detector as part of the The Large Binocular Telescope Interferometer instrument on the University of Arizona's Large Binocular Telescope.

This image of the WISPIT 2 system was captured by the Magellan Telescope in Chile and the Large Binocular Telescope in Arizona. The protoplanet WISPIT 2b is a small purple dot to the right of a bright white ring of dust surrounding the system's star. A fainter white ring outside of WISPIT 2b can be seen. Image: Laird Close, University of Arizona.

Fun facts

In addition to discovering WISPIT 2b, this team spotted a second dot in one of the other dark ring gaps even closer to the star WISPIT 2. 

This second dot has been identified as another candidate planet that will likely be investigated in future studies of the system. 

The discoverers 

WISPIT-2b was discovered by a team led by University of Arizona astronomer Laird Close and Richelle van Capelleveen, an astronomy graduate student at Leiden Observatory in the Netherlands. This followed the recent discovery of the WISPIT 2 disk and ring system using the VLT, which was led by van Capelleveen. 

This discovery was detailed in the paper "Wide Separation Planets in Time (WISPIT): Discovery of a Gap Hα Protoplanet WISPIT 2b with MagAO-X," published August 26, 2025 in the Astrophysical Journal Letters. A second paper led by van Capelleveen and the University of Galway published on the same day in the Astrophysical Journal Letters. 

This research was partially supported by a grant from the NASA eXoplanet Research Program. MagAO-X was developed in part by a grant from the U.S. National Science Foundation with support from the Heising-Simons Foundation.

Chelsea Gohd writes for NASA.

Supervisors, city councils hold joint discussion on community power option

LAKE COUNTY, Calif. — The Board of Supervisors and the city councils of Lakeport and Clearlake met Tuesday to discuss the option of joining Sonoma Clean Power, a community-owned energy provider that could offer Lake County residents cheaper and greener electricity.

Earlier this year, the county and its two cities formally asked Sonoma Clean Power, or SCP, to explore extending service into Lake County.

SCP is a community-owned organization that provides what’s known as community choice aggregation, or CCA, which allows local governments to buy power on behalf of their residents and businesses while Pacific Gas and Electric continues to handle transmission and billing.

Reportedly the SCP generates more renewable energy and charges lower rates. 

Since its launch in 2014, SCP has replaced PG&E’s power sources for most customers in Mendocino and Sonoma counties. According to a Lakeport City Council staff report, it now serves 87% of electric customers in those two counties. 

The three local governments are now considering whether it’s right for Lake County.

At Tuesday’s meeting, SCP representatives highlighted the benefits of local control, economic benefits, potential savings, and opportunities such as the Geothermal Opportunity Zone, or Geo Zone initiative if Lake County joins. If approved, Lake County would hold two seats on SCP’s governing board, representing about a 15% voting share.

SCP Chief Executive Officer Geof Syphers said this is the third time Lake County has explored joining SCP. In 2015, the agency was not ready to expand, and in 2019 it could not provide competitive rates.

This year, an updated feasibility study suggests potential bill savings of 4.2% to 12.9%. 

“We found the conditions were much more favorable,” Syphers said, also noting that rates for Lake County are expected to be slightly lower than in Sonoma and Mendocino counties because of lower PG&E’s fee.

He also noted that joining the program is not just choosing cleaner power, but also gives the community a financial tool — SCP has already issued $775 million in municipal bonds, all used to prepay supply contracts, and locked in a deal that will save customers $47 million over the next eight years.

“All residents and businesses will automatically be enrolled in May of 2027 unless they proactively opt out of service,” said SCP Managing Director Erica Torgerson of the enrollment process if Lake County decides to join this year. 

The workshop was informational and no decisions were made. The Board of Supervisors and Lakeport City Council are expected to vote on action on Tuesday, Oct. 21, at their respective meetings, and the Clearlake City Council on Thursday, Oct. 2.

Local concerns

Alongside the potential benefits, local officials raised concerns about governance and long-term commitments, among them the number of board seats offered. 

Lake County would receive two seats on SCP’s 13-member board, representing its 68,000 residents. Supervisor Bruno Sabatier argued that was inequitable, pointing out that four Sonoma County cities with fewer residents collectively hold four seats.

“So I feel like the branch that's being offered is not a partnership. It's kind of a tag-along, and I would love to see a rework of what does that equity actually look like if Lake County does join,” he said.

Syphers admitted it may not feel equitable, but stressed that changing it would require approval from small cities on the board that may not want to lose their seats. 

Local officials are also concerned about the potential option of withdrawal from the program. 

Supervisor Helen Owen questioned the 20 years of commitment if Lake County wants to quit. “It’s still the elephant in the room for me,” she said. 

Syphers clarified that any customer could opt out at any time, but complete withdrawal as a county would trigger the 20-year timeline. 

“I want to distinguish opt out from forcing everyone else to leave,” he said. “So if you want to force everyone in the county to leave our program, that's when the timeline starts.”

The lack of tribal engagement was also a major concern. 

“Those are their own jurisdiction, their own sovereign land. If we all say yes, are they automatically opted in, or are they completely separated out because they have their own jurisdictions and need to go through the same process?” Sabatier asked. 

Syphers explained that it was because the state law forming the CCA program did not consider tribes and decisions were made based on votes of the counties and cities involved. “They didn’t mention tribes,” he said. 

“That feels very disrespectful,” said Lakeport Councilmember Kim Costa.

At the end of the meeting, Syphers said he is committed to meeting with tribes throughout 2026 and “providing them with the respect for their governance by letting them know they can make the decision about whether to proactively opt out and leave or stay.”

Email staff reporter Lingzi Chen at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. 

Governor: Health care costs for many Californians will nearly double in three months

Without immediate action from Congress to extend key funding as part of a government shutdown deal, Californians enrolled in the state’s health care marketplace, Covered California, will see their monthly health insurance bills nearly double beginning in January — and in some cases more than triple, Gov. Gavin Newsom warned on Thursday.

Newsom’s office said in a Thursday statement, “As a result of President Donald Trump’s recently passed HR 1 (the “Big Beautiful Bill”), Congress made devastating cuts to health care, and failed to extend tax credits for all Affordable Care Act (ACA) enrollees to fund tax breaks largely benefiting billionaires. If Congress does not restore these tax credits, consumers with coverage through Covered California will see premiums jump by an average of 97 percent, nearly doubling overnight. Democrats in Congress have agreed to fund the government with these tax credits included, but Republicans continue to block the deal.”

“California has led the nation in expanding access to affordable health care, but Donald Trump is ripping it away. His Big Beautiful Betrayal gutted critical health care programs, and unless Republicans agree, nearly 2 million Californians will be hit with unaffordable bill hikes — and hundreds of thousands could lose coverage altogether,” said Newsom.

"Increasing out-of-pocket health care costs puts coverage out of reach for millions of Californians and others across the nation," said California Health and Human Services Secretary Kim Johnson. "This threatens affordability and will force many individuals and families to lose their health coverage altogether. Without federal action, the health of our communities is at risk."

Trump shutdown tied to health care funding

At midnight on Oct. 1, the federal government began shutting down after Republicans and Democrats in Congress failed to reach an agreement to extend funding. 

Democrats proposed a continuing resolution to fund the government through Oct. 31 and extend health‑insurance tax credits, but Republicans blocked the measure, which fell short of the 60‑vote threshold. 

Without renewal of these credits, ACA enrollees will see their costs skyrocket at the start of next year.

Deadly for Californians

If Congress does not immediately extend the tax credits as part of a government shutdown deal, Covered California enrollees will face unaffordable premium hikes in three months, beginning in January 2026. On average, premiums are expected to increase by 97 percent, effectively doubling overnight. For some, costs will more than triple. 

Key impacts include:

Premiums nearly double: Covered California enrollees will see a 97% increase in monthly premiums on average.

Low-income Californians hit hardest: Individuals making less than $62,600 will see premiums rise from $97 to $182 per month.

Older Californians impacted: Adults aged 55–64 will see monthly premiums climb from $186 to $365.

Self-employed Californians: Nearly 500,000 independent workers will face an average increase of $131 per month.

Communities of color disproportionately affected: Premiums for Latino Californians would rise by 122%, for Asian and Pacific Islander Californians by 112%, and for Black Californians by 106%.

Middle-class families lose big savings: More than 160,000 Californians making over $62,600 currently save an average of $502 per month thanks to health insurance tax credits – savings that would disappear.

Covered California reached record enrollment this year, with nearly two million Californians signing up for coverage. Without the enhanced premium tax credits, that progress is at risk, threatening to reverse historic gains in reducing California’s uninsured rate. 

Gov. Newsom is calling for immediate action from Congress to extend this funding and end the government shutdown.

Trump scraps the nation’s most comprehensive food insecurity report − making it harder to know how many Americans struggle to get enough food

Nearly 1 in 7 Americans had trouble consistently getting enough to eat in 2023. Patrick Strattner/fStop via Getty Images

The Trump administration announced on Sept. 20, 2025, that it plans to stop releasing food insecurity data. The federal government has tracked and analyzed this data for the past three decades, but it plans to stop after publishing statistics pertaining to 2024 data. The Conversation U.S. asked Tracy Roof, a political scientist who has researched the history of government nutrition programs, to explain the significance of the U.S. Household Food Security Survey and what might happen if the government discontinues it.

What’s food insecurity?

The U.S. Department of Agriculture defines food security as “access by all people at all times to enough food for an active, healthy life.”

People who are food insecure are unsure they can get enough food or unable to get enough food to meet these basic needs because they can’t afford it.

How does the government measure it?

The USDA has collected data on food insecurity since the mid-1990s. It includes the share of the population that is food insecure and a subset of this group considered to have very low food security.

People who are food insecure may not significantly reduce how much they eat, but they are likely to eat less balanced meals or lower-quality food. People with very low food security report eating less altogether, such as by skipping meals or eating smaller meals.

These statistics are based on answers to questions the USDA adds to the Current Population Survey, which the Census Bureau administers every December. There are 10 questions in the survey. Households with children are asked four more.

The questions inquire about access to food, such as whether someone has worried in the past year that their food would run out before they had enough money to buy more, or how frequently they have skipped meals, could not afford balanced meals, or felt hunger.

The U.S. food insecurity rate stood at 13.5% in 2023, the most recent year for which data is currently available. The final annual food security report, expected in October, will be issued for 2024 – based on data collected during the Biden administration’s last year.

Why did the government start measuring it?

Calls for creating the food stamp program in the 1960s led to an intense debate in Washington about the extent of malnutrition in the U.S. Until then, the government did not consistently collect reliable or national statistics on the prevalence of malnutrition.

Those concerns reached critical mass when the Citizens’ Board of Inquiry into Hunger and Malnutrition, launched by a group of anti-hunger activists, issued a report in 1968, Hunger USA. It estimated that 10 million Americans were malnourished.

That report highlighted widespread incidence of anemia and protein deficiency in children. That same year, a CBS documentary, “Hunger in America,” shocked Americans with disturbing images of malnourished children. The attention to hunger resulted in a significant expansion of the food stamp program, but it did not lead to better government data collection.

The expansion of government food assistance all but eliminated the problem of malnutrition. In 1977, the Field Foundation sent teams of doctors into poverty stricken areas to assess the nutritional status of residents. Although there were still many people facing economic hardship, the doctors found there was little evidence of the nutritional deficiencies they had seen a decade earlier.

Policymakers struggled to reach a consensus on the definition of hunger. But the debate gradually shifted from how to measure malnutrition to how to estimate how many Americans lacked sufficient access to food.

Calls for what would later be known as food insecurity data grew after the Reagan administration scaled back the food stamps program in the early 1980s. Despite the unemployment rate soaring to nearly 11% in 1982 and a steep increase in the poverty rate, the number of people on food stamps had remained relatively flat.

Although the Reagan administration denied that there was a serious hunger problem, news reports were filled with stories of families struggling to afford food.

Many were families of unemployed breadwinners who had never needed the government’s help before. During this period, the number of food banks grew substantially, and they reported soaring demand for free food.

Because there was still no government data available to resolve the dispute, the Reagan administration responded to political pressure by creating a task force on hunger in 1983. It called for improved measures of the nutritional status of Americans.

The task force also pointed to the difference between “hunger as medically defined” and “hunger as commonly defined.” That is, someone can experience hunger – not getting enough to eat – without displaying the physical signs of malnutrition. In other words, it would make more sense to measure access to food as opposed to the effects of malnutrition.

In 1990 Congress passed the National Nutrition Monitoring and Related Research Act, which President George H.W. Bush signed into law. It required the secretaries of Agriculture and Health and Human Services to develop a 10-year plan to assess the dietary and nutritional status of Americans. This plan, in turn, recommended developing a standardized measurement of food insecurity.

The Food Security Survey, developed in consultation with a team of experts, was first administered in 1995. Rather than focusing on nutritional status, it was designed to pick up on behaviors that suggested people were not getting enough to eat.

Did tracking food insecurity help policymakers?

Tracking food insecurity allowed the USDA, Congress, researchers and anti-hunger groups to know how nutritional assistance programs were performing and what types of households continued to experience need. Researchers also used the data to look at the causes and consequences of food insecurity.

Food banks relied on the data to understand who was most likely to need their help.

The data also allowed policymakers to see the big jump in need during the Great Recession starting in 2008. It also showed a slight decline in food insecurity with the rise in government assistance early in the COVID-19 pandemic, followed by another big jump with steeply rising food prices in 2022.

The big budget bill Congress passed in July will cut spending on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program by an estimated US$186 million through 2034, an almost 20% reduction.

Supporters of SNAP, the new name for the food stamp program adopted in 2008, worry the loss of the annual reports will hide the full impact of these cuts.

Why is the administration doing this?

In the brief press release the USDA issued on Sept. 20 announcing the termination of the annual food insecurity reports, the USDA indicated that the Trump administration considers the food security survey to be “redundant, costly, politicized, and extraneous,” and does “nothing more than fear monger.”

While I disagree with that characterization, it is true that anti-hunger advocates have pointed to increases in food insecurity to call for more government help.

Is comparable data available from other sources?

Although the USDA noted there are “more timely and accurate data sets” available, it was not clear which datasets it was referring to. Democrats have called on the Trump administration to identify the data.

Feeding America, the largest national network of food banks, releases an annual food insecurity report called the Map the Meal Gap. But like other nonprofits and academic researchers that track these trends, it relies on the government’s food insecurity data.

There is other government data on food purchases and nutritional status, and a host of other surveys that use USDA questions. However, there is no other survey that comprehensively measures the number of Americans who struggle to get enough to eat.

As in the 1980s, policymakers and the public may have to turn to food banks’ reports of increased demand to get a sense of whether the need for help is rising or falling. But those reports can’t replace the USDA’s Food Security Survey.The Conversation

Tracy Roof, Associate Professor of Political Science, University of Richmond

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

  • 92
  • 93
  • 94
  • 95
  • 96
  • 97
  • 98
  • 99
  • 100
  • 101

Community

  • Lake County Wine Alliance offers sponsor update; beneficiary applications open 

  • Mendocino National Forest announces seasonal hiring for upcoming field season

Public Safety

  • Lakeport Police logs: Thursday, Jan. 15

  • Lakeport Police logs: Wednesday, Jan. 14

Education

  • Woodland Community College receives maximum eight-year reaffirmation of accreditation from ACCJC

  • SNHU announces Fall 2025 President's List

Health

  • California ranks 24th in America’s Health Rankings Annual Report from United Health Foundation

  • Healthy blood donors especially vital during active flu season

Business

  • Two Lake County Mediacom employees earn company’s top service awards

  • Redwood Credit Union launches holiday gift and porch-to-pantry food drives

Obituaries

  • Rufino ‘Ray’ Pato

  • Patty Lee Smith

Opinion & Letters

  • The benefits of music for students

  • How to ease the burden of high electric bills

Veterans

  • CalVet and CSU Long Beach team up to improve data collection related to veteran suicides

  • A ‘Big Step Forward’ for Gulf War Veterans

Recreation

  • Wet weather trail closure in effect on Upper Lake Ranger District

  • Mendocino National Forest seeking public input on OHV grant applications

  • State Parks announces 2026 Anderson Marsh nature walk schedule 

  • BLM lifts seasonal fire restrictions in central California

Religion

  • Kelseyville Presbyterian to host Ash Wednesday service and Lenten dinner Feb. 18

  • Kelseyville Presbyterian Church to hold ‘Longest Night’ service Dec. 21

Arts & Life

  • Auditions announced for original musical ‘Even In Shadow’ set for March 21 and 28

  • ‘The Rip’ action heist; ‘Steal’ grounded in a crime thriller

Government & Politics

  • Lake County Democrats issue endorsements in local races for the June California Primary

  • County negotiates money-saving power purchase agreement

Legals

  • March 3 hearing on ordinance amending code for commercial cannabis uses

  • Feb. 12 public hearing on resolution to establish standards for agricultural roads

How to resolve AdBlock issue?
Refresh this page