Joanne Ayon and Benny Hawthorne were honored in a dedication ceremony at Hawthorne’s new home on Bella Vista Avenue in Paradise and received their keys. The homes were built by each of them and took about six months to build. Ayon and Hawthorne were required to help with building 30 hours per week as part of the Community Housing Improvement Program’s self-help homeownership program.

Homeowners in the self-help program spend at least 30 hours a week constructing their home with CHIP’s guidance from construction supervisors. Wells Fargo contributed a $100,000 grant toward the homes.

Hawthorne and his two dogs officially moved in Friday. Ayon started moving belongings in Friday as well.

Housing Program Supervisor Kate Anderson gave a speech at the event.

“People ask me ‘how do you build back a town?’ My answer is one bit at a time. It takes a community to build back a community,” Anderson said.

Mark Montgomery, CHIP director of fundraising and communications, echoed the praise toward the Paradise community.

“This town is an incredible partner,” Montgomery said.

Hawthorne was happy about his new home.

“I never thought I’d ever own a home,” said Hawthorne during the ceremony. “As awful as the fire was it gave me an opportunity.”

Ayon teared up during the ceremony.

“Until you lose everything you don’t know what it’s like,” said Ayon.

Judy Orozco, a CHIP housing specialist, helped complete the home loans for Ayon and Hawthorne.

“It’s amazing to see this process from beginning to end,” said Orozco. “These two have put in a lot of work and I am so happy for them.

Hawthorne seemed overwhelmed by the event and the turnout.

“I’m melancholy because I loved building this house and I don’t want it to end,” Hawthorne said.

Hawthorne and volunteers built the house frame, helped with constructing the roof and painted it. Construction crews completed the concrete and roof tiles. Hawthorne was present at the house construction every weekend from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. He works in financial aid at Butte College.

Ayon’s home on Elliot Road was once the site of her parents’ home which burned in the fire.

“I didn’t realize how many people were involved in the process until today,” said Ayon. “This is very heartfelt.”

Ayon also helped build her house and her granddaughter helped. Her house has three bedrooms and two bathrooms. Her mother will stay with her on weekends. Ayon moved to Paradise several years ago.

Montgomery said the houses meet Paradise’s standards for fire resistancy.

“The houses have stucco on the sides instead of wood,” he said. “The fences are metal and not wood. There are also other features of the house which are fire resistant.”

California’s 5.3% unemployment in February was the highest rate in the nation.

My trusty spreadsheet, looking at labor stats dating to 1976, could find only 11 other months the state reached this dubious ranking. Look to the early 1990s economic malaise (August to December 1994) and the coronavirus chill (March to August 2021).

That’s on top of our previous mention in this space that 2023 was the first year since 1994 that the state ranked dead last in the nation for job growth on a percentage-point basis.

To be fair, California historically has been the nation’s leading job creator. At the same time, it’s a reasonable bet that in any given month California will be high on the joblessness scorecard.

Consider that California unemployment has ranked second-highest amongst the states in 72 months over 48 years. It was third 52 times, fourth 35 times, and fifth 49 times.

So an average month since 1976 has seen California unemployment ranked No. 10 among the states. Only five places fared worse – Alaska, the District of Columbia, West Virginia, Mississippi, and Michigan.

And by the way, here’s another example of California’s persistent high joblessness: Its best month in the unemployment rankings since 1976 was 29th best in October 1987.

Yes, the best ranking was a paltry 29th place.

Why so high?

California has heavy concentrations of workers in businesses with big seasonal swings – hospitality, agriculture, and retail. Other economically volatile industries, major employers in California, include technology, real estate, and entertainment.

Additionally, California’s celebrated entrepreneurial grit has a downside – that risk-taking creates a higher-than-average failure rate. That can also boost unemployment.

Consider a yardstick for chronic high unemployment from my spreadsheet: How often during the past 48 years has a state’s monthly jobless rate ranked among the nation’s 10 highest?

This is not a Top 10 list to be envied.

• SHOPPING NEWS: What’s the big trend? Who’s buying what? CLICK HERE!

By this measure, California ranked in the Top 10 in 63% of the months since 1976. Just four others ranked more frequently: Alaska at 78%, DC at 69%, Michigan at 66%, and West Virginia at 63%.

Please note that California’s economic rivals were in the middle of the pack: Texas was No. 21 at 17% and Florida was 24th at 15%.

It’s worth noting that 12 states never made the Top 10 – Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Maryland, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, and Virginia, a diverse mix economically and politically.

Bottom line

It’s hard to sugarcoat California’s high unemployment in February.

Look, California’s astronomically lofty cost of living nudges folks with solid finances to think about relocating – no less those who are missing a paycheck.

But let’s mention that the state’s chronically high joblessness during the past half-century came as California created more jobs than any other state since 1976.

• RENT TRENDS: What’s available – and what are landlords charging? CLICK HERE!

That’s 9.7 million new jobs – 13% of all US hires. Even California’s job growth rate of 119% topped the 92% employment expansion in the rest of the nation.

Not to dismiss the pain of joblessness, but that top-of-the-nation 5.3% February rate is historically low. California has averaged 7.2% unemployment since 1976.

These stats suggest California employers have enjoyed the deep supply of job candidates that unemployment can create.

These same figures also indicate that California workers, if nothing else, have been very flexible.

PS: Ponder Nebraska, where the average monthly jobless ranking since 1976 is No. 48. That’s the lowest among the states. But Nebraska employers added just 477,000 workers over the 48 years – 95% less than California’s hirings.

Jonathan Lansner is the business columnist for the Southern California News Group. He can be reached at jlansner@scng.com

They were familiar with the process, and a few shared their lived experiences and how they are at working toward shelter — or not — at the moment.

Gina Marmol visited a few friends around noon Wednesday at Teichert Ponds; she’d made her way from Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Parkway north of East 20th street where, earlier in the day, she and others were informed of enforcement and possible arrest by Chico police.

“A lot of it is private property, so that’s our fault; that’s not okay to do that. But at this point, they are talking about arresting us,” Marmol said.

Marmol’s tent was still near Community Park; she plans to move, but she said she doesn’t know what to do at this moment.

“I don’t know what to do. … I got people fist-fighting me in the middle of the night. I’m a 60-year-old woman; I get attacked by men, I get attacked by women — I’m like, ‘I’m over this,’” Marmol said.

“It’s so brutal out here. So brutal. And I try to keep a male somebody around me at all times, and they just want sex. … It’s (messed) up out here. It’s not okay.”

Police served seven-day notices to several people in the morning who live near businesses by Community Park; by the Chico City Plaza and downtown post office; and a Highway 99 right-of-way south of Highway 32.

Community Park

Near Community Park, several people in tents pitched along Martin Luther King Jr. Parkway received notices dated March 27.

The notices stated the city will require everyone to leave the public property by April 6, and that there are enough shelter spaces for everyone at the location. As of Wednesday, 20 beds are open at the Torres Community Shelter and 20 beds at Chico’s Genesis Emergency Housing Site.

Marmol said, at this point, she has been working to get back into a Pallet shelter at Genesis because another housing opportunity fell through. She commented that Chico police have been very kind in the proces, and that she is proud of them; that they are respectful and come “knock” on their doors.

“Chico P.D. has been absolutely amazing in the way we treat us now. And I want them to have credit for that. They’ve been so respectful; so respectful. And everyone amongst the homeless agrees upon that, because years ago … they’d done some (stuff).”

Also near Community Park, Leighton Reed said he has been moving around the city since enforcement at Teichert Ponds and wants to be in a Pallet shelter — but he’d only been referred to the Torres Community Shelter.

Reed said shelter assessments were given to everyone in the morning, though he’d told police he was going to just leave the area.

“Basically if they let us have one area, we’d just stay in one area. But, they’re just making it to where people are saying, basically, (forget) it,” Reed said, referring to people moving in front of residences.

Chico does provide an area of space for campers on the corner of Eaton and Cohasset roads, but it is only available to people determined incompatible with shelter — in which case, Reed does not meet criteria.

“They’ll see us out in the open next to a house; they don’t even care. … I mean, don’t get me wrong, I’m probably doing it too, but I still feel guilty and I take off very quickly,” Reed said. “I’m not interrupting children in their play and all that stuff. We all think about that (stuff).”

Reed said he finds very little hope, though he appreciates people coming to bring food to him.

“(Hope) is mostly with each other; we give each other hope. But it’s getting to be that’s even falling short nowadays.”

City Plaza

People at Chico City Plaza said they received notices early Wednesday morning, including Lee Woodbury. She was grooming City Plaza landscaping with a broom, like one would at a zen garden — it kept her hands busy.

Woodbury told this newspaper about her experiences in several shelters that have been negative and does not prefer the shelter that is made available to her. She said she feels dehumanized.

“If I knew what else to be doing, I’d be doing it. And I’m really just at a loss. … It’s like you have all these things that don’t work for me,” Woodbury said.

Woodbury’s partner, Timothy Roush Sr., said he also does not prefer to be in shelter because he can’t stand being indoors — that he’d been “locked up” half of his life. He also experiences pain from metal in his body.

“Being inside walls freaks me out. Even going into the grocery store …,” Roush said.

Several others at City Plaza said they received notices as well. Woodbury said she woke up to police Wednesday at the steps of the post office.

“They told me if I step foot on the post office property again, I’d get arrested, so I went like this,” Woodbury gestured bringing her foot down.

“Then I grabbed my bike and my backpack and walked away. Because if somebody’s not here to know their rights and push that boundary, they’re never going to do it.”

The home, built by Habitat for Humanity and located on Dora Lee Lane, will be dedicated April 6, when new homeowner Bradly Reinhart will move in with his four children. Reinhart and his family lost everything in the Camp Fire. Another Habitat for Humanity house was built close to this house’s location.

People who attended Wednesday morning were able to tour the home and watch a video. Several people gave speeches regarding wildfire preparedness, how these homes are protected from wildfires and what they can do to protect the community.

The roofs of the houses have certain components to be wildfire safe. There are ember-resistant vents and non-combustible areas surrounding the homes, which is required. There is non-combustible siding, and windows are made with tempered glass, according to Steve Hawks, senior director for IBHS.

Habitat for Humanity of Butte County Executive Director Nicole Bateman was first to speak. She noted that Habitat has built 17 homes since the Camp Fire and “we are committed to building safe houses and making sure standards provide comfort for homeowners.”

Janis Bokar, forestry and community outreach assistant for the Butte County Fire Safe Council, hung out with the Wildfire Ready Raccoon, the mascot for the Paradise Ridge and Butte County Fire Safe Councils. Bokar said she was there to show support and say congratulations to the homeowners.

“This is a monumental day,” said Cal Fire-Butte County State Fire Marshal Daniel Berlant. “It’s been a rough road to recovery. We look toward wildfire resiliency and how to get there. We want to be prepared for the peak of wildfire season and make sure there is 100 feet of defensible space.”

Reinhart smiled broadly during his speech. He has been living in a trailer in Oroville with his family. A single father, he said his current home doesn’t have a kitchen. He is looking forward to having family gatherings around the kitchen table.

“Dads are supposed to protect and provide,” he said. “I am so excited to move into the home. The greatest thing I can experience is that my kids feel safe and I feel safe.”

Reinhart was ecstatic when he learned he was approved for the home.

“I appreciate everyone who helped me with the process such as IBHS,” he said. “I will be there April 6 and will show up with all of the kids.”

Casey Taylor lives in another wildfire-prepared home in Paradise. An administrator with Achieve Charter Schools in Chico and Paradise, she has lived in her new home since 2022.

“I feel safe and protected there,” Taylor said. “I’m always excited to see homes designated.”

Learn more at readyforwildfire.org.

The moment came nearly three hours into open session as councilors considered whether the city should proceed with a rent stabilization ordinance to help seniors living in mobile home parks. These residents voiced their fears at previous meetings, starting in the fall after a north Chico property announced a 30% hike — triple its increases the previous two years — that the owner dropped back to 10% under pressure from the mayor and others. They also addressed the Internal Affairs Committee, which elected not to make a recommendation to the full council.

Twelve Chicoans pushed for rent stabilization — among them Larry Wahl, chair of the Planning Commission, who’s served both as a councilor and county supervisor. A representative from a park owners association, Saulo Londono, argued against restrictions. Councilors Tom van Overbeek and Sean Morgan shared the latter view; Addison Winslow championed the former.

Deepika Tandon, the least outspoken councilor, shifted the tenor of the discussion. An owner of rental property, she noted the unique position mobile home residents find themselves as owners of their abodes but not the spaces they inhabit — a distinction that excludes them from rent protections other renters receive. She sought to learn more about the options Chico has to address the issue along with costs and liabilities the city could incur.

Dale Bennett quickly concurred. About as soft-spoken as Tandon, he distilled the same sentiment into a refrain: “We need more information.” The whole panel ultimately concurred and, on a 7-0 vote affirming Tandon’s motion, directed staff to return with, well, more information.

“I do understand there are pros and cons of rent stabilization,” Tandon said afterward. “I just don’t want to make any hasty decision on that.

“California already has rent limitations on other asset classes; having that on mobile home parks would not be a bad thing, because we know the cost of housing is high for people on fixed income. So if we can help them, that would be a wonderful thing.”

Morgan warned about failures of rent control yet supported the motion. Vice Mayor Kasey Reynolds, on Internal Affairs with van Overbeek and Winslow, expressed her affirmative vote by saying, “Sure.” Audience members applauded the decision.

“We’re very good at doing things people don’t think will happen,” Mayor Andrew Coolidge said later. “On rent stabilization, we’re getting more information, and I’m glad to hear it.”

Late business

The final item stretched past 9 p.m. Ironically, the crux of the matter involved judicious use of time.

Coolidge requested consideration of a comment period for councilors. He proposed three minutes apiece, once per month, to share about subjects not otherwise covered on the agenda.

Morgan voted against a discussion when the mayor first floated the idea — and Tuesday, he read a list of reasons against it. Primarily, he anticipated councilor comments devolving into campaigning and self-aggrandizement. Morgan also noted that a previous council instituted, then quickly rescinded, a bloc for reports from members about committees on which they serve; City Clerk Debbie Presson confirmed his history lesson.

Van Overbeek was even more blunt, calling such comments “a waste of time.”

Coolidge and Winslow asserted that monthly reports would inform colleagues as well as constituents. Presson said council policies already allow for this reporting — Coolidge and Winslow moved to allow reports on councilors’ districts, too. Before they could refine the proposal, Morgan made a substitute motion to stick with the status quo. Reynolds seconded, and it passed 5-2 over Coolidge and Winslow’s dissent.

The latter came away disgruntled, the former encouraged.

Mayor Andrew Coolidge enforced the council policy limiting public comments to topics within the city’s jurisdiction, which he said does not include “ceasefires and wars in other countries.” He redirected the first speaker, Rain Scher, then called a recess when another advocate for a ceasefire resolution, Chris Nelson, did not heed his admonition.

When the council returned, Coolidge advised the audience that a recurrence would prompt another recess — and a third would clear the chamber. The final speaker, Yahmo Ahqha, criticized “the rules of purview” he contrasted with other cities, adding: “We’re supposed to be telling you how to represent us. … You have very special rules that are very undemocratic.”

When Ahqha started a call and response of “free free Palestine,” Coolidge adjourned the meeting again and declared the speaker “out of order.” When councilors reconvened, the back of the room had emptied.

Mobile home comments got emotional, as well, with hardy residents waiting two hours for their chance to speak. Councilors reached consensus on exploring options once staff returns with more information.

Tuesday’s agenda also featured reviews of the Downtown Chico Business Association’s 12-month progress report; a proposal allowing alcohol at private events in City Plaza; and a policy for allocating Fire Victim Trust funds.

Mobile home parks hit councilors’ consciousness in the fall after Pleasant Valley Mobile Estates in north Chico announced a 30% hike in space rents following 10% increases the previous two years. The owner subsequently reduced the rise to 10%, but residents of that park and others asked the council to consider adopting a rent stabilization ordinance.

The council referred the matter to its Internal Affairs Committee, which heard from affected seniors during the March 4 meeting. Neither committee chair Tom van Overbeek nor Vice Mayor Kasey Reynolds seconded a motion from Councilor Addison Winslow to recommend the council weigh an ordinance, so the item came back to the full council with no suggested course of action.

Janet Olsen, a resident of a park outside city limits, spoke to the cumulative effect of annual increases on seniors with fixed incomes. Julie Threet clashed with the mayor on the scope of her comments, nearly precipitating a third recess; comments continued unabated from the final 11 speakers.

Celeste Macklin held back tears as she described her plight.  Al Johnson said the age of his unit precludes moving it to another park in any county — “my mobile home is no longer mobile.” Mary Carlisle told councilors, “You up there have a unique opportunity to protect not hundreds, but thousands of people in the city of Chico.”

Planning Commission Chair Larry Wahl, a former councilor and county supervisor, added his voice in support: “Free market is the American way — predatory pricing is not part of the free market.” Climate Action Commissioner Bryce Goldstein echoed the call for rent stabilization.

Saulo Londono of the Western Manufactured Housing Communities Association said the California Legislature is working on rent stabilization for mobile homes. “This is an emotional issue but also a complicated issue,” he concluded.

Winslow raised the specter of a ballot initiative for an ordinance. Van Overbeek countered that “rent stabilization is a misnomer” and that owners have the right under state law to recover their costs — but Councilor Deepika Tandon distinguished park tenants from housing renters, and asserted, “They should have a little more peace of mind than an apartment (tenant) who can move whenever they want.”

Tandon made a motion for staff to return with options for an ordinance — space control and allowable increases — and hear experiences from cities with rent stabilization — specifically, costs and liabilities the city might incur.

Councilor Dale Bennett agreed, saying he did not have enough information to proceed. Councilor Sean Morgan said he’s “all for getting more information” while skeptical of the effectiveness of rent controls.

After the 7-0 vote in favor, residents applauded.

Downtown matters

The DCBA, under terms of a funding contract with the city, presents periodic updates to the council. DCBA President Greg Scott summarized the first annual report — “time flies when you’re having fun” — by reviewing the focus areas of the group’s recovery plan: reorganization, marketing/communications, events and placemaking.

The city provides $140,800 a year, with the second and third years subject to councilors’ support of the progress. Key data points he relayed were a 14% decrease in parking revenue in 2023 from 2022 and that sales-tax revenue in the third quarter last year was 93% of 2020’s rate.

Winslow asked about a $114,000 deficit, which Scott attributed to an event that underperformed expectations, Chico Live, and disparities in assessments collected from businesses.

The councilor responded he didn’t “feel comfortable recommitting” funds under the current scenario and suggested tabling the report — staff working with the organization — rather than waiting for the 18-month update. Coolidge proposed two months.

Morgan made a substitute motion to accept the report, which passed 5-2 with Winslow and Coolidge dissenting.

The council also concurred on expanding alcohol provision in City Plaza to private functions. Councilors previously approved alcohol at public events; Feb. 5, Internal Affairs recommended the change.

Other business

Regarding fire relief, the Finance Committee last month recommended a policy to delineate uses of disaster-recovery monies that “do not conflict or jeopardize other forms of funding.” City Manager Mark Sorensen elaborated that specific projects will come forward during budget planning.

Councilors approved the policy unanimously.

Other open-session discussions included three budget adjustments and adding monthly reports from councilors to meetings (the latter continuing past this edition’s deadline). Closed session, a half-hour instead of the usual hour, consisted solely of updates on labor negotiations.

A few readers thought I was a tad harsh in a recent column that noted California had the nation’s slowest job growth in 2023.

Yes, adding any number of jobs isn’t bad – but 154,000 new workers equals only 0.9% growth in a hot US job market that grew 2%. That hiring pace – as measured on a percentage-point basis – ranked No. 51 among the states and the District of Columbia.

We often forget that California is by far the nation’s largest job market with 17.8 million workers. My trusty spreadsheet tells me the Golden State has ranked No. 1 since 1972. The second-biggest job market in the US is Texas at 13.9 million workers. Florida is No. 3 at 9.7 million.

But my readers’ argument that California’s size would make it hard to be among the fastest growing on a percentage-point basis is a stretch. Texas (3.3% more jobs in 2023) and Florida (up 3.4%) ranked in 2023’s top three for percentage growth along with Nevada (up 3.4%).

Look, there are various ways to measure economic progress.

Remember, percentage-point growth shows us the relative scale of hiring trends on the overall California job market as well as against other states. Still, let’s look at California ranked by the number of new jobs created – not the 2023 percentage gain.

My trusty spreadsheet tells me that those 154,000 California hires last year were topped by only three states – Texas (449,600), Florida (316,600), and New York (195,000).

However, California having lofty spots on this kind of job-creation scorecard is nothing newsy. California ranked No. 1 or No. 2 for total new jobs in 11 of the past 12 years (let’s forget coronavirus-chilled 2020’s last-place finish).

And historically speaking, over the past 52 years as the largest job market, California’s count of new workers led the nation 27 times and ranked second 10 times.

Or look how modest last year’s hiring was this way: 154,000 new jobs was 27% below California’s average year since 1972.

High rankings often equal high expectations. And in 2023, California’s job market missed its high bar.

Locally speaking

Where were those 154,000 California jobs created last year? Largely to the south, when looking at state data tracking 29 employment hubs …

1. San Diego: 21,000 new jobs bringing its total to 1.56 million (California’s No. 4 employment center).

2. Inland Empire: 19,800 jobs added to 1.69 million (No. 3).

3. Sacramento: 18,200 jobs added to 1.09 million (No. 8).

4. Orange County: 17,000 jobs added to 1.7 million (No. 2).

5. Los Angeles: 13,400 jobs added to 4.59 million (No. 1).

6. Oakland: 10,300 jobs added to 1.2 million (No. 5).

7. Fresno: 8,500 jobs added to 392,900 (No. 9).

8. San Jose: 4,200 jobs added to 1.16 million (No. 7).

9. Bakersfield: 4,200 jobs added to 294,000 (No. 11).

10. Modesto: 3,500 jobs added to 194,600 (No. 14).

And there was a clear last place – San Francisco. It lost 11,400 jobs last year, shrinking to 1.17 million, the state’s No. 6 job market. It was the only job losers among 29 markets tracked.

By the way, if you’re looking for top job growth on a percentage basis, tiny El Centro led California in 2023 with 3.2% more workers. But that’s only 1,800 new jobs, bringing the agriculture-rich border town’s employment to 59,000.

Optimism turned to celebration when early results indicated landslides on both Measure O and Measure P. As of the latest update, March 14, as the Butte County Elections Office finalizes the tally, each measure drew 62% opposition to Valley’s Edge versus 37% in favor.

“We were surprised — at least I was personally,” Eric Nilsson, a member of Smart Growth Advocates and the Butte Environmental Council, said Friday. Those and other organizations coalesced under the banner Stop Valley’s Edge (previously Valley’s Edge Resistance).

“As a group, we felt like we had a good chance of defeating the development,” he continued, “but we had no idea it would be a 2-to-1 margin, particularly when along the way we were outspent 10 to 1. That spending was shocking, but our approach was to educate, talk to people one on one, to do all those grassroots kind of things to be effective.”

The project proponents declined to comment until the vote gets certified within the next two weeks. Opponents already have started sharing their views on the property’s future.

Valley’s Edge is a 1,448-acre parcel on the southeast boundary of Chico, separated by a bike path from the Stonegate development approved along Bruce Road. The ownership group, namely Bill Brouhard, spent more than a decade developing the plan that would have added 2,777 housing units while keeping roughly half the acreage as parkland and open space. The City Council approved the proposal and variances from the general plan it would necessitate last January.

Stop Valley’s Edge put forth a list of concerns including fire risk, water, traffic and species conservation. Parallel to the referendum, coalition members filed suit to block the specific plan, and that litigation remains active at least until a case management conference May 15. Measures O and P overturned approval of the plan, but the litigants also seek to nullify the environmental impact report the council also approved.

Looking forward

Grace Marvin, conservation chair of the local Sierra Club chapter, expressed a prevailing view among opponents that “we want to protect that land as much as possible and not develop on it, but we’d be more than willing to talk about developing other areas of town.” Nilsson shared the same preference while noting the coalition is “looking at and open to alternatives, from 100% preservation of the land to some sort of combination of development and preservation of the land, depending on what that development might look like.”

Other allies have variations on the theme. Public interest attorney Marty Dunlap expressed that “the concept of Valley’s Edge as a community does seem to be offering some benefit, but not necessarily at that location — probably not at that location.” Jared Geiser, executive director of the local Audubon Society, said his conversations revealed “some people see high-density development on the city side of it, on the western side, and conserve the ridgeline. Me personally, I don’t want to see development out there … more sprawl in the foothills.”

Nilsson said opponents have engaged with public and private entities on the prospect of funding acquisition of the property for conservation as open space. Potential partners include the California Wildlife Conservation Board and the Northern California Regional Land Trust.

“We’d love to sit down with the landowners and see what’s possible,” he said. “Those are the next steps we’re looking at.”

Bandied in campaign messaging as the alternative to the Valley’s Edge Specific Plan, the owners could develop the site that currently sits in county jurisdiction under county standards. The property is zoned for 20-acre ranchettes. Geiser said he spoke with a county planner who confirmed such a project would require a parcel map that would need an environmental assessment and public review before approval.

Whether the litigants — Chico-based AquAlliance, the Sierra Club and the Center for Biological Diversity — successfully negotiate a rescission of the current EIR, Geiser explained that any substantive revision to the plan would trigger a new evaluation of environmental impacts.

“The process going forward after the referendum is not as cut and dry as any of us wish it here,” he added. “But I think history and examples around the state of California show that when people organize successful referendums against development, it is very rare for that development to come back in the same form.”

They didn’t know it would end up being a home initially owned by the physician Newton Thomas Enloe — the namesake of Enloe Health.

Anna Alexander, and her partner Dustin Vaught, are the newest owners of 488 E. Third St. Moving in about two months ago, the two have since learned its true origin starting with Enloe, and are determined to tell the story of the home’s various uses through the decades.

“We had a realtor and we had a very short list of demands: historic home near the park,” said Alexander. “All we knew when we bought it was that it was built in 1950, and it was built by the son of Dr. Enloe — and it turns out that none of that is right.”

Alexander and Vaught, since purchasing their home, have launched a research campaign to gather as much information as possible about the home by turning to social media. They are currently documenting their research and telling the story live on the image platform, Instagram, with the handle @enloeestate.

Alexander teaches public history at Cal State East Bay and said it has been her dream to purchase a historic house in her hometown of Chico.

The two first began by researching city records and the Enterprise-Record archives for any information they could find. The more they looked, the more layers they peeled back.

Former tenants have reached out, telling Alexander and Vaught of their stays at the house. Alexander said at points through time, the house served as an elegant venue for charity parties; a “palace” for a peculiar social group; a fraternity house neighbors fought hard against; and even as an office space.

“I immediately went to newspapers.com and started looking through the Enterprise-Record. … I really had no information,” Alexander said. “We heard rumors there was a frat, and that’s kind of all we had.”

Original deed

In their research, Alexander and Vaughn found the original deed to the home at the Butte County Clerk Recorder’s Office, and learned the original plot was purchased by Enloe on May 25, 1934 from the estate of Annie Bidwell for $1,500.

Following the prohibition era, one peculiar clause was included in the contract, but never became realized — evident by fraternities who would come to throw parties in the 1980s and ’90s.

“Said land is sold … on the condition that the grantee, his heirs or assigns, shall not use … said land … for the purpose of making or selling intoxicating liquors … should said condition or covenant be broken, the title herein granted shall cease, revert to and be vested in the heirs or assigns of Annie Ellicott Kennedy Bidwell,” the deed stated.

At the time, the plot of land extended from Third Street all the way up to Annie’s Glenn. But slowly in the coming years, new owners would come to subdivide the property, according to Alexander.

Enloe era

Their first mission is to add the home to historic registries. To do so, Alexander and Vaught are working on a narrative about the social history of the property, focusing on the time Enloe and his family occupied the house.

Many parts of the original home have been removed or renovated, and therefore don’t meet some criteria for its architectural significance. But the two think they have a good chance to register the house by writing a narrative on its social history.

“I’ve read all these stories about the Enloe’s and later owners throwing whole massive parties for the community. Ice cream socials; strawberry socials,” Alexander said. “In the ’30s and ’40s, this was like a socialite mansion where charity events happened. Something called Mrs. Enloe’s Sunken Gardens — I guess she was this amazing gardener with roses and camellias.”

“There were adorable stories of events that happened here,” Vaught said, “They’re so charming like (Enloe’s) daughter had an ice cream social, and it lists every person who attended this 3-year-old’s birthday party.”

By 1934, when the deed was signed, Enloe was 62 years old and his first hospital about 21 years old. Enloe Hospital would move to its location on The Esplanade in 1937 — all significant events to occur after the Great Depression, according to Chico historian Dave Nopel.

“The hospital by the 1930s had really, I’m going to say, become a very real and ongoing important part of the community — the single real hospital for the community — which would allow Dr. Enloe … to buy a nice new house where most people were scrambling in the depression era there.

“The Great Depression had settled in over Chico by ‘35, and I’m going to guess that only people with some real means could go ahead and build a big new house like that,” Nopel said.

“And of course to keep the hospital functioning and raising money for improvements and maintenance, I guess was a challenge. So very possibly, they needed to turn to charities to get support for that hospital.”

Decades following

While Alexander and Vaught work towards building the narrative around Enloe, the two have learned even more about the house in the following decades.

The two found the house had about 10 owners before themselves, including a manager from the Diamond Match Company; the son of a California governor; a businessman who first intended to subdivide the land; a building for a social club called Sunarts that was called the “palace;” a family they don’t know much about; a fraternity that caught negative attention while there; and owners who offered the house as transitional housing for people during COVID-19 lockdowns.

“It feels like every decade you look at the history of this house, there was something very different going on in the house,” Vaught said.

Almost 90 years passed after Enloe first purchased the home. For Vaught, the decades of changes to him represent reflections of what was going on in Chico during the time.

It spans eras from Enloe, who made his means as a physician in the Great Depression; to owners looking to subdivide during post-war development; to two college boys that ran a fraternity out of the building; to a regular single family home.

Now, the two are in the era of “post-COVID, work from home from the Bay Area, coming back to a small town,” Alexander said. “We’re able to live here because we’re basically work from home.”

The last time California ranked 51st for job growth before 2023 was the year Bill Clinton was sworn in as president, Beanie Babies were introduced, the first “Jurassic Park” hit the big screen, and Whitney Houston’s “I Will Always Love You” was No. 1 on the charts.

Yes, 1993 was a long time ago.

My trusty spreadsheet – looking at revised employment stats for California, 49 other states, and the District of Columbia from the Bureau of Labor Statistics – found the Golden State bosses adding workers at a 0.87% rate in 2023.

While any job growth is good, that hiring pace looked meager in an otherwise strong US labor market. California’s hiring pace also was less than half the 2% rate nationally. Second-slowest was D.C. at 0.91%.

Please note, the fastest job growth was happening in key economic rival states. Nevada and Florida gained 3.4% and Texas rose by 3.3%.

California’s economy juggled numerous challenges in 2023, including a weakening technology sector, labor unrest making it the nation’s strike hub, and population outflow – which created a shortage of workers to hire. There’s no doubt the state’s reputation as a tough place to do business doesn’t help.

Some California industries are in reverse gear. State jobs stats show noteworthy job cuts in the movie business, off 25% – major strikes all but shut production; at temp agencies, off 14% – drops common when hiring slows; lending, off 9% – rising rates slashed borrowing; and at warehouses, off 5% – online shopping has cooled.

• TRACK HOME INVENTORY: Get free SoCal supply data via St. Louis Fed. BOOKMARK THIS LINK!

And geographically speaking, some of California’s biggest job markets were weak: San Francisco jobs fell by 1% while employment grew only 0.3% in Los Angeles County and rose 0.4% around San Jose.

But tumbling to the bottom of the hiring rankings isn’t California’s style.

Remember 1993? When a California house cost $190,000, L.A.’s Metro subway opened, and the first PDF documents were created.

Looking back over 50 years, that year was the only other time that California was the worst state for job growth. The state’s job count shrank by 1% in 1993 largely due to a major loss of aerospace work and the fallout from a real estate crash.

Think about who’s been No. 51 in hiring more often since 1974: DC (6 times), Michigan (5 times), Alaska and West Virginia (4), and Louisiana, New York, North Dakota, and Wyoming (3).

One year earlier

It’s a swift reversal for California.

In 2022, coming off some of the nation’s tightest pandemic business limitations, jobs grew statewide by 5.5% – the fourth-best increase among the states. But replacing all the jobs lost during the coronavirus economic chill ended abruptly.

California’s 4.6-percentage-point drop in hiring pace between these two years was exceeded only by Nevada’s 4.9 dip. Nationally, job growth was off, too,  but only by 1.6 percentage points.

• HOW NIMBY ARE YOU? Ponder common objections to new housing.TAKE OUR QUIZ!

Now over the years California has been more likely to be a hiring leader than laggard.

Last year was the state’s seventh year in the bottom 10 in the past half-century, ranking it No. 26 among the states for bad job markets. The states earning this dubious distinction most often were West Virginia (25 times), then Connecticut (22), Pennsylvania and Rhode Island (20), and DC and New Jersey (19).

But 2022 was California’s 13th year in the top 10 for hiring. But that’s not nearly a national high.

Nevada’s been in the top 10 in 38 of these 50 years. Next comes Arizona and Florida with 33 years, Idaho at 30, Utah at 29, and Texas at 26.

Bottom line

Yes, California – the nation’s largest job market – has consistently outperformed most states.

Over 50 years, California’s 1.8% average annual growth ranks No. 19 and beats the 1.5% national pace. Tops? Nevada at 3.8%, Arizona at 3.1%, Utah at 2.9%, Florida at 2.6%, and Idaho and Texas at 2.5%.

And even over the last 10 years, the state has been above average. California ranked No. 14 with 1.7% job growth vs. 0.9% nationally. Tops? Utah, Idaho and Nevada at 2.9%, Florida at 2.6%, Arizona at 2.4%, and  Texas at 2.2%.

However, last year’s sluggish hiring pace should be a wake-up call to state leaders – political, business and labor – that California cannot take its long-running job-creation success for granted.

• REAL ESTATE NEWSLETTER: Get our free ‘Home Stretch’ by email. SUBSCRIBE HERE!

California is a pricey place to live and do business and there’s plenty of lower-cost, high-quality competition that have proven to be viable options for bosses and workers.

Jonathan Lansner is the business columnist for the Southern California News Group. He can be reached at jlansner@scng.com