El Dorado County supervisor John Hidahl dies at his home
Updated: 2:27 PM PST Nov 3, 2024
John Hidahl, the supervisor for El Dorado County District 1, died on Saturday afternoon. El Dorado County released a statement on Facebook Sunday morning announcing that Hidahl died suddenly at his home. “Supervisor Hidahl was a dedicated and devoted public servant who loved his country, his county, and his community,” the statement said in part. “He will be deeply missed by all those who knew him.”Details on what caused Hidahl’s death are still unknown. Hidahl was born and raised in Ceres, but lived in El Dorado County for 46 years, according to the county’s website. He was married to his wife Eileen for 52 years and together they raised five daughters. El Dorado County intends to release more details on Hidahl’s service in the coming days. See more coverage of top California stories here | Download our app | Subscribe to our morning newsletter
John Hidahl, the supervisor for El Dorado County District 1, died on Saturday afternoon.
El Dorado County released a statement on Facebook Sunday morning announcing that Hidahl died suddenly at his home.
“Supervisor Hidahl was a dedicated and devoted public servant who loved his country, his county, and his community,” the statement said in part. “He will be deeply missed by all those who knew him.”
Details on what caused Hidahl’s death are still unknown.
Hidahl was born and raised in Ceres, but lived in El Dorado County for 46 years, according to the county’s website. He was married to his wife Eileen for 52 years and together they raised five daughters.
El Dorado County intends to release more details on Hidahl’s service in the coming days.
A company Christmas potluck for employees of a San Pedro Taco Bell turned into a boozy bash, with one worker having sex with his wife in front of spectators and another vomiting into a guacamole bowl, according to a lawsuit by one of the employees.
The worker, Alana Bechiom, filed the lawsuit last week in Los Angeles Superior Court. She’s seeking unspecified damages in the suit.
When Bechiom reported the incident to human resources, the lawsuit claims, three co-workers who took part in the party were fired, but Bechiom said she was physically threatened and her car window was smashed, and she claims Taco Bell and and the franchise owner did nothing to protect her against the threats.
“While we don’t own or manage this location, the franchisee who owns and operates this restaurant has shared that they take these claims very seriously,” a Taco Bell spokesperson said in a statement.
The franchise owner, Alvarado Restaurant Group, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The alcohol-fueled party took place on Dec. 18, 2022 at the Taco Bell on 1031 S. Gaffey St. in San Pedro, where Bechiom had worked as a cashier, according to court records.
Workers were “encouraged to bring food in a potluck-styled buffet,” and Bechiom had decided to take a guacamole bowl to the party.
When she walked in, however, the lawsuit claims, she noticed the windows in the restaurant were covered with wrapping paper, and the cameras in the Taco Bell lobby were also covered.
She had been socializing in the parking lot for a while but, when Bechiom walked back in, according to court records, she found one of her male co-workers was “having sex with his wife in front of everyone at the party.”
The co-worker’s wife, the lawsuit states, was bent over and kissing two other co-workers, including a supervisor, simultaneously.
“[Bechiom] was shocked, disgusted and outraged by what she saw and ran,” according to the suit.
But before leaving, the lawsuit states she went back into the Taco Bell to get her guacamole bowl. Instead she found two of her co-workers vomiting, with one retching into her bowl.
Bechiom complained to her supervisor about what she saw and about someone vomiting into her bowl, but the supervisor then threatened to fight her, according to the suit.
After she reported the incident, three of the Taco Bell employees, including the supervisor and the male co-worker who had sex with his wife, were fired, the lawsuit claims.
But Bechiom claims she continued to receive threats from co-workers who called her a “snitch.” Four days after the party, she claims, someone smashed the window of her car.
When she reported the threats, she claims, Taco Bell and the franchise owner offered to transfer her.
Bechiom resigned, and is suing Taco Bell and Alvarado Restaurant Group for alleged discrimination, sexual harassment, retaliation and failure to investigate.
Los Angeles County supervisors voted Tuesday to extend — and slightly increase to 4% — a soon-to-expire cap on rent increases, sparing tenants in unincorporated areas from a big rent hike for an additional six months.
In November 2022, the supervisors approved a temporary 3% cap on annual rent increases, framing it as a short-term way to keep rent-burdened residents in their homes as the pandemic-era tenant protections dissipated. The cap applies to all rent-controlled units in unincorporated L.A. County — that means those units built before 1995, as well as all mobile homes.
The cap was meant to expire at the end of this year, at which point landlords could have hiked rents by up to 8%.
But on Tuesday, the supervisors voted 4 to 1 to approve the 4% cap and keep it in place through June.
The board also voted unanimously to direct relevant county departments to look into what a permanent cap should look like for unincorporated areas.
Supervisor Kathryn Barger voted against the 4% rent increase cap, calling it a “stopgap policy” that placed the burden onto mom-and-pop landlords.
The motion was crafted by Supervisor Lindsey Horvath and co-sponsored by Supervisor Hilda Solis, who both said they were concerned that dramatic rent hikes would increase homelessness in unincorporated L.A. County, home to more than 1 million residents.
“We’re not saying don’t increase rents,” said Horvath, the only renter of the five supervisors. “We’re saying to keep it manageable.”
Horvath’s office said roughly 270,000 households would be affected by the cap.
The push was met with skepticism from both Barger and Supervisor Holly Mitchell, who said they felt the county was failing its small landlords, who have been forced to pay more and more for insurance, home repairs and energy costs while the rent they rely on has stagnated.
Mitchell said many of the landlords struggling most were people of color. And some of the houses they owned were the last affordable options around.
“Walk through Leimert Park, walk through Hyde Park, some of the remaining affordable areas to live in this entire county — and look and see who owns those properties. Those are BIPOC people who either bought them years ago or inherited them,” she said. “So they’re property rich and cash poor.”
“They have got to be maintained — because if we lose them, we will be further screwed,” she said.
Rather than limit rent increases, Mitchell and Barger said the county should focus on building more housing and getting money out the door that they’d already marked to help small landlords.
Last week, Barger and Mitchell demanded an audit of the county’s rent relief program for mom-and-pop landlords after a sluggish rollout.
The supervisors had teamed up in January to ask the county’s Department of Business and Consumer Affairs to start distributing $45 million to small property owners for back rent owed starting in April 2022.
Nearly a year later, they say, the department has barely started — a fact that visibly angered Barger on Tuesday.
“You should be embarrassed,” Barger said, nodding to department directorRafael Carbajal. “We should all be embarrassed.”
The vote came amid objections from landlords who said they were hurting financially after having forgone any meaningful rent increases since before the pandemic.
Tenant advocates, meanwhile, urged the board to do all it could to prevent landlords from increasing rents by as much as 8%.
“This level of increase is close to what’s considered price gouging in an emergency, and is far above what is needed to give landlords a healthy return,” said Sasha Harnden of the Inner City Law Center.
The cap does not apply to any of the county’s incorporated cities, most of which have their own rules for rent increases.
The city of Los Angeles’ COVID-era freeze on rent increases in rent-stabilized units is set to expire at the end of January. On Wednesday, the City Council will consider a proposal to cap the amount a landlord can raise rent to 4% — or as much as 6% if the landlord pays utilities. If that does not pass, landlords will be able to raise rents by 7% — or up to 9% if the landlord covers utilities.
Times staff writer Julia Wick contributed to this report.
For Armando Herman, the July 11 L.A. County Board of Supervisors meeting was a typical outing.
He called an attorney a “dum dum” and an “Uncle Tom.” During a discussion on the upcoming Olympics, he accused a supervisor of fostering a Holocaust. He used an expletive 25 times, a gay slur twice and a racial epithet once. And he did much of it with a swastika pinned to his back.
Aside from labeling the diatribes as “off topic,” there was little the supervisors could do to stop Herman, 56, an infamous gadfly at both L.A. city and county meetings. His ugly remarks were protected by the 1st Amendment.
“You’re abusing my time,” he responded after one interjection from Board Chair Janice Hahn. “You need to stop that.”
“You’re abusing my ears,” she shot back.
Supervisor Janice Hahn at an L.A. County Board of Supervisors meeting on Oct. 3.
(Irfan Khan / Los Angeles Times)
A week later, county officials accused Herman of crossing a line by sending vulgar, threatening emails to four of the five members of the all-female board of supervisors. The emails, the officials argued, went beyond what is allowable under free speech protections. A judge agreed, barring Herman last month from attending board meetings in person for three years — although he is still allowed to speak by phone.
Herman insists he didn’t send the emails.
Inflammatory commentators like Herman, who gleefully indulge in hate speech, have been a continual source of disgust for local public officials. Sometimes, the commentators are forced to leave meetings when they act disruptively, such as shouting from the audience or speaking beyond the time limit — but the ban doesn’t extend to future meetings.
In a few instances, officials have obtained restraining orders requiring a critic to stay away from their homes, cars and offices. In 2019, the city of Los Angeles got three separate restraining orders against Herman after he allegedly threatened Deputy City Attorney Strefan Fauble, Los Angeles Board of Police Commissioners Executive President Richard Tefank and City Council President Paul Krekorian.
The city also got a restraining order in 2016 against vocal critic Wayne Spindler after he submitted racially incendiary drawings at a public meeting and labeled then-City Council President Herb Wesson with a racial slur.
In each case, a judge allowed Herman and Spindler to continue attending public meetings as long as they stayed 10 yards from the public official.
The newest order against Herman is unusual in barring him from setting foot inside the Kenneth Hahn Hall of Administration — including during the board’s weekly meetings.
In their petitions for temporary restraining orders, filed July 17, Supervisors Holly Mitchell, Hilda Solis, Kathryn Barger and Hahn each said they had received an email from Herman a few days earlier. Each email asked whether the supervisor would like the sender to “eat her delicious p— at [address],” including the supervisor’s home address in both the subject line and body of the message. The emails were sent from the address “armandoherman@proton.me.”
“l have done my best to tolerate his offensive and vulgar comments and behavior at the public meetings, but his recent email is deeply troubling and an escalation of his behavior that has me concerned for my safety,” Hahn wrote in her petition. “The comments and threats in the email are highly vulgar, deeply offensive, and when coupled with the fact that he tracked down my home address and included it with his comments, I am greatly concerned for my safety.”
The petition from Solis cites other instances in which staffers say they were harassed by Herman. That harassment culminated in July, staffers say, when Herman sent the email to Solis and a text message to one of her field deputies threatening sexual violence.
Herman, who is listed in court documents as a Hacienda Heights resident, denied sending the text and emails, writing in a court filing that he had never seen the email address where the messages originated. He included a complaint that he said he sent to the FBI alleging that he was being set up. He did not specify whether he had a suspect in mind.
“Someone is attempting to impersonate me with the goal of having sanctions placed on me, stripping me of my constitutional rights of attending board hearings,” he wrote. “I am a known activist with a foul mouth, but I have never sent the messages that they alleged that I sent.”
Herman, who was not represented by an attorney in the proceeding, did not respond to several calls for comment. Asked in a text message about his statements that he never sent the emails, he wrote, “Yes , TRUE THEY ARE trying and doing!” but did not respond to follow up messages.
Senior Deputy County Counsel Kent Sommer wrote in a Sept. 7 court filing that the “content, threats and vulgarity” in the emails was “entirely consistent with Mr. Herman’s demonstrated language and conduct” towards the supervisors.
After the court granted the county’s request for a temporary restraining order, Judge Gary Eto issued a permanent order on Sept. 14, barring Herman from going within 100 yards of the four supervisors’ homes, workplaces or cars.
The permanent order also barred Herman from going in person to any public meetings in the Kenneth Hahn Hall of Administration for three years.
The next meeting he could attend would be Sept. 13, 2026. However, he can still speak at meetings during phone-in public comments.
David Loy, legal director of the First Amendment Coalition, said that even the most offensive speech spewed in city and county public meetings is considered protected speech. However, he said, these protections do not extend to legitimate threats.
“He could be a Democrat, Republican, Nazi, Communist — it doesn’t matter what his point of view is,” said Loy. “What’s relevant is if there’s genuine or true threats to cause harm, unrelated to his politics or ideology.”
Last week, a judge issued an order requiring that Donald Harlan, a frequent speaker at City Council meetings, stay at least 100 yards away from Councilmember Bob Blumenfield, his home, his office and his car.
The case stems from a Sept. 8 council meeting where Blumenfield ordered Harlan removed for yelling from the audience.
After being told to leave, Harlan got up and pointed at Blumenfield, screaming: “Bob, you’re f— dead you f— Jew! I’m going to f— kill all your f— Jewish f— people!”
Harlan, listed in court records as a resident of L.A.’s Westlake neighborhood, is still allowed to attend council meetings in person and speak, but he must stay at least 10 yards from Blumenfield. In a legal declaration, Blumenfield said Harlan had made other anti-Semitic comments earlier this year, during a celebration of Jewish American Heritage Month at City Hall.
“These characters who flit in and out …. are mostly there to be disruptive. They enjoy it.” said Eric Preven, a gadfly whose running commentary is pointed yet civil. “Most of the time you just have to take it.”
Occasionally, however, the casual use of hate speech has caused an uproar among audience members.
Yvonne Michelle Autry, center, is ejected from a City Council meeting on Sept. 18, 2018, while fellow attendee Armando Herman waves his arms.
(Los Angeles Times)
In August, after Herman uttered an anti-Black slur, an activist with Black Lives Matter-Los Angeles demanded that council members have him ejected from the room. As Herman continued to give his remarks, audience members chanted, “Cut his mic! Cut his mic!”
“I understand that the language is offensive,” responded Jonathan Groat, a deputy city attorney. “Nobody condones this. But he legally is entitled to give his public comment.”
Two protesters were eventually ordered to leave the room for yelling, even as Herman continued speaking at the podium.
“The longer we disrupt him, the longer he’s gonna be up here,” Councilmember Marqueece Harris-Dawson told the audience.
While Herman is barred from county meetings, he has remained a reliable presence at City Hall, hurling slurs and epithets and at times using fake foreign accents in ways that target various racial and ethnic groups. He sometimes makes loud bleating noises and has his small dog in tow. He rarely says anything substantive.
On Friday, when Councilmember Katy Yaroslavsky — who is Jewish — called Herman’s name at a committee meeting, he arrived at the podium and said, “Thank you, Jew.” At one point, he said Yaroslavsky and Blumenfield were “f— Jews.” At another, he called council members “fucking c—.” He also used the N-word.
“I hope god kills you,” Herman said, punctuating his statement with a profanity.
Yaroslavsky ordered Herman to be removed from the room, not because of the language, but because, among other things, his remarks were off-topic. “Get him out of here, he’s out,” she said.
“We apparently are required to listen to this because of lawsuits,” Yaroslavsky told the audience.
Ahead of Diwali, the Delhi government has raised the minimum wages of unskilled, semi-skilled and skilled workers, with Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia saying this will be a respite for them from inflation.
The revised monthly wages will be applicable from October 1. Wages of unskilled workers will be increased from Rs 16,506 to Rs 16,792, semi-skilled workers from Rs 18,187 to Rs 18,499 and skilled workers from Rs 20,019 to Rs 20,357, a statement issued by the Delhi government said.
The city government had earlier raised the minimum wages in May.
“Increase in minimum wages will give respite to the labour class suffering from the adverse impact of inflation,” Sisodia said and claimed that the Delhi government pays the “highest minimum wages” to labourers in the country.
The move will benefit unskilled, semi-skilled, skilled and other workers in all scheduled employment categories of the Delhi government. This will also benefit those in clerical and supervisory jobs, he said.
The deputy chief minister said that people employed on minimum wages in the unorganised sector should also get the benefits of the dearness allowances, which are usually offered to state and central government employees.
The minimum wage rates for the supervisor and clerical cadres of employees have also been revised. The monthly wages of non-matriculated employees has been increased from Rs 18,187 to Rs 18499 and for matriculate employees from Rs 20,019 to Rs 20,357.
For graduates and those with higher educational qualifications, the monthly wages have been hiked from Rs 21,756 to Rs 22,146, the statement said. “Minimum wages in Delhi are the highest in comparison to any other states,” Sisodia said.
The Delhi government is revising the dearness allowance every six months to provide respite to all workers in Delhi from inflation, he said.