Your Thursday Newspaper 7/13/2026 Why was accused rapist allowed to go incognito for years? + New fence with sidewalks blocks ocean view! + City denies our request for police report on fatal crash + Who are these Council candidates?
DID EVERYBODY ELSE KNOW A FENCE WOULD BE PUT UP BLOCKING A BIT OF OUR OCEAN VIEW?
Wow! We are losing an awesome part of our ocean view!!
We are looking into the fence along Highway 1 that Caltrans crews are putting in along the old millsite property. This appears to be the work of Caltrans and is on their right of way? We have asked Isaac Whippy, city manager, if a Coastal Commission hearing was held by the city, as from our understanding blocking an ocean view requires Coastal Commission approval?
It may have happened and we missed it. There was always a fence there, but it was much shorter and did not block the ocean view. Why not a wire fence?. The lumber mill kept the fences short where people could see over them to the ocean. Their fences are/were taller in the areas where brush and trees block the view anyway. Did Caltrans do this as part of the sidewalking? (Those sidewalks are great btw.) We have called and emailed Isaac and will go from there. We have also emailed Caltrans and Robert Jason Pinoli, president and CEO of Mendocino Railway. We don’t know who wanted the wooden fence and what process approved it. City? Caltrans? Skunk? Nearby tribal property? We don’t know at this point.
GOODBYE GADGE AND THANKS FOR YOUR WORK!
Fort Bragg is losing another police officer. Gadge Farris’s last day on the job will be Friday. We have encountered Gadge on the job and are sorry to see him go. Note, the FBPD also includes SGT Padriac Ferris. The names are not spelled the same, but one might confuse them in a small town. We emailed him and if he replies, we will put in his words here.
BRIEF UPDATES IN THE DEATH OF PEDESTRIAN STEPHANIE SPRAGUE
https://www.gofundme.com/f/honoring-stephanie-sprague-after-a-tragic-accident
We sent a California Public Records Act request to the City of Fort Bragg seeking the name of the driver and the basic police report from the scene of the fatal crash. We stated clearly that we were not requesting investigative material—only the initial report from the scene. The City denied the request. Here is their reply:
“The City has identified no disclosable records in response to this Request. Custodian of Records in conjunction with Staff made this determination. The records you requested do not fall within the categories made disclosable by law. Per GC 7923.600 this is still an investigative incident and is therefore exempt from disclosure.”
Our Position on the City’s Denial
We believe the City is wrong, and we are appealing. The police report from the scene is not an investigatory document. It is a fixed record of basic facts — who was involved, where it happened, what officers observed, and what actions were taken. It does not change over time. If any investigative or unconfirmed notes were added to the report, those portions can be redacted, as the California Public Records Act allows.
Based on past experience, the name of the driver cannot be withheld. It is a basic identifying fact in a fatal collision, not an investigative conclusion.
It is possible there is more to this story. That appears to be the case here, and everyone — including Stephanie’s family — has asked the community to wait for verified information. We have no idea what the unreleased facts may be. But we have covered other cases over the years that remind us why transparency matters.
In one case in Butte County in the 1980s, we pressed for the name of a driver. It turned out the person who stopped — and whom everyone assumed was the driver — was not the person who first struck the pedestrian. There is no evidence of anything like that here. The point is simply: you never know, and that is why public records matter.
About Stephanie
Stephanie’s cats are still on the loose, but her dog is home with her son. She was the heart and soul of the Old Fashioned Dress Review at Paul Bunyan Days, an expert in vintage fashions, and a joyful presence at Footlighters. Her death shattered her partner Joseph for a time, but he is moving forward with the Dress Review, which will be dedicated to her, with many remembrances and her favorite old‑fashioned outfits shown off.
We have a full remembrance story for Stephanie on the way. The fundraiser for her is posted above. This is a tragedy — help if you can.
Fort Bragg City Council Race: Early Signals and Long Memory
This Fort Bragg City Council election could get pretty ugly — that’s what we’ve already heard from multiple corners. The good news is that it also has a promising crop of candidates, including several newcomers.
In conversations around town, people tell us they sense the council may be heading back toward a more traditional, tradition‑run posture. Fort Bragg spent most of its history with a conservative majority; the shift toward liberal leadership only happened after the civic turmoil of the 1990s — the nefarious acts by conservative councilmembers and a city manager, the arson fires, and the infamous punch on the steps of City Hall. Voters revolted against that era’s anarchy and changed course. That is the historical record.
We are hearing now, from many residents, that the council may be drifting back toward its long‑standing civic character. That is not a prediction — only a reflection of what people are saying. Readers should confirm all election information with trusted sources.
Four of the candidates on this year’s ballot — the three incumbents and Mary Rose — were also on the ballot in 2022 for this same seat. Mary Rose finished sixth in that race, with three more candidates behind her, in one of the busiest contests Fort Bragg has ever seen. This year’s race has seven candidates instead of nine, but we’ve heard indications it may still get intense.
Fort Bragg City Council Candidates Certified
The Mendocino County Elections Office has certified the sufficiency of nomination papers submitted by eight candidates seeking election to three four-year seats on the Fort Bragg City Council this November. We give more information on the new candidates than the incumbents, as they have the advantage of having been seen and argued about for at least four years now. The candidates are:
Tess Albin-Smith, 75,- Incumbent
Levi Cooke- 36, A relative newcomer who has made a noticeable stir on Facebook and spoke at the most recent City Council meeting. Cooke has burst onto the scene in recent months and is the newest face in this year’s field of candidates.
“I was born in Eureka, raised in Trinity County, and have lived in Fort Bragg for the past 10 years. I’m a full‑time College of the Redwoods student, independent researcher, and app developer who’s become actively involved in local government and community issues,” he told me.
Jason Godeke- 58, Mayor, incumbent. (There is no public vote for mayor in Fort Bragg. All candidates run for City Council seats, and once the election results are certified, the five‑member council selects the mayor and vice mayor from among themselves.
This vote happens at the first organizational meeting following the seating of newly elected councilmembers. The selection is made by the council, not by voters, and the mayor serves at the pleasure of the council for the duration of that term.)
Mary Rose Kaczorowski- Age not provided. Mary Rose has been an environmental activist on the Mendocino Coast for more than 25 years. She is an artist working in several mediums and has a large body of writing and artwork, much of it available online. She has reported for the Mendocino Voice in recent years and has held various jobs locally, including at the Advocate‑News.
Frank and Mary Rose have been co‑workers at several places over the years — the U.S. Census Bureau, the Mendocino Voice, Adventist Health Mendocino Coast Hospital, and the Advocate‑News (though not at the same time).
Mary Rose has run for City Council more than once. In the 2022 race for this same seat, she finished fifth. That contest had nine candidates; three of those same candidates are running again this November. In 2022, Albin‑Smith finished fourth on election night, but edged out Michelle Roberts in the final certified results by three votes.
Scott Mayberry, 62, – Perhaps the best known of the challengers, Scott Mayberry spent his career in law enforcement. He served as Fort Bragg’s Police Chief until 2014, then continued in public service as an investigator for the Mendocino County District Attorney’s Office until his retirement from active duty. His father, Joe Mayberry, also served as Fort Bragg’s chief of police, making the Mayberry name one of the longest‑running law‑enforcement families in the city’s history.
Scott has remained visible in the community since retiring, and with the supporters and reputation he has built over decades, he enters this race as one of the more recognizable non‑incumbent candidates. Many residents know him from his years in uniform, his administrative leadership at the police department, and his later work for the DA’s office.
Marcia Rafanan-49, Incumbent- Vice Mayor
Mary Ann Schmidt, 62 Mary Ann Schmidt moved to Fort Bragg a few years ago from New Hyde Park, New York, and has become an active member of the local arts community. Her Facebook profile describes her as a “Storyteller, Advocate of cognitive sovereignty, Dragon Dreamer, Lover of Life,” a mix that reflects the creative, eclectic presence she has brought to town since arriving.
She participates in local arts events and circles, and is known among artists for her enthusiasm, her imaginative framing of ideas, and her willingness to jump into community projects.
Richard Ulveling, 35, Richard Ulveling is a local business owner who runs Richard’s Auto Clean, a mobile car‑detailing service. He is originally from the Portland, Oregon area, where he grew up, and has lived in Fort Bragg for more than ten years.
Ulveling is known locally through his business and his work around town, and enters the race as one of the younger candidates in this year’s field.
Information about the candidates and the November 2026 election is posted on the City’s official website: City of Fort Bragg website
Election Notes and Local Context
One unusual feature of Fort Bragg elections is that campaign signs follow two different calendars depending on where you live. Because the City administers the Coastal Zone for the California Coastal Commission, signage rules change when the Coastal Commission is involved.
Signs may go up now in the inland zone, but not until Sept. 3 in the Coastal Zone. The boundary between the two is not a simple line; it cuts through neighborhoods in ways that aren’t obvious, though areas closer to the ocean generally fall inside the Coastal Zone.
The last day to register to vote for the November 2026 election is October 19, 2026. Residents can register online with the Secretary of State or in person at the Mendocino County Registrar of Voters office in Ukiah. Mail‑in registration forms are available at City Hall and the Fort Bragg Public Library. Sample ballots will begin mailing September 24, 2026.
Fort Bragg has always been a very different place from Mendocino City — the town that never incorporated and now has no universally agreed‑upon name. Mendocino was once church‑centered and dry; Fort Bragg was a work‑hard, play‑late mill town with more bars per capita than anywhere else on the Coast, or so the old stories go. Time passed, people aged, and most of the bars closed. Cannabis is common in both places now, but Fort Bragg still leans beer and Mendocino still leans wine. Fort Bragg draws the Sacramento fishing crowd; Mendocino draws Bay Area tourists.
Fort Bragg remains a traditional town, with old families and long‑standing civic habits. Willits and Ukiah were once the county’s conservative centers, but those places have shifted left over time. Everything changes. Elections have their own personalities, and there is no way to know how this one will unfold. What we can say is that, whatever direction voters take, good people will be stepping forward to lead.
MAN WHO TURNED MOVIE NIGHT INTO A SEXUAL NIGHTMARE SENTENCED TO STATE PRISON — THAT WAS THE DA’S HEADLINE. SO WHY DIDN’T WE EVER KNOW THIS CASE EXISTED?
We have a big problem with the way Matthew Ryan Mayo’s case was handled — along with other cases involving arrests that come out of investigations. Mayo, and other accused sex criminals, were allowed to move forward with total discretion and completely out of public view until conviction.
This man was arrested and then allowed to remain free for several years, which might be fine on its own — but nobody ever knew this was happening. There was no public awareness that a serious sex‑crime case was moving through the system.
During that time, Mayo continued working in health care. He had been the chief respiratory therapist at a hospital in Marin County and later worked as a respiratory therapist in Willits, where he raped a co‑worker.
And research shows that people who commit sexual assault often have a pattern of offending, not a single incident. Studies of sexual‑offense behavior consistently find higher rates of repeat offending than in many other crime categories — which is exactly why transparency in these cases matters.
First, the facts of the case — then our big questions about how this, and other sexual‑assault cases, are handled without any public arrest information.
The following is from a press release provided by District Attorney David Eyster:
Convicted rapist Matthew Ryan Mayo, age 46, formerly of Crawford Ranch Road in Hopland and Sonoma County, was sentenced in the Mendocino County Superior Court Wednesday afternoon, August 12th, to eleven (11) years in state prison, the maximum sentence allowed by law for the three crimes Mayo perpetrated in 2020.
Mayo was convicted by jury in May earlier this year of the rape of an incapacitated woman, a felony; drugging another to perpetrate one or more felonies, a felony; and distributing a photograph of an intimate part of another without consent, a misdemeanor.
At the time of his crimes in 2020, defendant Mayo was a state-licensed respiratory therapist working at Howard Memorial in Willits. He invited a co-worker to his home after work to watch a movie.
During her visit Mayo offered his guest a Heineken, which she accepted without knowing that he had mixed the drug zolpidem (marketed as Ambien) into the beer. Later, after she was already incapacitated from the first spiked drink and sexually assaulted, Mayo forced on the victim more spiked liquid before he repeatedly raped her.
Drugs commonly used in drug-facilitated sexual assaults (DFSA), like zolpidem, are primarily fast-acting central nervous system depressants. These substances – particularly when mixed with alcohol – can rapidly impair a victim’s behavior, perception and decision-making capacity, putting the victim at a severe physical and mental disadvantage. CNS drugs are used by predators seeking to commit sex crimes as CNS drugs quickly metabolize and are eliminated as evidence from a victim’s system, often before the crime can even be reported.
Zolpidem, normally used for patients suffering from insomnia, rapidly produces muscle relaxation and sedation, leaving victims unable to defend themselves. Its effects include slurred speech, loss of the ability to verbally and physically resist, staggering gait and impaired coordination.
For a naïve or new user, zolpidem can cause a rapid shift from consciousness to deep stupor or coma. Victims of zolpidem poisoning experience anterograde amnesia, meaning they experience partial or complete memory loss for events occurring while under the influence.
In sexual assault cases, zolpidem causes a cognitive slowing and impaired judgment which reduces a victim’s ability to consent through any accepted norm of informed, voluntary choice. A person under the influence of zolpidem could appear alert but, instead, is operating without executive control or memory encoding.
The Respiratory Care Board of California, a division of the Department of Consumer Affairs, obtained a court order early in the local prosecution restricting defendant Mayo’s license, an order that prevented him from working in the respiratory therapist field pending the outcome of his Mendocino County charges.
With Wednesday’s prison sentence now entered in the books, it is expected that the Respiratory Care Board will now permanently revoke Mayo’s license to practice in the respiratory care field.
The law enforcement agencies that worked to gather evidence against Mayo were the Mendocino County Sheriff’s Office, the Department of Justice DNA crime laboratory in Redding, and the DA’s own Bureau of Investigations.
Special thanks are again extended to witnesses who brought their special training and expertise to bear in court through expert testimony. Those experts were Dr. Kristen Marin (Sexual Assault Response Team) of Adventist Health Ukiah Valley; Carolyn Heitsman (DNA) of the DOJ crime lab; Richard Kreutzer (digital forensics) of Lake County; and toxicology expert, Dr. Marc A. LeBeau of Missouri.
These types of prosecution are not possible without victims having the courage and confidence to come forward and cooperate – both in the short and long terms — with the investigating agencies and the prosecution.
The trial attorney last May, DA David Eyster returned to court Wednesday afternoon – with the victim looking on from the gallery — to argue why Mayo had earned and should receive the maximum state prison commitment. Mendocino County Superior Court Judge Victoria Shanahan presided over Wednesday’s sentencing hearing and ordered the defendant serve the eleven-year commitment. Judge Shanahan did not mince her words in addressing Mayo during the hearing. As the hearing was concluding, the Court looked directly at the defendant and sternly told him, “You deserve every year of the eleven I have imposed.”
END OF DA PRESS RELEASE
We made a fuss when he was convicted and the District Attorney finally told Mendocino County about this — but did not include a photo. Now the DA, who tried this case himself, has included a photo at sentencing. But not at conviction. Why not?
And why does every person accused of drunk in public, DUI, petty theft, or any other routine crime get their name in the booking log? At the same time this man was already charged with rape, everyone else was still getting their photo posted in the jail booking log. The DA routinely releases photos of convicted drunk drivers, and once even issued a major press release about a woman tried for DUI — a case where the jury hung. But not this guy, and not other sex offenders at conviction.
Why are they not arrested and entered into the booking log with charges? His name was never out there until he was convicted. And research shows that many sexual offenders commit more than one assault, which makes transparency even more important.
The DA does not release photos of arrestees, but does release photos of people who have committed minor crimes — especially minor compared to this. We are baffled.
This business of inviting a woman over and plotting a drug‑facilitated rape ahead of time is extremely disturbing and, in our view, raises the case to a higher level. Was she the first? We don’t know — and that’s part of the problem.
We worked to get his photo and get it out there. We had it, but could not get anyone to confirm it was him, despite multiple attempts. We also contacted the state respiratory board, which suspended Mayo’s license based on the allegations, preventing him from working as a respiratory therapist while he awaited trial.
We don’t think this was a coverup of any kind — only that there is no mechanism requiring people who are arrested and charged with a crime, but who voluntarily come in or meet detectives in their attorney’s office, to be booked into the jail. When that happens, they never enter the public booking log, and their names and charges never appear alongside everyone else charged with anything above an infraction.
In our view, their names and charges should be public somewhere, just as they are for everyone else who is arrested, booked, and photographed for far lesser offenses.
Respiratory therapists are highly trained and invaluable people in every hospital. Patients would die far more often if they weren’t there to monitor oxygen levels, regulate breathing, and manage the critical functions of the lungs. They are great people doing essential work, and most of them are exactly who you want at your bedside. But, as in any profession, there are exceptions.
We received the following statement a few weeks ago in response to our questions about how the board protects patients and oversees licensees.
“The Board is committed to public protection and treats every complaint or referral seriously, ensuring each is reviewed through a thorough, fair, and consistent process.
The Board investigates all complaints and referrals it receives. During an investigation, the Board will collect evidence and consult experts or legal counsel as needed. After the investigation is complete, the Board determines the appropriate action: issue a citation, file a formal accusation, refer the case to prosecutors, issue a warning or cease‑and‑desist, refer to another agency, or close the case for insufficient evidence.
When there is potential immediate risk to the public, the Board can seek immediate restrictions or suspension while the case proceeds. Each case is unique, and the Board monitors criminal cases and coordinates with the appropriate law enforcement agency while they are under way.
After a criminal conviction, the Board is legally required to complete the administrative disciplinary process, which includes obtaining an Interim Suspension Order (ISO), filing an Accusation, and proceeding under the Administrative Procedure Act before a final revocation can be imposed.
The Board has proposed legislation in its Sunset Bill (SB 1304) that would allow automatic suspension and revocation for certain serious felony convictions involving respiratory care practitioners.
More information about the Board’s complaint and enforcement process is available at https://www.rcb.ca.gov/enforcement/index.shtml, and disciplinary actions, including revocations, are published athttps://www.rcb.ca.gov/enforcement/disc_actions.shtml.”
Regards,
Jonathan Morales
Manager, Office of Public Affairs (Dept of Consumer Affairs, State of CA.
What this case leaves behind is a sharper truth: a system that keeps its most serious charges quiet cannot expect the public to trust it. When violent‑felony arrests can move forward with no booking log, no photo, no basic daylight — while people accused of far lesser crimes are displayed for all to see — something essential is out of alignment.
We’re not asking for drama. We’re asking for consistency, for visibility, for the same baseline transparency applied to everyone else who enters the criminal‑justice pipeline. Communities can only protect themselves when they know what’s happening around them. Silence doesn’t make anyone safer; it only hides the information people need to understand their own world.
So we’ll keep pressing. We’ll keep asking why these cases vanish from view until the moment of conviction. We’ll keep pushing for a mechanism that treats serious charges with the same public accountability as everything else above an infraction.
Justice only works when the community can see the system they’re asked to trust.
