Home Care In Grass Valley, CA

GRASS VALLEY — A driver was hospitalized with major injuries following a collision with a big rig on a Grass Valley highway, officials said Tuesday.

California Highway Patrol's Grass Valley division said it happened around 2:15 p.m on the Golden Center Freeway (Highway 49) near Dorsey Drive.

Firefighters responded to the scene due to the car catching fire from the collision. CHP said the driver was able to exit the burning car on his own and was alert.

Photos from the scene released by CHP show the car crashed into the back of the big rig's trailer. The entire front end of the car, up to the windshield, was heavily damaged and stuck underneath the back end of the trailer, which was also damaged in the fire.

The driver of the big rig was not injured.

Golden Center Freeway was temporarily shut down south of Dorsey due to the crash and fire. Traffic was eventually able to pass through the center divider while officials worked to clear the scene.

The circumstances of the crash remain under investigation.

Richard Ramos

Richard Ramos is a web producer for CBS Sacramento who was born and raised in Sacramento. He graduated with a BA in Journalism from CSUS.

On an early spring day, California Solar Electric Cooperative workers gathered at a local food co-op in Grass Valley, California, for a company meeting. Posters celebrating cooperative principles decorated the walls; one, proclaiming “Democratic Member Control,” showed ants working together to carry a bright green fern leaf. Some of the electricians filtered in late, having come straight from a job site.

“We want to take a moment to recognize some amazing people in our co-op,” said Melanie Duggan, a senior project manager at Cal Solar, which installs rooftop solar and battery systems. Duggan and other managers then praised their colleagues’ “commitment to craft” and “pure fucking magic” — core values of the company. Workers cheered and clapped after each shout-out.

This supportive culture is at the heart of Cal Solar. “I haven’t run into any other construction environments where you have construction workers saying, ‘Love you,’” Lars Ortegren, the company’s co-founder and director of construction services, told me.

Cal Solar has been installing panels on homes and businesses in Grass Valley and surrounding Nevada County for the past 25 years. In 2019, it became a worker-owned cooperative, and Ortegren went from being sole owner to an employee-owner.

Today, Cal Solar’s worker-owners spend their days constructing solar systems and managing sales. But they also run a company. They make decisions, share profits and have a financial stake: $5,000 invested up front, or $1,000 down and $4,000 financed through paycheck withdrawals. Any employee may buy in, though currently only 46% are owners. Not everyone wants the additional responsibilities, Ortegren said, but all workers benefit from the cooperative culture.

“I haven’t run into any other construction environments where you have construction workers saying, ‘Love you.’”

Ortegren has wanted to create well-paying solar jobs and a collective workplace since he first entered the industry over two decades ago. “I had this whole fantasy of creating an anarchist labor union for solar installers,” he told me. Previously, Ortegren and Angel Niblock, Cal Solar’s general manager, were members of the Industrial Workers of the World. They believe in “the dignity of labor, in democratic workplaces and in the idea that those who do the work should have the say and a stake in how it’s done,” as Niblock put it at the company meeting.

In recent years, the solar industry has ballooned: It employs nearly six times more workers than the coal industry, according to a 2024 report from the Department of Energy. Solar jobs vary, though. Employees at rooftop solar companies like Cal Solar install panels in their own communities, while installers on large utility-scale projects travel between remote sites and rarely see their families, though they may earn more money. In California, for example, contractors often partner with labor unions and must pay prevailing wages on large projects. In states with weaker labor laws, however, some utility-scale facilities contract with temporary hiring agencies that have notoriously bad labor practices.

Meanwhile, Cal Solar’s worker-owners shape company policies and generate wealth for themselves and their colleagues.

A FEW HOURS before the company meeting, Alejandro de Necochea and his crew installed racking and wires on a home in Grass Valley. Panels leaned against the ranch-style house and power drills buzzed, echoing above the gentle ripple of a nearby stream.

“Every two or three days, I have a new job site that’s beautiful, just like this,” de Necochea said, gesturing toward the cedar, ponderosa and oak trees surrounding the property.

Solar first caught his interest over a decade ago, when he moved to Grass Valley to live with his parents in an off-grid home. That’s not unusual in Nevada County, which has attracted people interested in hippie, back-to-the-land lifestyles since the 1960s. De Necochea’s family relied on solar panels for electricity, so he learned the basics. Then, 10 years ago, he started working at Cal Solar. He’s now a lead journeyman electrician, worker-owner and board member with additional governance responsibilities.

De Necochea enjoys being a worker-owner, but “it’s not all sunshine and rainbows,” he said. “You definitely feel the pressure of it being your company.” For 10 hours a day, four days a week, he climbs on roofs and installs solar systems. But if there’s a board meeting in the evening, he doesn’t get to clock out when his shift ends. He could probably make more money on utility-scale projects, but he’s committed to Cal Solar.

“I had this whole fantasy of creating an anarchist labor union for solar installers.”

That commitment creates a sense of accountability: During the COVID-19 pandemic, for example, worker-owners took pay cuts to keep the business afloat. “You really feel like people got your back going through ups and downs,” he said.

Industry insiders call those ups and downs the “solarcoaster.” Companies must contend with shifting state and federal incentives, changing building codes, new technologies and global economic trends. “We’re at a low point right now on that solarcoaster,” Niblock told me.

Current challenges include the Trump administration’s tariffs, inflation, a potential rollback of a 30% federal tax credit for residential solar and reductions in California’s rooftop solar incentives. Right before California’s policy changed in April 2023, sales spiked. “We booked like a year’s worth of work,” said Casey Tomasi, Cal Solar’s design manager, “and then it immediately fell off a cliff.”

But Grass Valley homeowners still want solar, partly for independence from Pacific Gas and Electric. In recent years, PG&E has shut off power during periods of high wildfire risk, and Ryan Harris, who owns the home where de Necochea worked this spring, wanted a more reliable system. “Going without power for 14 days in the middle of winter or in the middle of a 115-degree heat storm in the summertime — it’s absolutely miserable,” he said. Now, his family will have electricity even when the grid shuts down.

THE CO-OP MODEL has helped Cal Solar and other residential solar companies stay resilient. “You have multiple sources of people working on these problems and solving them together, versus like one single owner sitting in his or her office trying to solve all this on their own,” said Stephen Irvin, co-founder and CEO of Amicus Solar Cooperative, a purchasing co-op that shares best practices and pools the collective buying power of small companies like Cal Solar to reduce equipment costs.

Today, 22 of Amicus’ 85 member companies have some form of employee ownership. Irvin himself was a co-founder of Namaste Solar, an early worker-owned solar company in Boulder, Colorado. Other employee-owned solar companies include Technicians for Sustainability in Tucson, Arizona, and Positive Energy Solar in northern New Mexico.

The collective brainstorming Irvin speaks of was visible at Cal Solar’s company meeting this spring. “What do you envision for the future of our co-op?” Niblock asked her co-workers.

“My biggest thing is staying lean right now and not growing too fast,” de Necochea replied.

“I’m interested in working for low- to mid-class people,” Ortegren said later. “I would love to not work for rich people anymore.” Ortegren sees himself and his co-workers not just as electricians but as educators, explaining how to use solar efficiently and effectively.

“As a co-op, it’s our vision,” Niblock said. “We have to have imagination. We have to be the creators of our own destinies.”

This report was made possible in part by the Fund for Environmental Journalism of the Society of Environmental Journalists.

We welcome reader letters. Email High Country News at [email protected] or submit a letter to the editor. See our letters to the editor policy.

This article appeared in the June 2025 print edition of the magazine with the headline “Collective power.”

Spread the word. News organizations can pick-up quality news, essays and feature stories for free.

The City of Grass Valley is in a contract with Grindline Skateparks, Inc. to demolish the current 20,500 square foot skatepark in Condon Park and rebuild a new modern 15,000 square foot skatepark.

During a city council meeting this week, the members of the council decided to honor that contact and not change direction, even after hearing objections from people in the local skateboarding community.

If the city broke the contract with Grindline, and halted the demolition scheduled to begin on May 19, they may risk losing the Prop 64 grant money, part of which has already been spent.

Grindline has invoiced approximately $175,000 for the design and consulting work so far, according to Zac Quentmeyer, Deputy Public Works Director for Grass Valley.

Grindline has also placed an order for the steel package to be used for the rails and “coping” on the corners of the skate elements, according to Quentmeyer.

“If the city broke the contract, Grindline could come after the damages for the loss of profit, and the loss of work their employees were expecting,” according to Quentmeyer. “The amount the city may have to pay is upwards of $200,000 or more.”

Potentially, as much as $400,000 of the $1,500,000 from the State of California would then need to be repaid to the Prop 64 Health and Safety Grant; the remaining balance may also have to be returned.

Ad hoc committee formed for potential future expansion

The city council gave direction to create an ad hoc committee to consider additional options for a phase 2 expansion of the 15,000 square foot plan from Grindline.

In the future, a phase 3 skatepark at another location may be planned if funding becomes available; however, that would require environmental studies, public workshops, and other time-consuming requirements.

It was maintained that “blowing up” the contract between the city and Grindline is not fiscally responsible, according to Councilmember Tom Ivy.

In the past few weeks approximately 1,700 signatures against the demolition were collected, however the public comment period for the project was several months ago.

“I think some of the best things that have come out of the last two weeks is all the engagement that we’ve received,” Quentmeyer said. “While it’s true that we were hoping for some of this engagement to come earlier, staff doesn’t see this as a negative, but we’re looking at it as a huge positive. I would encourage the skate community to stay engaged.”

The chamber at city hall was filled with members of the skate community hoping to influence the council and stop the demolition of the current skatepark.

“Please don’t take the skatepark, there’s nothing wrong with it,” one public speaker said to the council.

Speakers pleaded with the city council to reverse their decision, and referred to the current skatepark as their “home” where they found support from one another.

When the city was asking for public input on the proposed project, a group called Nevada County Skate (NSC) and many others in the community worked with the city to provide feedback to Grindline on the project’s design.

Now that the demolition is set to begin, another group named the Grass Valley Skatepark Coalition (GVSC) informed the city that they think the current park is adequate, and the plan for the proposed park is too small — even saying the smaller park is a safety hazard.

Members from GVSC told the council that many people did not know about the process of public input, and that the people who did participate in the workshops with Grindline were not heard and included.

“NCS… they stole our voice… They meddled and they manipulated both parties. They did not represent us,” one speaker at Tuesday night’s meeting said. “NCS cheated us. They took our voice, and they lied.”

The division within the skateboarding community itself has been apparent in the past few weeks.

“They are a very small part of this community, and they didn’t represent us,” the speaker said. “It’s very saddening, heartbreaking. We’re all in a bad place now. You guys at the city are in a predicament. We’re devastated.”

The decision by the council to move forward and demolish the current skatepark in Condon Park to prepare the space for a rebuild was upheld.

The 20-year-old skatepark has cracks that reportedly pose a safety hazard to its users, and the foundation underneath it is in jeopardy, according to Matt Fluegge, Chief Executive Officer for Grindline Skatepark Inc.

“There are definitely some areas of the existing park of concern for both safety and longevity,” Fluegge said during a public workshop with members of the skate community back in April 2024.

The shifting of the slabs at the bottom of the bowl is a primary concern that would increase over time.

Rehabilitating the park and expanding it was an option originally discussed over a year ago, though the city council took the advice of Fluegge who recommended demolition and a complete rebuild.

The topography of the current skatepark creates an engineering problem as well.

“Water is probably flowing down that hillside under the park, trapped under there,” Fluegge said.

“This is an agenda information item,” the city’s attorney David Ruderman said. “We can take direction, but there can be no action on this item tonight.”

The council did already vote and approve the contract with Grindline, according to Ruderman.

If changes to the project were made, the state may not reissue the grant, according to Councilmember Jan Arbuckle.

“In the worst case scenario, you end up with no park,” Arbuckle said. “Or we go forward with something that not everybody likes.”

The council has voted to move forward with Grindline three times, according to Arbuckle.

“The mayor put it back on the agenda because you guys signed this petition,” Arbuckle said. “I don’t know how many times we’re going to have this meeting and hear the same thing over and over again, being told the same figures makes no sense to me. It’s a bad use of staff time.”

The council agreed to form an ad hoc committee which would include two members of the council, city staff, and members from both NCS and GVSC to seek funding for a phase 2 skatepark.

Options could include expanding the current location, or building another skatepark near it.

An extension built on to the current skate park at the existing site leaves more room to expand in the future, according to Kiser.

Working with the state to make changes to the current terms of the Prop 64 grant is a slow process, according to Kiser.

Kiser told the council and the public that he has submitted questions regarding the possibility of changing the terms of the proposed grant, and has not received a reply.

“You may be able to settle the contract with Grindline for $200,000 or whatever has been spent today; the worst case scenario is the $450,000. I can’t tell you,” Kiser said.

Kiser could not guarantee that the state would approve changes to the current grant or any future grant submission.

“My thought is to (create) the ad hoc committee, commit a small amount of money to have Grindline do a (draft) concept,” Kiser said. “The point is to have a drawing and a figure that you can go after funding for, because that’s what the grants want to see.”

In the world of grant funding and application approval, definite plans for any project and its costs need to be presented in order to qualify for grant funding, especially in a competitive environment when the state is in a fiscal deficit.

On Wednesday, Quentmeyer said that he reached out to Grindline and “floated the idea of the option for them to draft a proposal for a second phase, and Grindline replied that they would be more than happy to work with the city on that.”

“Initially we will be looking at an expansion at Condon,” Quentmeyer said. “All of the options for phase 2 are on the table.”

Next steps

Eric Gorman, a spokesperson for GVSC, said his organization did not believe that the Prop 64 grant money would be jeopardized if plans for the skatepark were changed.

“We weren’t able to accomplish our goal last night, but we are continuing to fight for what we believe the community deserves,” Gorman said.

Gorman is in the process of calling all of the city council members, urging them to request another meeting with the city manager.

Four out of five of the city council members need to contact the city manager to request another meeting, and then they need to vote on opening up the discussion to re-vote and stop the demolition of the existing skate park at Condon Park.

Gorman said the group would like to amend the contract with Grindline in order to build a park adjacent to the existing park.

“I don’t believe that an amendment to the contract with Grindline would compromise the grant, Gorman said. “The mayor doesn’t seem to feel that way, and other city council members who are committed to our cause don’t either, as far as I can tell.”

The skate community has been “traditionally underserved for decades,” Gorman said.

The city staff seems committed to working with GVSC moving forward to develop further resources and amenities, and the rest of the city council seems on board with prioritizing more square footage of skate park, according to Gorman.

“The best case scenario is having two parks, which is preserving the existing park, building a new park adjacent to it, and then eventually, with additional funding developed through grants and other resources, to build another addition that will combine those two parks together,” Gorman said.

To contact Staff Writer Marianne Boll-See, email [email protected].