Science

The L.A. wildfire cleanup was fast. Residents eager to rebuild worry officials chose speed over safety

Published

7 months ago

December 3, 2025

The L.A. wildfire cleanup was fast. Residents eager to rebuild worry officials chose speed over safety

The devastation left in the wake of January’s Eaton and Palisades fires was unimaginable. The firestorms engulfed 59 square miles of Southern California — more than twice the size of Manhattan — transforming entire city blocks in Altadena and Pacific Palisades into corridors of ashes, twisted metal and skeletal trees.

Federal disaster officials rapidly deployed thousands of workers to gather up the wreckage across the burn scars. Armed with shovels and heavy construction equipment, crews quickly collected fire debris from rugged cliffsides, dusky shorelines and sprawling burnt-out neighborhoods. In a matter of months, they transformed the heaps of charred rubble into mostly vacant matchbox lots, ready for rebuilding.

Recently, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers reported that it had finished clearing roughly 2.6 million tons of wreckage from nearly 9,700 properties, an astonishing eight-month federal cleanup that has been extolled as the largest and fastest in modern American history. Private contractors removed fire debris from an additional 2,100 parcels.

However, many experts worry that the rapid pace of federal cleanup resulted in sloppy work, time-saving measures and lax oversight that may ultimately cost homeowners.

The Army Corps has largely demobilized and contractors have cleared out, and they’ve left serious questions for disaster victims who are preparing to embark on one of the region’s largest reconstruction campaigns in the past century.

Mandana Sisco, right, and her husband, Justin, visit the site where their home once stood as their children, Marley, 5, and her brother, August, 7, play in Pacific Palisades. The Siscos, who had their lot independently tested for toxins, were relieved when tests revealed there was no contamination to the soil.

(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)

Federal officials also notably disavowed the need to conduct soil testing, insisting it would be too time-consuming. But soil sampling performed by university researchers, local public health authorities and Los Angeles Times journalists have found excessive levels of toxic metals at properties already cleared by the Army Corps.

Share via

A team of university scientists from UCLA, Loyola Marymount and Purdue tested soil samples from 47 already-cleaned homes in Altadena, finding 49% of already-cleaned homes still had elevated levels of lead above California’s standards for residential properties.

“It’s not a recovery if you leave 50% of the properties unsafe.”

— Andrew Whelton, Purdue University

“This recovery cannot be credibly compared to any other wildfire cleanup in recent memory,” said Andrew Whelton, an engineering professor at Purdue University who studies natural disaster recovery. “And that is because of deliberate decisions by government officials at all levels to skip soil testing. They did not determine that when the contractors left a property, the property was safe to use.

“It’s not a recovery if you leave 50% of the properties unsafe. While the federal government may demobilize, the onus now has been pushed to the property owners to either finish the job. Or they can ignore it, because L.A. County doesn’t require your property to be safe to rebuild.”

Despite such concerns, many praise the effort for its efficiency. The speedy recovery has allowed some survivors, including Altadena resident Carlos Lopez, to rebuild much earlier than they anticipated.

“It’s hope,” Lopez said about his homesite, where, on Sept. 10, workers have already built a wooden frame. “Neighbors that I talked to, we just wanted something to grasp onto that we’re actually moving forward. There’s some realization that we can get back home sooner rather than later.”

Line chart showing the percent of cleanup for both the Eaton and Palisades fires

Col. Jeffrey Palazzini, who oversaw debris removal operations for the Palisades fire, said the Army Corps and its contractors have largely received positive feedback from property owners, like Lopez. He said the speed is a reflection of the urgency of the public health threat, not necessarily an indication of poor workmanship.

Signs are posted as construction is underway on the home of Carlos Lopez in Altadena.

The L.A. County wildfire cleanup marks the maturation of a federal wildfire response that has tackled a barrage of historically destructive fires in Oregon in 2020, New Mexico in 2022 and Hawaii in 2023 — each of which were the largest wildfires in their state’s history.

“Over the past seven to 10 years, I think there has been — sadly — enough experiences for this process to be streamlined and improved upon with lessons learned each time it happens,” said Laurie Johnson, a renowned urban planner who specializes in natural disaster recovery. “And I think L.A. has been a benefit of that.”

Lindsey Horvath, L.A. County supervisor representing the Palisades, expressed cautious optimism for the road ahead. “Throughout the cleanup, we’ve followed all recommended best practices and will continue to follow the advice of experts throughout our recovery,” Horvath said in a statement. “I continue to call for soil testing to give homeowners greater peace of mind before rebuilding, and support efforts to make recovery assistance more accessible so we can rebuild faster and safer. Recovery doesn’t end here.”

Early days

In Pacific Palisades and Malibu, the wildfires turned some of the region’s most famous stretches of roads — including Sunset Boulevard and Pacific Coast Highway — into an unrecognizable labyrinth of debris. Mansions with picturesque views of the Pacific Ocean were obliterated into charred slabs of stucco, broken concrete and dust.

In Altadena, a middle-class melting pot tucked into the foothills of the San Gabriel Mountains, the inferno consumed century-old cottages and family-owned businesses on Lake Avenue, the community’s main commercial drag.

In the wake of these twin disasters, Gov. Gavin Newsom’s administration asked the federal government to take the lead on recovery. In the final days of his administration, President Biden approved funding and deployed federal agencies to start removing and disposing the most dangerous materials from affected properties.

Jan. 9 aerial view of neighborhoods destroyed by the Palisades fire.

In mid-January, neighborhoods were a literal minefield of explosive materials, including propane tanks, firearm ammunition and large lithium-ion batteries in electric vehicles, e-bikes and blackout-ready battery storage systems. There were also a plethora of household items that contained corrosive acids and toxic ingredients that needed to be collected to prevent them from polluting soil and groundwater.

On Jan. 16, the Environmental Protection Agency deployed its first teams to assess the damage and presence of hazardous materials. The agency ultimately identified about 13,600 properties, mostly single-family homes, that had been damaged or destroyed in the fire, and probably rife with hazardous materials.

Within days of taking office, President Trump signed an executive order instructing the EPA to expedite the removal of hazardous materials. EPA administrator Lee Zeldin later said Trump had directed the agency to complete the mission in 30 days — a demanding directive for work that typically takes several months.

In response, the Federal Emergency Management Agency increased disaster funding by nearly $179 million, money used to “surge” 850 contractors to collect the most dangerous materials from the burn scars by that deadline, according to records obtained by The Times.

In white coverall suits and full-face respirators, hazmat workers went property by property sifting through the ashes to dredge up lead-acid batteries, tins of paint thinner and pesticide canisters.

EPA personnel and agency contractors converted popular community gathering spots, including the driving range of Altadena Golf Course and the parking lot of Will Rogers State Beach, into hazmat stockpile sites. Workers laid down multiple layers of plastic liners where materials could be sorted and eventually hauled to hazardous waste dumps.

EPA crews comb the ruins of a home on Miami Way that was burned in the Palisades fire.

On Feb. 25 — two days ahead of schedule — the EPA announced it had completed that work. Its hazmat crews had overseen the removal of 300 tons of hazardous debris from 9,400 properties — making it the largest-ever hazardous materials cleanup for a wildfire the EPA had ever executed.

However, the EPA had also passed over 4,500 parcels, or 30% of properties, deeming them unsafe to enter. A Times analysis of residential properties found that workers balked at accessing 1,336 homes damaged or destroyed in the Palisades fire, and 1,453 homes in the Eaton fire.

EPA spokesperson Julia Giarmoleo said the deferred properties had hazardous trees, dangerous obstructions, steep slopes and unstable walls that prevented the EPA field teams from safely accessing the property.

“EPA’s operations are always based on completing the entirety of our work as quickly, efficiently, and safely as possible,” Giarmoleo said. “In the case of the L.A. fires, EPA encountered a higher percentage of properties that required deferral due to partial structural destruction compared to previous EPA wildfire responses.”

The remaining hazmat work was, instead, left for the Army Corps of Engineers, the agency tasked with handling the second phase of debris removal.

The Army Corps rolls in

The Army Corps and its primary contractor, Environmental Chemical Corp., were charged with removing millions of tons of ash, concrete and metal. They vowed to remediate upward of 12,000 properties by January 2026 — within a year of when the deadly wildfires first broke out. The ambitious timeline would outpace any wildfire debris removal mission the Army Corps had ever tackled, including the 18-month recovery for the 2023 Lahaina wildfire that destroyed 2,200 homes and buildings.

Jan. 14 photo of Eliot Arts Magnet Middle School burned by the Eaton fire in Altadena.

The Army Corps and ECC hired several subcontractors, and in early February dispatched the first cleanup crews to several schools that were ruined in the fires, including Pasadena Rosebud Academy Charter School in Altadena, where hazmat workers shoveled asbestos waste into thick plastic bags. They waded through a field of charred debris, gathering up fire-gnarled steel rods, metal door frames and structural beams into piles, which were later loaded onto dump trucks and hauled away to landfills.

Soon after, workers moved onto fire-destroyed homes. In mid-February, after a two-day delay due to heavy rainfall, crews finished clearing their first homesites in Altadena and Pacific Palisades.

A view of Eliot Arts Magnet Middle School after the federal cleanup.

As the cleanup progressed, one obstacle for public officials was tracking down the thousands of displaced survivors and getting them to sign paperwork that would grant federal cleanup crews permission to clear their properties. Because the fast-moving wildfires forced people to evacuate with little warning, many fled with only the clothes on their backs.

“Obviously, someone will have to be last. But we wanted to make sure that process was transparent.”

— Anish Saraiya, director of Altadena recovery director

Army Corps personnel tried to disseminate sign-up instructions and appeal to the public at press conferences and community meetings. Local officials helped by making phone calls to disaster victims in parts of Altadena where response had been lacking, according to Anish Saraiya, Altadena’s recovery director for L.A. County Supervisor Kathyn Barger’s office.

“Our office even started calling individual property owners, because there was already a concern about the disparity postfire west of Lake [Avenue],” Saraiya said. “One of the things we wanted to make sure is that this was an equitable process that got to everybody at once. Obviously, someone will have to be last. But we wanted to make sure that process was transparent.”

Wildfire victims seek disaster relief services at one of two FEMA Disaster Recovery Centers in Pasadena.

By April, with roughly 9,000 opt-ins, the federal cleanup had hit its stride. About 230 cleanup crews and 4,000 workers fanned out across the burn scars, working 12-hour shifts to remove debris from homes and haul it to landfills and scrapyards.

Following reporting by The Times, FEMA and the Army Corps drew criticism from environmental advocates and fire survivors for deciding not to perform soil testing after cleanups to ensure properties did not have toxic metals, such as lead, above California’s health standards for residential properties.

It would be the first major wildfire response in California since 2007 without a measurable goal for clearing toxic substances.

Homes destroyed by the Eaton fire were cleaned at a faster rate than those affected by the Palisades fire, according to a Times analysis of residential properties. Army Corps officials said they attempted to prioritize properties near schools, coastlines, waterways and occupied homes.

One such property belonged to Bronwen Sennish and her husband; their Spanish-style home had been a short distance from Palisades Elementary Charter School.

Sennish said she appreciated the sense of urgency and sensitivity with which the Army Corps approached her home. On one April morning, when she and her husband arrived at their lot, heavy machinery was already humming. Sennish said that the crew happily explained the parameters of their work. And the excavator operator took the time to sift through the rubble with the two in search for anything salvageable. “People who have been trained in the military are incredibly good at problem solving and logistics,” Sennish said.

But not everyone had a positive experience.

Cleanup crews, for example, excavated too much soil from Colten Sheridan‘s lot in northeast Altadena in April, according to internal Army Corps reports obtained by the Los Angeles Times. Sheridan, who is still displaced and living temporarily in Santa Cruz County, said he was never informed of the potentially costly mistake.

Instead, five months later, while Sheridan contemplated rebuilding plans, he was shocked to find out from L.A. Times journalists that his property had been the subject of a complicated internal debate within the Army Corps and debris removal workers.

“I feel like I absolutely should have been notified. I’m just reeling in my head right now,” he said. “If they over-excavated, and if they’re not going to do anything about it, what are my recourses? I don’t know.”

In early September, Sheridan called an Army Corps hotline dedicated to handling questions and concerns about the federal cleanup, but didn’t get answers.

A sign expressing community resilience in Altadena on Sept. 10.

A sign announces a future home to be built on a destroyed property in Altadena.

Now Sheridan fears he may have to foot the bill to bring in clean soil and regrade his property before he can rebuild. If a home is seated too low, it won’t be able to properly connect sewer lines and storm drains, which require a high-to-low slope.

Army Corps officials declined to comment on Sheridan’s property, citing privacy concerns.

Many environmentalists and community members had worried the speed of the cleanup might lead to workers cutting corners or substandard workmanship.

Cleanup supervisors routinely observed workers without masks and other safety equipment, according to Army Corps records. In some cases, workers disregarded decontamination protocols by stepping outside of contaminated areas without rinsing their boots.

Jana Karibyna in the backyard of her home after it was destroyed by the Eaton fire.

And according to internal documents attained by The Times, debris crews were regularly confused how to handle contaminated pool water — which researchers have found to contain trace amounts of lead, arsenic and other toxic chemicals. The contractors allegedly sprayed it into building footprints, front lawns, neighboring properties and even in the street, where it could have ended up in drainage systems leading to the oceans.

James Mayfield, owner of Mayfield Environmental Engineering, a private contractor specializing in hazardous materials, cleaned around 200 properties destroyed in the L.A. fires. For pools filled with ash, he suctioned contaminated water with a vacuum truck and sent it to locations that treat wastewater.

Mayfield believes inexperienced workers and the breakneck timeline probably led to some crews ignoring those best practices and redepositing toxic metals onto residential properties and local waterways.

“Proper hazmat disposal is about $10,000,” Mayfield said. “You can imagine, most people didn’t want to do that. They want to cut corners.”

Many wealthier homeowners with robust insurance policies opted out of the federal cleanup and decided to hire private contractors, which, in some cases, may have expedited their cleanup and rebuilding timeline, and provided access to services the government program didn’t provide — such as post-cleanup testing or property-wide soil removal.

A Times analysis of the private cleanups underscores the wealth gap between affluent residents of Pacific Palisades and working-class communities in Altadena: At least 1,392 homes opted out of the cleanup in the Palisades, nearly four times the number in the Eaton fire area, according to the analysis.

Tom James, a lifelong Palisades resident, decided that the Army Corps cleanup came with too many uncertainties. He also didn’t feel comfortable signing the liability waiver that would indemnify the federal government and contractors in the event of mistakes. He chose instead to hire a private crew that he was able to pay with his insurance policy, to clear out fire debris from his historic Victorian home in the heart of the Alphabet Streets, along with his collection of vintage cars and motorcycles in his garage underneath.

Still, James was affected by federal contractors. An Army Corps crew working next door left a large pile of his neighbors’ soil in his backyard. He walked down to the American Legion where Army Corps officials were stationed to let them know. A representative apologized and vowed to remove soil, but James said they never returned.

A time to rebuild

All told, the federal project cleared 9,673 properties — a mix of home sites, commercial properties, parks and schools — according to the Army Corps.

Aerial view of cleared properties and construction crews working on rebuilding a home in Altadena.

That has paved the way for the submission of more than 3,000 applications to rebuild — some 900 of which have already been approved.

In Altadena, some residents ready to rebuild have returned to their empty lots in RVs. The screech of tablesaws and popping of nail guns break up the silence in the fire-hollowed corners of these neighborhoods.

“I had a very simple lot, and they took everything I wanted removed … my neighbor has a real issue to solve now with getting dirt back in.”

— Lamar Bontrager, Altadena resident.

Lamar Bontrager, a real estate agent, has already laid a foundation and begun framing his home on Loma Alta Drive. He credits the Army Corps for the quick start.

“I had a very simple lot, and they took everything I wanted removed,” Bontrager said. Bontrager counts himself lucky. Looking at other lots around town, he said some neighbors will have a big lift. “At some houses, they [federal contractors] dug massive holes — my neighbor has a real issue to solve now with getting dirt back in.”

A fallen tree in front of a construction crew rebuilding an Altadena home that burned down.

While the cleanup was the fastest in history, some survivors feel forgotten. According to federal records, 391 property owners who requested federal help were deemed ineligible by FEMA.

FEMA says some of those properties did not experience enough damage for eligibility. The agency deemed others, including many multi-family homes, as commercial properties, and, therefore, also ineligible.

These decisions put some of the largest housing developments affected by the fires in a bind. For example, the Army Corps cleared the Tahitian Terrace mobile home park in Pacific Palisades, across the street from Will Rogers State Beach, but did not clean up the Pacific Palisades Bowl, a 170-unit mobile home park next door.

“There’s hundreds and hundreds of people that are still having sleepless nights.”

— Jon Brown, Pacific Palisades Bowl resident.

Residents were never told why one property qualified and the other did not; those decisions are entirely up to FEMA.

Rusted metal frames and a blanket of pallid ash still sit within a few hundred feet from the ocean. Residents, who have heard little from the landowners about the dilemma, have been stuck in limbo.

“There’s hundreds and hundreds of people that are still having sleepless nights,” said one resident, Jon Brown, co-chair of the Palisades Bowl Community Partnership fighting for residents’ right to return home. “I just drove by the park today and it just makes me sick.”

Brown and others have watched the Corps clear thousands of lots and a handful of owners start rebuilding, while their piles of charred debris remained virtually untouched. They have little certainty they’ll ever be able to return.

Brown, facing steep rent for temporary housing, fears the owners may be looking for a way out — selling the land or changing its use.

“What is going to compel them to rebuild it as a mobile home park if they can’t even be motivated to clean it up?” Brown asked.

Federal disaster officials and contractors are no longer around to answer those questions.

Before the Army Corps and its workers packed up, they held two small ceremonies to commemorate the last homes to be cleaned in each burn scar.

In Altadena, Tami Outterbridge, daughter of renowned artist John Outterbridge, had specifically requested to be last.

Tami Outterbridge is working to preserve the legacy of her father, artist John Outterbridge.

She and her mother, Beverly, lived in two separate homes on their family’s lot in West Altadena. They postponed their cleanup several times, asking her father’s friends and contemporaries to help them scour the ashes for pieces of his artwork and other mementos. They found a pair of her father’s vintage spectacles and fragments of his sculptures, assembled from knickknacks and everyday objects.

When the cleanup crew arrived in mid-August, they came with a team of dog-assisted archaeologists that helped find her grandmother’s ashes — and recover some of John Outterbridge’s collection of flutes from underneath a collapsed wall.

“Those are things that literally are irreplaceable,” Tami Outterbridge said. “As I was reckoning with what it meant to say you’ve lost two homes and all your possessions — that’s when the idea started formulating. I can literally adhere to Dad’s art practice, which was very much about this notion of finding objects that other people saw as discarded — not worthy, trash debris — and turning them into aesthetic marvels.”

Stanley C. Wilson sifts through the ashes that remain of John Outterbridge's family home.

At the Aug. 14 ceremony commemorating Outterbridge’s home as the final Altadena home to be cleaned as part of the federal project, Saraiya, the Altadena recovery director, looked around at a neighborhood that just a few months ago had been chock-full of ash and cinders. It was now a sweeping panorama of mostly empty, mulch-covered lots.

“I’m not a very emotional person, but I felt myself getting choked up,” he said, “because it was really this one clarifying moment that this work is done.”

Saraiya said he understood local officials would need to soon start discussing rebuilding roads, installing underground power lines and planning a more fire-resilient community. “After all of these months, after all of this work and all of this effort — there’s so much more to do.”

Assistant data and graphics editor Vanessa Martinez and senior journalist Lorena Iñiguez Elebee contributed to this report.

Science

New FireSat satellites promise faster wildfire detection over California and beyond

Published

19 hours ago

July 6, 2026

Press Room

New FireSat satellites promise faster wildfire detection over California and beyond

A trio of satellites set to launch early Tuesday will give wildland firefighters more time to respond and scientists more information about fire-prone regions across the globe.

The launch from Vandenberg Space Force Base is the first phase in a constellation called FireSat that will eventually cover the globe with 50 satellites collecting high-resolution imagery of fires and conditions on the ground every 20 minutes.

Earth Fire Alliance, the nonprofit group behind FireSat, got the project off the ground with $69 million in grants from the Bezos Earth Fund, Google and the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation.

San José-based Muon Space built the satellites. Muon and the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection are both FireSat partners.

The satellites use advanced thermal sensors to detect heat and can pick up signals from fires as small as a beach bonfire, as well as cooler fires that have been smoldering for days, according to Michael Falkowski, lead scientist at Earth Fire Alliance. That information will help fire officials, including the Los Angeles and Los Angeles County fire departments, understand whether blazes are growing, where they are headed and how much soot and smoke they are generating.

FireSat’s infrared instruments detected this small roadside fire in Medford, Ore., during a 2025 test flight.

(Muon Space)

“If we can differentiate between a smoldering fire and a flaming combustion fire, it really has a big impact on how we can understand the air quality emissions coming off the fire,” Falkowski said.

Fires that burn at low temperature produce more harmful gases than hot fires. Think about a campfire. When it’s burning hot with bright flames, there is relatively little smoke. When it’s smoldering, it produces lots of thick, white or gray smoke.

Wildfires work the same way.

A hot, fast-burning fire has enough oxygen and heat to burn with more complete combustion, producing less smoke for every pound of wood burned.

Earth Fire Alliance will provide data from these first three satellites in the next few months to Cal Fire and fire agencies in Oregon, Texas, Australia and Portugal. Cal Fire will share it with Southern California fire agencies.

The network will also turn its sensors on in the Amazon Basin for the Brazilian nonprofit Amazon Environmental Research Institute.

Cal Fire should begin receiving data from the scientists later this year, according to Falkowski, who joined Earth Fire Alliance last year from NASA, where he was an earth science program manager running the agency’s fire science program.

Instruments on the satellites will be able to detect fires the size of a shipping container.

Falkowski said the new FireSat satellites are a big improvement over existing ones because they will be able to see smaller fires with better resolution and distinguish low-intensity “cool” fires from high-intensity hot ones.

“The satellites are really designed to measure fire across the entire temperature profile, so we can see cool fires all the way up to really hot fires,” he said.

That kind of granular information is important for emergency responders in the field and planners who make decisions about calling for extra help or ordering evacuations.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration operates three satellites that can detect a fire somewhere inside a square 1,230 feet across.

In contrast, instruments on the FireSat satellites will be able to detect small brush and roadside fires 16 feet across.

Cal Fire officials have long embraced new technology to get ahead of wildfires in recent years, testing autonomous firefighting helicopters and partnering with UC San Diego to use artificial intelligence to filter images from a network of more than 1,200 cameras on lookout towers and mountain tops. The Alert California program is able to spot smoke in a video and sends automated messages to one of 21 agency command centers across California.

In 2025, Alert California sent out automated warnings before authorities even received 911 calls from the public 51% of the time, according to Phillip SeLegue, staff chief of Cal Fire’s intelligence program.

A worker at Mountain View-based Muon Space puts the final touches on a wildfire-detection satellite.

FireSat will help incident commanders get better information more quickly, and, unlike fire-spotting aircraft, the satellites can linger over a fire for days or weeks and aren’t hampered by high winds or smoke.

Travis Medema, chief deputy for the Oregon State Fire Marshall, said his office will use FireSat to plan escape routes and monitor fires. “If we can fight these when they are small, we feel we will be more efficient and can protect Oregonians,” he said.

One expert noted that turning satellite data into information useful to firefighters and forestry managers will take some time. The FireSat data will “be amazing for fire nerds, but how and whether it helps individual fires remains to be seen,” said Joe H. Scott, founder of Pyrologix, a wildfire analysis firm based in Missoula, Mont. “Right now, we are not basing decisions on where satellites tell us a fire is,” Scott said.

Pyrologix develops wildfire risk management models for federal agencies, local governments and utilities. Scott said FireSat’s high-resolution data will help him build better prediction models that take into account weather, drought, plants and the history of fires in a region.

Science

14 propositions that could remake California taxes, housing, healthcare and elections

Published

1 day ago

July 6, 2026

Press Room

14 propositions that could remake California taxes, housing, healthcare and elections

California voters will decide 14 statewide propositions in the Nov. 3 election, measures placed on the ballot mostly by either powerful interest groups or lawmakers that will affect the lives of millions of Californians.

While a proposed tax on state billionaires has dominated headlines, voters will also have a chance to weigh in on a number of consequential issues, from healthcare to voter identification requirements and more.

Californians are accustomed to legislating by the ballot and often face a list of propositions. But even by the standards of the state’s direct democracy process, the 2026 election stands out. The campaigns supporting and opposing the ballot measures have already collected more than $100 million in contributions, and are expected to use their money to inundate the television airwaves, livestreams and social media feeds and to flood mailboxes with glossy campaign mailers over the coming months.

Here are the measures on the Nov. 3 ballot:

Proposition 1: The Veterans and Affordable Housing Bond Act of 2026

Spurred by the state’s affordable housing shortage, state lawmakers are asking voters to approve an $11.25-billion bond to boost affordable housing construction around the state.

Advocates say the funds would help build more than 40,000 shovel-ready affordable homes that are unable to move forward because of a financing gap and help preserve thousands of other existing units.

Proposition 1 includes specific funding for high-need groups, including $1.25 billion for a veterans’ home loan program, $1.15 billion for supportive housing for homeless people, $350 million for student housing at state universities, $450 million for farmworker housing and $200 million for Native American tribes.

“In California, we don’t turn away from the needs of our people — we meet them head-on,” said Gov. Gavin Newsom in a statement about the measure. “We are giving voters the power to help shape the future of housing in our state. This bond is about building communities, expanding access and affordability in California, where every family has a fair shot at a place to call home.”

Some Republicans took issue with the measure’s title — “The Veterans and Affordable Housing Bond Act of 2026” — arguing that it included veterans to have broader appeal while doing little to actually help homeless veterans.

“It’s a sad thing to say that you have to use the veterans as bait to get the people of the state of California to approve an $11-billion bond, and I just think that’s shameful,” said Sen. Shannon Grove (R-Bakersfield), an Army veteran. “Call it what it is. It’s a homeless bond, and it does include some veterans’ benefits, but it is not a veterans bond.”

Proposition 2: Save for California’s Future Act

Icon illustration of California in a crystal ball.

This measure would give California lawmakers more flexibility over state spending and allow them to save money that could otherwise go back to taxpayers.

The measure, supported by Newsom, seeks to exempt deposits into state savings accounts from a spending limit that voters adopted through a series of ballot measures dating back to the late 1970s, and to increase the share of tax revenue that can be put into the rainy day fund.

Under an existing state appropriations restraint, also known as the Gann Limit, lawmakers cannot spend more than an amount determined by a formula that takes annual tax proceeds, changes to the population and cost of living into consideration. Tax revenue above the limit must be divided between schools and refunds to taxpayers.

The measure could incentivize lawmakers to save more money because funds tucked away in the rainy day fund would no longer be considered expenditures counted toward the spending limit. By allowing lawmakers to set aside more money that is not subjected to state spending limits, it could also allow them to hold onto money that otherwise would be returned to taxpayers under current law.

This proposed constitutional amendment was placed on the ballot by state lawmakers.

Proposition 3: Fund schools and healthcare

Icon illustration of books, an apple, a hospital and stacks of coins.

If passed, this proposition would make permanent an existing tax on high-income Californians.

The existing tax, passed by voters in 2012 and extended in 2016, is set to expire in 2031. It applies to people who earn more than $360,000 for single filers, $721,000 for joint filers, and $490,000 for heads of household. It adds between 1% to 3% to these high earners’ personal income tax rates.

According to the initiative text, the funds are largely earmarked for local school districts and community colleges, with some portion of the money going to California’s rainy day reserves — which the state uses to prevent cuts to healthcare and other services when revenues decline. The measure says revenues cannot be spent on state bureaucracy or administrative costs.

The state’s nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office expects the measure to bring in between $5 billion and $15 billion annually, depending on how the stock market is performing, with the amount expected to grow over time.

Proposition 4: Public financing of campaigns

Icon illustration of money inserted into a ballot box.

This measure would allow the state and local governments to offer public campaign financing to candidates running for elected office. Candidates receiving the funding must abide by expenditure limits and adhere to the criteria set by statute, ordinance or charter to demonstrate broad support, such as demonstrate a large number of small dollar contributions.

None of the public campaign financing can come from funds designated for education, transportation or public safety. The financing cannot discriminate based on party or whether a candidate is a challenger or an incumbent. The public funds cannot be used for legal costs, fines or to pay back personal loans to a campaign.

This measure was placed on the ballot by the California Legislature and governor.

Proposition 5: Recall elections

Icon illustration of a ballot box being yanked offstage by a large hook.

This measure would change the way recall elections are conducted in California. Under this proposed constitutional amendment, during a recall election, voters would decide solely whether a politician should be removed from their elected position. If the recall is successful, that office would remain vacant until it is filled in accordance with existing law — either by a separate election or by appointment.

Under current law, voters make two separate decisions during a recall election: Whether to remove the subject of the recall from office and, if they are booted, which candidate running to replace them should fill the position. The candidate who receives the most votes wins, even if they receive far less than 50% of the vote.

The proposed constitutional amendment would also allow the recalled politician to run in the next election to fill the vacancy, though they cannot be appointed to their former post. Under the current system, office holders targeted in a recall are barred from being a candidate to replace themselves in that same election.

The proposal comes in the wake of the unsuccessful, Republican-led recall campaign against Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2021, which in part tested voter sentiment about his response to the COVID-19 pandemic. One of the sponsors of the recall-reform measure was Sen. Josh Newman (D-Fullerton), who was recalled from office in 2018 after he voted to increase gas taxes for road repairs, legislation pushed by then-Gov. Jerry Brown. Newman won back his seat in 2020.

This proposed constitutional amendment was placed on the ballot by the California Legislature.

Proposition 37: Homeownership loan program

Icon illustration of a home with magnifying glass, pen and contract.

Proposition 37 would create a down payment assistance program to help middle-class Californians buy a new home.

The measure, spearheaded by former state Senate Majority Leader Bob Hertzberg, would allow middle-class California residents — defined as anyone who makes less than 200% of an area’s median income — borrow most of their down payment for a new home that they plan to live in. It is designed to boost construction of single-family homes.

A down payment is traditionally about 20% of the purchase price of a home. If passed, the measure would create a state-administered loan program that offers qualified homebuyers a second mortgage of up to 17% of a home’s sale price.

The proposition would allow the California Housing Finance Agency to issue up to $25 billion in revenue bonds to administer the program.

The Legislative Analyst’s Office does not anticipate the measure to result in direct state or local costs because the costs are meant to be covered by homeowners’ mortgage payments.

Proposition 38: Immunology research bond

Icon illustration of several viruses and bacteria.

Proposition 38 asks voters to approve an $8.4-billion bond to support research in the burgeoning fields of immunology and immunotherapy, which study the human immune system and how it can be used to prevent, treat and cure diseases.

If approved, half of the funding would go toward the creation of a new immunology and immunotherapy research institute affiliated with the University of California. The other half would fund research grants for other California-based universities and nonprofit medical research institutions to study potential treatments for cancer, Alzheimer’s disease and heart disease.

The measure has a built-in discount program for Californians — it requires that any technology or drugs developed from bond-funded research be sold to California patients for a price at least 20% below the national average.

Backers of the proposal include the Alzheimer’s Assn., National Multiple Sclerosis Society and other healthcare groups. Supporters argue the funding would facilitate research that could save lives and save patients “billions of dollars in health care costs by preventing and curing a range of debilitating diseases and illnesses,” according to the initiative text.

Proposition 39: Voter identification

Icon illustration of a California driver's license, photo and Real ID.

Proposition 39 would require Californians to show government-issued identification every time they vote at the polls.

Currently, Californians must affirm under penalty of perjury that they are U.S. citizens and provide information to verify their identity, such as their birth date, driver’s license or Social Security number, when registering to vote, but they don’t have to present identification when they cast their ballot.

Under this measure, voters would also need to present government-issued ID each time they vote in-person at the polls or, if voting by mail, provide the last four digits of a “unique identifying number from government-issued identification” that matches the one they provided when they registered to vote. California would be required to provide free voter ID cards on request, and state and county election officials would be required to verify registered voters are U.S. citizens by using government data.

The voter ID measure has support from Assemblymember Carl DeMaio (R-San Diego), who has framed it as necessary to prevent voter fraud and restore trust. It comes as President Trump is pushing for stricter voter identification requirements and severe limits on voting by mail.

Democrats and voting rights groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, oppose the measure, saying California’s elections are already secure — voter impersonation and noncitizen voting cases are rare — and that it would make voting harder for many eligible voters, including people who have changed names, move frequently or face housing instability.

According to the Legislative Analyst’s Office, the measure would make election administration more expensive, costing state and local governments anywhere from tens of millions to low hundreds of millions of dollars annually, plus tens of millions in upfront implementation costs.

Proposition 40: Billionaire tax

Icon illustration of a hand with cufflinks pinching a money coin.

This proposition, supported by a healthcare worker union, would impose a one-time tax of 5% on taxpayers and trusts with assets valued at more than $1 billion.

According to a state-prepared summary of the measure, 90% of the tax revenues would be spent on healthcare and 10% would fund food assistance or education-related programs. California’s richest residents would be able to spread the payments over five years.

The Legislative Analyst’s Office estimates it would generate “tens of billions of dollars” spread over several years, but would lead to an annual decrease in state income tax revenues of “hundreds of millions of dollars or more.”

Newsom has publicly opposed the tax, arguing it would lead wealthy residents to leave the state and lead to future budget problems. Other opponents include Planned Parenthood, the California School Boards Assn. and a nonprofit called Building a Better California that is backed by tech execs and venture capitalists.

Some billionaires have already proactively moved themselves or their businesses out of the state because of the proposal, which as written would retroactively apply to residents of the state as of Jan. 1.

Proposition 41: Requires limits and audits on new state special taxes

Icon illustration of scissors cutting a document in half with stacks of coins nearby.

This is one of two ballot measures crafted by opponents of the proposed initiative to impose a new tax on California billionaires, and it would in effect undercut or curtail that wealth tax.

This proposed ballot measure would also prohibit any new state taxes from being excluded from the state’s current voter-approved spending limit. The proposed billionaire tax would have such an exclusion. If the billionaire tax proposal is approved by voters but this proposal receives more votes, the billionaire tax measure would be voided.

The measure would require the state auditor to conduct a financial and performance audit of proposed ballot initiatives and of the programs they fund. The measure would require audits of any program that would receive funding from the special tax in the proposed initiative to assess the efficiency of the program and recommend who ought to reduce its annual costs by 10%. If the measure passes, the costs of the audits would be paid via the revenues generated by the special tax.

This ballot initiative is one of two so-called poison pills to sink the billionaire tax that is being bankrolled by Building a Better California, which has raised well over $100 million from the state’s most affluent. The largest donor is Sergey Brin, a co-founder of Google, who has reportedly moved out of California because of the tax proposal. He donated at least $82 million to the group as of late June.

Proposition 42: Ban on new state personal property taxes

Icon illustration of scissors cutting a document in half with a house symbol. Stacks of coins nearby.

This is one of two ballot measures created by opponents of the proposed initiative to impose a tax on California billionaires, and it would in effect void that wealth tax.

This proposed ballot measure would prohibit new taxes on personal property, intellectual property, retirement accounts and other assets and would limit situations in which a ballot measure or state lawmakers can impose or raise taxes retroactively — both of which are essential parts of the billionaire tax initiative.

If the billionaire tax proposal is approved by voters but this proposal receives more votes, the billionaire tax ballot measure would be voided.

Proposition 43: Voting thresholds for special taxes

Icon illustration of two dollar bills with checkmarks and one dollar bill with a red X.

The measure would prohibit local governments from imposing new special taxes unless the proposed tax receives approval from two-thirds of voters. The restriction also applies to citizen initiatives, which currently only need a simple majority vote to be approved.

The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn. supports Proposition 43. The advocacy group has characterized the measure as an effort to “save” 1978’s Proposition 13, the landmark initiative that capped California property tax increases and required a super-majority of votes to approve most future tax increases.

Assemblymember Buffy Wicks (D-Oakland), who authored the legislation that became Proposition 43 — ACA 22 — opposes the measure and has urged Californians to vote against it. She said the only reason she crafted the bill was because it was a necessary bargaining chip to torpedo another ballot measure backed by the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn. that would have devastated revenues for local governments and retroactively rescinded some local tax increases.

“I authored ACA 22 not because I wanted it to become law — but because it was the only path left to get the more dangerous initiative off the ballot before time ran out,” Wicks posted on social media.

Proposition 44: Regulate health clinic spending

Icon illustration of a stethoscope encircling stacks of coins.

If passed, Proposition 44 would require federally qualified health centers to spend 90% of their revenue on “program services advancing their charitable purpose” rather than management and overhead. Community clinics that fail to comply would be penalized, with fines placed in a state-managed fund to be spent on clinic workforce programs.

Advocates say clinics spend too much on executive pay and other administrative costs and not enough on patient care. The measure, which would dictate how clinics spend money, is designed to fix that. The measure is backed by the Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West, an influential healthcare workers union, which argues it will help hold clinics accountable.

In May, the California Primary Care Assn., which represents more than 2,300 community health clinics, sued to block the ballot measure. The state’s powerful doctors’ lobby, the California Medical Assn., also opposes the measure, arguing it would ban clinics from keeping funding in reserves and hamper their ability to upgrade equipment or expand to new locations.

The Legislative Analyst’s Office estimates that enforcing the measure would cost the government up to the low tens of millions annually, and that much of the cost would be paid for through penalties and fees charged to affected clinics. The office says the measure has “uncertain” impacts and could lead to clinic closures.

Proposition 45: CEQA reform

Icon illustration of half of the Earth and half of a mechanical gear.

This proposition would amend the California Environmental Quality Act, or CEQA, and speed up the process for projects deemed “essential,” including certain housing, water, health, public safety, energy and transportation projects.

Jails, detention facilities and oil or natural gas production facilities would not be considered “essential” projects, according to the measure text.

If passed, the measure would set deadlines for public agencies to complete environmental review, allow expedited review of a project’s environmental impacts — currently, public agencies are required to consider a range of feasible alternatives to reduce environmental impacts — and establish deadlines for filing and resolving lawsuits.

CEQA lawsuits have often been used to block construction of housing in the state. For instance, in Berkeley, neighbors used CEQA — citing potential noise impact from partying students — to delay, for years, UC Berkeley’s construction of student dorms on People’s Park.

The Legislative Analyst’s Office estimates that the state and local government implementation will cost in the tens of millions of dollars for the first several years. It notes the legislation would probably result in net savings in the long term due to reduced administrative and legal workload.

Times staff writers Seema Mehta and Phil Willon contributed to this report.

Science

July Fourth fireworks may bring ‘hazardous’ air quality to Southern California. What you need to know

Published

3 days ago

July 4, 2026

Press Room

July Fourth fireworks may bring ‘hazardous’ air quality to Southern California. What you need to know

L.A.’s love of fireworks makes for a colorful Fourth of July, with dozens of official celebrations and countless illicit explosions expected for the holiday.

But as each sparkler, Roman candle, palm and peony dissipates, it leaves behind a cloud of noxious gases, soot and finely ground toxic metals — some of which ends up in the lungs of revelers and passersby below.

Hazardous levels of air pollution are expected across central and southern Los Angeles County, northern Orange County, and Riverside and San Bernardino counties from 5 p.m. Saturday evening through 3 p.m. Sunday, according to the South Coast Air Quality Management District. Unhealthy air quality is also expected in northern Los Angeles County and southern Orange County.

Pollution levels are expected to build from dusk onward Saturday, as light winds and increased firework activity lead to an increase in smoke, a South Coast AQMD advisory said. Soot and particulates will likely linger through Sunday afternoon before being dispersed by the wind.

Firework-related pollution can trigger coughs, breathing problems, asthma flares and heart attacks, according to Los Angeles County Public Health, and anyone experiencing severe or worsening cardiovascular symptoms like chest pain or difficulty breathing should seek medical attention immediately.

Pyrotechnics set off at home are even more likely to trigger cardiovascular problems, the American Lung Assn. says, as the burst of pollutants takes place closer to the ground.

July 4 and 5 are traditionally two of the worst days of the year for the region’s air quality, according to South Coast AQMD. This year’s celebration comes on the heels of a late June warehouse fire in Boyle Heights that released extraordinary amounts of soot and smoke across the county, on par with pollution generated by the previous year’s wildfires.

To limit negative health effects, the L.A. County public health department recommends avoiding strenuous physical activity and keeping doors and windows closed. As whole house fans and swamp coolers can suck additional pollutants inside, the department recommends using air purifiers or air conditioners as alternatives when possible.