Topline:
Some 400 people gathered today at Fair Oaks Burger for a rally to safeguard the community's character after the Eaton fire.
Why it matters: "Altadena Not For Sale" has become the rallying cry for this loose-knit local movement. In addition to a rally, event organizers also provided food, produce, supplies and more for residents today.
Keep reading ... to read more about how Altadenans are banding together to preserve their home.
After losing her home in the Eaton Fire, Dana Sledge says she started getting calls from her mortgage company about selling her property.
The Altadena resident was appalled, and told them her home is not for sale. Sledge was among hundreds of people who gathered Saturday in the parking lot of Fair Oaks Burger, the only surviving building on its block after the Eaton Fire.
Their message: “Altadena Not For Sale.”
The restaurant, which has been feeding the community for more than a month, has become a gathering place for displaced residents. On Saturday, it was the site of a rally for people like Sledge, who want to preserve the neighborhoods leveled by the Eaton Fire.
Sledge said the elderly in particular have been targeted as one group of potential sellers. To her, “Altadena Not For Sale” is not just a rallying cry, but a “walking advertisement.”
“Some people don't have a lot of fight — they're preying upon that,” Sledge said. “It's not that people don't love their homes, love their community. People grew up here.”
Heavenly Hughes is co-founder of My Tribe Rise — the group behind the “Altadena Not For Sale” T-shirts.
“We wanna let people know that Altadena is not for sale, that we’re gonna find a way to keep land and property within the community," Hughes said, "whether it’s we’re buying and selling from one another, whether it’s finding out about land trusts…finding out about subsidies that can help our community members be able to do the new build."
Elena Lopez’s former home was just two houses down from Fair Oaks Burger. She’s lived in Altadena since 1973 and says she’s rebuilding.
“I raised my kids in this home and my nieces and nephews. This is a generational home that’s been passed down," Lopez said.
Next to her was her niece, Monami Ruiz, also born and raised in Altadena. She was back in the community to sift through her former house for keepsakes and to pick up supplies for their current home.
To her the slogan is a call for the neighborhood to return to what it once was.
“Don’t ever give up on your community," Ruiz said. "Everybody needs to come back to Altadena and make it just an amazing place again.”
In addition to bringing like-minded people together, Saturday's event extended Fair Oaks Burger's commitment to keeping people fed. On Saturday, Fair Oaks Burger, local community organization My Tribe Rise, and the AIDS Health Foundation provided fresh produce, hot meals, free clothing and other supplies for the community.
“We already exceeded 400 families here today,” says Carlos Marroquin, director of food for health with the AIDS Healthcare Foundation — who said they expected the crowd to continue throughout the afternoon.
Marroquin, who has provided aid in other natural disasters, says events like today’s rally are about lifting people up.
“The problem here is that people are gonna get desperate, but we have to remind each other that if we work together, if we become advocates for those people that are struggling… that is key for our success," he said.
Marroquin says his organization will be providing food indefinitely.
“Our goal here is long term…every week, every Saturday from 9 to 12, we are serving right here in this location,” he said.
Funding from the World Central Kitchen for these free meals will end at the beginning of April. But the burger joint’s owners Janet and Christy Lee have no intention of stopping.
Topline:
An annual meeting of the nation's governors that has long served as a rare bipartisan gathering is unraveling after President Donald Trump excluded Democratic governors from White House events.
More details: The National Governors Association said it will no longer hold a formal meeting with Trump when governors are scheduled to convene in Washington later this month, after the White House planned to invite only Republican governors. On Tuesday, 18 Democratic governors also announced they would boycott a traditional dinner at the White House.
Why it matters: The governors' group, which is scheduled to meet from Feb. 19-21, is one of the few remaining venues where political leaders from both major parties gather to discuss the top issues facing their communities. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said on Tuesday that Trump has "discretion to invite anyone he wants to the White House."
Read on... for what this means for the group and what happened last year at the White House meeting.
An annual meeting of the nation's governors that has long served as a rare bipartisan gathering is unraveling after President Donald Trump excluded Democratic governors from White House events.
The National Governors Association said it will no longer hold a formal meeting with Trump when governors are scheduled to convene in Washington later this month, after the White House planned to invite only Republican governors. On Tuesday, 18 Democratic governors also announced they would boycott a traditional dinner at the White House.
"If the reports are true that not all governors are invited to these events, which have historically been productive and bipartisan opportunities for collaboration, we will not be attending the White House dinner this year," the Democrats wrote. "Democratic governors remain united and will never stop fighting to protect and make life better for people in our states."
Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt, a Republican who chairs the NGA, told fellow governors in a letter on Monday that the White House intended to limit invitations to the association's annual business meeting, scheduled for Feb. 20, to Republican governors only.
"Because NGA's mission is to represent all 55 governors, the Association is no longer serving as the facilitator for that event, and it is no longer included in our official program," Stitt wrote in the letter, which was obtained by The Associated Press.
The governors' group, which is scheduled to meet from Feb. 19-21, is one of the few remaining venues where political leaders from both major parties gather to discuss the top issues facing their communities. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said on Tuesday that Trump has "discretion to invite anyone he wants to the White House."
"It's the people's house," she said. "It's also the president's home, so he can invite whomever he wants to dinners and events here at the White House."
Representatives for Sitt and the NGA didn't comment on the letter. Brandon Tatum, the NGA's CEO, said in a statement last week that the White House meeting is an "important tradition" and said the organization was "disappointed in the administration's decision to make it a partisan occasion this year."
In his letter to other governors, Stitt encouraged the group to unite around common goals.
"We cannot allow one divisive action to achieve its goal of dividing us," he wrote. "The solution is not to respond in kind, but to rise above and to remain focused on our shared duty to the people we serve. America's governors have always been models of pragmatic leadership, and that example is most important when Washington grows distracted by politics."
Signs of partisan tensions emerged at the White House meeting last year, when Trump and Maine's Gov. Janet Mills traded barbs.
Trump singled out the Democratic governor over his push to bar transgender athletes from competing in girls' and women's sports, threatening to withhold federal funding from the state if she did not comply. Mills responded, "We'll see you in court."
Trump then predicted that Mills' political career would be over for opposing the order. She is now running for U.S. Senate.
The back-and-forth had a lasting impact on last year's conference and some Democratic governors did not renew their dues last year to the bipartisan group.
Copyright 2026 NPR
Topline:
Many veterans turn to private companies for help filing disability claims at the Department of Veterans Affairs and then face bills that run well into the thousands of dollars.
About the new law: A booming industry that charges veterans for help in obtaining the benefits they earned through military service must shut down or dramatically change its business model in California by the end of the year under a new law Gov. Gavin Newsom signed Tuesday. The law prohibits unaccredited private companies from billing former military service members for help with their Department of Veterans Affairs claims.
The backstory: Technically, it was already illegal under federal law to charge veterans for that work, but Congress 20 years ago removed criminal penalties for violations, and scores of private companies emerged, offering to speed up and maximize benefit claims.
Read on... for more about the new law.
A booming industry that charges veterans for help in obtaining the benefits they earned through military service must shut down or dramatically change its business model in California by the end of the year under a new law Gov. Gavin Newsom signed Tuesday.
The law prohibits unaccredited private companies from billing former military service members for help with their Department of Veterans Affairs claims.
Technically, it was already illegal under federal law to charge veterans for that work, but Congress 20 years ago removed criminal penalties for violations, and scores of private companies emerged, offering to speed up and maximize benefit claims.
“We owe our veteran community a debt of gratitude — for their years of service and sacrifice," Newsom said in a written statement. "By signing this bill into law, we are ensuring veterans and service members get to keep more money in their pockets, and not line the coffers of predatory actors. We are closing this federal fraud loophole for good.”
Critics call the private companies “claim sharks” because their fees are often five times the monthly benefit increase veterans obtain after using their services. CalMatters in September, for instance, interviewed a Vietnam-era veteran who was billed $5,500 after receiving benefits that would pay him $1,100 a month.
Depending on a disability rating, a claim consulting fee under that model could easily hit $10,000 or more.
“We owe it to our veterans to stand with them and to protect them from being taken advantage of while navigating the benefits they've earned,” said Sen. Bob Archuleta, a Democrat representing Norwalk. Archuleta, a former Army officer, carried the legislation. “This is not about politics; it's about doing what's right. Making millions of dollars on the back of our veterans is wrong. They've earned their benefits. They deserve their benefits.”
California’s new law is part of a tug-of-war over how to regulate claims consulting companies. Congress for several years has been at a stalemate on whether to ban them outright, allow them to operate as they are or regulate them in some other way.
California is among 11 states that have moved to put the companies out of business, while another group of mostly Republican-led states has legalized them, according to reporting by the veteran news organization The War Horse.
That split in some ways reflects the different ways veterans themselves view the companies. The bill had overwhelming support from organizations that help veterans file benefits claims at no cost, such as the American Legion and Veterans of Foreign Wars, as well as from Democratic Party leaders, including former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco.
But the VA’s claims process can take months and sow uncertainty among applicants. Several of the claims consulting companies say they have helped tens of thousands of veterans across the country, and that they have hundreds of employees.
Those trends led some lawmakers to vote against the measure, including Democrats with military backgrounds.
“We're going to say to you, ‘Veteran, you know what, I don't know if you are too stupid or too vulnerable or your judgment is so poor you can't choose yourself,'” said Sen. Tom Umberg, a Democrat and former Army colonel, during a debate over the measure last month.
The new law was such a close call for lawmakers that nine of 40 senators did not vote on it when it passed that chamber last month, which counts the same as a “no” vote but avoids offending a constituency that the lawmaker wants to keep.
It was also one of the 10 most-debated measures to go before the Legislature last year, according to the CalMatters Digital Democracy database. Lawmakers spent 4 hours and 39 minutes on the bill at public hearings in 2025 and heard testimony from 99 speakers.
Two claims consulting companies spent significant sums hiring lobbyists as they fought the bill, according to state records. They were Veterans Guardian, a North Carolina-based company that spent $150,000 on California lobbyists over the past two years; and Veterans Benefit Guide, a Nevada-based company that spent $371,821 lobbying on Archuleta’s bill and a similar measure that failed in 2024.
Those companies view laws like California’s as an existential threat. Both have founders with military backgrounds. Veterans Benefit Guide sued to block New Jersey’s law prohibiting fees for veterans claim consulting, and a federal appeals court sided with the company last year.
"This was the hardest bill I’ve had to work on since I’ve been in the Legislature," said Assemblymember Pilar Schiavo, a Santa Clarita Democrat who supported the law. "We know why that is, because there was so much money on the other side."
Charlotte Autolino, who organizes job fairs for former military service members as the chairperson of the Veterans Employment Committee of San Diego, criticized Newsom’s decision to sign the law. She spoke to CalMatters on behalf of Veterans Benefit Guide.
“The veterans lose,” she said. They lose the option. You’re taking an option away from them and you’re putting all of the veterans into one box, and that to me is wrong.”
But David West, a Marine veteran who is Nevada County’s veterans service officer, commended Newsom. West was one of the main advocates for the new law.
“The veterans of California are going to know that when (Newsom) says he’s taking care of everybody, he’s including us; that he values those 18- and 19-year-olds who are raising their hands, writing a blank check in the form of their lives; to then ensure that they aren’t writing checks to access their benefits,” West said.
This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.
Topline:
James Van Der Beek — best known for his role as Dawson Leery in the hit late 1990s and early aughts show Dawson's Creek — has died. He was 48. Van Der Beek announced his diagnosis of Stage 3 colon cancer in November 2024.
The announcement: His family wrote on Instagram on Wednesday, "Our beloved James David Van Der Beek passed peacefully this morning. He met his final days with courage, faith, and grace. There is much to share regarding his wishes, love for humanity and the sacredness of time. Those days will come. For now we ask for peaceful privacy as we grieve our loving husband, father, son, brother, and friend."
His background: Van Der Beek started acting when he was 13 in Cheshire, Conn., after a football injury kept him off the field. He played the lead in a school production of Grease, got involved with local theater, and fell in love with performing. A few years later, he and his mother went to New York City to sign the then-16 year old actor with an agent. But Van Der Beek didn't break out as a star until he was 21, when he landed the lead role of 15-year-old Dawson Leery, an aspiring filmmaker, in Dawson's Creek.
Read on... for more on Van Der Beek's life and legacy.
James Van Der Beek — best known for his role as Dawson Leery in the hit late 1990s and early aughts show Dawson's Creek — has died. He was 48. Van Der Beek announced his diagnosis of Stage 3 colon cancer in November 2024.
His family wrote on Instagram on Wednesday, "Our beloved James David Van Der Beek passed peacefully this morning. He met his final days with courage, faith, and grace. There is much to share regarding his wishes, love for humanity and the sacredness of time. Those days will come. For now we ask for peaceful privacy as we grieve our loving husband, father, son, brother, and friend."
Van Der Beek started acting when he was 13 in Cheshire, Conn., after a football injury kept him off the field. He played the lead in a school production of Grease, got involved with local theater, and fell in love with performing. A few years later, he and his mother went to New York City to sign the then-16 year old actor with an agent.
But Van Der Beek didn't break out as a star until he was 21, when he landed the lead role of 15-year-old Dawson Leery, an aspiring filmmaker, in Dawson's Creek.
Van Der Beek's life changed forever with this role. The teen coming-of-age show was a huge hit, with millions of weekly viewers over 6 seasons. It helped both establish the fledgling WB network and the boom of teen-centered dramas, says Lori Bindig Yousman, a media professor at Sacred Heart University and the author of Dawson's Creek: A Critical Understanding.
"Dawson's really came on the scene and felt different, looked different," Bindig Yousman says.
It was different, she points out, from other popular teen shows at the time such as Beverly Hills, 90210. "It wasn't these rich kids. It was supposed to be normal kids, but they were a little bit more intelligent and aware of the world around them … It was attainable in some way. It was reflective."
The Dawson's drama centered around love, hardships, relationships, school and sex — sometimes pushing the boundaries when it came to teens discussing sex. Van Der Beek's character Dawson was a moody, earnest dreamer, sometimes so earnest he came across as a "sad sack," says Bindig Yousman. He had a seasons long on-again off-again on-screen relationship with his best friend Joey, played by Katie Holmes. Bindig Yousman says Van Der Beek quickly became seen as a heartthrob.
"I think he was very safe for a lot of tweens, and that's when we started to get the tween marketing," she says, referring to the attention paid to him by magazines like Teen People and Teen Celebrity. "And so because he wasn't a bad guy, he was conventionally attractive … He definitely appealed to the masses."
Dawson's Creek launched the careers of not just of James Van Der Beek, but his costars Katie Holmes, Joshua Jackson and Michelle Williams. All went on to have successful careers in the entertainment industry.
Despite his success, Van Der Beek didn't land many roles that rose to that same level of fame he enjoyed in Dawson's Creek. Perhaps because audiences associated him so much with Dawson Leery, it was difficult to separate him from that character.
Still, he starred in the 1999 coming of age film Varsity Blues, as a high school football player who wants to be more than just a jock. In 2002's Rules of Attraction, he played a toxic college drug dealer.
And he actually parodied himself in the sitcom Don't Trust the B---- in Apartment 23. In it, he's a self-obsessed actor unsuccessfully trying to get people to see him as someone other than the celebrity from Dawson's Creek. In an episode where he decides to teach an acting class, the students ignore the lesson and instead pester him to perform a monologue from the show.
In real life as well, the floppy blond-haired Dawson Leery is the one that stole fans' hearts, but Bindig Yousman says Van Der Beek still enjoyed a strong fanbase that followed him to other shows, even when they were only smaller cameos.
In the 2024 Instagram post about his cancer, Van Der Beek said "Each year, approximately 2 billion people around the world receive this diagnosis ... I am one of them." He leaves behind six children.
The cast of Dawson's Creek reunited to raise money for the nonprofit F Cancer, which focuses on prevention, detection and support for people affected by cancer. They read the pilot episode at a Broadway theater in New York City in September 2025. His former co-star Michelle Williams organized the reunion. James Van Der Beek was unable to perform, due to his illness, but contributed an emotional video that was shown onstage. In it, he thanked his crew and castmates, and the Dawson's Creek fans for being "the best fans in the world."
Copyright 2026 NPR
The Los Angeles Department of Transportation released the locations around the city it feels would most benefit from camera systems, which, once up and running later this year, will automatically detect speeding violations and help generate citations.
The background: Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a law in October 2023 that authorizes several cities throughout the state to pilot speed safety cameras. The number of cameras in each city is based on population, and L.A. has authority to install the systems at 125 locations throughout the city.
The criteria: It probably doesn’t need to be said, but there are a lot of miles of roads in L.A. To identify potential locations for cameras, the city looked at 550 miles of corridors that are already known to see speeding cars, where past interventions to tamp down on speeding haven’t been effective and where speeding has been determined to be the primary reason for collisions. The number of lanes and proximity to schools, senior centers and street racing hotspots were also factored in. Council offices were consulted, as well.
The proposed locations: The city is proposing to install cameras on street light poles at “mid-block locations.” The city is recommending spreading the systems nearly equally among the council districts. In the middle of this page is a map showing the proposed locations. You can see the names of the locations in this council file.
Share your thoughts: The public can share their thoughts on the proposed locations before the L.A. City Council weighs in. The public can also comment on other legislatively mandated documents outlining, among other aspects of the program, how the city plans to protect civil liberties and the data that went into selecting proposed camera locations.
Instructions for public comment: City officials are asking public comments be submitted through the council file or as an email to Department of Transportation staff: ladot.speedsafety@lacity.org.
The timeline: L.A. is further behind its peer cities in installing the camera systems. San Francisco launched its cameras last year, Oakland’s went up earlier this year and Long Beach recently approved locations for its batch. L.A. expects to launch a 60-day public information campaign this summer before activating the cameras in July, followed by an additional 60-day period during which violators will receive warnings. After that warning period is over, the cameras will begin issuing citations.
