The Brief

As the investigation into the cause of the Eaton Fire continues — potentially sparked by Southern California Edison transmission equipment — many people, from community members to officials to Gov. Gavin Newsom himself, have called for burying a lot more power lines.

The cost, though, can be staggering.

It’s estimated that burying power lines in the wake of the wildfires will soar past $860 million. And it’s a cost that will be passed along to ratepayers.

Here in Southern California, there’s no way to eliminate the risk of wildfire — after all, fire has been a part of our landscape for millennia. But as the effects of climate change escalate and we continue to live in areas increasingly prone to catastrophic fire, how much risk are we willing to tolerate? And how much are we willing — and able — to pay to reduce that risk?

It’s a major conundrum with no easy answer.

The electric conundrum 

Electricity is a basic necessity of modern life. At the same time, power lines have sparked some of the most destructive and deadly fires in California history.

Then there’s climate change. Experts say the level of fossil fuel pollution we’ve pumped into the atmosphere is making wildfires a lot worse. The January fires were a textbook example of that: record-dry conditions stretched deep into winter, coinciding with the peak of Santa Ana wind season, and well, the rest is tragic history.

The glow of the Eaton Fire seen in the distance.

(

Matt Dangelantonio

/

LAist

)

To lessen those climate effects, the world’s top scientists agree we need to shift away from fossil fuels such as coal, oil and gas, and instead generate electricity from cleaner sources such as solar and wind, and power everything from cars to buildings with electricity instead of gas.

But all that demand is driving up costs. That’s in no small part a result of needing to upgrade the power grid to prevent wildfires in the first place, while also boosting the amount of electricity the grid can move around as we shift to cleaner energy sources.

We spoke to experts to try to shed some clarity on this complex electric conundrum.

The background on going underground

Burying power lines underground as a way to prevent fire is a relatively recent practice.

Traditionally, power lines were mostly put underground for aesthetic reasons — communities didn’t want to look at lines criss-crossing their streets — or when there simply wasn’t an option to put them aboveground, for example, in extreme environmental conditions.

A utilities crew fixes a power line at the corner of Marengo and Woodbury in Altadena.

(

Josie Huang

/

LAist

)

Utilities began burying lines to prevent fire in earnest with Pacific Gas and Electric in 2021, said Duncan Callaway, professor of energy and resources at UC Berkeley. The proposal to bury thousands of miles of lines came after the 2018 Camp Fire, which was sparked by PG&E equipment and became the most destructive and deadliest fire in California history. It burned the town of Paradise to ash and killed 85 people.

Calls for burying lines underground have only risen after every catastrophic fire since then.

After the LA wildfires

In the wake of the Eaton and Palisades fires, and an executive order from the governor, Southern California Edison has released a plan to bury more than 150 circuit miles of distribution power lines in the footprints of the Palisades and Eaton Fires, primarily in Altadena and Malibu.

SCE was already planning to bury many of the lines burned in Malibu, which are all in high-risk fire areas. In Altadena, the plan includes potentially putting lines underground in areas not designated as high fire risk, but that burned in the Eaton Fire.

The total cost is expected to be between $860 million and $925 million.

The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power has also vowed to go underground with some 4,000 power lines in the Palisades area at a cost of $1 million to $14 million per mile.

The details of these plans are still being developed, but much of the cost to carry them out is likely to increase rates. Both SCE and LADWP say they are looking for state, federal and philanthropic funding to help offset rate increases.

Most of the Southern California' Edison's power lines in Altadena were destroyed or damaged in the Eaton Fire.

(

Courtesy SCE

)

Power lines in Malibu overseen by Southern California Edison were in the process of being put underground before the Palisades Fire.

(

Courtesy SCE

)

How can power companies prevent fires? 

There are four main strategies utilities use to prevent fires sparked by power lines:

• Shutting off the power during high-risk conditions (otherwise known as Public Safety Power Shutoffs). Edison’s policy is to shut off power when winds hit 60 mph. (The utility says winds were at 59 mph at the transmission line that may have caused the Eaton Fire). They also use the emerging tool of “fast-trip” sensors, which shut off power lines automatically during high-risk conditions. 
• Vegetation management in high-risk fire zones, including keeping vegetation from growing too close to power lines.
• Hardening power infrastructure with fire-proof and fire-resistant materials, such as replacing wood poles and covering exposed wires. (For example, Southern California Edison has been installing “covered conductors” or coated wires across thousands of miles of high-risk power lines, which reduces the risk of fires sparked by arcing wires.)
• Putting power lines underground, which eliminates the risk of sparking a fire from that equipment and the need to shut off power during risky weather.

When does it make sense to go underground? 

There’s no one-size-fits-all approach, but experts LAist spoke with said burying power lines should be reserved for the highest-risk fire areas.

It doesn’t make sense for every type of power line, either. For example, transmission lines — those huge towers that are the subject of the Eaton Fire investigation — generally are not good candidates for going underground. That’s because they are generally less likely to spark a fire since they’re a lot higher above vegetation. SCE’s plan focuses on putting what are called “distribution” lines underground — the power lines we generally see in our neighborhoods. 

Going underground works best “in an area where the risk is really, really high, such that deploying some of the other measures that are lower cost, like depowering lines and vegetation management, are not going to deliver significant risk reductions,” said Meredith Fowlie, a UC Berkeley professor who has studied the costs and benefits of wildfire mitigation by the state’s major utilities. “That's a judgment call in terms of how much we want to spend to eliminate risk in certain areas.”

Altadena residents walk near the damage of the Eaton Fire.

(

Brian Feinzimer

/

LAist

)

Fowlie’s research has focused primarily on PG&E territory, where they’ve done cost-benefit analysis for taking power lines underground primarily in more wooded, rural communities, as well as some in the urban-wildland interface.

But defining what’s “high risk” continues to change, especially as human-caused climate change exacerbates California’s already-extreme cycles of fire, flood and drought.

The current SCE plan calls for underground lines in some areas that hadn’t previously been considered high risk. And California’s new fire-hazard maps dramatically increase the number of areas considered high risk in the state. No one — not researchers or utilities — thinks it’s a realistic option to bury every power line in every designated high-risk area.

A map outlines the high risk areas for fire in Altadena.

(

Brent Jones / NPR

/

Source: California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection; building footprints from Microsoft

)

“Especially living in California, there is this visceral feeling that we should just eliminate wildfire risk, but we can't do that,” Fowlie said. “And so it is going to be a question of how much risk are we willing to tolerate? How much are we willing to spend to reduce risk?”

Why is the cost to go underground so high?

Southern California Edison estimates it costs between $3 million and $5 million per mile to take a power line underground. To compare, it costs around $900,000 per mile to cover lines with fire-resistant material through Edison’s “covered conductor” program. Installing covered conductors can also be done a lot faster —  typically within 16 to 24 months compared with 25 to 48 months or longer for underground projects, said Jeff Monford, a spokesperson for Edison.

The cost for going underground is so much higher and the timeline is longer largely because of all the work involved: you have to dig a trench, coordinate with other underground infrastructure such as sewer systems, and then often redo roads and sidewalks once you’re all done, said Monford.

Southern California Edison workers service a utility pole in the aftermath of the Eaton Fire in Altadena on Jan. 12.

(

Ethan Swope

/

AP

)

Underground lines don’t have to be maintained as often, but when they do need to be fixed, power outages can last a lot longer and the fix can be more expensive, Monford added.

The costs in Altadena and Malibu, however, shouldn’t be quite as high as moving existing lines underground because most of the infrastructure has burned and needs to be replaced anyway, Monford said.

“ We are able to treat it more similar to how we would treat a brand new development,” Monford said. “We are redoing everything there as opposed to inserting things in different spots and that can make it more cost-effective to do some of the undergrounding.”

Since the Thomas and Woolsey Wildfires in 2017 and 2018, SCE has put more than 40 miles of power lines underground at a cost of about $110 million to date. How it will affect our rates is currently going through the regulatory process, but if approved, would help raise the average residential customer's bill by about 10%.

On average, carrying out wildfire mitigation strategies contributes to a significant chunk of our bills — about 10%, according to Edison.

What goes into the average SCE electric bill.

(

Courtesy SCE

)

A lesson from PG&E and 'fast trip' sensors

In a study by Callaway and Fowlie, they found what they believe might be a cost-effective alternative to some underground projects.

Their study found that installing “fast trip” sensors on high risk power lines reduced fires started by power lines by as much as 80% and is less expensive than putting lines underground (but the power still goes out). The “fast trip” sensors work by automatically shutting off power lines when conditions become particularly risky.

 ”We're not suggesting that we shouldn't be putting power lines underground,” Fowlie said. “Especially as wildfire risk is escalating, there will be areas where that's absolutely the right step to take. But this innovation changes the calculation when we're thinking about which areas it's cost-effective to put lines underground.”

When it comes to safety and reliability, undergrounding lines has plenty of positives: For one, it eliminates the risk of ignitions and prevents the need to shut off power during high-risk situations. But Callaway said the cost is enormous.

“I think customers should be open to alternatives,” Callaway said.

What other options are there? 

Power shutoffs, which no one likes either.

But there are ways to ease the pain of shutting off the power during risky fire weather.

Enter: solar and battery storage.

SCE briefly mentions in its plan to underground power lines that their investments in the rebuild would also go towards building “microgrids” with solar and battery storage in locations such as schools, libraries and other community spaces where people could ride out power outages, as well as the homes of medically-vulnerable customers.

More solar and battery storage reduces the disruption of power shutoffs, and possibly the need to go underground as much with power lines, said Fowlie.

“We do have technologies that can help households and communities weather that kind of reliability impact during red flag days,” Fowlie said.

To be clear, that’s not a cheap option either — the state is currently grappling with how rooftop solar is affecting our electricity bills, and installing solar along with a battery is more expensive than solar alone.

 ”It comes back to this question about utilities, customers, and regulators being very careful and deliberate about what is the quality of power supply that they want in extreme conditions when wildfire risk is high,” said Callaway. “So battery storage is one really important thing. It's also really important to be thinking beyond the power lines and about the vegetation surrounding the communities that are at risk.”

Meaning, prescribed burning and other types of vegetation management. (That can look very different in different places. See our coverage on that in the context of the LA fires here.)

The fact is, the necessary work to harden our power grid, shift to cleaner energy sources and mitigate wildfire all has a cost, and tradeoffs.

“ We do have tools in the toolkit,” Fowlie said. “As we confront what it would really cost to underground all of the distribution lines that are in high risk areas, we have to be scrutinizing very carefully those trade-offs.”

This story first appeared on The LA Local.

Since 1977, Richard Santillan has been to every Opening Day game at Dodger Stadium. 

“The tradition goes from my father, to me, to my children and grandchildren. Some of my best memories are with my father and children here at Dodger Stadium,” Santillan told The LA Local, smiling under the shade of palm trees near the entrance to the ballpark Wednesday morning. He was there to protest the team less than 24 hours before Opening Day.

Santillan, like countless other loyal Dodgers fans, is grappling with his fan identity over the team’s decision to accept an invitation to the White House and owner Mark Walter’s ties to ICE detention facilities.

More than 30 people joined Santillan on Wednesday morning for a press conference held near 1000 Vin Scully Drive to convey a message directly to the team. 

“We are demanding the Dodgers stop participating in funding of inhumane treatment of families and do not go to the White House to celebrate with the criminal in chief,” Evelyn Escatiola told the crowd. “Together, we have the power to make a change.”

Escatiola, a former dean of East Los Angeles College and longtime community organizer, urged fans to flex their economic power by “letting the Dodgers know that we do not support repression.”

Jorge “Coqui” Rodriguez, a lifelong Dodgers fan, spoke to the crowd and called on Dodgers ownership to divest from immigration detention centers owned and operated by GEO Group and CoreCivic.

Jorge Coqui H Rodriguez speaks at a press conference outside Dodger Stadium on March 25, 2026, to demand the Dodgers not to visit the White House following their 2025 World Series win.

(

J.W. Hendricks

/

The LA Local

)

In a phone interview a day before the protest, Rodriguez told The LA Local he did not want the Dodgers using his “cheve” or beer money to fund detention centers. 

“They can’t take our parking money, our cacahuate money, our cheve money, our Dodger Dog money and invest those funds into corporations that are imprisoning people. It’s wrong,” Rodriguez said. 

Rodriguez considers the Dodgers one of the most racially diverse teams and said the players need to support fans at a time when heightened immigration enforcement has become more common across L.A.

The team’s 2025’s visit to the White House drew ire from the largely Latino fan base, citing the Trump administration’s ongoing attacks on immigrants. 

In June, the team came under further scrutiny when rumors swirled online that federal immigration agents were using the stadium’s parking, which immigration authorities later denied in statements posted on social media accounts.

The team again came under fire after not releasing a statement on the impacts of ICE raids on its mostly Latino fan base at the height of immigration enforcement last summer. The team later agreed to invest $1 million to support families affected by immigration enforcement.

When he learned the Dodgers were pledging only $1 million to families in need, Rodriguez called the amount a  “slap in the face.” 

“These guys just bought the Lakers for billions of dollars and they give a million dollars to fight for legal services? That’s a joke,” Rodriguez said. “They need to have a moral backbone and not be investing in those companies.”

According to reporting from the Los Angeles Times, former Dodgers pitcher Clayton Kershawsaid last week that he is looking forward to the trip.

“I went when President [Joe] Biden was in office. I’m going to go when President [Donald] Trump is in office,” Kershaw said. “To me, it’s just about getting to go to the White House. You don’t get that opportunity every day, so I’m excited to go.”

The Dodgers have yet to announce when their planned visit will take place. 

Santillan sometimes laments his decision to give up his season tickets in protest of the team. His connection to the stadium and the memories he has made there with family and friends will last a lifetime, he said. On Thursday, he will uphold his tradition and be there for the first pitch of the season, but with a heavy heart.

“It’s a family tradition, but the Dodgers have a lot of work to do,” he said.

A local favorite mom-and-pop bookshop in Eagle Rock is facing displacement due to a steep rent hike. The owners say theirs is just one of several small businesses along Eagle Rock Boulevard struggling to keep up with lease increases.

Over the past 19 years, many in the neighborhood have come to love READ Books for its eclectic collection of used titles and shop dog Florence.

Co-owner Jeremy Kaplan said it’s been a delight to grow with the community over the years.

“Like seeing kids come back in, who were in grade school and now they’re in college,” Kaplan said.

But the building where Kaplan and wife Debbie rent was recently sold, and the rent increased by more than 130% to $2,805 a month, Kaplan said. He told LAist it was an increase his small business simply could not absorb.

Kaplan said he originally was given 30 days notice of the rent increase. After some research, assistance from Councilmember Ysabel Jurado’s office and some pro-bono legal help, Kaplan said he pushed back and got the 90-day notice he’s afforded by state law.

California Senate Bill 1103 requires landlords to give businesses with five or less employees 90 days’ notice for rent increases exceeding 10%, among other protections.

Systems Real Estate, the property management company, did not immediately respond to LAist’s request for comment.

What can small businesses do? 

Nadia Segura, directing attorney of the Small Business Program at pro bono legal aid non-profit Bet Tzedek said California law does not currently allow for rent control for commercial tenancies.

Outside of the protections under SB 1103, Segura said small businesses like READ Books don’t have much other recourse. And even then, commercial landlords are not required to inform their tenants of their protections under the law.

“There’s still a lot of people that don’t know about SB 1103. And then it’s very sad that they tell them they have these rent increases and within a month they have to leave,” Segura said.

She said her group is seeing steep rent hikes like this for commercial tenants across the city.

“We are seeing this even more with the World Cup coming up, the Olympics coming up. And I will say it was very sad to see that also after the wildfires,” Segura said.

Part of Bet Tzedek’s ongoing work is to advocate for small businesses, working with landlords who are increasing rents to see if they are willing to give business owners longer leases that lock in rents.

What’s next 

After READ Books posted about their situation on social media, commenters chimed in to express their outrage and love for the little shop.

While he looks for a new spot, Kaplan says he’s forming a coalition of local businesses and activist groups to see what can be done to help other small businesses facing similar displacement. He wants to address the displacement issue for businesses like his, which have made Eagle Rock the distinctive neighborhood that it is today.

Owl Talk, a longtime Eagle Rock staple selling clothing and accessories in a unit in the same building as READ Books, is facing a “more than double” rent increase, according to a post on their Instagram account.

Kaplan said he’s been in touch with the office of state Assemblywoman Jessica Caloza and wants to explore the possibility of introducing legislation to set up protections for small businesses like his, including rent-control measures or a vacancy tax for landlords. Kaplan said he also reached out to the office of state Sen. Maria Durazo.

By his count, Kaplan said there are about a dozen businesses within surrounding blocks that are at risk of closing their doors or have shuttered due to rent increases or other struggles.

When READ Books was founded during the Great Recession, Kaplan said he knew it was a longshot to open a bookstore at the same time so many were struggling to stay in business.

“It was kind of interesting to be doing something that neighborhoods needed. That was important to me growing up, that was important to my children, that was important to my wife growing up,” Kaplan said.

“And then somebody comes in and says, ‘We’re gonna over double your rent.”

Topline:

Frozen budget: Most of the city’s Bureau of Street Lighting budget comes from an assessment that people who own property illuminated by lights pay on their county property tax bill. The amount people pay depends on the kind of property they own and how much they benefit from lighting. A typical single-family home currently pays $53 annually, and in total, the assessments bring in about $45 million annually for the city to repair and maintain streetlights. Changing the amount the Bureau of Street Lighting gets from the assessment requires a vote among property owners who benefit from the lights.

Ballots: L.A. City Council’s vote gives city staff the green light to prepare and send out those ballots. Miguel Sangalang, who oversees the bureau, said at a committee meeting earlier this month that he expects to send out ballots by April 17. Notices about the ballots will be sent out prior to the ballots themselves.

Near unanimous vote: L.A. City Councilmember Monica Rodriguez was the only “No” vote Tuesday, saying she wanted to see a more current strategic plan for the bureau. Sangalang said the bureau developed a plan in 2022 that lays out how money will be spent. Councilmember Imelda Padilla was absent for the vote.

Vote count: Votes will be weighted according to the assessment amount. Basically, the more you’re asked to pay yearly to maintain streetlights, the more your vote will count. Ballots received before June 2 will be tabulated by the L.A. City Clerk.

How much more money: According to a report, the amount needed in assessments from property owners to meet the repair and maintenance needs of the city’s streetlighting in the next fiscal year is nearly $112 million.

Use of the money: Sangalang said at a March 11 committee meeting that the extra funds would be used to double the number of staff to handle repairs and procure solar streetlights, which don’t face the threat of copper wire theft. That would all potentially reduce the time it takes to repair simple fixes down to a week. Currently, city residents wait for months to see broken streetlights repaired. The assessment would come with a three-year auditing mechanism.