The Brief

The Los Angeles Fire Department’s after action report — released Wednesday — details the challenges the department faced and the ways its response failed during the Palisades Fire in January.

The report, which is marked “for internal department use only” on every page, is quite critical, documenting shortcomings with preparation and response, and how systemic problems endangered the lives of firefighters and the public.

LAist has documented similar issues — particularly around communication between departments and with the public during evacuations, going back to the 2018 Woolsey Fire.

LAist on Wednesday asked the Fire Department to comment on the announcement of a man facing charges related to starting the Palisades Fire but has not received a response.

Here are 10 takeaways from the Fire Department's recent report.

1. Unprepared to perform

Overwhelmed by the complexity of the incident, several chief officers didn’t know what they were supposed to be doing, the report says, and reverted to responsibilities they had when at lower ranks. As a result, tasks were neglected as command and staff roles went unfilled.

2. Understaffing hampered the initial response 

The number of firefighters and equipment dedicated to the initial fire response was not what would be expected on a red flag day, the report says. That lack of personnel “seriously impeded the ability of resources to provide initial suppression and structure defense efforts on the initial attack.”

3. Money influenced staffing levels

“The decision to deploy was overwhelmingly based on perceived financial constraints,” the document reads.

The responsibility of figuring out the amount and type of resources needed during red flag events can be traced to 2017, the report says, when standards about how to staff up during fire weather were softened. The report says that decision was prompted by financial and personnel shortages.

The changes also shifted the decision making to a “singular human being,” which means the “level of experience, knowledge, training and even the number of deployments in a year where there are limited incidents can introduce bias or even create complacency and ultimately influence the incorrect deployment model.” The report does not explicitly state whom that individual was.

4. Working for two days straight

Because of resource mismanagement, many firefighters worked more than 36 hours straight in the early stages of the fire. Some worked for more than 48 hours, the report says, inhaling gases released by burning lithium ion batteries and other pollutants. “The combination of fatigue, exhaustion and sleep deprivation severely hindered their ability to make safe decisions,” the report says. And the extended exposure to dangerous smoke put their health at short- and long-term risk.

5. Firefighters were denied help

“Several urgent requests for additional resources at the Palisades Fire were denied or delayed, which impacted the firefighters' ability to engage in effective structure defense,” says the report.

6. Hundreds of drones

More than 400 drones flew over the fire, some more than once, interrupting aerial firefighting efforts as pilots were forced to avoid collisions. One drone climbed to an altitude of 21,289 feet. And another hit a CL-415, resulting in an arrest and charges.

Flying a drone near a wildfire can be a federal crime.

7. Inability to track where people are

“Accurately tracking assigned resources during the initial attack proved daunting because of radio communication issues, insufficient situational awareness and the changing incident organization,” reads the report.

8. Conflict among team members 

Some people in the Emergency Operations Center (the central hub of coordination for the fires) didn’t understand what their roles were, according to the report. And even if they did, some of them refused to help others with duties outside of their own: “This caused conflicts,” the report says. The report does not name any individuals.

9. Delays in evacuation orders

“There was a delay in communicating evacuation orders, warnings and shelter-in-place notifications to the public,” the report says. “As a result, spontaneous evacuations occurred without structured traffic control, causing citizens to block strategic routes to the fire.”

A law enforcement representative with the ability to oversee evacuations and make decisions couldn’t be found for “an extended period.”

10. Communication chaos

Many of the problems described above can be traced back to problems with communications.

One of the report’s recommendations is that the Fire Department needs a dedicated communications plan for wildfires.

Here’s a list of some of the communications problems the report documents:

• There was a delay in defining responsibilities for different divisions throughout LAFD. When those responsibilities were defined, they weren’t communicated to those already working on the fire.
• Task forces and strike teams didn’t communicate resource needs, delaying support around structure defense. 
• Radio communication was chaotic, as responders working on separate fires (Palisades and Sunset) tried to talk on one frequency, leading to an overwhelming amount of radio traffic. That also created  “delayed communication, reduced situational awareness and resources struggling to coordinate tactics and tasks.”
• The Department Operations Center wasn’t able to maintain accurate information on resources, impacting situational awareness.
• Reporters who reached out for information were directed to an LAFD email address, but no one was processing the requests. 
• Firefighters on the ground didn’t monitor air-to-ground communications.
• When Cal Fire, the state firefighting agency, arrived, no contact information was given, and even after they took a leading role, LAFD continued to communicate using old frequencies, causing confusion.
• A repeater was installed on the Palisades water tank to boost communication capabilities in hilly areas. The report later notes that “an LAFD repeater was set up as a backup system but was not utilized by any resources on the Palisades incident.”

A journalist's printed copy of the LAFD's report.

(

Matthew Ballinger

/

LAist

)

Nithya Raman, a member of the Democratic Socialists of America who offered a message of hope to a city beset by crises, has beaten Karen Bass in the race for Los Angeles mayor, the first time an incumbent has been ousted from that office in nearly a quarter century.

Raman, who is of Indian descent, becomes the first South Asian mayor of L.A. She was elected to the City Council six years ago.

“For too long our broken and unjust status quo has convinced Angelenos that this is the best that we can do,” Raman told supporters on election night. “You saw hopelessness, and you chose hope.”

Bass conceded the race Thursday morning. At the time, she had 48% of the vote compared with Raman's 52%, according to the latest vote count.

In a statement, Bass said it had been an honor to serve "the city that raised me." She said she had carried that responsibility with her every day since she was elected.

“While this is not the outcome we hoped for, the people of Los Angeles have spoken," she said. "I have called Councilmember Nithya Raman to congratulate her on her victory, and I have committed to ensuring a smooth and seamless transition. Moving this city forward is what Los Angeles needs from all of us.

“I love Los Angeles," she continued. "I believe in Los Angeles. And I will continue to ensure the promise of a better life belongs to all of us. Thank you.”

A champion of tenants' rights, Raman has promised she would tackle housing affordability, homelessness and police reform — the latter by removing Police Chief Jim McDonnell. She also has vowed to improve basic city services like pothole and streetlight repair.

A year ago, Raman wasn’t on anybody’s radar for mayor. A year earlier, she narrowly won reelection to a second term representing District 4, which stretches from Hollywood to Sherman Oaks.

Seeing polls that showed Bass was highly unpopular, she filed to run against her one-time ally on the last day possible, Feb. 7, stunning the political establishment.

She had endorsed Bass only weeks earlier.

Raman’s road to victory

No other political figure stepped up to challenge Bass. Not Rick Caruso, the billionaire developer who lost to Bass four years ago. Not county Supervisor Lindsey Horvath. So Raman did.

In the primary, Raman overcame a strong campaign by conservative TV personality Spencer Pratt to finish second behind Bass. Pratt, who lost his home in the Palisades Fire, came in third.

In the general election, Raman beat Bass despite the political establishment’s backing of the mayor. Bass had the support of the Los Angeles County Democratic Party, the Chamber of Commerce and the L.A. County Federation of Labor. Airbnb also spent big on behalf of Bass, who supported lifting restrictions on the homestay industry in the run-up to the 2028 Olympics.

Mayor Karen Bass (left) and challenger Nithya Raman speak at a forum focused on environmental issues during the 2026 L.A. mayoral race.

(

Ashlyn Ablao

/

LAist

)

Raman’s election represented a repudiation of the status quo, a reflection of Angelenos’ deep dissatisfaction with how the city was being governed. Polls showed support closely correlated with age, with younger voters supporting Raman.

Her victory coincided with a blue wave that swept across the country and came despite a barrage of negative ads against her by the Los Angeles Police Protective League, the union that represents rank-and-file officers. The ads focused on Raman’s opposition to an ordinance that allows the police to remove homeless encampments from around schools, daycare centers and other sensitive sites.

Raman said the program merely shuffled unhoused people down the street.

Raman had her share of powerful support. Three big unions broke with the Federation of Labor and backed her over Bass: the Western States Council of Carpenters, UNITE HERE Local 11 and the United Auto Workers.

Hedge fund manager Aaron Sosnick poured more than $8.5 million into ads supporting Raman and bashing Bass. Sosnick is an avid cyclist who wants to see more bike lanes in L.A. He funneled some of his money through Streets for All, a community group that ran ads against Bass.

Outside independent expenditures topped $16 million for Bass and against Raman, compared with $13 million for Raman and against Bass.

Raman also touted a massive door-knocking campaign that involved more than 11,000 volunteers knocking on more than 110,000 doors.

The election marked a generational shift in leaders. Bass is 73 years old and drew much of her support from older voters. Raman is 45 and enjoyed the overwhelming support from voters ages 30 to 39, according to a UC Berkeley/L.A. Times poll taken days before the election.

A relative newcomer to LA politics

Raman was born in India and moved to Louisiana with her family when she was 6. She earned a degree in social studies from Harvard and a master's in urban planning from MIT Raman became a naturalized citizen at the age of 22.

Raman moved to L.A. in 2013 and founded a nonprofit neighborhood homeless services coalition. She also served as executive director of Time’s Up Entertainment, a now-defunct group that was formed in response to the #MeToo movement.

The mother of twin boys and wife of a Hollywood screenwriter burst onto the political scene when she ousted an incumbent City Council member in 2020 with the backing of the DSA.

In defeating Bass, the first Black woman to serve as L.A. mayor, Raman ousted an icon in progressive politics in L.A. Bass was a community organizer who for years fought against police abuse and the crack epidemic in South L.A. Later, she went on to become speaker of the California State Assembly and represent L.A. in Congress.

Congresswoman and Los Angeles Mayoral Candidate Karen Bass speaks on stage at the Los Angeles County Democratic Party Election Night party held at the Palladium in Hollywood on Tuesday, Nov. 8, 2022.

(

Brian Feinzimer

/

LAist

)

In 2022, Bass was elected as a progressive Democrat with the backing of a coalition that looked a lot like the one she had this year, with the exception of the police union, which backed Caruso four years ago. She was able to portray herself as an outsider coming in to fix City Hall.

This year, however, Bass was the incumbent saddled with the city's problems. Her popularity plummeted in the wake of the Palisades Fire. She was out of town when it broke out and was sharply criticized for the Fire Department’s response.

Adding to her woes was the homelessness crisis. The latest count showed the number of unhoused people was growing after a two-year drop. Numerous audits found deep mismanagement of hundreds of millions of dollars by the regional Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority. Until recently, Bass sat on the board of the authority.

Her ouster is an ignominious end to an otherwise honorable career in public service.

In her concession statement, Bass thanked her supporters and her family, who she said had stood beside her through every challenge.

“Over the past four years, we have taken on some of the most difficult challenges facing any major American city," Bass said. "Coming out of the pandemic, when encampments lined our streets and businesses were trying to reopen — we got Angelenos off the streets, made our neighborhoods safer, built more affordable housing, and created new opportunities for working families.

"We stood together through devastating wildfires and protected our immigrant communities when Donald Trump sent federal troops into our streets to spread fear and intimidation," she continued. "That progress belongs to all of us."

Despite her six years on the City Council, Raman enters the mayoral stage as an outsider promising to shake up an intransigent City Hall.

She may face an uphill battle. All but one of her colleagues on the council backed Bass, including three DSA members. City Controller Kenneth Mejia was the only elected official at City Hall to endorse Raman.

She may have an ally in the city attorney. DSA-backed Marissa Roy is leading Deputy District Attorney John McKinney in the race for that office.

The world of artisanal chocolate has exploded. Going into a specialist store, or even a mainstream supermarket, can be overwhelming, with rows of gorgeously designed chocolate bars facing you. How on earth do you find out what you like — let alone what to buy?

That’s the question Brian Cisneros, director of this weekend’s inaugural L.A. Chocolate Festival, would like to help you with. He sees the festival — in addition to being a great way to bask in chocolate for a day or two — as a way to learn how to read labels, properly taste chocolate and meet the people behind those craft bars.

“You've had some practice, you've met some chocolate makers,” he said. “And now you're able to evaluate, ‘Oh, that was worth the $8,’ or, ‘That was so good, I'm going to get that as a gift.’”

Everything chocolate is on offer, from pastries and drinking chocolate to ceremonial cacao.

(

Char Beck

/

Courtesy LA Chocolate Festival

)

Cisneros has been passionate about spreading the bean-to-bar chocolate gospel for 18 years, since he began the then-tiny but now large-scale annual Northwest Chocolate Festival in Seattle.

“When I founded the festival, there were only six craft chocolate or bean-to-bar chocolate makers in the United States,” he recalled.

Chocolate back then was dominated by large conglomerate producers, whose trade and manufacturing practices were increasingly being called out by activists.

“I had learned about all the trade implications in chocolate, and I really wanted to help connect people with chocolate that was ethical,” he said. “That was part of the original reason for the show.”

As the craft movement has expanded, so has the Northwest festival, with more than 100 exhibitors from all over the world. Well established enough, he felt, to expand to Los Angeles this year. He also has a personal connection — he grew up in Bellflower, with a grandmother who lived in East Los Angeles, before moving to Seattle for high school.

“So there is a little bit of a homecoming energy for me personally,” he said, “though I try to keep that internal.”

Exhibitors include Dick Taylor, a small batch maker from Northern California.

(

Char Beck

/

Courtesy LA Chocolate Festival

)

The festival is being held on Saturday, Nov. 7, and Sunday, Nov. 8, at The Magic Box @ The Reef in DTLA. It’s the new kid in town — smaller than its Seattle sibling at around 30 exhibitors — but Cisneros sees advantages in a more intimate, less overwhelming event, aiming for a “more boutique experience,” he said. Exhibitors include California maker Dick Taylor and Melissa Coppel, a Las Vegas-based vegan chocolate maker, with educational workshops all day included in the ticket price.

Gov. Gavin Newsom is commuting the death sentences of 548 people, clearing the California death row for the first time since the state conducted hangings in the late 19th century.

It is a monumental move in the history of capital punishment in America: The prisoners represent more than a quarter of the nation’s condemned inmates.

And it is a decision Newsom has spoken about in starkly personal terms. In 2019, shortly after taking office, he issued a moratorium on executions just three years after voters rejected a ballot measure to abolish the death penalty and instead approved one to speed them up. But at the time, the governor said he couldn’t be responsible for killing another person.

“After nearly 30 years in office I have come to understand the limits of what government can justly accomplish,” Newsom wrote in a letter addressed “to all Californians.” “I take this action because I firmly believe that state-sanctioned killing is incompatible with California’s values, undermines the foundations of our legal system, and diminishes each of us.”

Since 2024, death row has been a metaphorical place. The male prisoners were cleared out of their individual cells in San Quentin State Prison and distributed among other 24 facilities. Twenty female prisoners condemned to death were moved to general population at the Central California Women’s Facility that year. Even before Newsom’s 2019 moratorium, it had been more than a decade since the state performed an execution.

Some of the decisions Newsom made Thursday will need court approval. For those convicted of multiple felonies, four of seven judges on the Supreme Court will have to sign off on the commutations.

Newsom said those with the commuted sentences will not be eligible for new Board of Parole Hearings commutation and resentencing regulations. That addresses some concerns prosecutors, victims’ groups and supporters of the death penalty had expressed as they anticipated Newsom’s decision: that those newly sentenced to life might get a chance later to be released.

His anticipated decision garnered sharp condemnation in recent weeks from those groups, who argued it flew in the face of juries and judges that had upheld the death sentences, and voters who have upheld the practice.

“I don’t think he or any person should undo the sentence rendered by a jury and signed off by a judge because of his personal beliefs or feelings,” said Topo Padilla, president of Crime Victims United, last week.

Natasha Minsker, former director of the American Civil Liberties Union of California's Center for Advocacy and Policy, said the death penalty is now a forgotten part of California politics. “I’m shocked, when I talk to legislators and tell them to oppose it, they say we don’t have the death penalty in California,” she said.

Mary McComb, the former State Public Defender, said from her first case defending a man with intellectual disabilities who was charged with a capital offense, she has found a moral reason to oppose the death penalty.

“One can always hope, but without the commutations, it’s not always guaranteed that governors would continue to have the courage to (maintain a moratorium),” McComb said

This is a developing story that will be updated.

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.

California Democrats went all in on redistricting last year in a rebuke of President Donald Trump’s call for Republicans to gerrymander red states and preserve their U.S. House majority.

Ultimately, though, it appears such a gamble wasn’t even necessary.

The “blue tsunami” that engulfed the country was enough to sweep away Republicans in ruby-red districts that Trump won by double digits two years ago as Democrats improved on their 2024 margin by a stunning 15 percentage points.

At least five of California’s nine-member Republican delegation were among the political casualties.

It’s not clear yet whether California Democrats could have picked up those seats under the old district lines drawn by the state’s independent redistricting commission, known as the gold standard for map drawing.

“There was no need to undermine the work of independent redistricting when there has been so much good work done to improve representation,” said Carah Ong Whaley, executive director of the group Better Choices for Democracy, which opposed Proposition 50, the voter-approved measure to temporarily suspend the commission and redraw the maps to oust five Republicans.

She said it was party elites with large public platforms, led by Gov. Gavin Newsom, who drilled into voters’ psyches that California voters would suffer from Texas’ “rigging” of the midterm elections.

“It wasn’t that a lot of voters all of a sudden organized and said, ‘We need to get back at Texas,’” Ong Whaley said. “It was party elites telling voters they shouldn’t take this.”

‘People were despondent about Trump’

Still, the party faithful are adamant that Prop. 50 was a crucial unifying force for California voters who felt helpless in the face of a mercurial second Trump administration.

“It gave Democrats and voters an opportunity to do something and to realize that they, in fact, did have power to act,” said Rep. Zoe Lofgren, who leads the California Democratic delegation, in an interview with CalMatters Wednesday. “People were despondent about Trump.”

At first, Lofgren said, the delegation hoped that the mere threat of California redrawing its own districts would be enough to call Trump’s bluff. She said Newsom wrote a letter to Texas Gov. Greg Abbott — who lost his own reelection bid Tuesday night — and proposed a detente: If you stop your gerrymandering, we’ll stop ours. Texas forged ahead.

Gov. Gavin Newsom meets with attendees during a campaign event on Proposition 50 in Los Angeles on Nov. 1, 2025.

(

Ethan Swope

/

AP Photo

)

The energy from the Prop. 50 win, along with off-year victories in New York City’s mayoral race and gubernatorial contests in New Jersey and Virginia, helped propel Democrats out of the political wilderness, said Paul Mitchell, who drew the new maps.

“That victory put wind in the sails for a lot of folks who went on to help create this blue tsunami,” Mitchell said. “It was the only way the Democrats were fighting back.”

In addition to ousting five Republicans, the maps were also drawn to shore up support for incumbent Democrats in Southern California swing districts. Mitchell estimated that protecting those members in one of the most expensive media markets in the country freed up more than $100 million that the cash-strapped party could spend in newly competitive districts elsewhere.

But critic Mike Madrid said it was unethical to try to save democracy and preserve good governance by actively dismantling the voter-created redistricting commission designed to keep map drawing out of the hands of partisan operatives and lawmakers.

“It's like a textbook warning of what the founders were concerned about when they warned about political parties,” said Madrid, co-founder of the Lincoln Project and an anti-Trump Republican who opposed Prop. 50. He called the move to prioritize party loyalty over democratic norms a “very, very dangerous” precedent.

“What they were literally saying is, ‘Let's undo democracy to protect democracy,’” Madrid said. “There's something very Orwellian about it.”

‘Can all meet in one car’

Tuesday’s blue tsunami dealt a seismic blow to California’s Republican delegation, which is expected to drop from nine to just four or even three members.

The handful who survived were in solidly red districts that shielded them from voters’ fierce pushback elsewhere.

Prop. 50 packed conservative voters into just a few reliably Republican districts, including those of Central Valley Rep. Vince Fong and Sierra Nevada Rep. Tom McClintock, whose races were called shortly after polls closed Tuesday night. In Southern California, two incumbents were still duking it out for the state’s last safe Republican seat.

“I guess the good news is that they can all meet in one car,” quipped longtime Republican consultant Jon Fleischman of the waning California GOP delegation.

Fong defeated Democratic challenger Sandra Van Scotter with 63% of the vote as of Wednesday in a district with a 20-percentage-point Republican voter registration advantage.

Campaign spokesperson Ryan Gardiner declined to make Fong available for an interview or comment on Republicans tumultuous losses elsewhere. In a statement, Fong said he would “continue fighting to lower costs, protect our communities and deliver critical investments for our region.”

To the northeast, McClintock’s victory over Democrat Michael Masuda was a narrower but comfortable lead with 56% of the vote as of Wednesday.

Jon Huey, a campaign manager for McClintock, declined an interview request from CalMatters and did not respond to questions about the GOP’s losses but McClintock signaled in a statement that perhaps his Republican colleagues had acquiesced to Trump too much.

“The American people spoke loudly and clearly that they are hurting and angry about the economic impact of the war in Iran and the tariffs on their quality of life,” McClintock said in a statement. “Congress has surrendered too much of these responsibilities to the executive branch and it is time for Republicans and Democrats alike to restore the constitutional balance.”

Rep. Ken Calvert, who moved to run in Orange County’s 40th Congressional District after his Inland Empire district was redrawn, was leading with about 54% of the vote against Republican colleague Rep. Young Kim Wednesday.

Meanwhile, Mojave Desert Republican Rep. Jay Obernolte was hanging on for his political life against Tessa Lynn Hodge, a Democrat, in a race that wasn’t even considered competitive before Election Day. On Wednesday, Obernolte was leading with 51% of the vote.

“Everyone else was caught in the blast zone,” GOP strategist Rob Stutzman said.

Coming out of a ‘massacre’

Tuesday’s results could spell more trouble for congressional Republicans in future elections. National party leaders will have even less of an incentive to invest in California candidates if there are simply fewer of them.

Trump’s botched redistricting maneuver in red states and his failure to respond to California’s gerrymander ultimately left the California delegation out to dry, Stutzman said.

The National Republican Congressional Committee, the fundraising arm responsible for electing House Republicans, will likely focus on competitive seats in North Carolina, Texas and Florida going forward, he said.

“It’s a complete disaster, and these California Republicans just got the worse end of the stick.”

NRCC spokesperson Christian Martinez did not immediately return a phone call, voicemail and text message requesting comment Wednesday.

The few remaining GOP members are unlikely to challenge the president despite his all-time unpopularity, Fleischman said.

“None of them are mavericks,” he said. “I don’t see our four most conservative Republicans from California bucking the president and bucking House leadership.”

Next steps for Democratic gerrymandering

As part of their promise to win over voters for the mid-decade redistricting last year, California Democrats promised to roll back the new House maps ahead of 2030 and pass legislation to ban gerrymandering.

The ball is now in their court, said Ong Whaley. “They promised it was just this one time.”

Lofgren, who has repeatedly introduced legislation aimed at banning mid-decade redistricting and establishing independent commissions in each state, said she was optimistic that a Democratic-controlled Congress would be open to ending partisan gerrymandering.

“Congress has the right to legislate on this,” she said. “The idea that this will be bipartisan, I'm skeptical because of their prior actions. But we'll see.”

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.