Topline:
Southern California Edison recently released its payout plan for survivors of the Eaton Fire. As fire survivors navigate their recovery and decide if the program makes sense for them, LAist put together a guide to answer some of the most common questions.
The backstory: We spoke to several lawyers and insurance experts, listened to two town hall meetings and asked Edison questions directly.
Read on ... to get into the details of the compensation program.
Southern California Edison recently released its payout plan for survivors of the Eaton Fire. As fire survivors navigate their recovery and decide if the program makes sense for them, LAist put together this guide to answer some of the most common questions.
We spoke to several lawyers and insurance experts, listened to two town hall meetings and asked Edison questions directly.
Edison said this program can help fill “the gap,” shorthand for the difference between how much survivors get from insurance or otherwise have to rebuild and how much rebuilding actually costs. The program is meant to cover what insurance doesn’t, not to make survivors whole.
Lawyers told LAist the program is likely to pay out less money than litigation, though it could make sense for uninsured or severely underinsured survivors who don’t have the funds or desire to wait through a longer legal process.
Ultimately, experts emphasized, the decision on how to move forward is deeply personal and unique to each survivor’s circumstance.
At a recent town hall, Edison Chief Executive Pedro Pizarro said more than 380 claims already have been submitted, with more than 180 in progress. Most survivors who have submitted so far have not used a lawyer, he said.
Edison plans to host more town halls about its compensation program. Check the bottom of this page for the latest dates when they're available.
If you need assistance with submitting a claim, here's how to reach Edison representatives:
Find more details about the program on the company's frequently asked questions page.
Southern California Edison has never provided such a program, and this one is unique among compensation programs in California, which have been carried out by one of the other three major investor-owned utilities, Pacific Gas & Electric, after the 2015 Butte, 2017 North Bay and 2018 Camp fires.
The 2017 and 2018 fires led to PG&E declaring bankruptcy, and the compensation program was administered via a trust. The program, which still is paying out survivors years later, has faced allegations of slow, low payouts and high overhead costs. That funding was limited due to the utility’s bankruptcy, so payouts were capped.
Edison says its program has no cap on payouts. Because the Edison program does not operate through a trust and the utility is not expected to declare bankruptcy, it’s hard to directly compare the programs, experts told LAist.
Edison told LAist the first $1 billion of claims will be paid via the utility’s ratepayer-funded insurance. If claims exceed that amount, the company will seek reimbursement through the state’s Wildfire Fund, which was established in 2019 after the 2017 Thomas Fire in Santa Barbara and Ventura counties.
“The program is structured to minimize financial impact to the company while providing meaningful support to those affected,” said Edison spokesperson Gabriela Ornelas in an email to LAist.
State officials warned earlier this year that that $21 billion fund could be drained by costs associated with the Eaton Fire, which are estimated to be as high as $45 billion. In October, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a bill to expand the fund by $18 billion. The fund had been initially paid for by the utilities’ equity and shareholder earnings, but the new law could allow Southern California Edison to shift billions of dollars of Eaton Fire costs to its customers.
Earlier this year, the state approved a rate hike to help Edison cover the ongoing costs from past fires. And the utility is seeking further rate hikes to pay for wildfire mitigation and to cover “reasonable costs of its operations, facilities [and] infrastructure.”
Edison will accept claims from homeowners, renters and businesses affected by the Eaton Fire within an identified zone.
Property damage will have to be documented in Cal Fire’s Damage Inspection data. Properties within the fire perimeter (designated "Zone 1") and slightly beyond ("Zone 2) are eligible. You can see a detailed map of eligibility when you start a claim. (You can save your progress on the Edison website, so you don’t have to complete everything in one sitting.)
Claims will cover total or partial structure losses, commercial property loss, business interruption, homes with non-burn damage (such as smoke, soot or ash), physical injuries and deaths.
Survivors who already sold their properties are also eligible for the program (more on that below). Hedge funds and insurance companies are not eligible.
The program will accept applications until Nov. 30, 2026.
Zone 1 includes the original fire perimeter and is extended about 400 feet beyond it.
Zone 2 covers more properties, based on their proximity to the smoke plume, other destroyed structures and the fire’s origin, according to Edison.
There are a few elements of the program that will vary, depending on which zone your property is in. For example, no extra documentation is needed for properties in Zone 1 to receive the flat payment of $10,000 for landscaping damage.
The company says it is using a model developed by economic consulting firm Compass Lexecon, with methodology independently analyzed by RAND, to determine a property’s value and how much to pay out.
The RAND analysis states that about 20% of estimates are expected to be off by more than $200 per square foot, with about half of those errors being overestimates and half being underestimates.
“In general, the model tends to underestimate pre-fire value for … homes at the luxury, or high end, of the local market,” the report states. “It tends to overestimate value for homes … at the low end of the market or in below-average structural condition.”
You can find examples of calculations at the “View Sample Offers” tab on this page.
Pizarro said at a recent town hall that Edison’s team may add examples to the page as questions continue to arise. Below are direct links to some examples:
A single claim is required per household, and there are two paths for a payout: “fast pay” and “detailed review.” Every survivor is required to start with the “fast pay” option.
Edison’s “fast pay” option will provide an offer within 90 days of an applicant submitting a "substantially complete” claim. If the survivor accepts the offer, payment will be made within 30 days.
If survivors don’t feel the first offer is fair, they can choose to have a “detailed review,” which requires more steps and documentation and can take up to nine months for a payment offer. There’s no guarantee that offer will be higher. If you don’t like the "detailed review" offer, you can still accept the initial "fast pay" offer.
If survivors use an attorney to apply for Edison’s payout program, which is not required, they will receive an offer for additional compensation equal to 10% of their net damages to help cover that cost.
An insurance expert LAist spoke with recommended survivors speak with a lawyer before deciding on the claim, and ask them about establishing a “special needs trust,” which can protect survivors who rely on public assistance from losing that assistance with the payout or even insurance reimbursement.
Edison has identified three categories: economic, non-economic, and what the company is calling a “direct claim premium.”
Economic loss includes costs associated with property damage, personal property, loss of use, business disruption, business interruption, physical injury and death. Find the details for economic loss calculations on page 16 of the plan.
Non-economic loss includes fixed payments to survivors for the emotional trauma of the fire, as well as compensation for those injured in the fire or to the heirs of someone who died. Find the details for non-economic loss on page 24 of the plan.
The “direct claim premium” is a fixed amount added on top of the offer. Find the details of the direct claim premiums on page 25 of the plan.
Non-economic damages, the direct claim premium, and the 10% increase to help cover attorney fees will not be included in the insurance deduction. Non-economic damage offers also won’t change if a survivor chooses to go with the detailed review after receiving their fast pay offer.
A survivor’s entire insurance policy, regardless if they have received an insurance payment, will be subtracted from the economic losses portion of Edison’s offer, but not the non-economic, “direct claims premium,” or the attorney compensation.
Insurance companies may seek reimbursement for their costs from Edison through a process called “subrogation.” Edison has already agreed to pay one undisclosed insurance company 52 cents on the dollar for claims related to the Eaton Fire.
The offers through Edison’s program are nonnegotiable, but survivors can ask for reconsideration within 14 days of the offer, which triggers the detailed review process.
Accepting a payout will include agreeing not to sue Edison, the company said.
Instead of accepting a payout, survivors can pursue a lawsuit against Edison. Survivors can continue their litigation at the same time as applying for the payout program.
The first set of lawsuits against SoCal Edison are not set to go to trial until early 2027, though some may be settled before then.
Lawyers told LAist there are a lot of questions about the payout timeline, though they acknowledged it will almost certainly be faster than litigation.
For example, Edison determines if a claim is “substantially complete” before accepting it and launching the 90-day timeline. Furthermore, survivors have to go through that "fast pay" track, even if they have unusual circumstances and will likely require the "detailed review" track, which Edison says will take up to nine months.
Meanwhile, the first set of Eaton Fire lawsuits are not set to go to trial until early 2027, though some could be settled before then.
At a recent webinar, Edison representatives said the plan includes three and a half years of temporary housing for single family homeowners with a destroyed residence. (See pages 18 through 21 of the plan.)
For renters, the temporary housing assistance adds up to three months of pre-fire rent. (See pages 21 through 23 of the plan.)
In this instance, according to Edison representatives, the Compass Lexecon model would use your sale price plus the pre-fire value estimate. Appraisal documentation will only be considered in the detailed review process.
Pizarro said people who apply quickly could be paid out before the end of the year, avoiding a change in federal tax policy next year.
“We have a team ready to process offers as quickly as possible, in large part, being mindful of that potential tax deadline, unless the government changes that,” Pizarro said at a town hall last week.
He said he expects the first offers to be made soon.
The Internal Revenue Service does have specific tax reporting requirements for settlement payments, and there’s a deadline coming very soon.
The Federal Disaster Tax Relief Act, signed into law by former President Joe Biden at the end of last year to provide tax relief for victims of major disasters, expires at the end of 2025.
Non-reportable payments include:
Unless Congress passes an extension, more types of payments will become taxable in 2026.
Reportable payments, after 2026:
California, however, extended its tax protections for disaster survivors through 2030. Experts told LAist it’s still not clear if the Edison program falls under those regulations.
However, Manoj Viswanathan, a law professor at UC Law San Francisco, said it seems “very likely” that Edison’s compensation program would qualify under that California law because fire victims are giving up their rights to sue, similar to a settlement. Other law and tax experts LAist spoke to agreed the wording of California’s tax relief law likely would cover Edison’s program.
U.S Sen. Alex Padilla of California has proposed making the payments exempt from taxes.
Topline:
Less than 24 hours before season opener, longtime Dodgers fans demand the team divest from immigration detention centers and decline the White House visit.
More details: More than 30 people joined Richard 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 that 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.”
The backstory: 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.
Read on ... for more on how some fans are feeling leading up to Opening Day.
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.
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.
Topline:
The warmer weather and high water flow are causing an early outbreak of black flies in the San Gabriel Valley, according to officials.
What are black flies? Black flies are tiny, pesky insects that often get mistaken for mosquitoes. The biting flies breed near foothill communities like Altadena, Azusa, San Dimas and Glendora. They also thrive near flowing water.
What you need to know: Black flies fly in large numbers and long distances. When they bite both humans and pets, they aim around the eyes and the neck. While the bites can be painful, they don’t transmit diseases in L.A. County.
A population spike: Anais Medina Diaz, director of communications at the SGV Mosquito and Vector Control District, told LAist that at this time last year, surveillance traps had single-digit counts of adult black flies, but this year those traps are collecting counts above 500.
So, why is the population growing? Diaz said the surge is unusual for this time of year.
“We are experiencing them now because of the warmer temperatures we've been having,” Diaz said. “And of course, all the water that's going down through the river, we have a high flow of water that is not typical for this time of year.”
What officials are doing: Officials say teams are identifying and treating public sources where black flies can thrive, but that many of these sites are influenced by natural or infrastructure conditions outside their control.
How to protect yourself: Black flies can be hard to avoid outside in dense vegetation, but you can reduce the chance of a bite by:
SGV Mosquito and Vector Control District
Submit a tip here
You can also send a tip to district@sgvmosquito.org
(626) 814-9466
Greater Los Angeles Vector Control District
Submit a service request here
You can also send a service request to info@GLAmosquito.org
(562) 944-9656
Orange County Mosquito and Vector Control
Submit a report here
You can also send a report to ocvcd@ocvector.org
(714) 971-2421 or (949) 654-2421
Local favorite mom and pop shop READ Books in Eagle Rock is facing displacement due to a steep rent hike. The owners say they’re just one of several small businesses along Eagle Rock Boulevard struggling to keep up with lease increases.
What happened? The building where Kaplan and his 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.
What's next? 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.
Read on... for what small businesses can do.
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.
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.
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:
The Los Angeles City Council approved a plan in a 13-1 vote on Tuesday to send ballots to more than half a million property owners asking if they are willing to pay more per year to fortify the city’s streetlight repair budget, most of which has essentially been frozen since the 1990s. The item still requires L.A. Mayor Karen Bass’ signature, but her office confirmed to LAist on Wednesday that she’ll approve it.
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 on 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.
Topline:
The Los Angeles City Council approved a plan in a 13-1 vote Tuesday to send ballots to more than a half-million property owners asking if they are willing to pay more per year to fortify the city’s streetlight repair budget, most of which essentially has been frozen since the 1990s. The item still requires L.A. Mayor Karen Bass’ signature, but her office confirmed to LAist on Wednesday that she’ll approve it.
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.
