Sponsored message
Logged in as
Audience-funded nonprofit news
radio tower icon laist logo
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
Subscribe
  • Listen Now Playing Listen
  • Listen Now Playing Listen

The Brief

The most important stories for you to know today
  • Parents seeking to make it a constitutional right
    In a classroom of children, a young girl with a raised hand is in the foreground and center. Her back is turned to the camera and the other kids either have their heads down or are sitting and looking at the teacher in the background of the image.
    Paloma, 7, Irma, 8, and Almarissa Segura, 14, are sisters attending San Antonio Elementary School in Lockwood on Thursday, March 31, 2022. Paloma, currently a 2nd grader, is in the same class as her sister Irma in 3rd grade; Almarisa is presently in 8th grade and will soon attend Soledad High School.

    Topline:

    For the second time in two years, a coalition of advocates wants to make a high-quality education a constitutional right in California. Advocates behind a proposed ballot measure say the right to a high-quality education is more crucial than ever.

    The concerns: While some see the measure as a simple and obvious proposal designed to empower families and students, critics anticipate a barrage of lawsuits against schools and districts resulting from the vaguely defined phrase “high-quality education.”

    What's next: The California Attorney General’s office approved three versions of the initiative language, but the authors haven’t yet selected which one they’ll try to get on the ballot. Once they make the decision, they’ll start gathering signatures. There’s currently no organized opposition to the proposed measure.

    For the second time in two years, a coalition of advocates wants to make a high-quality education a constitutional right in California.

    The push comes in the aftermath of pandemic-era school closures and distance learning, during which parents witnessed firsthand what they considered deficient instruction.

    As educators now try to help students recover, advocates behind a proposed ballot measure say the right to a high-quality education is more crucial than ever. But while some see it as a simple and obvious proposal designed to empower families and students, critics anticipate a barrage of lawsuits against schools and districts resulting from the vaguely defined phrase “high-quality education.”

    “It seems like the intention is to initiate lawsuits,” said Richard Barrera, a board member at the San Diego Unified School District, the state’s second-largest district. “It seems like it’s written in a way to drain funding from public schools to go into the pockets of lawyers.”

    The California Attorney General’s office approved three versions of the initiative language, but the authors haven’t yet selected which one they’ll try to get on the ballot. Once they make the decision, they’ll start gathering signatures. There’s currently no organized opposition to the proposed measure.

    It seems like it’s written in a way to drain funding from public schools to go into the pockets of lawyers.
    — Richard Barrera, board member at the San Diego Unified School District

    Supporters of the proposed ballot measure argue that critics exaggerate the concerns about frivolous lawsuits. Christina Laster, a parent and the western region’s education director for the National Action Network, said that parents just want to hold districts accountable. She said litigation is a final resort used in extreme cases.

    “For the most part, parents have not been willing to file lawsuits,” she said. “They just want conversation and change.”

    More than 10 years ago, John Affeldt, the managing attorney at the civil rights advocacy group Public Advocates, represented plaintiffs who unsuccessfully sued the state seeking to guarantee the right to a high-quality education. He argued that the state and local districts have a variety of ways to define a high-quality education, whether it be through state standards or test scores.

    That detail, he said, can be worked out later, whether in the courts or by the state Legislature and governor. The most urgent need, Affeldt said, is ensuring public schools are serving California’s students.

    “We should’ve settled this already,” he said. “If education is going to be fundamental and meaningful… it has to deliver something of decent quality.”

    A battle started in L.A. 

    Students Matter, a coalition of education advocates, authored the proposed measure under the leadership of former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa.

    James Liebman, a Columbia Law School professor who helped draft the language, said of the three versions written, the third version will most likely be the coalition’s choice. It reads: “The state and its school districts shall provide all public school students with high-quality public schools that equip them with the tools necessary to participate fully in our economy, our society, and our democracy.”

    Villaraigosa said the measure is largely a response to former Los Angeles Unified Superintendent Austin Beutner’s statements in response to a lawsuit brought by parents frustrated over distance learning during the first years of the pandemic. Beutner said a district is only required to provide a free public education, not a high-quality one.

    Villaraigosa said he feared what this complacency might do to future generations of students and voters.

    “The less you know, the more easily you can be persuaded by people who are selling you half-baked solutions to complex problems,” he said. “Just look at Trump’s base. They’re less educated people.”

    If education is going to be fundamental and meaningful… it has to deliver something of decent quality.
    — John Affeldt, managing attorney at the civil rights advocacy group Public Advocates

    Liebman said the phrase “high-quality” is intentionally broad so that future generations and local districts can each define what a “high-quality” education is. He said even the authors of the U.S. Constitution used broad language that evolved through legal interpretations over time.

    “Our nation’s Constitution developed over hundreds of years,” he said. “You can’t predict everything that’s going to happen.”

    Liebman added that enshrining a high-quality education as a constitutional right in California will give students and their families another tool for holding their schools and districts accountable. He expects political mobilization, not litigation, to be the main avenue for seeking accountability.

    But William Koski, a law and education professor at Stanford University, remains skeptical that political mobilization, if it materializes, will pressure the Legislature to take action.

    “Everyone in the California Legislature knew schools were underfunded,” he said. “Yet they couldn’t do anything about it because of a fear of raising taxes.”

    In its analysis, the Legislative Analyst’s Office notes that the measure would not have a direct fiscal impact on the public education system. But the LAO also notes that there could be “unknown and highly uncertain” costs, depending on how courts interpret the measure’s language.

    Courts as a venue for policy?

    For supporters of the measure, those costs are worth empowering families through a constitutional right. But Koski said that, perhaps most significantly, the initiative will open the courts as a venue for shaping education policy, giving parents more power to strike down decisions made by state lawmakers and local school boards.

    Koski said this could result in legal battles over actions ranging from teacher layoffs to school closures. Or in the event of another pandemic or public health crisis, parents could challenge a district’s decision to move to remote instruction.

    “All of this could land in the courts’ hands,” Koski said.

    Students Matter’s 2022 version of this proposed ballot measure more strongly suggested the possibility of legal action against schools and districts. It stated that a parent or guardian could bring “[a]n action to enforce the right to a high-quality public education.” The 2024 ballot versions omit this language.

    Villairagosa said the measure is in no way designed to invite lawsuits. Rather, he said, it’s meant to encourage legislation and funding proposals to better equip the state’s schools.

    A crowd of people dressed warmly, seen from above. In the midst of the crowd, someone has both hands raised high holding a purple sign up that reads "Pay me what you owe me!"
    Thousands gather outside the LAUSD headquarters in downtown Los Angeles in support of the SEIU99 and UTLA strike on Tuesday, March 21, 2023.
    (
    Ashley Balderrama
    /
    for LAist
    )

    Villairagosa’s tense history with teachers unions adds a thorny political dimension to the proposal. He enjoyed strong support from charter school advocates during his 2018 gubernatorial bid. Teachers unions have historically opposed charter schools for pulling students, and thus state funding, from traditional school districts. Charter schools are also typically not unionized. As mayor, Villairagosa clashed with United Teachers Los Angeles in his efforts to weaken tenure protections.

    As of yet, it remains unclear how the politics for this most recent initiative will unfold. Villaraigosa said his team met with the California Teachers Association to discuss the measure. He didn’t disclose any details from the meeting. But he said he’s open to working with the union to finalize the details of the initiative.

    “I think what I made clear is that the only way for us to get a high-quality education is for us to work together,” he said.

    Becky Zoglman, an associate executive director for the California Teachers Association, declined to comment on the proposed ballot measure and only said that teachers are already striving to provide a high-quality education to all students. She said the union will take a position on the proposed measure only if it makes it onto the ballot. The association also did not take a position on the 2022 initiative, which did not gather enough signatures to appear on the ballot.

    Both Koski and Liebman pointed to Kentucky as a positive example of what could happen if a state enshrines the right to a high-quality education into its state constitution.

    In 1989, the Kentucky Supreme Court found that the state had failed to provide an “efficient” education to all of its students and ordered the Legislature to overhaul the public school system. A study published in 2004 found that the 1989 decision resulted in more per-pupil funding as well as higher test scores.

    But in California, Koski said the vagueness of the proposed language could invite lawsuits targeting everything from book bans to school closures.

    “I do think it’s appropriate to hold school systems accountable,” he said. “But should every decision be subject to scrutiny in a lawsuit? I don’t know about that.”

  • Service fees are raising eyebrows for fans
    A view of an outdoor cement skate park near a beach, with a giant white logo that says "LA28" on it.
    Tickets to the 2028 Olympics in Los Angeles went on sale Thursday.

    Topline:

    As the locals-only sale kicks off and Southern Californians have their first chance to buy tickets to the Olympic Games, some fans are wide-eyed at the high fees on all tickets and the prices in general, which start at $28 but go up to more than $5,500 a pop.

    Sticker shock: Lori Rovner of Manhattan Beach told LAist that one $2,100 ticket had a $505 service fee, bringing the total cost to $2,604.63.

    Other prices: Some people LAist spoke with opted for only $28 or similarly priced tickets, even if it meant missing some of the biggest Olympic events. One user on Reddit said they purchased 18 tickets for around $550.

    Read on … about how much fans are spending on tickets.

    Lori Rovner of Manhattan Beach is a big sports fan, so there was no question that when tickets for the Olympic Games went on sale, she'd be signing up.

    She scored a slot in the first ticket drop, which launched Thursday, and logged on right at 10 a.m., hoping to score tickets to the Opening Ceremonies and some finals too. After battling her computer to get through "access denied" screens and a lost shopping cart due to a 30-minute time limit, she bought 16 tickets.

    It was only when she was about to purchase that she noticed the service fees, which were around 24% of each ticket. One $2,100 ticket had a $505 service fee, bringing the total cost to $2,604.63.

    "It's insane," she said of the fee. "I don't understand what the service is."

    As the locals-only sale kicks off and Southern Californians have their first chance to buy tickets to the Olympic Games, some fans are wide-eyed at the high fees on all tickets and the prices in general, which start at $28 but go up to more than $5,500 a pop. Opening Ceremony tickets start at $328.68

    The service fees aren't a surprise add-on. The price fans see when browsing the site is the total cost, including the fee. Still, some who bought in the first phase of sales were surprised when they saw the fees add up.

    One user on Reddit of shared their cart of 10 tickets, which added up to $11,264. That included $1,038 in fees alone. Commenters responded in shock and awe.

    Service fees are standard in ticket sales, but the percentage they charge can vary widely. High fees have been a source of ire for music and sports fans for years. A 2018 report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office found that the average fees on a primary ticket market were 27%.

    LA28 did not respond to LAist's requests for details on the service fee, like what it pays for or why it's a percentage rather than a flat rate.

    Not everyone seemed bothered by the prices. Some people LAist spoke with opted for only $28 or similarly priced tickets, even if it meant missing some of the biggest Olympic events. One user on Reddit said they purchased 18 tickets for around $550.

    "I went with all $28 tickets," they wrote in the online forum about the Olympics. "I got women’s soccer, gymnastics, beach and regular volleyball, track and field, baseball and a few others."

    For some, the ticket process, the prices and the dense web of events to choose from made it too hard to pull the trigger.

    Jeff Bartow of Sierra Madre made a spreadsheet with some competitions he was interested in seeing before he logged on to buy tickets Friday.

    "So many times, so many schedules, so many events," Bartow said. "I think I initially thought I was going to go to a bunch, but thinking about how crazy it's going to be … I might be a little more limited."

    This is just the first ticket drop. There will be more opportunities to buy tickets in the months to come — and on a resale market that launches in 2027.

    Some ticket-buyers told LAist they already were contemplating which tickets they'd keep and which ones they'd re-sell, just minutes after buying them.

  • Sponsored message
  • Why have there been so few arrests?

    Topline:

    In the more than two months since the Department of Justice released its latest batch of files on the investigation into Jeffrey Epstein, prosecutors have not brought any new charges based on the documents, despite federal lawmakers on both sides of the aisle continuing to demand accountability.


    The backstory: Since the release of the files in 2025 and 2026, there have been no related arrests in the U.S. However, the disclosures have led to some resignations and other reputational repercussions for some high-ranking Americans. The lack of arrests in the U.S. contrasts to the fallout in the U.K., where investigators have pursued charges related to corruption, not sexual abuse, in their dealings with Epstein. Two former government officials — former Prince Andrew and ex-ambassador Peter Mandelson — were arrested on suspicion of misconduct in public office.


    Lack of evidence: In the U.S., top Justice Department officials have said that they found no evidence compelling enough to pursue further charges related to Epstein, and that the public can make their own assessments based on the disclosed documents. In a statement to NPR, Justice Department spokesperson Katie Kenlein said that "there have not been additional prosecutions beyond Epstein and Maxwell because there has not been credible evidence that their activities extended to Epstein's network."

    In the more than two months since the Department of Justice released its latest batch of files on the investigation into Jeffrey Epstein, prosecutors have not brought any new charges based on the documents, despite federal lawmakers on both sides of the aisle continuing to demand accountability.

    The more than 3 million pages of documents include accusations by alleged victims of Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell's abuse and thousands of emails and photos showing Epstein associated with prominent figures. The files indicate that many of these people maintained contact with the disgraced financier long after he pleaded guilty in 2008 to sex crimes that involved minors. Appearing in the files is not necessarily an indication of criminal wrongdoing.

    The release of the Epstein files came after Congress passed the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which forced the Justice Department to make public all documents it held related to Epstein.

    Epstein died in prison about a month after a 2019 arrest on sex-trafficking charges. Maxwell was convicted on sex-trafficking charges in 2021 and is serving a 20-year sentence. Since the release of the files in 2025 and 2026, there have been no related arrests in the U.S. However, the disclosures have led to some resignations and other reputational repercussions for some high-ranking Americans.

    The lack of arrests in the U.S. contrasts to the fallout in the U.K., where investigators have pursued charges related to corruption, not sexual abuse, in their dealings with Epstein. Two former government officials — former Prince Andrew and ex-ambassador Peter Mandelson — were arrested on suspicion of misconduct in public office. Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, as he is now known, has denied wrongdoing and has not been formally charged. Mandelson has also not been charged, and lawyers for Mandelson have said that the arrest was prompted by a "baseless suggestion."

    In the U.S., top Justice Department officials have said that they found no evidence compelling enough to pursue further charges related to Epstein, and that the public can make their own assessments based on the disclosed documents.

    In a statement to NPR, Justice Department spokesperson Katie Kenlein said that "there have not been additional prosecutions beyond Epstein and Maxwell because there has not been credible evidence that their activities extended to Epstein's network. However, if prosecutable evidence comes forward, the Department of Justice will of course act on it as we do every day in sexual trafficking and assault cases across the count[r]y."


    On Thursday, President Trump announced that Attorney General Pam Bondi is out of the top job at the Justice Department, following bipartisan criticism over her handling of the Epstein files.

    NPR asked four former prosecutors and one former law enforcement officer why there may not have been enough evidence to levy additional charges. Here's what they said.

    Prosecutors must prove guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt"

    Prosecutors must prove to a jury that a person committed a crime "beyond a reasonable doubt," according to Barbara McQuade, a professor at the University of Michigan Law School.

    "One of the biggest misconceptions people have is how difficult it is to charge and convict somebody for a criminal case," said McQuade, who served as the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan.

    A prosecutor's ethical responsibility is to charge cases only if they believe there is enough evidence for a conviction, McQuade said. Documents, including emails, jokes, and even plane itineraries, can be a place to start, but, alone, they are not enough to prove guilt, McQuade said.

    "What you would need [is] rock solid evidence," McQuade said. "You can't charge someone for a crime without sufficient evidence, and I have yet to see evidence of a crime involving an Epstein associate that has gone uncharged."

    Based on his understanding of the case, Paul Butler, a professor at Georgetown Law, said he agreed that prosecutors who investigated Epstein's alleged associates "may have believed that they couldn't persuade a jury beyond a reasonable doubt." He said problems with witness credibility or certain forensic evidence can prevent a case from moving forward.

    The U.K. cases are focused on corruption 

    In the U.K., the two people arrested are being investigated on suspicion of "misconduct in public office." McQuade said the U.S. does not have a single equivalent federal law. Instead, the U.S. prosecutes public corruption through statutes that focus specifically on crimes such as bribery and extortion.

    After the release of the latest files, British police began investigating Andrew's correspondence with Epstein when Andrew was a U.K. trade envoy. At that time, Andrew allegedly shared government itineraries, investment plans and notes from official foreign trips with Epstein. The information may have been covered by the United Kingdom's Official Secrets Act.

    Similarly, Mandelson has been accused of passing confidential government information to the late sex offender when Mandelson was a U.K. Cabinet minister.

    Meeting the burden of proof is especially challenging for sex crime cases

    Victim statements are essential for establishing basic elements, such as the timeframe of events, required to build sexual assault cases, said Diane Goldstein, a retired police lieutenant from California and the executive director of the Law Enforcement Action Partnership. But a victim may be reluctant to come forward because of a fear of retaliation, not believing the police can help, believing it is a personal matter, or not wanting to get the perpetrator in trouble.

    McQuade noted that in some sex trafficking cases, especially those in which a perpetrator is in a position of power, victims may experience intimidation or threats that prevent them from speaking out.

    Victims also may be hesitant to move forward with allegations because they fear having to testify at trials where defense attorneys may attempt to poke holes in their allegations, McQuade said.

    Goldstein said that for sex crime cases to advance, investigators need to follow certain policies and procedures. "If you don't have a legitimate police investigation to start, you're not going to get any type of criminal filing," Goldstein said.

    Other potential charges are also a difficult path

    Prosecutors may have considered pursuing charges of criminal conspiracy related to sex trafficking against people associated with Epstein, said Jessica Roth, a professor at Cardozo School of Law. FBI documents in the files relating to its investigation into Epstein's crimes identify certain people as "co-conspirators."

    But Ankush Khardori, a senior writer and columnist at Politico magazine who worked as a federal prosecutor on financial fraud cases, told NPR those identifiers are not "formal accusation[s]" and are simply part of "interim documents."

    "The FBI does not determine who is a co-conspirator," Khardori said. "That is a legal judgment that prosecutors make."

    But for those conspiracy cases, "criminal intent," in particular, is difficult to establish, said Roth, who worked as a federal prosecutor in the U.S. attorney's office for the Southern District of New York for seven years. Criminal conspiracy charges "would require knowledge and intent on the part of each individual who was charged," Roth said. If a person who communicated with Epstein had some suspicion that he was engaged in illegal activity, that alone would not be sufficient evidence to press charges, she said.

    Investigators may have considered charges related to criminal tax violations, McQuade said. But the statute of limitations has likely ended on those cases, she said, meaning that prosecutors can no longer bring charges.

    The current evidence lacks context

    Legal experts say the haphazard way the documents were released and redacted makes it difficult for the public to understand why no additional charges have been filed.

    Roth, the Cardozo law professor, said the information is in "isolation," without the appropriate context. "We'll see an individual photograph that looks perhaps incriminating. We'll see an email that looks incriminating, but we don't necessarily have everything that was said before and after that email and that exchange," Roth said.

    One document that could explain why no charges were pursued, according to Butler, is a heavily redacted DOJ memo naming "potential co-conspirators" of Epstein. "The parts that should indicate why the department declined prosecution on any alleged co-conspirators other than Ghislaine Maxwell [are] redacted," said Butler, the Georgetown law professor and a former federal prosecutor.

    Butler said those redactions are "unusual" because they do not appear to follow the permissible reasons for redactions in the Epstein documents. Those reasons include confidentiality for Epstein's alleged victims, or anything that would compromise an ongoing investigation, Butler said.

    "When the Justice Department grudgingly releases information when pressed by politics or forced by Congress, it also creates the impression that they have something to hide," Butler said. "That there is some cover-up going on."
    Copyright 2026 NPR

  • New report shows sharp rise in LA County
    Empty playground swings

    Topline:

    Nearly 30% more students in Los Angeles County experienced homelessness from 2022-23 to 2023-24, making it the county’s highest rate in the past five years and far outpacing the rate of homelessness across the state in the same timeframe, as the resources to identify and support this student population have decreased.

    Norwalk-La Mirada Unified: Researchers found that Norwalk-La Mirada Elementary Unified School District had the highest rate of student homelessness in the county — 1 in 3 students, meaning that over 4,700 students were identified as experiencing homelessness during the 2023-24 school year out of a total cumulative enrollment of about 15,600.

    Underidentifed students: Researchers also found that the Transformation of Schools focuses on the lack of dedicated funding for school staff to identify and support homeless students. Students and families facing homelessness do not always self-identify, whether due to fear, shame or being unaware that their housing situation is considered homelessness

    Nearly 30% more students in Los Angeles County experienced homelessness from 2022-23 to 2023-24, making it the county’s highest rate in the past five years and far outpacing the rate of homelessness across the state in the same timeframe, as the resources to identify and support this student population have decreased.

    The UCLA Center for the Transformation of Schools published two reports on Wednesday on the state of student homelessness in the county: “Rising Numbers, Fading Resources: Students Experiencing Homelessness in Los Angeles County” and “Hidden in Plain Sight: Fear, Underidentification, and Funding Gaps for Housing-Insecure Students in Los Angeles County.”

    Researchers found that Norwalk-La Mirada Elementary Unified School District had the highest rate of student homelessness in the county — 1 in 3 students, meaning that over 4,700 students were identified as experiencing homelessness during the 2023-24 school year out of a total cumulative enrollment of about 15,600.

    The city of Norwalk, where the district is located in the eastern region of the county, was sued by the state in 2024 for banning emergency shelters and other support services for people experiencing homelessness. Last year, the state reached a settlement with the city, which was forced to overturn the ban and put $250,000 toward building affordable housing.

    Student homelessness is defined differently under the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act, a federal law that requires every public school to count the number of students who are living on the street, in shelters, in motels, in cars, doubled up with other families, or moving between friends’ and relatives’ homes.

    As a result of this expanded definition, McKinney-Vento includes doubled-up students in the count of homelessness. Doubled-up is a term used to describe children and youth ages 21 and under living in shared housing, such as with another family or friends, due to various crises.

    There were a few other patterns seen in the L.A. County data analyzed by the UCLA researchers:

    • Latino students were disproportionately more likely to experience homelessness: they represent 65% of the county’s student population, but 75.5% of student homelessness
    • A third of homeless students were in high school
    • Many districts with the highest rates of homelessness had higher school instability but lower dropout rates

    While McKinney-Vento has an expanded definition that includes more types of homelessness than several other definitions, identifying students remains difficult.

    The second report from the UCLA Center for the Transformation of Schools focuses on the lack of dedicated funding for school staff to identify and support homeless students. Students and families facing homelessness do not always self-identify, whether due to fear, shame or being unaware that their housing situation is considered homelessness under McKinney-Vento.

    “A lot of these young people are dealing with a lot of trauma, so they don’t want to be identified. They don’t want to be pointed out; sometimes it’s scary for them, because they think we’re going to report them to the Department of Children and Family Services,” said L.A. County Office of Education staff interviewed for this report.

    School staff, known as homeless liaisons, who work with homeless students received a historic influx of federal funds during the Covid-19 pandemic — $98.76 million for California, out of $800 million nationwide, from the American Rescue Plan-Homeless Children and Youth.

    That funding has since ended, and there is no other dedicated, ongoing state funding set aside solely for the rising number of homeless students. This has led districts in California to “heavily depend on highly competitive and unstable federal streams,” the UCLA researchers wrote. Those federal streams have become increasingly precarious as the federal administration last year sought policy changes that would shift how they are structured.

  • Fire reaches 3,500 acres, forces evacuations
    Dark smoke rises in the distance in a wide view of homes and neighborhoods.
    The Springs Fire around 11 a.m. in east Moreno Valley.

    Topline:

    Multiple evacuation orders are in place for residents near the Springs Fire burning east of Moreno Valley in Riverside County. The fire was first reported around 11 a.m.

    What we know:

    • Acreage:  3,500 acres as of Friday afternoon
    • Containment: 5%

    Evacuation orders and warnings are issued for nearby neighborhoods. Here's the latest evacuation map.

    Keep reading... for more on evacuations and weather conditions.

    This is a developing story and will be updated. For the most up-to-date information about the fire you can check:

    Multiple evacuation orders are in place for residents near the Springs Fire burning in east of Moreno Valley in Riverside County. The fire was first reported around 11 a.m.

    As of this afternoon, the fire has reached 3,500 acres.

    West of the Springs Fire, a separate bush fire near Acton also began Friday afternoon. The Crown Fire has burned 280 acres and is 25% contained.

    The basics

    • Acreage: 3,500 acres as of Friday afternoon
    • Containment: 5%
    • Structures destroyed: None reported
    • Deaths: None
    • Injuries: 0
    • Personnel working on fire: 260
      • 2 helicopters
      • 36 engines
      • 2 dozers
      • 2 water tenders
      • 7 crews

    Evacuation map and orders

    The Moreno Valley College campus closed Friday afternoon due to air quality and evacuated all students and staff.

    Evacuation orders have been issued by the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department for the following areas:

    • MOE-0507
    • MOE-0747
    • MOE-0745
    • MOE-0641
    • MOE-0746
    • MOE-0744
    • RVC-0748
    • RVC-0826
    • RVC-0825

    Evacuation warnings

    Authorities say those who require additional time to evacuate and those with pets and livestock should leave immediately.

    • MOE-0504
    • MOE-0505
    • MOE-0506
    • MOE-0633
    • MOE-0637
    • MOE-0638
    • MOE-0639
    • MOE-0640
    • MOE-0743
    • MOE-0822
    • MOE-0823

    Evacuation shelters

    Valley View High School
    13135 Nason St.
    Moreno Valley, 92555

    Animal Shelter

    San Jacinto Animal Shelter
    581 S. Grand Ave. San Jacinto 92582

    Moreno Valley Animal Services
    14041 Elsworth St.
    Moreno Valley, CA 92553

    Road closures

    Gilman Springs Road is closed from Alessandro Road to Bridge Street, according to Cal Fire.

    What we know so far

    The Springs Fire was first reported around 11 a.m. Friday near Gilman Springs Road as a 5-acre fire that grew to 1,000 acres by 1:45 p.m.

    Conditions are fairly windy and dry in that area, according to the National Weather Service. Wind gusts reached 20 to 30 mph from the east. The Santa Ana wind event is expected to last into tomorrow.

    Listen to our Big Burn podcast

    Listen 39:42
    Get ready now. Listen to our The Big Burn podcast
    Jacob Margolis, LAist's science reporter, examines the new normal of big fires in California.

    Fire resources and tips

    Check out LAist's wildfire recovery guide

    If you have to evacuate:

    Navigating fire conditions:

    How to help yourself and others:

    How to start the recovery process:

    What to do for your kids:

    Prepare for the next disaster: