The Brief

Southern California has more than a few uncompleted freeways. But have you ever noticed the one that has a 40-mile gap?

We’re talking about the 90 Freeway and transportation officials’ grand plan to connect Marina del Rey to Yorba Linda in Orange County.

It’s one of the region’s timeless examples of what happens when residents get angry about transportation, and how a multi-million-dollar project became a bit of a dumpster fire.

A brief history of the freeway

Today, Route 90 is split in two. There’s a few freeway miles in Marina del Rey that primarily lets drivers connect to the 405 Freeway. Then there’s a few miles way to the east that start as street-level Imperial Highway. But further into Yorba Linda, it quickly turns back into what resembles a freeway that ends a few miles away at the 91 interchange.

It’s one of those things that make you scratch your head and wonder, “Who thought this was a good idea?”

You could say it works for each section’s current purpose, but they’re slices of what could have been. The freeway master plan from the 1950s called for a route that would have given inland Orange County a straight shot to Pacific Coast Highway.

Parts of it have gone by different names over the years: The Slauson Freeway, the Richard M. Nixon Freeway and the current Marina Freeway on the Westside. At one point, the whole freeway was named after Nixon because he was born in Yorba Linda, but officials removed it in 1976 after the Watergate scandal.

It’s unclear whether Caltrans officially ever acquired the entire route, but some of their sections were relinquished back to their respective cities over the decades, which removed the Route 90 designation. That’s why it’s so split apart on maps. (Fun fact: The Yorba Linda City Council opted to bring the name back for its portion as the Richard M. Nixon Parkway. And yes, that means they don’t officially call it a freeway anymore.)

The master plan got mixed reviews depending on who you ask. In the beginning, there was excitement for new areas to get high-speed access — the 90 was even called “one of the most vital elements in the freeway system.” But that love quickly soured as the paths were drawn.

Problems with the path

The project was plagued by an alleged bribe.

In 1965, West L.A. Assemblymember Lester McMillan was indicted by an L.A. County grand jury on a charge of soliciting a $10,000 bribe. The charge stemmed from a secret recording during a discussion between the lawmaker and Culver City business leaders about introducing legislation to reroute the freeway.

McMillan admitted to taking action against a proposed route that would have gone through a business district in the neighborhood because “people were up in arms about it,” but money never changed hands. The charges were eventually thrown out after his lawyers argued it would have been a fee for his expenses.

A panoramic view of the Los Angeles Freeway system, taken from a blimp at an unknown date.

(

Security Pacific National Bank Collection

/

Los Angeles Public Library

)

Meanwhile homeowners who would have been displaced in other areas if the freeway was fully built also got angry and protested votes on the path. Residents argued that there was a serious lack of oversight in the state’s freeway planning process.

As opposition grew, county Supervisor Kenneth Hahn asked then-Gov. Ronald Reagan in 1967 to intervene in the “Slauson Freeway fight” and cancel a key public hearing that was slated to happen with his administration shortly after he took office.

However, the meeting was held, and added to concerns that the freeway was being developed too fast and without much thought. Residents and local officials grew concerned that a commission, which was in charge of reviewing freeway recommendations from the state division of highways, was improperly making decisions. Opponents claimed the division used “questionable practices” and gave inaccurate traffic predictions. (Early figures estimated at least 170,000 drivers a day by 1970.)

Ronald Reagan and several officials look at a freeway monitoring system in 1971. The map monitored the San Diego, Santa Monica and Harbor freeways.

(

Herald Examiner Collection

/

Los Angeles Public Library

)

As residents worried L.A. would become a patchwork of freeways, demands grew for an overall state transportation study that included rapid transit planning.

At the end of 1967, city leaders banded together to come up with better ideas. While the state highway department still had jurisdiction, the hope was that they could try to ensure a route that didn’t “wipe out the middle of a city,” said La Mirada Mayor Edward Le Clair.

But disdain for the freeway solidified in the early '70s, in part because there wasn’t enough money to build it, and other freeways with similar routes were already happening, such as the 105 Freeway. The L.A. County Board of Supervisors, which had previously backed the Slauson Freeway, moved to kill portions of it in 1973, and two years later, so did the state.

The 90 Freeway plans died that decade in part because money dried up, inflation was high and there was a major gas shortage. Groups hope to reuse some of the space. Plans have proposed in recent years to turn the Westside’s Marina Freeway into affordable housing and green space.

By the end of January, students will have returned to two of the three public school campuses burned in the Palisades Fire one year prior, though their classrooms are temporary.

Palisades Charter High School students are scheduled to return to their campus Jan. 27. They’ve been in a refurbished Santa Monica department store since April.

“ I am just overwhelmed with gratitude for the constant support that has been shown for our school and for our families, our teachers, all of our administrators and staff,” said Principal Pamela Magee at a press conference Tuesday with Los Angeles Unified leaders. Pali High is an independent charter high school located on district property.

In June, the LAUSD Board approved a $604 million plan to rebuild the high school, as well as two burned district elementary schools— Marquez and Palisades.

Superintendent Alberto Carvalho said the three campuses’ new buildings will open in 2028— shaving two years off of the original 5-year timeline.

“ These projects will come in on time or ahead of schedule,” Carvalho said. “These projects will come in at or below budget, and these projects will honor the resilience, the determination, the courage and yes, the suffering and the sacrifice of the community of the Palisades.”

About the costs and the design

The district plans to use money from the $9 billion bond voters approved in 2024 to help pay for the rebuild, but also anticipates some reimbursement from its insurer and FEMA.

District-contracted architects are finalizing their designs and plan to submit to the state for approval in the spring, said Chief Facilities Executive Krisztina Tokes. She said the plan is to rebuild with future environmental risks in mind.

“ From the earliest design stages, wildfire resiliency has been treated as a core requirement and not an add-on,” Tokes said. For example, using fire-resistant concrete blocks, installing enhanced air filtration systems and planting shade trees where they won’t hang over buildings.

Environmental testing preceded students’ return to the fire-impacted campuses. Director of the Office of Environmental Health and Safety Carlos Torres said the district continues to monitor air quality through its network of sensors and is developing a plan for periodic testing.

“We just can't just walk away,” Torres said.

Enrollment is down at all three schools compared to before the fires, but district leaders say they are confident families will return to the rebuilt campuses.

“I find it hard to believe that this community won't come back to its former glory,” said Board Member Nick Melvoin, who represents the Palisades. “We gave a lot of thought in an accelerated timeline to rebuilding for the next century.”

Marquez Charter Elementary

What’s the damage? The campus is a “total loss.” More than three dozen classrooms, administration buildings, the school’s auditorium and playground burned down.

How much has LAUSD budgeted to rebuild? $202.6 million

Where are the students? Students returned in September to portables covering about one-third of the campus. There’s also two playgrounds, a garden, library and shaded lunch area. Enrollment has dropped 60% compared to before the fire from 310 to 127 students.

What’s next? District-contracted architects are finalizing their designs and plan to submit to the state for approval in the spring.

Palisades Charter Elementary School teacher Ms. Davison talks with her students in their new classroom on the campus of Brentwood Elementary Science Magnet last year.

(

Brian van der Brug

/

Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

)

Palisades Charter Elementary

What’s the damage? About 70% of the campus was destroyed including 17 classrooms, the multipurpose room and play equipment.

How much has LAUSD budgeted to rebuild? $135 million

Where are the students? Students continue to share a campus with Brentwood Science Magnet. Enrollment has dropped 25% compared to before the fire from 410 to 307 students.

What’s next? District-contracted architects are finalizing their designs and plan to submit to the state for approval in the spring.

Palisades Charter High School, pictured in December 2025, is scheduled to reopen to students Jan. 27, 2026.

(

Kayla Bartkowski

/

Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

)

Palisades Charter High School

What’s the damage? About 30% of the campus was destroyed including 21 classrooms, storage facilities and the track and field.

How much has LAUSD budgeted to rebuild? $266 million

Where are the students? Students started the school year in a renovated Sears building in downtown Santa Monica. Enrollment has dropped 14% compared to before the fire, from 2,900 to 2,500 students.

What’s next? Classes will resume at the main campus Tues. Jan. 27 in a combination of surviving buildings and 30 new portable classrooms.

The Trump administration says it’s planning to freeze about $10 billion in federal support for needy families in California and four other Democrat-run states, as the president announced an investigation into unspecified fraud in California.

The plans come on the heels of the Trump administration announcing a freeze on all federal payments for child care in Minnesota, citing fraud allegations against daycare centers in the state.

The state’s Democrat governor, Tim Walz — who ran for vice president against Donald Trump’s ticket in 2024 — announced Monday he was dropping out of running for reelection. He pointed to fraud against the state, saying it’s a real issue while alleging Trump and his allies were “seeking to take advantage of the crisis.”

On Monday, the New York Post reported that the administration was expanding the funding freeze to include California and three other Democrat-led states, in addition to Minnesota. Unnamed federal officials cited “concerns that the benefits were fraudulently funneled to non-citizens,” The Post reported.

Early Tuesday, President Trump alleged that corruption in California is worse than Minnesota and announced an investigation.

“California, under Governor Gavin Newscum, is more corrupt than Minnesota, if that’s possible??? The Fraud Investigation of California has begun. Thank you for your attention to this matter! PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP,” the president wrote on his social media platform Truth Social.

He did not specify what alleged fraud was being examined in the Golden State.

LAist has reached out to the White House to ask what the president’s fraud concerns are in California and to request an interview with the president.

“For too long, Democrat-led states and governors have been complicit in allowing massive amounts of fraud to occur under their watch,” said an emailed statement from Andrew Nixon, a spokesperson for U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which administers the federal childcare funds.

“Under the Trump administration, we are ensuring that federal taxpayer dollars are being used for legitimate purposes. We will ensure these states are following the law and protecting hard-earned taxpayer money.”

Gov. Gavin Newsom’s press office disputed Trump’s claim on social media, arguing that since taking office, the governor has blocked $125 billion in fraud and arrested “criminal parasites leaching off of taxpayers.”

Criminal fraud cases in CA appear to be rare for this program

Defrauding federally funded programs is a crime — and one LAist has investigated, leading to one of the largest such criminal cases in recent years against a California elected official, which surrounded meal funds.

When it comes to the federal childcare funds that are being frozen, the dollar amount of fraud alleged in criminal cases appears to be a tiny fraction of the overall program’s spending in California.

A search of thousands of news releases by all four federal prosecutor offices in California, going back more than a decade, found a total of one criminal case where the press releases referenced childcare benefits.

That case, brought in 2023, alleged four men stole $3.7 million in federal childcare benefits through fraudulent requests to a San Diego organization that distributed the funds. All four pleaded guilty, with one defendant sentenced to 27 months in prison and others sentenced to other terms, according to authorities.

It appears to be equivalent to one one-hundredth of 1% of all the childcare funding California has received over the past decade-plus covered by the prosecution press release search.

Potential impact on California families

The plans call for California, Minnesota, New York, Illinois and Colorado to lose about $7 billion in cash assistance for households with children, almost $2.4 billion to care for children of working parents, and about $870 million for social services grants that mostly benefit children at risk, according to unnamed federal officials speaking to the New York Times and New York Post.

In the largest category of funding, California receives $3.7 billion per year. The program is known as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, or TANF.

 ”It's very clear that a freeze of those funds would be very damaging to the children, families, and providers of California,” said Stacy Lee, who oversees early childhood initiatives "at Children Now, an advocacy group for children in California.

 ”It is a significant portion of our funds and will impact families and children and providers across the whole state,” she added. “It would be devastating, in no uncertain terms.”

About 270,000 people are served by the TANF program in L.A. County — about 200,000 of whom are children, according to the county Department of Public Social Services.

“Any pause in funding for their cash benefits – which average $1000/month - would be devastating to these families,” said DPSS chief of staff Nick Ippolito.

Ippolito said the department has a robust fraud prevention and 170-person investigations team, and takes allegations “very seriously.”

It remains to be seen whether the funding freeze will end up in court. The state, as well as major cities and counties in California, has sued to ask judges to halt funding freezes or new requirements placed by the Trump administration. L.A. city officials say they’ve had success with that, including shielding more than $600 million in federal grant funding to the city last year.

A union representing California childcare workers said the funding freeze would harm low-income families.

“These threats need to be called out for what they are: direct threats on working families of all backgrounds who rely on access to quality, affordable child care in their communities to go to work every day supporting, and growing our economy,” said Max Arias, chairperson for the Child Care Providers United, which says it represents more than 70,000 child care workers across the state who care for kids in their homes.

“Funding freezes, even when intended to be temporary, will be devastating — resulting in families losing access to care and working parents facing the devastating choice of keeping their children safe or paying their bills.”

Federal officials planned to send letters to the affected states Monday about the planned funding pauses, the New York Post reported. As of 3 p.m. Tuesday, state officials said they haven’t gotten any official notification of the funding freeze plans.

“The California Department of Social Services administers child care programs that help working families afford safe, reliable care for their children — so parents can go to work, support their families, and contribute to their communities,” said a statement from California Department of Social Services spokesperson Jason Montiel.

“These funds are critical for working families across California. We take fraud seriously, and CDSS has received no information from the federal government indicating any freeze, pause, or suspension of federal child care funding.”