The Brief

California lawmakers are demanding answers after a live fire demonstration over Camp Pendleton Saturday led to a misfire that rained shrapnel on the 5 Freeway, striking two California Highway Patrol vehicles.

An artillery shell exploded over the freeway during a celebration of the 250th anniversary of the Marine Corps, attended by Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth. Pieces of shrapnel scattered on the closed roadway and struck a patrol vehicle and motorcycle.

“I was very disappointed, because I hoped we could celebrate the Marine Corps without undue risk,” Rep. Mike Levin, a Democrat from San Clemente and Carlsbad who represents the district including Camp Pendleton, told CalMatters. “I’m led to believe the decision-making did not put public safety first. That's why we’re calling for a full investigation.”

On Wednesday Levin sent a letter signed by 26 California Congress members and the state’s two senators to Hegseth, asking who decided to shoot live artillery over the freeway, and how authorities planned for the safety risks.

“While we are relieved no one was injured, we are deeply concerned by the decision-making that led to this incident,” Levin wrote.

The mishap deepened conflicts between President Donald Trump and California leaders including Gov. Gavin Newsom, with some Republicans chastising Newsom for closing the freeway during the live fire exercise. Other local leaders were exasperated by an unorthodox military display that they believe was orchestrated for the benefit of Trump administration officials.

“It’s almost absurd that this would be acceptable,” California Sen. Catherine Blakespear, an Encinitas Democrat whose district includes Camp Pendleton, told CalMatters. “And for what? There’s no military benefit. There’s no community benefit. It’s posturing with militaristic bluster at the expense of the safety and well-being of the community.”

The Marine Corp’s 250th birthday party 

On Saturday Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton held a demonstration featuring aircraft, ships, and amphibious assault vehicles to celebrate the milestone anniversary. It involved firing artillery across the coastal freeway in a planned demonstration of 60 rounds, according to the CHP incident report.

That location was unusual, military and public safety officials said. Although live fire training is routine, it usually takes place on designated ranges within the 125,000 acre base in North County San Diego.

“It is highly uncommon for any live-fire or explosive training activity to occur over an active freeway,” CHP Border Division Chief Tony Coronado said in a statement Sunday. “As a Marine myself, I have tremendous respect for our military partners, but my foremost responsibility is ensuring the safety of the people of California and the officers who protect them.”

The first round launched at 1:46 p.m. Saturday from M777 Howitzers on a beach west of Interstate 5 toward the east, the incident report stated. That artillery round failed to clear the roadway and detonated midflight near Interstate 5 southbound, sending shrapnel flying toward protective service details assigned to the vice president. After that, the exercise was halted and no more munitions were fired.

An officer described hearing what sounded like “pebbles” falling on his CHP BMW motorcycle, and other shards struck an empty Ford patrol vehicle. The two officers who had driven the vehicle saw a two inch by half inch piece of shrapnel on the hood, which left a small dent or scratch. Photos in the incident reports show the patrol car struck by shrapnel, and an officer holding the metal shards.

The CHP called for additional review of the planning, communication and coordination between state and federal partners about the freeway closure and public safety. The Marine Corps is also investigating the incident, the Washington Post reported.

Levin said he hoped the Marine Corps anniversary would bring the country together to honor the force’s 250 year history: “Our Marines deserve to be celebrated without compromising these ideals.”

A risky exercise

The incident snarled traffic for hours on the freeway, which Newsom had ordered closed for the exercise. And it startled residents in San Diego and Orange Counties, who are accustomed to noise from military exercises, but didn’t expect one to take place over a civilian transportation corridor. Some shared photos of surreal highway signs warning of the live fire event.

“Artillery on base is normal,” Levin said. “I hear it all the time from my house. But everything we’ve seen is that firing over the freeway is not how this ordinarily works. Common sense tells us it’s much riskier to fire over the freeway.”

Ian Bennett, a retired Army artillery officer who served in Iraq in 2003, said military leaders plan for every facet of munitions exercises, from gun settings and direction to range conditions and weather.

“You want to make sure that everything is done safely because you don’t want to have a mishap offramp all the good that you’re doing,” Bennett said.

Live fire exercises involve multiple dry fire rehearsals and any that affect civilians or take place in sensitive areas require extra coordination to make sure there are no surprises, he said.

“I’ve never had cause to shoot over a major road during training,” Bennett said. “From my personal perspective, that’s not something I would consider.”

Miscommunications before the mishap

San Diego leaders described miscommunications about the live fire demonstration at Camp Pendleton in the days beforehand, with some elected officials saying they weren’t in the loop.

“If there was coordination, I would expect it would include my office,” Blakespear said. “We weren’t even informed or invited to the event.”

Last Wednesday the Marine Corps issued a statement assuring the public that live fire demonstrations would take place on approved training ranges and comply with established safety protocols.

But that evening, Levin voiced concern that parts of Interstate 5 could be closed in both directions “to accommodate events tied to anything partisan or political.”

Leaders in Oceanside, the city south of the base, said there was conflicting and changing information about the demonstration until the morning of the event.

“I was in planning for probably a month to a month and a half out, and there were a lot of unknowns,” Oceanside Police Department Assistant Chief John McKean said. “The government doesn't tell you a whole lot of stuff out front, other than we’re coming out and we want a big party.”

The day before, the word was that the freeway would remain open, Bennett said. He awoke to a phone call at 6:30 a.m. Saturday to learn it would be shut.

Live fire exercise fuels political feuds

In a statement Saturday, Newsom announced the freeway closure, describing the live fire exercise as a show of force meant to intimidate Trump’s opponents, thousands of whom were demonstrating at “No Kings” protests throughout San Diego the same day.

“The President is putting his ego over responsibility with this disregard for public safety,” Newsom wrote. “Firing live rounds over a busy highway isn’t just wrong — it’s dangerous.”

All lanes in an area along the base were scheduled to close for about four hours, McKean said, but they were ultimately shut for just under an hour, between about 1 p.m. and 2 p.m.

McKean, who served in the Marines, said it’s not typical but not unprecedented to shoot across a roadway. Safety concerns include not only misplaced explosions but also noise distractions, he said.

“It’s more of scaring people with the large percussion that comes from the big boom right in front of you,” he said. “I don’t think they do it that often.”

Republican Rep. Darrell Issa, who represents East County San Diego, complained on X that Newsom overruled “the best-trained and most-experienced leaders of our Marine Corps” to shut down the freeway and denounced the closure as “a spiteful publicity stunt… to ruin the occasion.”

After the errant explosion, Issa’s office said the danger was blown out of proportion.

“The media don’t need to amplify these comic exaggerations,” Issa’s spokesperson Jonathan Wilcox wrote in an email to CalMatters. “*This* is what shut the freeway down for several hours? Congressman Issa knows that a real governor — whether Republican Pete Wilson or Democrat Jerry Brown — would never have mislead (sic) the public and exploited a minimal incident for some attempted partisan gain.”

Levin acknowledged that as the minority party Democrats have fewer levers to get answers to questions about the misfire at Camp Pendleton. But he said he’ll use his role on the House Committee on Appropriations to keep up pressure.

“The administration heard safety warnings from the Marine Corps, and completely ignored them,” he said. “That would mean JD Vance and Pete Hegseth cared more about their demonstration than the safety of Marines, the safety of communities. So we need to push for answers and accountability.”

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

As Los Angeles homeowners grapple with the expense of rebuilding after last year’s devastating fires, an L.A. City Councilmember is putting forward an idea that could lower some costs.

Councilmember Traci Park, who represents the Pacific Palisades, has introduced a motion to explore waiving part of the city’s portion of the local sales tax for fire victims who purchase rebuilding materials in the city.

The 1% of the local 9.75% sales tax that goes into the city’s general fund would be given back to consumers under the proposal. The waiver could apply to lumber, appliances and other rebuilding goods purchased within the city.

The motion, introduced Friday by Park and seconded by Councilmember John Lee, says: “The City should do everything within its power to alleviate the financial burden for these residents and businesses in order to facilitate their return and stabilize the Pacific Palisades community.”

Would it make much of a difference? 

Economists told LAist the proposal could help many homeowners mitigate the high cost of rebuilding, but likely wouldn’t tip the scales for under-insured, under-resourced property owners.

“It wouldn't hurt if it's very well designed and easy to use,” said Alexander Meeks, a director at the Santa Monica-based Milken Institute. “But I'm not sure if it's really going to tackle the scale of the financial challenge that survivors are facing.”

Meeks noted that the tax waiver wouldn’t lower up-front costs such as environmental testing, architectural design and permitting. And it may not help homeowners sourcing raw materials from outside the city.

Zhiyun Li, a UCLA Anderson School of Management economist, said the waiver could help some homeowners justify the additional cost of rebuilding more fire-safe structures.

“Homeowners must typically pay out of pocket to upgrade to IBHS+ standards, which are more stringent,” Li said. “The tax waiver could encourage upgrading to IBHS+ standards or investing more in mitigation, thereby reducing future risk and improving the likelihood of maintaining insurance coverage.”

What’s next for the proposal? 

The proposed tax relief would not be available to properties that have been sold since the fires started in January 2025.

The motion has been sent to the City Council’s budget and fire recovery committees. If approved by the full council, it would require the city administrative officer, the Office of Finance and the city attorney to report back to the council within 60 days on options for crafting a tax relief plan.

The motion calls for the report to consider factors such as how to minimize the burden of administering the tax relief, what documentation homeowners would have to submit and what it would cost the city to oversee the program.

Senate and House Republican leadership have resurrected a stalled plan to fund the Department of Homeland Security after a record 47-day funding lapse.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said in a joint statement on Wednesday that the House will take up a measure passed by the Senate last week to fund most of DHS except Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol through the end of September.

Republicans would then attempt to fund ICE and Border Patrol for three years using a party-line budget reconciliation bill that would not require support from Democrats.

"In following this two-track approach, the Republican Congress will fully reopen the Department, make sure all federal workers are paid, and specifically fund immigration enforcement and border security for the next three years so that those law-enforcement activities can continue uninhibited," Thune and Johnson wrote.

The agreement comes nearly a week after House Republicans dismissed an identical plan, refusing to take up the Senate-passed measure and instead passing a 60-day short term funding bill for all of DHS that had little chance of overcoming Democratic opposition in the Senate.

Johnson called the agreement a "joke" and President Donald Trump declined to publicly endorse the deal. Trump had previously resisted any package that did not include his push to overhaul federal elections known as the Save America Act.

"I think any deal they make, I'm pretty much not happy with it," Trump told reporters last week.

Democrats welcomed the agreement as in line with their pledge not to give ICE any more money without reforms after immigration enforcement agents killed two U.S. citizens in Minneapolis. But the deal does not include any of the policy demands Democrats are pressing for, such as a ban on masks for immigration enforcement officers and requiring warrants issued by a judge, not just the agency, to enter homes.

"For days, Republican divisions derailed a bipartisan agreement, making American families pay the price for their dysfunction," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., wrote in a statement Wednesday. "Throughout this fight, Senate Democrats never wavered."

Trump seemed to bless the revived plan earlier Wednesday, writing on social media that he wants a party-line bill to fund immigration enforcement on his desk by June 1.

"We are going to work as fast, and as focused, as possible to replenish funding for our Border and ICE Agents, and the Radical Left Democrats won't be able to stop us," Trump wrote.

Despite the shutdown, ICE has been minimally impacted because Republican lawmakers approved $75 billion for ICE through another party-line budget reconciliation bill last year.

Congress is on a two-week recess, but the Senate and House could move to fund all of DHS except ICE and CBP as early as Thursday using a procedure known as unanimous consent that allows the chambers to circumvent formal voting as long as no member objects.

Even during a recess when most members are not in Washington, this could be unpredictable, especially in the House, where many hard-line conservatives oppose a deal that does not fully fund DHS.

"Let's make this simple: caving to Democrats and not paying CBP and ICE is agreeing to defund Law Enforcement and leaving our borders wide open again," Rep. Scott Perry, R-Pa., a member of the ultra-conservative House Freedom Caucus, wrote on X. "If that's the vote, I'm a NO."

If a member does object, that could require waiting for another vote when all members are back from recess.

Claudia Grisales contributed reporting.
Copyright 2026 NPR

California clocked its second-worst snowpack on record Wednesday, a potentially troubling signal ahead for fire season.

It’s an alarming end to a winter that saw abnormally dry conditions briefly wiped from California’s drought map in January, for the first time in a quarter-century.

Though precipitation to date has been near average, much of it fell as rain rather than snow. Then March’s record-breaking heat melted most of the snow that remains. The state’s major reservoirs are nevertheless brimming above historic averages and are flirting with capacity, and a smattering of snow, rain and thunderstorms are dousing last month’s heat wave.

But experts now warn that California’s case of the missing snowpack could herald an early fire season in the mountains.

On Wednesday, state engineers conducting the symbolic April 1 snowpack measurement at Phillips Station south of Lake Tahoe found no measurable snow in patches of white dotting the grassy field.

“I want to welcome you call to probably one of the quickest snow surveys we’ve had — maybe one where people could actually use an umbrella,” joked Karla Nemeth, director of the California Department of Water Resources. “We’re getting a lot of questions about are we heading into a hydrologic drought? The answer is, I don’t know.”

State data reports that California’s snowpack is closing out the season at an alarming 18% of average statewide, and an even more abysmal 6% of average in the northern mountains that feed California’s major reservoirs.

Only the extreme drought year of 2015 beat this year’s snowpack for the worst on record, measuring in at just 5% of average on April 1st, when the snow historically is at its deepest.

“I think everyone's anticipating that it will be a long, busy fire season,” said Lenya Quinn-Davidson, director of the UC Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources Fire Network.

“Without a snowpack, and with an early spring, it just means that there’s much more time for something like that to happen.”

‘It’s pretty bizarre up here’ 

In the city of South Lake Tahoe, which survived the massive Caldor Fire in the fall of 2021 without losing any structures, fire chief Jim Drennan said his department is already ramping up prevention efforts.

“It's pretty bizarre up here right now. It really seems like June conditions more than March,” Drennan said. “People are already turning the sprinklers on for their lawns.”

Without more precipitation, an early spring may complicate prescribed burning efforts. But Drennan said fire agencies in the Tahoe basin can start mechanically clearing fuels from forest areas earlier than usual.

“That means we can get more work done,” he said.

It also means homeowners need to start hardening their homes now, said Martin Goldberg, battalion chief and fuels management officer for the Lake Valley Fire Protection District, which protects unincorporated communities in the Lake Tahoe Basin’s south shore.

Goldberg urges residents to scour their yards for burnable materials, create defensible space and reach out to local fire departments with questions. The risks are widespread — from firewood, wooden fences, gas cans, plants, pine needles — even lawn furniture stacked against a house.

“In years past, I wouldn't even think of raking and clearing until May,” Goldberg said. “But my yard's completely cleared of snowpack, and it has been for a couple weeks now.”

‘A haystack fire’

Battalion chief David Acuña, a spokesperson for Cal Fire, said fire season is shaped by more than just one year’s snowpack.

Climate change has been remaking California’s fire seasons into fire years. And California’s recent average to abundant water years have fueled what Acuña called “bumper crops of vegetation and brush.”

“Most of California is like a haystack. And if you’ve ever seen a haystack fire, they burn very intensely because there's layers of fuel,” Acuña said.

Like Quinn-Davidson, Acuña wasn’t ready to make specific predictions about fires to come.

But John Abatzoglou, a professor of climatology at UC Merced, said the temperatures and snowpack conditions this year offer a glimpse of California in the latter decades of this century, as fossil fuel use continues to drive global temperatures higher.

How this year’s fires will play out will depend on when, where and how wind, heat, fuel and ignitions combine. But it foreshadows the consequences of a warmer California for water and fire under climate change.

“This,” Abatzoglou said, “is yet another stress test for the future in the state.”

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