Eaton

Southern California Edison increased the number of Eaton fire victims that are eligible to file claims for damages in its final compensation proposal, though some Altadena residents say the utility’s program still falls short.

After talking to residents about the plan it released in July, Edison said it decided to expand the area of homes that are eligible for compensation for smoke damage.

“Expanding the eligibility area is one of the most significant updates made as a result of feedback,” said Pedro Pizarro, the chief executive of Edison International, the utility’s parent company. “The number of qualified properties nearly doubled for those with damage from smoke, soot or ash.”

The utility also increased the amount of compensation it is offering for some victims. For example, each child in a family that lost its home will be eligible to receive $75,000 for pain and suffering, up from $50,000 in the initial plan.

To receive payments under the utility’s Wildfire Recovery Compensation Program, families must agree to drop any lawsuits they filed against the utility for the Jan. 7 fire.

The program also is open to businesses that lost revenues and renters who lost property. And it covers those who suffered physical injuries or had family members who died.

Edison is launching the victim compensation program even though government fire investigators have not released their report on the cause of the fire. The inferno swept through Altadena, destroying 9,400 homes and other structures and killing 19 people.

Videos captured the fire igniting under a century-old transmission line in Eaton Canyon that Edison had not used since 1971, and Pizarro has said a leading theory is that the line somehow re-energized and ignited the blaze. Edison said in a federal securities filing this week that “absent additional evidence, SCE believes that it is likely that its equipment could be found to have been associated with the ignition.”

In documents detailing its final compensation plan, the utility included the example of a family of four with a 1,500-square-foot home that was destroyed. The family would receive $900,000 to rebuild, $360,000 for personal property, $140,000 for loss of use and $380,000 for pain and suffering. It also would receive a $200,000 “direct claim premium” for agreeing to settle outside of court.

That total of $1,980,000 is then reduced by the family’s $1 million of insurance coverage, according to the company’s example.

On Thursday, state Sen. Sasha Renée Pérez (D-Pasadena) sent a letter to Edison saying she was concerned about how the utility was requiring victims to waive their future legal rights in order to get compensation. And she called on Edison to provide immediate housing assistance to fire victims.

“Having acknowledged its potential role in starting the Eaton Fire, Edison must do everything within its power to prioritize the needs of survivors and make this commitment a core part of its corporate duty,” she wrote to Pizarro. “This means ensuring fire victims can recover and rebuild their lives with the support they are owed.”

Edison expects to be reimbursed for most or all of the payments it makes to victims by a $21-billion state wildfire fund that Gov. Gavin Newsom and lawmakers created in 2019 to shield utilities from bankruptcy. Administrators of the wildfire fund told members of the state Catastrophe Response Council this week that they expect Eaton fire claims “to be in the tens of billions of dollars.”

In September, Newsom signed a bill that will bolster the money available by another $18 billion for future wildfires. Under that bill, Edison is allowed to raise electric rates for any Eaton fire costs that exceed the original $21-billion fund.

Some Eaton fire survivors told the council, which oversees the wildfire fund, that Edison’s program fails to fully cover damages suffered by victims. Joy Chen, executive director of the Eaton Fire Survivors Network, recently sent the council a report detailing where her group found shortfalls. For example, Chen said, Edison is deducting a homeowner’s full insurance coverage from the compensation amounts even if the insurer has reimbursed the family for only part of that amount.

“Nine months after Edison’s negligence shattered our lives, the toll is clear,” the group’s report states. “Many have drained retirement savings, maxed out credit cards, or watched marriages and health deteriorate under the strain. “

“You destroyed our homes, lives and community,” the report says of Edison. “Fix what you broke. “

Chen’s group joined with Perez in calling for Edison to provide emergency housing assistance for victims.

Edison said its program is designed “to help the community recover and rebuild faster.” The utility said a report by RAND, the non-profit research group it hired to assess the compensation plan, determined the payment amounts “used modern statistical methods and in our judgment were thoughtfully done and well executed.”

Edison said victims can start filing for claims now and that it expects to get back to them with an offer within 90 days.

The firestorms that broke out in January ravaged two distinctly different stretches of Los Angeles County: one with grand views of the Pacific Ocean, the other nestled against the foothills of the San Gabriel Mountains.

But so far, a push from congressional Republicans to investigate the Jan. 7 firestorm and response has been focused almost exclusively on the Palisades fire, which broke out in L.A.’s Pacific Palisades and went on to burn parts of Malibu and surrounding areas.

In a letter to City Council President Marqueece Harris-Dawson, two U.S. senators this week intensified that investigation, saying they want an enormous trove of documents on Los Angeles Fire Department staffing, wildfire preparations, the city’s water supply and many other topics surrounding the devastating blaze.

U.S. Sens. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) and Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) asked for records related to several issues raised during and after the Palisades fire, including an empty reservoir and the failure to fully extinguish a previous fire that was later identified as the cause.

In contrast, the letter only briefly mentions the Eaton fire, which broke out in the unincorporated community of Altadena and spread to parts of Pasadena. That emergency was plagued by delayed evacuation alerts, deployment issues and allegations that electrical equipment operated by Southern California Edison sparked the blaze.

Both fires incinerated thousands of homes. Twelve people died in the Palisades fire. In the Eaton fire, all but one of the 19 who died were found in west Altadena, where evacuation alerts came hours after flames and smoke were threatening the area.

Scott and Johnson gave Harris-Dawson a deadline of Nov. 3 to produce records on several topics specific to the city of L.A.: “diversity, equity and inclusion” hiring policies at the city’s Fire Department; the Department of Water and Power’s oversight of its reservoirs; and the removal of Fire Chief Kristin Crowley by Mayor Karen Bass earlier this year.

Officials in Los Angeles County said they have not received such a letter dealing with either the Palisades fire or the Eaton fire.

A spokesperson for Johnson referred questions about the letter to Scott’s office. An aide to Scott told The Times this week that the investigation remains focused on the Palisades fire but could still expand. Some Eaton fire records were requested, the spokesperson said, because “they’re often inextricable in public reports.”

The senators — who both sit on the Senate’s Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs — opened the probe after meeting with reality TV star Spencer Pratt, who lost a home in the Palisades fire and quickly became an outspoken critic of the city’s response to the fire and subsequent rebuilding efforts. At the time, the senators called the Palisades fire “an unacceptable failure of government to protect the lives and property of its citizens.”

The investigation was initially billed as a look at the city’s emergency preparations, including the lack of water in a nearby reservoir and in neighborhood fire hydrants the night of the fire. The Times first reported that the Santa Ynez Reservoir, located in Pacific Palisades, had been closed for repairs for nearly a year.

The letter to Harris-Dawson seeks records relating to the reservoir as well as those dealing with “wildfire preparation, suppression, and response … including but not limited to the response to the Palisades and Lachman fires.”

Officials have said the Lachman fire, intentionally set Jan. 1, reignited six days later to become the Palisades fire. A suspect was recently arrested on suspicion of arson in the Lachman fire. Now, the senators are raising concerns about why that fire wasn’t properly contained.

The sweeping records request also seeks communications sent to and from each of the 15 council members and or their staff that mention the Palisades and Eaton fires. At this point, it’s unclear whether the city would have a substantial number of documents on the Eaton fire, given its location outside city limits.

Harris-Dawson did not provide comment. But Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martínez, who serves on the council’s public safety committee, made clear that he thinks the senators are confused by Southern California’s geography — and the distinctions between city and county jurisdictions.

“MAGA Republicans couldn’t even look at a map before launching into this ridiculous investigation,” he said. “DEI did not cause the fires, and these senators should take their witch hunts elsewhere,” he said in a statement.

Officials in L.A. County, who have confronted their own hard questions about botched evacuation alerts and poor resource deployment during the Eaton fire, said they had not received any letters from the senators about either fire.

Neither Los Angeles County Supervisor Kathryn Barger — who currently serves as board chair — nor Supervisor Lindsey Horvath had received such a document request, according to their aides. Barger represents Altadena, while Horvath’s district includes Pacific Palisades, Malibu and unincorporated communities affected by the Palisades fire.

Monday’s letter also seeks records “referring or relating to any reports or investigations of arson, burglary, theft, or looting” in fire-affected areas, as well as the arrest of Jonathan Rinderknecht, the Palisades fire arson suspect. It also seeks documents on the council’s efforts to “dismantle systemic racism” — and whether such efforts affected the DWP or the Fire Department.

Alberto Retana, president and chief executive of Community Coalition, a nonprofit group based in Harris-Dawson’s district, said he too views the inquiry from the two senators as a witch hunt — one that’s targeting L.A. city elected officials while ignoring Southern California Edison.

“There’s been reports that Edison was responsible for the Eaton fire, but there’s [nothing] that shows any concern about that,” he said.

Residents in Altadena have previously voiced concerns about what they viewed as disparities in the Trump administration’s response to the two fires. The Palisades fire tore through the mostly wealthy neighborhoods of Pacific Palisades and Malibu — home to celebrities who have since kept the recovery in the spotlight. Meanwhile, many of Altadena’s Black and working-class residents say their communities have been left behind.

In both areas, however, there has been growing concern that now-barren lots will be swiftly purchased by wealthy outside investors, including those who are based outside of the United States.

Scott, in a news release issued this week, said the congressional investigation will also examine whether Chinese companies are “taking advantage” of the fire recovery. The Times has not been able to independently verify such claims.

Eaton Corporation (ETN -2.15%) has garnered significant investor interest due to its exposure to the rapidly growing data center infrastructure market, and rightly so. Still, is it enough to justify the current valuation, and what do investors need to assume about the company’s growth prospects to buy the stock? Here’s the lowdown.

A valuation change

The change in investor sentiment toward Eaton is expressed in the chart below. Traditionally, electrical and power products companies were viewed as mature and relatively low-growth entities that struggled to expand beyond the confines of low-single-digit gross domestic product growth. As a rough rule of thumb, such companies in the industrial world are accorded a ratio of enterprise value (market cap plus net debt) to earnings before interest, taxation, depreciation, and amortization (EBITDA) of about 11 and/or a price-to-free-cash-flow ratio of about 20.

As you can see in the following chart, these valuations are mainly consistent with what Eaton previously traded at. However, in recent years, there has been a significant increase in the valuation investors are willing to pay.

ETN EV to EBITDA data by YCharts.

Why investors view Eaton more favorably

The increase in valuation is due to the increase in its growth rate — in 2019, its three-year average revenue growth rate was 2.7% compared to 8.2% in 2024 — and the potential for growth stemming from its exposure to data centers, particularly in North America. The need for data centers is being largely driven by the increasing use of artificial intelligence (AI). The table below breaks out Eaton’s revenue by segment, illustrating the significant contribution of the Electrical Americas segment over the past few years.

Data source: Eaton SEC filings.

The growth in the Electrical Americas segment is expected to be driven by data centers in the near term, as they have now become Eaton’s second-largest end market by sales, with management estimating that data centers will be responsible for 17% of total revenue in 2025. Moreover, it’s reasonable to argue that its second-fastest growing end market, utilities (11% of revenue), is at least in part driven by demand for power from data centers.

In addition, Eaton is a beneficiary of the “electrification of everything” megatrend, with solid end demand from defense and aerospace (estimated to account for 6% of 2025 sales). It also has growth prospects in commercial aerospace (9%), given Boeing and Airbus‘ backlogs and plans to ramp up production.

Image source: Getty Images.

Is Eaton Stock a buy?

The growth case is compelling, and Wall Street analysts expect Eaton’s revenue to grow at a 9% compound annual growth rate (CAGR) to 2027, with earnings growing at a near 14% annual rate.

That being said, there are a few key considerations to keep in mind. First, data centers and utilities are expected to account for a combined 28% of revenue in 2025, and there’s no guarantee that the torrid rates of growth in AI-led data center spending will continue.

Second, as the table above indicates, its eMobility business (components for electric vehicles) is not currently profitable. Since management expects to grow at a double-digit rate to 2030, the vehicle business (internal combustion engine components) is only expected to grow by low single digits to 2030; it’s hard to see how this relative shift in automotive-related revenue won’t result in some margin pressure.

Third, the company’s valuation relative to non-pure play data center peers appears high. A stock like Vertiv might be a better fit for investors seeking a pure-play data center stock.

ETN EV to EBITDA data by YCharts.

Trading at an EV/EBITDA of 19 using estimates for 2027 and at a price-to-free-cash-flow of 28.6 using 2027 estimates, Eaton looks like a fully valued stock because it will need more than a ramp-up in data center spending expectations before the stock seems like a good value.

Southern California Edison hasn’t accepted responsibility for igniting the Eaton fire, but it is now offering each victim who lost their home hundreds of thousands of dollars, according to a draft of its planned compensation program.

The owner of a 1,500-square-foot home destroyed in the wildfire, given as an example in the company’s draft, would receive $900,000 to rebuild. In addition, the utility is offering that owner an additional $200,000 for agreeing to settle their claim directly with Edison.

The family of each destroyed home would also get compensation for pain and suffering — $100,000 for each adult and $50,000 for each child, according to the draft.

Edison announced in late July that it was creating a program to directly compensate Eaton fire victims to help avoid lengthy litigation. The Jan. 7 fire destroyed more than 9,400 homes and other structures in Altadena and killed at least 19 people.

Pedro Pizarro, chief executive of Edison International, the utility’s parent company, said in a press release Wednesday that the compensation program for victims was “designed to help them focus on their recovery.”

The company said that it would hold four community meetings to get public comments on the proposed compensation plan, the first scheduled for Thursday at 7 p.m.

“While the investigation continues, inviting input on draft details is the next step in helping the community rebuild faster and stronger,” Pizarro said.

Edison said it had hired consultants Kenneth Feinberg and Camille Biros, who both worked on the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund, to help create the program.

“The proposed fund is designed as an alternative to conventional litigation in the courtroom,” said Biros. “The terms and conditions are completely transparent and voluntary. No claimants or their lawyers are required to participate until and unless they are satisfied with the compensation offer.”

Private lawyers representing Eaton fire victims have urged caution. They say similar programs created by utilities to compensate victims of other wildfires resulted in lower payouts than families received through lawsuit settlements.

In court, Edison already faces dozens of lawsuits filed by Eaton fire victims. Settling those lawsuits is expected to take years. Attorneys bringing the cases on behalf of victims would get 30% or more of the eventual settlement amounts.

Edison’s draft protocol lists proposed payments for people who were injured, renters who lost their belongings and businesses that lost property or revenues when they were forced to close.

Among the payments to the families of those who died would be $1.5 million for pain and suffering and other noneconomic damages, according to the draft. Each surviving spouse and other dependent would receive an additional $500,000.

In addition, the family who lost a loved one would receive a direct claim premium — a bonus for settling directly with Edison — of $5 million, according to the plan.

Edison said the direct claim premiums — which include $200,000 for families who lost their home, $10,000 to those whose homes were damaged, as well as other amounts for other victims — were only available through its program and would not be offered in litigation.

The utility said victims don’t need an attorney to apply for the compensation. But it is also offering to add 10% to the damage amounts, excluding the direct claim premiums, to cover legal fees of those who have a lawyer.

Victims will get their compensation offers within nine months of applying, Edison said. The company said it was also offering victims a “fast pay” option where they could receive their financial settlement offer within 90 days.

“Speed in processing claims is essential,” Feinberg said.

Edison has said that the government’s investigation into the fire could take as long as 18 months. Pizarro said in April that a leading theory was that a century-old transmission line that had not been in service since the 1970s somehow became reenergized and sparked the fire.

If Edison’s equipment is found to have caused the blaze, the company would be reimbursed for the cost of amounts it pays to victims by a $21 billion state fund. The fund was created by lawmakers in 2019 to shield utilities from bankruptcy if their equipment ignites a catastrophic fire.

The public must register to attend the meetings at ce.com/directclaimsupdates. The final meeting is at 7 p.m. on Monday.

Federal prosecutors on Thursday sued Southern California Edison over its alleged role in the deadly Eaton fire, a blaze that killed 19 people and destroyed more than 9,000 homes and other structures in Altadena and the surrounding area.

In a civil complaint, prosecutors allege that the Eaton fire was ignited by “faulty power infrastructure or by sparks from faulty power infrastructure owned, maintained, and operated” by Edison.

The results of the official investigation of the fire by the Los Angeles County Fire Department and California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection have not yet been announced. The government’s lawsuit notes that the investigation into the fire remains ongoing.

The government also sued Edison on Thursday for its alleged role in the Fairview fire, which burned near Hemet in 2022. Prosecutors are seeking tens of millions of dollars in damages from Edison, alleging the company’s negligence caused both fires.

Together, the fires burned tens of thousands of acres of National Forest System lands, killed 21 people and destroyed thousands of buildings, according to the U.S. attorney’s office in Los Angeles.

Acting U.S. Atty. Bill Essayli said “there’s no reason to wait” for the results of the investigation into the Eaton fire. During a Thursday morning news conference, Essayli cited evidence and “Edison’s own statements … that there’s no other apparent cause for the fire.”

“We believe that the evidence is clear that Edison is at fault,” he said. “The reason not to wait is because fire season is coming up again. We want Edison to change the way it does business. It does not maintain its infrastructure in a way to prevent fires. We do not want another fire igniting.”

Essayli stressed that the intention is for the utility company and “not the ratepayers” to bear the burden of the costs.

“Innocent hardworking Californians who pay their electricity bills should not have to pay for Edison’s negligence by incurring higher utility rates,” he said.

Jeff Monford, a spokesman for Southern California Edison, told The Times that the company is reviewing the lawsuits “and will respond through the appropriate channels.” It is “committed to wildfire mitigation through grid hardening, situational awareness and enhanced operational practices.”

In addition, he said, “our thoughts are with the community affected by the Fairview fire. We continue our work to reduce the likelihood of our equipment starting a wildfire.”

Although the cause of the Eaton fire is still under investigation, Monford said, it “was heartbreaking for so many of us who live and work in the Los Angeles area.”

In April, Pedro Pizarro, chief executive of Edison International, the utility’s parent company, said that “a leading hypothesis” of Eaton fire investigators was that a century-old transmission line, last used during the Vietnam War, somehow became reenergized and sparked the fire.

The government’s lawsuit cites a July Edison filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, in which the utility company stated it was “not aware of evidence pointing to another possible source of ignition” for the Eaton fire.

In March, the California Public Utilities Commission fined Edison $2.2 million for the Fairview fire, which killed two people and destroyed 36 homes and other structures in Hemet.

The commission said the utility violated state regulations by failing to cooperate with investigators and not safely maintaining its electrical equipment.

State investigators concluded that the 2022 Fairview fire was ignited when Edison’s equipment came in contact with a cable owned by Frontier Communications.

The government is seeking more than $40 million in damages tied to the Eaton fire. For the Fairview fire, the government is seeking to recover about $37 million in damages incurred by the Forest Service, including approximately $20 million in fire-suppression costs, according to the U.S. attorney’s office in L.A.

“The lawsuits filed today allege a troubling pattern of negligence resulting in death, destruction, and tens of millions of federal taxpayer dollars spent to clean up one utility company’s mistakes,” Essayli said in a written statement Thursday.

“We hope that today’s filings are the first step in causing the beginnings of a culture change at Southern California Edison, one that will make it a responsible, conscientious company that helps — not harms — our community.”

Edison is facing dozens of lawsuits from people who lost their homes or businesses in the Jan. 7 Eaton fire. A study by UCLA estimated that losses from the fire could be $24 billion to $45 billion.

State officials say damage claims from the Eaton fire could wipe out a $21-billion fund California created to shield utilities from the cost of blazes sparked by their electrical lines.

Southern California Edison’s plans to compensate Eaton fire victims for damage were met with skepticism Thursday from lawyers representing Altadena residents, but drew tentative support from others who say the initiative could help shore up the state’s $21-billion wildfire fund.

The utility announced its Wildfire Recovery Compensation Program this week, saying it would be used to quickly pay victims, including those who were insured, while avoiding lengthy litigation.

The announcement comes as state officials consider ways to shore up the state’s fund to compensate wildfire victims, amid fears that it could be fully exhausted by Eaton fire claims. Fees that attorneys receive as part of victim settlements could further strain the fund.

State Sen. Henry Stern (D-Calabasas) said Edison’s new program may have some merit as potentially “a more efficient way” than lawsuits to make sure victims are fairly compensated.

He pointed out that lawyers were “coming across the country to represent” Eaton fire victims. “Are they really getting their money’s worth when they pay 30% to these lawyers?” Stern asked.

Mark Toney, executive director of the Utility Reform Network, said Edison’s program had the potential to reduce costs that otherwise must be covered by the wildfire fund, which was established in part by a surcharge on the bills paid by customers of Edison, Pacific Gas & Electric and San Diego Gas & Electric.

“If Edison is determined to be the cause of the fire, anything they can settle early reduces the costs that otherwise would be paid later,” Toney said.

The utility has released few details of how the program would work, leaving victims who are already coping with uncertainty with more questions. And lawyers who had been seeking to represent victims in lawsuits against Edison were quick to urge caution.

“Without admitting fault or providing transparency, Edison is asking victims to potentially waive their rights,” said Kiley Grombacher, one of dozens of lawyers involved in litigation against Edison for the Jan. 7 wildfire that killed 19 and destroyed 9,000 homes in Altadena.

According to Edison, the program would be open to those who lost homes or businesses as well as renters who lost property. It would also cover those who were harmed by smoke, suffered physical injuries or had family members who died.

“People can file a claim even if they are involved in active litigation,” said Kathleen Dunleavy, an Edison spokeswoman.

Dunleavy said the company would be releasing more information soon, including on eligibility requirements.

At a Thursday meeting in Sacramento of the Catastrophe Response Council, which oversees the wildfire fund, officials said they were creating criteria that Edison must follow in designing the program, including having measures to prevent fraud and clear eligibility standards.

Sheri Scott, an actuary from Milliman, told the council that the firm estimated that losses from the Eaton fire ranged from $13.7 billion to $22.8 billion.

“We heard from our guest today that we might run out of money very quickly,” said Paul Rosenstiel, a member of the council appointed by Gov. Gavin Newsom.

He urged state lawmakers to consider changing the law that created the fund so that less money was at risk of flowing to third parties who aren’t fire victims.

PG&E created a program to directly pay victims of the 2021 Dixie fire, which burned more than 960,000 acres in Northern California. It created a similar program to compensate victims of the 2022 Mosquito fire, which burned nearly 77,000 acres in Placer and El Dorado counties.

PG&E said it offered Mosquito fire victims who lost their homes $500 per square foot and $9,200 per acre for those whose lots did not exceed 5 acres. To aid in rebuilding efforts, victims who decided to reconstruct their homes were eligible for an additional $50,000.

Lynsey Paulo, a PG&E spokeswoman, said in an email that the company paid nearly $50 million to victims of the Dixie fire through its program. That money went to 135 households, she said.

“PG&E’s program was designed to provide claimants with resources to rebuild as quickly as possible and help communities recover,” she said.

Richard Bridgford, a lawyer who represented Dixie fire victims, said that PG&E’s offer was lower than victims won through lawsuits, and that only a fraction of those eligible for the PG&E program decided to participate, he said.

”Victims have uniformly done better when represented by counsel,” said Bridgford, who now represents victims of the Eaton fire.

Edison’s announcement of its program came as fire agencies continue to investigate the cause of the Eaton fire. Edison said in April that a leading theory is that a dormant transmission line, last used in 1971, somehow was reenergized and sparked the blaze. The company says the new compensation program “is not an admission of legal liability.”

“Even though the details of how the Eaton Fire started are still being evaluated, SCE will offer an expedited process to pay and resolve claims fairly and promptly,” Pedro Pizarro, chief executive of Edison International, the utility’s parent company, said in a news release. “This allows the community to focus more on recovery instead of lengthy, expensive litigation.”

The utility said it had hired consultants Kenneth R. Feinberg and Camille S. Biros, who had worked on the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund, to help design the program.

If Edison is found responsible for the fire, the $21-billion state wildfire fund would reimburse the company for all or most of the amounts paid to victims through the new program or through lawsuits and insurance claims.

Half of the fund’s $21 billion came from charges to electric bills of customers of Edison, PG&E and SDG&E. The other half was contributed by shareholders of those three companies, which are the only utilities that can seek reimbursements from the fund.

Seeking to avoid lengthy litigation, Southern California Edison said Wednesday it will offer to compensate Eaton fire victims directly for damages suffered, even though it has yet to formally concede that its equipment ignited the blaze on Jan. 7.

Edison said it planned to launch a Wildfire Recovery Compensation Program this fall that would be open to those who lost homes, businesses or rental properties in the fire that killed 19 people and destroyed more than 9,400 homes and other structures in Altadena. It would also cover those who were harmed by smoke, suffered physical injuries or had family members who died.

“Even though the details of how the Eaton Fire started are still being evaluated, SCE will offer an expedited process to pay and resolve claims fairly and promptly,” Pedro Pizarro, chief executive of Edison International, the utility’s parent company, said in a press release. “This allows the community to focus more on recovery instead of lengthy, expensive litigation.”

The utility said it had hired consultants Kenneth R. Feinberg and Camille S. Biros, who had worked on the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund, to help design the program.

Dozens of lawsuits have been filed against Edison in the wake of the Jan. 7 fire that videos captured igniting under a transmission line in Eaton Canyon. The cause is still under investigation, but Pizarro has said a leading theory is that an idle Edison transmission line, last used in 1971, somehow became re-energized and started the blaze.

An attorney who represents fire victims expressed skepticism of the plan, saying it could lead to reduced compensation for fire victims.

“In the past, the utilities have proposed these programs as a means for shorting and underpaying victims,” said attorney Richard Bridgford said. “Victims have uniformly done better when represented by counsel.”

Edison said the program would be designed to quickly compensate victims, including those who were insured. People can apply with or without an attorney, it said. The program is expected to run through 2026.

“The architecture and timing of the SCE direct claims program will be instrumental in efficiently managing funding resources, mitigating interest costs and minimizing inflationary pressures so funds can address actual claims and fairly compensate community members for their losses,” Pizarro said.

If Edison is found responsible for the fire, the state’s $21 billion wildfire fund is expected to reimburse the company for all or most of the payments it makes to victims. Brigford said he believed the wildfire fund would be enough to cover the Eaton fire claims.

“They are trying to make people panic so they don’t get adequate representation,” he said.

Others are concerned that the state wildfire fund is inadequate. Officials at the Earthquake Authority, which administers the wildfire fund, said in documents released in advance of a Thursday meeting that they fear the costs of the Eaton fire could exhaust the fund.

State officials plan to discuss what can be done to lengthen the life of the fund at the meeting.

Edison said more information on eligibility and other details of the compensation plan would be released in the coming weeks.

In a high-stakes gamble, Wall Street hedge funds are offering to buy claims that insurers may have against Southern California Edison if the utility is found liable for causing the devastating Eaton fire in Altadena.

The solicitations are legal, but have alarmed California state officials — who loathe the idea of investors profiting from a disaster that claimed 18 lives and destroyed more than 9,400 homes and other structures.

“I think everyone in this room looks at a catastrophe, like what happened in Southern California, and our natural instincts are to say, ‘What can we do to help?’” Tom Welsh, the chief executive of the California Earthquake Authority, which manages the state’s wildfire fund, said at a recent public meeting. “There are other actors in the environment who look at that situation in Southern California and ask instead, “What can I do to profit?’”

The investors are aiming to buy so-called subrogation claims from insurance companies. These are claims that insurers would file against Edison seeking reimbursement for the money they paid to their policyholders for fire damages if it’s determined the utility’s equipment triggered the wildfire that began Jan. 7.

For the insurers, selling the claims — even at a steep discount — allows them to get at least some reimbursement for the money they’ve paid out. For the hedge funds buying the claims, it’s a gamble that could pay big if Edison is found liable and they can cash in those claims for much more than they paid.

More than $17 billion in insurance claims for the Eaton and Palisades fires has been paid out so far, according to the California Department of Insurance.

State officials say California has a stake in the trading of fire-related subrogation claims, which was previously reported by Bloomberg, because of the potential effect on the state’s wildfire fund.

That fund, which currently has about $21 billion, would be used to cover most of the costs of damage claims should Edison be found liable for starting the Eaton blaze. While the cause is still under investigation, a leading theory is that a decommissioned transmission line in Eaton Canyon was reenergized and sparked the blaze, Edison has said.

The wildfire fund is managed by a state board called the Catastrophe Response Council. At its last meeting in May, Welsh told the board that solicitations from New York brokers and investment firms began landing in his email inbox in March.

Ronald Ryder at Oppenheimer & Co., a New York investment firm, told Welsh in an email on April 15 that his company was currently trading the subrogation claims. Ryder wrote that there had already been 10 transactions worth more than $1 billion in recovery rights for the Eaton fire as well as the Palisades fire in Pacific Palisades, where the city of Los Angeles faces potential liability.

In another email, Ryder told Welsh that investors were bidding 47 cents on the dollar for the claims related to the Eaton fire. For the Palisades fire, the bidding was 5 cents on the dollar, Ryder wrote.

Welsh warned the council that “speculative investors” might hold onto the Eaton claims and “really try to get outsized profits by demanding settlements from Edison of 75, 80, 85 cents on the dollar.”

If that were to happen, the wildfire fund could pay out “hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars” more than if the claims were settled directly by the insurers, he said.

“That would really, very negatively impact the durability of the wildfire fund,” Welsh said.

Oppenheimer declined to comment, and Ryder didn’t respond to messages.

Under a 2019 state law, the state wildfire fund would be expected to reimburse Edison for most of the insurers’ payments to policyholders if its electrical equipment is found to have started the Eaton fire. The Palisades fire, which occurred in territory serviced by the L.A. Department of Water and Power, isn’t covered by the state fund.

California lawmakers created the wildfire fund in 2019 to protect the state’s three biggest for-profit utilities — Edison, Pacific Gas & Electric and San Diego Gas & Electric — from bankruptcy if their equipment sparks catastrophic wildfires.

The possibility of large settlements paid out by the wildfire fund has led to dozens of lawsuits against Edison, even before the cause of the fire has been determined.

If found responsible for the fire, Edison would negotiate settlements with the insurers, as well as with homeowners and others who have filed lawsuits, saying they’ve been harmed. The utility would then ask the state wildfire fund to cover those amounts.

If the insurers have sold their claims, however, the investors who bought them would reap the returns. Attorneys who handle the complex transactions would also get a cut and “generally take a very high percentage off the top,” Paul Rosenstiel, a catastrophe council member, said at last month’s meeting.

Already, Gov. Gavin Newsom and other state leaders are worried that the $21-billion wildfire fund could be depleted by damage claims from the Eaton fire.

Welsh recounted how a hedge fund had profited in 2019 by buying insurers’ subrogation claims against PG&E after its transmission line was found to have started the 2018 Camp fire that killed 85 people and destroyed much of the town of Paradise. Bloomberg reported at the time that hedge fund Baupost Group made a profit of hundreds of millions of dollars by buying the claims at 35 cents on the dollar and later getting a settlement valued at much more.

To stop hedge funds from profiting on the claims, Welsh said, the earthquake authority is now considering changing its claim administration procedures to make the settlements less lucrative for those investors.

One possible change being discussed, according to authority staff, would require a utility that ignited a wildfire to prioritize settling the claims of victims and insurers who have not sold their subrogation rights before those claims owned by hedge funds.

More than 30 million Californians across the state could see their electric bills go up to pay for the devastating Eaton fire, as officials scramble to shore up a state wildfire fund that could be wiped out by damage claims.

One early estimate places fire losses from the Eaton fire at $24 billion to $45 billion. If Southern California Edison equipment is found to have sparked the blaze on Jan. 7, as dozens of lawsuits allege, the damage claims could quickly exhaust the state’s $21-billion wildfire fund.

“Everyone is concerned about this,” said Michael Wara, director of Stanford’s climate and energy policy program, who was involved in the fund’s creation. “If we need to put more money into the fund, where will it come from?”

The wildfire fund was created to shield the state’s three big utilities from bankruptcy in the event one was found liable for massive fire damages.

At a meeting last month, members of the state Catastrophe Response Council, which oversees the fund, were told that Gov. Gavin Newsom and legislative leaders were being urged to extend a monthly surcharge on electric bills beyond its planned expiration in 2035. The fee, called the non-bypassable charge, adds roughly $3 a month to the average residential bill.

“They are asking the people of California to put more money into the fund,” said council member Paul Rosenstiel, a former investment banker and Newsom advisor, according to a transcript of the meeting. “Some of them are asking for an extension of the non-bypassable charge.”

The fee is paid by customers of the state’s three big for-profit utilities — Edison, Pacific Gas & Electric and San Diego Gas & Electric.

Rosenstiel didn’t respond to a request for comment. At the meeting, he didn’t say who was lobbying the governor and lawmakers to extend the surcharge to ratepayers.

California utility executives have told their investors they have been talking to Newsom and legislative leaders about shoring up the fund. PG&E executives have said that they have asked that no new money come from utilities or their shareholders, which would likely leave electric customers to pay more.

“We continue to advocate that we don’t think there is a good case that investors should contribute to the fund,” Patti Poppe, PG&E’s chief executive, told Wall Street analysts in an April conference call.

A Siller Skycrane removes Southern California Edison’s tower 208 from a hillside in Altadena in May. The idle transmission tower, suspected of sparking the Eaton fire, will be examined at a lab.

(Myung J. Chun/Los Angeles Times)

Pedro Pizarro, chief executive of SoCal Edison’s parent company Edison International, was asked in a recent call with Wall Street analysts about the prospects for legislation that would bolster the wildfire fund.

“Clearly the governor’s office is engaged, as are our legislative leaders,” he said, adding that he was “certainly very encouraged by the level of diligence and engagement that I’m seeing.”

Asked to elaborate, Kathleen Dunleavy, a SoCal Edison spokeswoman, said the utility was not seeking a specific solution to questions of the fund’s durability.

“Our focus is to convey the importance of a strong wildfire fund,” she said. “We are not being prescriptive in how to achieve that.”

This year, the electric bill surcharge is expected to add $923 million to the fund, according to California Public Utility Commission records. If the fee was extended an additional 10 years, it would require customers of the three utilities to pay an additional $9 billion into the fund.

That doesn’t sit well with consumer advocates, who point out customers are already on the hook to contribute half of the $21-billion fund, while also paying higher bills to cover costs such as undergrounding and insulated electric wires.

Those measures are intended to make the electric system safer. Yet despite spending billions of dollars last year on wildfire mitigation, the number of fires sparked by its equipment jumped from 90 in 2023 to 178 last year.

Altadena homes lie in ruins after the Eaton fire.

(Robert Gauthier/Los Angeles Times)

“We think ratepayers have more than done enough,” said Mark Toney, the executive director of The Utility Reform Network, also known as TURN, a consumer group in San Francisco. “My position is that ratepayers should not pay another penny.”

Rosenstiel said at the May meeting that Newsom and legislative leaders were also being asked for the state’s general fund, which pays for schools, healthcare, prisons and other government operations, to contribute to the fund that protects utilities from wildfire claims.

The governor’s office declined to answer questions and said Newsom’s schedule didn’t allow time for an interview.

Newsom has a seat on the Catastrophe Response Council. He was a no-show at the group’s most recent meeting, sending a designee in his place.

Assemblywoman Cottie Petrie-Norris (D-Irvine), the chair of the Assembly’s Utilities and Energy Committee, acknowledged that lawmakers are concerned about the fund but said that they are still considering remedies.

“All options are on the table and are being considered and evaluated,” she said. “I have certainly not arrived at a solution yet.”

The cause of the Eaton fire, which killed 18 people and destroyed more than 9,000 homes, businesses and other structures in Altadena, remains under investigation.

Edison CEO Pizarro has said a leading theory is that an unused, decades-old transmission line in Eaton Canyon was reenergized and sparked the blaze. Video captured flames erupting under an Edison transmission tower on the night of the fire.

If Edison’s equipment is found to have started the inferno, the state’s wildfire fund is expected to cover most of the cost of damages over $1 billion, under a 2019 law that was passed after PG&E went bankrupt from its liability for the deadly 2018 Camp fire.

The first $1 billion in damages from the Eaton fire would be covered by insurance that electric customers paid for.

The total cost of the fire in Altadena won’t be known until dozens of lawsuits make their way through the courts, which could take years.

A February study by UCLA economists Zhiyun Li and William Yu estimated that the fire caused $24 billion to $45 billion in property damages and capital losses, or the cost to replace what was destroyed.

Officials at the California Earthquake Authority, which manages the wildfire fund, told members of the Catastrophe Response Council in a May memorandum that the authority had “undertaken a significant project to evaluate alternatives for extending the durability of the Wildfire Fund in the face of potential large losses.”

To determine how to strengthen the fund, authority officials said they had rehired consultants who worked with Newsom’s office in 2019 to create the fund. The four firms will be paid $4.5 million, which the fund will cover, they said.

Among the consultants is Guggenheim Securities, the investment banking arm of Guggenheim Partners. Another subsidiary of Guggenheim Partners owns stock in the state’s three big utilities.

A recommendation to tap utility customers to replenish the fund, instead of the utility companies themselves, would likely have a big impact on company share prices.

“They [Guggenheim] certainly have a vested interest in the financial success of the utilities,” Toney said.

A spokesman for Guggenheim Securities said the stocks owned by the sister company didn’t pose a conflict, saying it “maintains a robust conflict management program, including strict information barriers between its investment banking department and the rest of Guggenheim Partners.”

Wara at Stanford said if Edison is found responsible for the Eaton fire, the wildfire fund would cover what insurers paid to victims and also pay for property damage not covered by insurance.

For example, families who lost their homes but received insurance payouts lower than the value of their property could seek the balance from Edison, he said. The utility would then seek to recover those sums from the wildfire fund.

The other deadly Los Angeles County inferno that ignited on Jan. 7, the Palisades fire, is not covered by the wildfire fund because Pacific Palisades is served by the Los Angeles Department of Water & Power, a municipal utility. The fund only covers blazes ignited by equipment owned by the state’s three biggest investor-owned utilities.

“They have their insurance and that’s it,” Wara said of Palisades fire victims.

At its meeting last month, the state Catastrophe Response Council was informed that insurance claims from the Eaton fire have totaled roughly $15 billion so far.

Adding to the damage bill is the potential cost of lawsuits. The possibility that the fund will pay out large amounts for Eaton fire damages has led to dozens of lawsuits being filed against Edison, even before the official cause has been determined.

Families of Altadena residents who died have filed wrongful-death suits. Edison is also facing lawsuits from L.A. County and other local governments for damages, including to public infrastructure such as water systems. Residents living outside the fire’s borders have filed suit, saying they were harmed by lead and other toxins in the smoke.

If a court found Edison negligent in maintaining its equipment, Wara said, victims could ask for compensation for pain and suffering, which would escalate the cost.

“Then the wildfire fund is out of money,” Wara said.

Pizarro has said that Edison is “committed to a thorough and transparent investigation.”

“Our hearts go out to everyone who has suffered losses,” he said.

The 2019 law that created the wildfire fund, known as AB 1054, greatly limited what Edison would have to pay for any of the claims. The company has told its investors that its maximum liability would be $3.9 billion.

The three utilities are asking legislators to ensure that state law continues to protect them and their shareholders, even if the $21-billion fund runs out of money.

Since the January fires, Edison, PG&E and Sempra, the parent company of San Diego Gas & Electric, have each spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to lobby in Sacramento, according to required regulatory reports they filed for the first three months of the year.

A PG&E lobbyist reported taking Assemblywoman Petrie-Norris to a $267 dinner at Paragary’s, a bistro in Sacramento, on Feb. 3.

Petrie-Norris said the dinner was with Carla Peterman, a former state public utilities commissioner who is now a top PG&E executive. Petrie-Norris said they talked about a planned March hearing on electricity affordability and didn’t discuss the wildfire fund.

The next month, a PG&E lobbyist took Dee Dee Myers and Rohimah Moly, two of Newsom’s top staff members, to the upscale Prelude Kitchen & Bar, which is a short walk from the state Capitol.

Willie Rudman, a spokesman for the Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development, said the wildfire fund wasn’t discussed at the meal. Instead it “was a general meet and greet,” Rudman said, where the governor’s staff and PG&E executives “discussed opportunities for future collaboration.”

PG&E declined to answer questions. Lynsey Paulo, a PG&E spokesperson, said in a statement that the utility’s lobbying expenses were paid with shareholder funds and not money from customers.

“Like many individuals and businesses, PG&E participates in the political process on behalf of our customers and company,” Paulo said.

Eaton Canyon and adjacent federal land that burned in the January wildfires in L.A. County will remain closed through 2026 and maybe longer given the extensive damage caused by the Eaton fire and subsequent flooding, county officials said during a recent news conference.

One of the most popular hiking areas in L.A. County, Eaton Canyon previously saw a million visitors per year. Officials said they’ve seen a spate of trespassers in the park since the fire, including one hiker who tried to reach Echo Mountain only to get lost and require rescue. Officials are pleading with the public to stay out of the area and let the land heal.

Karen Mateer, vice president of the Eaton Canyon Nature Center Associates, speaks during a news conference last week in which officials asked the public to stay out of the Eaton fire burn scar to let the land heal.

(Jaclyn Cosgrove / Los Angeles Times)

“With apologies to James Taylor, we’ve seen fire and we’ve seen rain, and I’ll tell you what, we’ve also seen a fair amount of air in the form of wind coming through the canyon,” said Karen Mateer, vice president of the Eaton Canyon Nature Center Associates. “Those are three of the basic elements of nature, and now we really need to focus on the fourth, the earth.”

Although it will take time for the land most damaged by the L.A. fires to heal, there are some areas of the burn scars that have recently reopened or will reopen soon.

Here is the latest information on trails in three recent burn zones.

Eaton fire

The Eaton fire killed much of the plant life in Eaton Canyon, leaving the soil unstable. As such, boulders and burned trees can fall at any moment.

Norma Edith García-Gonzalez, director of L.A. County Parks and Recreation, said on one of her first visits to the canyon after the fire, a tree fell five feet in front of her. All hikers should heed the warnings to stay out, she said. Additionally, those who trespass could face substantial fines if caught.

For those wanting to see a waterfall like the gorgeous cascade that plummets down the mountain at Eaton Canyon, I’d recommend checking out the popular Switzer Falls. It was closed immediately following the Eaton fire, and there was some confusion about whether the trail had reopened. At last week’s news conference, Justin Seastrand, forest recreation manager at Angeles National Forest, confirmed it is open! However, the nearby Bear Canyon Trail Camp and the trail leading to it remain closed.

The burned hillsides around Eaton Canyon in the San Gabriel Mountains.

(Jaclyn Cosgrove / Los Angeles Times)

A similar and beautiful trail, Millard Canyon, which also features a waterfall, will likely remain closed through 2026, as its restroom burned in the fire, Seastrand said.

Henninger Flats, a popular hiking destination north of Eaton Canyon, suffered even more serious damage, said Kim Bosell with L.A. County Parks. The old museum, propagation areas and restrooms are gone, and workers will need to remove that debris before the area is safe for hikers to access, Bosell said.

Before the fire, officials had planned to add Henninger Flats to the Eaton Canyon natural area, she said. “Unfortunately the fire took it before we could follow through with those plans, but what the future holds for it, we don’t know right now,” Bosell said.

Bridge fire

Last September, the Bridge fire burned almost 55,000 acres, including 25 trails on federal land.

The popular Bridge to Nowhere hike was near where the fire started and will remain closed for the foreseeable future, Seastrand told me, because the rivers and creeks in the area were seriously damaged during the fire and subsequent flooding. It’ll take tremendous manpower (and money) to bring it back online.

But, the good news is, the U.S. Forest Service revised the Bridge fire closure order last week to reopen two popular routes to Mt. Baldy, the Baldy Bowl Trail (Ski Hut) and Devil’s Backbone Trail. Bear Canyon, sometimes referred to as Old Mt. Baldy Trail, remains closed.

This reopening is more than a little bit exciting, considering the closure of these two trails was probably one of the least popular decisions that Angeles National Forest officials have made in a hot minute.

That said, you might notice these trails and others in the Mt. Baldy area, like Icehouse Canyon, are listed as closed on the forest service’s website when they’re actually open.

That’s, in part, because the U.S. Forest Service recently updated several forest websites and in doing so broke the links for several trails and campgrounds. The update rolled out about the same time that the federal government fired thousands of forest service workers. So, needless to say, it might be a minute before the website reflects reality. In the meantime, check the closure order if you have a question about what’s open. (You’re also welcome to email your local outdoors reporter!)

Palisades fire

In the coming weeks, hikers will be able to return to a handful of popular trails in and around the Palisades burn scar.

I spoke to Richard Fink, district superintendent for the Angeles District of California State Parks, who told me that some parkland and trails are closed not because of fire damage, but because they’re being used by state and federal officials in the recovery effort in the aftermath of the Palisades fire.

That list includes Will Rogers State Park, where Fink told me that the park was severely burned, but the trails are in great shape.

“We could open the trails at Will Rogers tomorrow if the rest of the park would be open,” Fink said. “There are actually a lot of trails that [the fire] really didn’t have any impact [on], and also due to our parks being closed, we’ve been able to perform a lot of the work already.”

An area of Topanga State Park near Eagle Springs Fire Road that did not burn in the recent Palisades fire.

(Jaclyn Cosgrove / Los Angeles Times)

Parts of Topanga State Park were used by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for hazardous debris removal, and L.A. County Department of Water and Power is using part of the park to rebuild the power grid in the Palisades. Once those efforts are finished later this year, that region of the park should be able to reopen, officials said.

“The state park priority for parts of Topanga and parts of Will Rogers State Historic Park are first and foremost to help the recovery and then to eventually get them open to the public,” Fink told me.

The southern part of Topanga State Park suffered the worst damage in the Palisades fire and will remain closed for “a while,” in particular the area around the Topanga Ranch Motel, which was “completely destroyed,” Fink said.

There are trails that may take years to recover or may no longer be accessible to the public moving forward, he said.

The Palisades fire burned several acres through Topanga State Park, especially in the southern end of the park where structures were destroyed, as well as popular hiking trails.

(Jaclyn Cosgrove / Los Angeles Times)

The popular Los Leones Trail will remain closed, although it suffered minimal damage and was one of the first trails the state parks crew worked on in early March. Crews cleared burned vegetation, removed landslides and widened the trail. It’s in good structural shape, officials said, but will remain closed because the neighborhood near the trailhead remains closed to the public. Once the neighborhood reopens, a crew will need to remove plants that have grown in the path thanks to a lack of foot traffic.

But, dear Wilder, I do have some good news for you.

On Saturday, I hiked with Rachel Glegg, volunteer coordinator with the Santa Monica Mountains Task Force, who took me around Topanga State Park to see the trail work that the Sierra Club Angeles Chapter’s trail crew, state park workers and other volunteers have completed.

Thanks to those efforts, Glegg said, officials aim to open the following trails in the next few weeks:

• East Topanga Fire Road from Trippet Ranch to Parker Mesa, although anything beyond the Parker Mesa junction will likely remain closed to keep the public away from neighborhoods burned in the fire
• Eagle Rock Fire Road, Eagle Springs Fire Road and Fire Road #30 to the Hub Junction in Topanga State Park
• The Garapito Trail in Topanga State Park, which Glegg’s crew is still working on, but is close to repairing fully

Several phacelia grandiflora plants are growing along a burned section of the Garapito Trail.

(Jaclyn Cosgrove / Los Angeles Times)

On my trip with Glegg, I just kept saying, “This is so beautiful,” as I took in the views of the surrounding city and ocean. We spotted loads of wildflowers, including phacelia grandiflora and a small patch of California poppies. Like you, I am eager to return and make more memories in this beautiful, resilient landscape.

3 things to do

A child plays at a previous migration celebration hosted by the Friends of Ballona Wetlands.

(Friends of Ballona Wetlands)

1. Get up close with birds in Playa Vista
Friends of Ballona Wetlands will host its annual migration celebration from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. Saturday at Ballona Discovery Park. Raptors will be present for visitors to see and learn about up close. Guests can also enjoy music, purchase native plants and partake in a scavenger hunt, along with tours of the freshwater marsh. Learn more at ballonafriends.org.

2. Celebrate National Bike Month in L.A.
People for Mobility Justice will host a community bike ride from 8:30 a.m. to noon Saturday, starting at Ted Watkins Memorial Park. As part of this celebration of National Bike Month, riders will travel through the Florence-Firestone area, learning about bike safety and local resources. Participants should bring water, along with their bike and helmet. Register at eventbrite.com.

3. Prance down open streets in Glendale
The city of Glendale will close 1.3 miles of Glendale Avenue from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. Saturday for its first car-free open streets event. Let’s Go Glendale will feature live music (including a strolling mariachi) and other arts and culture programming. Visitors can walk, run, bike or take the route in any other preferred people-powered way. Learn more at glendaleca.gov.

The must-read

A female black bear and her cub scour a South Lake Tahoe neighborhood in search of food.

(Corey Arnold / For The Times)

It’s rare to see a black bear in the wild, and it’s even rarer for someone to be hurt by one, much less killed. That’s why it was so startling when news broke of the death of Patrice Miller, 71, who, a coroner’s report found, was killed by a black bear in her home. Times reporters Jessica Garrison and Lila Seidman wrote in their recent story that questions — and even disbelief — still exists around how Miller died. “We don’t believe the bear did it,” said Ann Bryant, executive director of the Bear League in the Tahoe Basin. “And I will go on record as saying that.” The bear in question has been killed. What remains is an intense debate over how California should manage its population of an estimated 65,405 black bears, especially those found lumbering around mountain towns.

Happy adventuring,

P.S.

The U.S. Forest Service is taking public comment through Monday on its proposal to log trees and clear chaparral across 90,700 acres in Los Padres National Forest, which sits north of L.A. County and features gorgeous landscapes. “But this plan falls short and threatens habitat in many areas,” according to advocacy nonprofit ForestWatch. “The project emphasizes vegetation removal in remote areas — places that pose little threat to public safety but are rich in biodiversity, cultural value and recreational importance. The plan also allows for commercial logging, and it overlaps with roadless areas and endangered species critical habitat.” You can learn more at the organization’s website, where you can submit your comment as well. You can also submit your comment on this federal website.

For more insider tips on Southern California’s beaches, trails and parks, check out past editions of The Wild. And to view this newsletter in your browser, click here.

Federal agencies must do more to house struggling victims from January’s Eaton Fires, Rep. Judy Chu (D-Monterey Park) and advocacy groups argued Tuesday.

Chu hosted a roundtable at the Altadena Library with officials from the Federal Emergency Management Agency, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services and other agencies, where a dozen organizations assisting fire survivors pleaded for more assistance.

Even with the availability of federal vouchers and other housing aid, thousands of people remain bouncing between hotel rooms, living out of their cars or in other unstable housing situations, advocates said.

“Survivors of the Eaton Fire are slipping through the cracks,” Chu said at a press conference following the event.

Chu is urging FEMA to authorize a housing program called Direct Lease where FEMA directly rents apartments for disaster survivors who cannot find somewhere to live on their own. The Times reported this month that FEMA hasn’t implemented Direct Lease in Los Angeles even though it’s commonly made available after natural disasters nationwide, including the 2023 wildfires in Maui.

Nearly 13,000 homes were destroyed in January’s wildfires with more than half the losses in Altadena and surrounding areas.

FEMA and CalOES officials have said that their data shows thousands of rental units available across L.A. County, making the program unnecessary.

“We know from anecdotal evidence that that cannot be true,” Chu said. “It is far from the truth.”

Fire survivors have faced numerous barriers to finding permanent housing while they decide on rebuilding their homes, advocates said. Landlords’ income requirements are too high. Potential tenants’ credit scores are too low. Some landlords aren’t accepting the vouchers FEMA is providing survivors. And the agency is including apartments in the Antelope Valley and other areas far from Altadena in its assessment of L.A.’s rental market.

By not taking these factors into account, FEMA officials are ignoring needs on the ground, advocates said.

“There is a huge gap between availability and vacancy and accessibility,” said Jasmin Shupper, president of Greenline Housing Foundation, a local nonprofit.

The push for additional housing aid comes amid widespread cuts to FEMA and resistance from the Trump administration for disaster spending nationwide. On Tuesday, the president threatened to strip federal funds from California if the state continued to allow transgender athletes to compete in girl’s sports.

Chu said that FEMA already has provided $132 million in assistance, including $40 million for help with housing.

She said that money for Direct Lease was available through the existing federal disaster allocation following January’s wildfires. She noted that she supported the state’s request to Trump and Congress for $40 billion for long-term recovery efforts.

FEMA and CalOES didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment on Chu’s request. After Times reporting earlier this month, state emergency officials said they were reevaluating an earlier decision not to advocate for Direct Lease.