Maps

In an era of escalating climate disasters, the ability to translate data into life-saving action has never been more critical. For the Asia-Pacific region—the world’s most disaster-prone, this is not an abstract challenge but a daily reality. At the forefront of this battle is the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP), which is leveraging artificial intelligence to close the gap between risk knowledge and on-the-ground resilience. In this exclusive Q&A, Kareff May Rafisura, Economic Affairs Officer at the ICT and Disaster Risk Reduction Division of ESCAP, provides a clear-eyed look at their innovative tool, SatGPT, and how it’s changing the game for communities from the remote village to the ministerial office.

1. It’s one thing to see a flood risk map, and another to break ground on a new levee. Could you walk us through how a local official might use SatGPT to confidently decide where to actually build?

Kareff May Rafisura, Economic Affairs Officer at the ICT and Disaster Risk Reduction Division of ESCAP: First, it’s worth noting that there’s growing rethinking within the science and policy communities on the long-term benefits and trade-offs of constructing artificial levees.

Going back to your question, understanding an area’s flood history is key to making smart infrastructure decisions. You wouldn’t build a levee on natural floodplains, for example. Without risk knowledge, levees might not protect communities effectively and could even cause problems downstream or in ecologically sensitive areas. SatGPT offers a rapid mapping service that helps local officials make risk-informed decisions. It significantly reduces the time and cost traditionally required to assess flood characteristics, such as frequency, spatial extent, and impacts, and converts that data into actionable information. This information is critical for decisionmakers who must weigh it alongside economic, social, and environmental considerations when determining whether, and where, to build a levee.

2. We often hear about getting tech “to the last mile.” Picture a rural community leader with a simple smartphone. How does SatGPT’s insight practically reach and help them make a life-saving decision?

Kareff: SatGPT’s strength lies in enhancing historical risk knowledge. It’s not designed to predict the next disaster, but rather to help communities prepare more effectively for it. For instance, when a rural leader needs to decide whether to evacuate ahead of a flood, she will still rely on early warnings from national meteorological services. What SatGPT can do is support smarter ex-ante planning—so that when early warning information arrives, the community is ready to respond quickly. This includes decisions on where to build shelters, how to lay out evacuation routes, and where to preposition relief supplies. These are all critical elements that must be in place to help avert disasters, as consistently demonstrated in the cyclone response histories of India and Bangladesh.

3. Floods are an urgent threat, but what about slower crises like droughts? Is the vision for SatGPT to eventually help with these less visible, but equally devastating, disasters?

Kareff: ESCAP coordinates the long-standing Regional Drought Mechanism, which has been supporting drought-prone countries in gaining access to satellite data, products, tools, and technical expertise—everything they need to conduct drought monitoring and impact assessments more effectively. Our support goes beyond making data available—we work with countries and partners to strengthen institutions and capacities, converting these data into actionable analytics and insights. We are currently working with three Central Asian countries in establishing their own Earth observation-based agricultural drought monitoring systems.

4. AI is powerful, but it can sometimes reflect our own blind spots. How are you ensuring SatGPT doesn’t accidentally worsen inequality by overlooking the most vulnerable communities in its models?

Kareff: You raised a valid concern. That’s why in our capacity development work, our participants combine SatGPT’s flood mapping with socio-economic data to pinpoint who’s most at risk and where. They work on use cases that unpack the exposure of essential services like hospitals and water treatment facilities. When these critical infrastructures fail, it’s the poorest who pay the highest price. That’s why it’s vital to understand the hazards that threaten them.

5. Governments have tight budgets. If you were making the pitch to a Finance Minister, what’s the most compelling argument for investing in SatGPT now versus spending on recovery later?

Kareff: Investing in reducing disaster risk – which involves measures taken before disasters occur to reduce vulnerability and enhance resilience (e.g., early warning systems, resilient infrastructure, land-use planning) – is far more cost-effective than recovery. Every dollar invested in disaster risk reduction can save multiple dollars in future losses. While the benefits are context-specific, a recent multi-country study found that for every $1 invested, the return can be as high as $10.50.

6. The region is innovating fast, with countries like Indonesia and Thailand building their own systems. How does SatGPT aim to be a good teammate and connect with these national efforts, rather than just adding another tool to the pile?

Kareff: That’s a good point. And beyond technological innovation, we’re also seeing progress in policy and institutional innovations being put in place. Our intention is not to replace national systems, but to show what’s possible when you make risk knowledge accessible and actionable. We work closely with our national counterparts with a focus on integrating SatGPT insights into existing workflows and systems-not reinventing them.

7. Training young professionals is key. Beyond the technical skills, what’s the most important lesson you hope they take away about using this technology responsibly?

Kareff: I’m glad you recognize that today’s most pressing need goes beyond technical expertise. That’s precisely why our technical capacity-building activities are held alongside youth forums to provide a platform for young people to engage in meaningful conversations around values and motivations. As stakeholders, we all share the responsibility of upholding safe, secure, and trustworthy artificial intelligence systems to support sustainable development.

8. Looking ahead a year, what would a “win” for SatGPT look like on the ground? Is it a specific number of communities better protected, or a faster warning time?

Kareff: Forecasting and enhancing the forecast lead times remains the responsibility of mandated early warning agencies. SatGPT is well-positioned to support efforts to protect more communities. By enhancing the historical understanding of floods, it can help improve the accuracy of early warning information, help communities proactively plan their response, and reduce disaster risk ex-ante. In that sense, I would say that effective SatGPT roll-out would amount to both gains in space and time – more communities being warned with improved lead times for mitigative response with more reliable historical data for granular risk characterization.

9. The document mentions turning the Jakarta Declaration into action. From your vantage point, what’s the biggest spark of progress you’ve seen so far?

Kareff: One of the most promising sparks of progress has been the strengthened regional cooperation aimed at enhancing the capacity of countries—especially the countries in special situations—to overcome barriers to accessing the benefits of innovative geospatial applications. With the support of ESCAP members, we are implementing field projects, providing capacity-building and technical assistance, facilitating expert exchange, and knowledge sharing across more than a dozen countries. These efforts are helping to develop space-based solutions from the ground up to tackle sustainable development challenges such as urban poverty, air pollution, droughts, floods, and crop biodiversity loss.

10. Finally, behind all the data and code, you mention this is about protecting lives. Has working on SatGPT given you a new perspective on what “resilience” truly means for a family facing a flood?

Kareff: Having lived and worked for the United Nations in some of the world’s most flood-prone countries, I’ve witnessed first-hand how the lack of historical data can lead to underinvestment in risk reduction. Tools like SatGPT and other digital innovations are not silver bullets, but they help close this gap by converting geospatial data into actionable insights – quickly and more accessibly – to guide communities to prepare and protect lives and livelihoods.

The conversation with Kareff May Rafisura underscores a pivotal shift in disaster risk management: from reactive recovery to intelligent, data-driven preparedness. SatGPT represents more than a technological achievement; it is a practical instrument of empowerment, ensuring that from the finance minister to the rural community leader, the best available knowledge informs the decisions that save lives and safeguard futures. In the fragile balance between human vulnerability and environmental force, such tools are not just helpful, they are essential. The future of resilience in the Asia-Pacific is being written today, not in the aftermath of disaster, but in the proactive, thoughtful application of innovation like SatGPT.

Hurricane Melissa, which has been barrelling towards Jamaica, is expected to be the most powerful hurricane to ever make a direct hit on the island.

The hurricane intensified on Monday into a Category 5 storm, the most powerful on the Saffir-Simpson scale, with wind speeds exceeding 252km/h (157mph). It was expected to make landfall on Tuesday morning, according to the National Hurricane Center (NHC) in the United States. It said the storm will cause “destructive winds” and “catastrophic flooding”, which it forecast to worsen throughout the day and night.

Jamaica’s Meteorological Service added: “Life-threatening storm surge, accompanied by large and destructive waves, is likely along the south coast of Jamaica late Monday through Tuesday morning.”

How did Hurricane Melissa form?

Melissa originated as a cluster of thunderstorms off the coast of West Africa. It travelled west and evolved into a depression. On October 21, it reached tropical storm status.

Over the weekend, Melissa became a Category 4 storm as it made its way west through the Caribbean Sea.

Melissa is the 13th hurricane of the 2025 Atlantic hurricane season, which runs from June 1 to November 30. On average, the Atlantic basin experiences about seven hurricanes and three major hurricanes each year. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in the US predicted an above-normal Atlantic hurricane season this year with 13 to 18 named storms.

This is the third Category 5 hurricane of the season after Hurricanes Erin and Humberto.

Authorities use the Saffir-Simpson hurricane wind scale to classify storms. The scale divides hurricanes into five categories based on their sustained wind speeds.

The highest is Category 5, which means a storm that has a sustained wind speed of 252km/h (157mph) or higher. Category 5 storms usually bring “catastrophic damage”, according to the NHC.

How has Melissa progressed? When and where will it hit Jamaica?

In anticipation of the hurricane, residents in Jamaica have been told to protect their homes with sandbags and boards, and to stock up on essentials.

The NHC said hurricane-force winds will extend up to 45km (30 miles) from Melissa’s centre and tropical storm-force winds will extend up to 315km (195 miles) from it.

Here is how the storm has progressed so far:

Monday, 7am in Jamaica (12:00 GMT)

On Monday morning, Melissa was upgraded to a Category 5 hurricane as it moved northwest in the Caribbean.

Tuesday, 1am (06:00 GMT)

Melissa will likely make landfall soon after this time. The NHC said because the storm is moving slowly – at 8km/h (5mph) – it will cause more damage.

“This extreme rainfall potential, owing to the slow motion, is going to create a catastrophic event here for Jamaica,” NHC Deputy Director Jamie Rhome said.

Melissa is expected to bring rainfall of 381mm to 762mm (15 to 30 inches) to portions of Jamaica and additional rainfall of 203mm to 406mm (8 to 16 inches) for southern Hispaniola through Wednesday with rainfall totals of 1,016mm (40 inches) possible. Catastrophic flash flooding and numerous landslides are likely.

Wednesday, 1pm (18:00 GMT)

Melissa is forecast to pass over Cuba by Wednesday before moving through the Greater Antilles and out into the Atlantic.

It is predicted to weaken to Category 3 by the time it reaches Cuba.

What is the latest on the ground?

Jamaican Prime Minister Andrew Holness said: “I know that there are many Jamaicans who are anxious, who are very concerned, and rightfully so. You should be concerned.

“But the best way to address anxiety and any nervousness and concern is to be prepared.”

Jamaica’s Meteorological Service has advised small craft operators and fishermen on the cays and banks to remain in safe harbour until wind and sea conditions return to normal

“Leaving the island before the hurricane arrives is not an option,” it said. The main airports – Kingston and Montego Bay – are closed. Kingston’s airport is warning: “Passengers, contact your airline for rebooking. DO NOT go to the airport.”

Warnings have also been put in place for parts of Haiti, the Dominican Republic and eastern Cuba, where Melissa is expected to cause similar damage.

Jamaica’s history of hurricanes

According to the NHC, Jamaica has experienced only one Category 4 storm, Hurricane Gilbert in 1988. It was the most destructive storm in Jamaica’s history and killed at least 45 people.

In October 2012, Hurricane Sandy was the first to make landfall on the island since Gilbert. It hit as a Category 1 storm.

In 2024, Hurricane Beryl, a Category 5 storm, brushed the southern coast of Jamaica and caused heavy winds and rain and damaged buildings. It also caused the deaths of four people.

EXPLAINER

Satellite imagery shows Israel holds about 40 active military positions beyond the yellow line.

Satellite imagery analysis by Al Jazeera’s fact-checking agency Sanad shows that the Israeli army holds about 40 active military positions in the part of the Gaza Strip outside the yellow line, the invisible boundary established under the first phase of the ceasefire to which its troops had to move, according to the deal.

The images also show that Israel is upgrading several of these facilities, which help it maintain its occupation of 58 percent of Gaza even after the pullback by troops to the yellow line.

While the majority of sites are concentrated in southern Gaza, every governorate hosts at least one military position. Some sites are built on bases established during the war, while others are newly constructed. The total number of sites in each governorate is:

• North Gaza: 9
• Gaza City: 6
• Deir el-Balah: 1
• Khan Younis: 11
• Rafah: 13

One of the most prominent military points in Gaza City is located on top of al-Muntar Hill in the Shujayea neighbourhood of Gaza City. A comparison of images between September 21 and October 14 shows the base being paved and asphalted.

Where is the invisible yellow line?

Since the ceasefire took effect about two weeks ago, nearly 100 Palestinians have been killed in Israeli attacks across the Strip, with some attacks occurring near the yellow line.

On October 18, Israeli forces killed 11 members of the Abu Shaaban family in the Zeitoun neighbourhood of Gaza City, according to Gaza’s Civil Defence. Seven children and three women were among those killed when the Israeli military fired on the vehicle as the family attempted to return home to inspect it.

The Israeli military said soldiers had fired at a “suspicious vehicle” that had crossed the so-called yellow line. With no physical markers for the line, however, many Palestinians cannot determine the location of this invisible boundary. Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz has since said the army will install visual signs to indicate the line’s location.

In the first ceasefire phase, Israel retains control of more than half of the Gaza Strip, with areas beyond the yellow line still under its military presence. This has blocked residents of Beit Lahiya, Beit Hanoon, the neighbourhoods of Shujayea, Tuffah, Zeitoun, most of Khan Younis, and all of Rafah City from returning home.

What are the next phases of Trump’s 20-point Gaza plan?

According to the 20-point plan announced by United States President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on September 29 – developed without any Palestinian input – Israel is to withdraw its forces in three phases, as shown on an accompanying crude map, with each phase marked in a different colour:

• Initial withdrawal (yellow line): In the first phase, Israeli forces pulled back to the line designated in yellow on the map. Hamas has released all living Israeli captives that were in Gaza, and most of the dead bodies of captives who passed away in the enclave.
• Second withdrawal (red line): During the second phase, an International Stabilisation Force (ISF) will be mobilised to oversee security and support Palestinian policing, while Israeli forces are to retreat further to the line marked in red, reducing their direct presence in Gaza.
• Third withdrawal (security buffer zone): In the final phase, Israeli forces are to pull back to a designated “security buffer zone”, leaving a limited portion of Gaza under Israeli military control, while an international administrative body supervises governance and a transitional period.

Even after the third withdrawal phase, Palestinians will be confined to an area which is smaller than before the war, continuing a pattern of Israel’s control over Gaza and its people.

Many questions remain about how the plan will be implemented, the exact boundaries of Palestinian territory, the timing and scope of Israeli withdrawals, the role of the ISF, and the long-term implications for Palestinians across Gaza and the occupied West Bank.

The plan is also silent on whether Israel gets to continue its aerial and sea blockade of Gaza, which has been in place for the past 18 years.

The 2025 Nobel Peace Prize is scheduled to be announced on Friday, October 10, at 11:00 am local time in Oslo, Norway (09:00 GMT).

The announcement comes from the Norwegian Nobel Institute on behalf of the all-Norwegian, five-member Nobel Committee, appointed by the Norwegian Parliament and responsible for selecting and presenting the laureates.

Nominations for this year’s award closed on January 31, and the selection process remains shrouded in secrecy.

A brief history of the Nobel Prize

The Nobel Prizes are named after Alfred Nobel (1833–1896), a Swedish chemist, engineer and industrialist best known for inventing dynamite, an explosive that transformed the modern world through advances in construction and mining, but which was also responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of people in wars.

Motivated by a desire to shape his legacy, Nobel left a multimillion-dollar fortune to fund annual prizes, awarded to those who “have conferred the greatest benefit to humankind” in the preceding year.

The first Nobel Prizes were awarded in 1901 for outstanding achievement in the fields of physics, chemistry, medicine, literature and peace.

In 1968, Sweden’s central bank, Sveriges Riksbank, established the Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel, expanding the categories to six.

So far this year, four Nobel Prizes have been announced. After the Peace Prize on October 10, the final award for economics will be revealed on October 13.

Who can be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize?

The Nobel Peace Prize is meant to recognise individuals and organisations that have made exceptional efforts to promote peace, resolve conflicts and advance human rights.

The 2025 Nobel Peace Prize has 338 nominees, including 244 individuals and 94 organisations, up from 286 candidates in 2024.

Nominations are kept confidential, and committee members are prohibited from discussing their decisions for 50 years. Only the nominators themselves may choose to disclose their submissions.

While a person cannot nominate themselves, they may be nominated multiple times by others.

This year, United States President Donald Trump has become a focus of Nobel Peace Prize nominations. Trump, who has said, “Everyone says I should get the Nobel Peace Prize,” has received several endorsements: Israel, Cambodia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Pakistan, even as many have questioned his credentials.

While many well-known figures have been nominated in the past but never received the Nobel Peace Prize, the names most frequently searched in the Nobel nomination database are Adolf Hitler, Mahatma Gandhi and Joseph Stalin.

These individuals represent vastly different legacies: Hitler was nominated in 1939 as a satirical gesture, Gandhi was nominated multiple times between 1937 and 1948 but never awarded, and Stalin was nominated in 1945 and 1948 for his role in ending World War II.

Who has received the Nobel Peace Prize?

As of 2024, the Nobel Peace Prize has been awarded 105 times to 142 laureates – 111 individuals and 31 organisations.

Among the individual recipients, 92 are men and 19 are women.

The youngest laureate to date is Malala Yousafzai, who received the award at the age of 17 in 2014, while the oldest is Joseph Rotblat, honoured at 86 for his work against nuclear weapons.

The International Committee of the Red Cross holds the record for the most Peace Prizes, having been recognised three times, followed by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), which has won twice.

Geographically, Europe accounts for the largest share of laureates at 45 percent, followed by North America (20 percent), Asia (16 percent), Africa (9 percent) and South America (3 percent).

In addition, United Nations organisations represent about 7 percent of all Nobel Peace Prize recipients.

When was the Peace Prize not awarded?

The Nobel Peace Prize has not been awarded every year.

It was skipped on 19 occasions, specifically in 1914–1916, 1918, 1923, 1924, 1928, 1932, 1939–1943, 1948, 1955–1956, 1966–1967, and 1972, usually due to war or the absence of a suitable candidate.

According to the statutes of the Nobel Foundation, if none of the candidates’ work is deemed significant enough, the prize may be withheld and the prize money carried forward to the next year. If it still cannot be awarded, the amount is transferred to the Foundation’s restricted funds.

One notable instance came in 1948, the year Mahatma Gandhi was assassinated. Gandhi had been nominated several times – in 1937, 1938, 1939, 1947, and again in 1948 – for his nonviolent leadership of India’s freedom movement. In 1948, the Nobel Committee chose not to award the prize, citing “no suitable living candidate”, widely seen as an implicit tribute to him.

Has anyone refused the award?

The Nobel Peace Prize has only been refused on one occasion.

In 1973, Vietnamese politician Le Duc Tho and US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger were awarded the prize for their efforts to end the Vietnam War.

Tho declined the award, citing the ongoing conflict in Vietnam.

The Vietnam War lasted from the late 1950s to 1975, ending with the fall of Saigon on April 30, 1975, and killed millions of people.

Has the award ever been shared?

Yes, very often. Out of the 105 awards presented so far:

• 71 prizes were given to a single laureate,
• 31 prizes were shared between two laureates, and
• 3 prizes were shared among three laureates.

According to the Nobel Foundation’s statutes, a prize can be divided equally between two recipients or shared among up to three if their work is considered to merit the award jointly. The prize cannot be divided among more than three people.

Who are all the winners of the Nobel Peace Prize?

The table below lists all Nobel Peace Prize laureates from 1901 to 2024, along with their country of origin.

EXPLAINER

In the first phase of the ceasefire plan, Israel will remain in control of nearly 60 percent of the Gaza Strip.

In the early hours of Wednesday morning in Gaza, United States President Donald Trump announced that Hamas and Israel had agreed on the first phase of his ceasefire and captive-exchange plan.

In a post on his Truth Social platform, Trump stated : “ALL the hostages will be released very soon, and Israel will withdraw their troops to an agreed upon line.”

The “agreed upon line” refers to a vague map shared by Trump on October 4, showing an initial Israeli withdrawal zone marked in yellow, later dubbed the “yellow line” by Trump officials.

After negotiations, Israel has agreed to the initial withdrawal line, which we have shown to, and shared with, Hamas. When Hamas confirms, the Ceasefire will be IMMEDIATELY effective, the Hostages and Prisoner Exchange will begin, and we will create the conditions for the next… pic.twitter.com/0VfaMSOqQ1

— Trump Truth Social Posts On X (@TrumpTruthOnX) October 4, 2025

By Sunday or Monday, Hamas is expected to release about 20 living captives, along with the bodies of about 25 others, while Israel will free some 2,000 Palestinians detained in Israeli prisons. Final details have yet to be confirmed.

Where is the initial withdrawal ‘yellow line’?

Israel currently controls more than 80 percent of Gaza’s 365sq km (141sq miles) area, including areas under forced evacuation orders or designated by Israel as military zones.

Once the deal is signed, fighting would be expected to end immediately, and Israeli forces would withdraw to the line marked in yellow.

The final map has not yet been published following negotiations in Egypt, but based on the October 4 map, the area inside the yellow line represents approximately 155sq km (60sq miles), leaving about 210sq km (81sq miles), or 58 percent of Gaza, under Israeli control, as verified by Al Jazeera’s Sanad team.

Most notably, Israeli forces will remain in several previously populous Palestinian neighbourhoods, including:

• Beit Lahiya
• Beit Hanoon
• Parts of Gaza City’s Shujayea, Tuffah and Zeitoun
• More than half of the Khan Younis governorate
• Nearly all of the Rafah governorate

In addition, Israel will continue to control all crossings in and out of Gaza, including the Rafah crossing with Egypt.

Hundreds of thousands of Palestinians have been displaced multiple times throughout two years of war and are desperate to return to their homes, but the continued Israeli presence in these areas makes that unlikely in the near term.

What is supposed to happen next?

According to the 20-point plan announced by Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on September 29 – developed without any Palestinian input – Israel is to withdraw its forces in three phases, as shown on an accompanying crude map, with each phase marked in a different colour:

• Initial withdrawal (yellow line): In the first phase, Hamas is expected to release all remaining Israeli captives, both living and deceased, while Israeli forces pull back to the line designated in yellow on the map.
• Second withdrawal (red line): During the second phase, an International Stabilization Force (ISF) will be mobilised to oversee security and support Palestinian policing, while Israeli forces retreat further to the line marked in red, reducing their direct presence in Gaza.
• Third withdrawal (security buffer zone): In the final phase, Israeli forces are to pull back to a designated “security buffer zone”, leaving a limited portion of Gaza under Israeli military control, while an international administrative body supervises governance and a transitional period.

Even after the third withdrawal phase, Palestinians will be confined to an area which is smaller than before the war, continuing a pattern of Israel’s control over Gaza and its people.

Many questions remain about how the plan will be implemented, the exact boundaries of Palestinian territory, the timing and scope of Israeli withdrawals, the role of the International Stabilization Force, and the long-term implications for Palestinians across both Gaza and the occupied West Bank.

Californians were mailed inaccurate voter guides about the November special election asking them whether to redraw congressional district boundaries, according to the secretary of state’s office. The state agency announced that it would mail postcards correcting the information to voters, which is likely to cost millions of dollars.

“Accuracy in voter information is essential to maintaining public trust in California’s elections,” said Secretary of State Shirley Weber. “We are taking swift, transparent action to ensure voters receive correct information. This mislabeling does not affect proposed districts, ballots, or the election process; it is solely a labeling error. Every eligible Californian can have full confidence that their vote will be counted and their representation is secure.”

The voter guide was sent to California registered voters about Proposition 50, a ballot measure championed by Gov. Gavin Newsom and other state Democrats to try to boost the number of Democrats in Congress. The proposal was in response to Texas and other GOP-led states trying to increase the number of Republicans in the House at the behest of President Trump to enable him to continue to enact his agenda during his final two years in office.

The special election will take place on Nov. 4, but voters will begin receiving mail ballots in early October.

On page 11 of the voter guide, a proposed and hotly contested congressional district that includes swaths of the San Fernando and Antelope valleys and is currently represented by Rep. George Whitesides (D-Agua Dulce) was mislabeled as Congressional District 22. However, on more detailed maps in the voter guide, the district is properly labeled as District 27.

“It is unfortunate that it was incorrect on the statewide map in the voter guide,” said Paul Mitchell, the Democratic redistricting expert who drew the new proposed congressional districts. “But the important thing is it is correct in the L.A. County and the Southern California maps,” allowing people who live in the region to accurately see their new proposed congressional district.

There are 23 million registered voters in California, but it’s unclear whether the postcards will be mailed to each registered voter or to households of registered voters. The secretary of state’s office did not respond to a request for comment Tuesday evening.

Even if the corrective notices are mailed to voter households rather than individual voters, the postage alone is likely to be millions of dollars, in addition to the cost of printing the postcards. The special election, which the Legislature called for in August, was already expected to cost taxpayers $284 million.

Opponents of Proposition 50 seized upon the error as proof that the measure was hastily placed on the ballot.

“When politicians force the Secretary of State to rush an election, mistakes are bound to happen,” said Amy Thoma, a spokesperson for one of the campaigns opposing the effort. “It’s unfortunate that this one will cost taxpayers millions of dollars.”

Former state GOP Chairwoman Jessica Millan Patterson, who leads another anti-Proposition 50 campaign supported by congressional Republicans, added that such mistakes were inevitable given how quickly the ballot measure was written and the special election was called.

“The Prop. 50 power grab was rushed through so fast by greedy politicians that glaring mistakes were made, raising serious questions about what else was missed,” she said. “California taxpayers are already on the hook for a nearly $300 million special election, and now they’re paying to fix mistakes too. Californians deserve transparency, not backroom politics. Secretary Weber should release the cost of issuing this correction immediately.”

The campaign supporting the ballot measure did not respond to requests for comment.