A Sacramento man once described by a judge as “the monster parents fear the most” seemed destined to spend the rest of his life in prison after he was convicted of 16 counts of kidnapping and child molestation in 1999.
Instead he is now set to go free after being granted elderly parole — much to the anger and horror of some of his victims, as well as the prosecutor who oversaw his case.
“He shouldn’t be breathing the same air that we’re breathing at all,” one victim, who was kidnapped and assaulted when she was just 4 years old, told The Times in an interview. “I disagree with him getting paroled out because he’s a horrible person. That man is a monster.”
David Allen Funston approached children playing outside their homes in the Sacramento suburbs and used candy and toys to lure them into his vehicle in 1995 and 1996, prosecutors said.
Following his conviction, he was sentenced to 20 years and 8 months in prison, as well as three consecutive sentences of 25 years to life. Now 64, he is incarcerated at the California Institution for Men in Chino.
Under California’s elderly parole program, inmates are generally eligible for a parole suitability hearing if they are over 50 years old and have been incarcerated for at least 20 continuous years. The individual can then be released if the parole board determines they do not pose an unreasonable risk to public safety.
Funston was initially denied elderly parole in a May 2022 hearing, according to records from the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. However, he was granted parole at a board hearing in September, and that decision was recently upheld in a review Wednesday by the full board, CDCR records show.
CDCR did not respond to a request for comment Friday on Funston’s estimated release date or on the Board of Parole Hearings’ rationale for deeming him suitable for elderly parole.
But those involved in Funston’s case struggle to understand how the program’s criteria could apply to him.
“A lot of people get out of prison and I don’t scream about it, but this is one I’m screaming about,” said former Sacramento County Dist. Atty. Anne Marie Schubert, who prosecuted the case against Funston while serving as a deputy district attorney.
Funston used a Barbie doll to lure the victim who spoke with The Times into his vehicle in Foothill Farms in 1995. He then took her to a house, bathed with her, put her on a bed, held a knife to her throat and threatened to kill her if she told her family, prosecutors said. He performed multiple sex acts on her, causing her to bleed.
“He’s one sick individual,” the victim said. “What if he gets out and and tries to find his old victims and wants to kill us?”
The Times generally does not name victims of sexual assault.
Schubert used DNA evidence found on one of the victims to help prove that Funston had kidnapped and abused her. Schubert later rose to prominence for her role in the case against Joseph James DeAngelo — also known as the Golden State Killer — where she pioneered the use of DNA evidence in securing cold case convictions.
Although the DeAngelo case attracted national attention, Funston’s always loomed large in her mind.
“It was the worst child sexual predator [case] I’ve ever prosecuted, hands down,” she said.
Eight children — seven girls and one boy, all of whom were under the age of 7 when they were victimized — testified in the case against Funston, according to reporting from the Sacramento Bee. Before these offenses, he had also been convicted of sexually assaulting a woman in Colorado.
In one incident in 1995, prosecutors said Funston used candy to lure a 5-year-old girl into his car in Highland Hills, took her up into the hills and assaulted her.
“He beat her. He took her underwear and shoved it down her throat because she was screaming. He then raped her to the point that she has vaginal trauma,” Schubert said.
Afterward, Schubert said, he dumped the girl on the side of Highway 50, where she was found crying and walking barefoot.
In November 1995, Funston took a 5-year-old boy into some bushes pulled down his pants, and orally copulated him, prosecutors said. Four days later, he kidnapped two sisters, ages 4 and 5, from outside their grandmother’s apartment by offering them candy and a ride home. A woman witnessed the girls getting in his car and called the Sacramento County Sheriff’s Office.
“He dropped us off after driving us a few hundred feet and we got out of the car, went home and there was already a sheriff questioning my mom,” one of the sisters told The Times. “We were the lucky ones. There were other victims who were not so lucky.”
That victim said she believes granting Funston elderly parole is “a huge disservice to all Californians,” saying that his sexual attraction to young children is “an illness that doesn’t go away.”
Schubert sent a letter to CDCR on Friday asking that Funston be referred for screening as a sexually violent predator. Under California’s sexually violent predator program, offenders who are eligible to be released from state prison can be civilly committed to a state hospital and prevented from being released into the public.
“The pattern of behavior demonstrates predatory intent, multiple victims, use of force, threats of lethal violence, and sexual offenses against prepubescent children,” she wrote, “precisely the category of offender for whom the SVP Act was enacted.”
In a rare action against a top administrator, UCLA on Tuesday fired its chief financial officer after officials said he inaccurately described the campus deficit, which has come under scrutiny by faculty leaders amid growing operation costs, attacks by the Trump administration and weaker-than-promised state funding.
Vice Chancellor and Chief Financial Officer Stephen Agostini, who had overseen UCLA’s $11-billion budget since May 2024, “will no longer serve in his role, effective immediately,” Chancellor Julio Frenk wrote in a brief campuswide message, announcing an interim appointment and a national search for a replacement.
The abrupt change came days after Agostini gave an interview to the Daily Bruin student newspaper saying the campus had “financial management flaws and failures” predating his arrival, leading to what he said was a $425-million deficit. In the interview, Agostini blamed financial woes on faculty and staff raises, academic departments’ requests for new positions and expanded programs, and UCLA athletics, which has run in the red for multiple years.
Agostini suggested that UCLA’s annual financial reports going back to 2002 were incorrect, saying he saw “very serious errors” — a charge UCLA officials deny. UCLA’s last posted financial report covers the 2022-23 fiscal year.
Agostini did not respond to requests for comment from The Times.
In his campus letter, Frenk did not state a reason for Agostini’s dismissal.
A source with knowledge of the situation told The Times that the firing was tied to Agostini’s public statements regarding the budget and long-term financial management, which were made without Frenk’s approval. The person asked to have their name withheld because they were not authorized to speak to the media about administrative matters.
In a separate statement, Mary Osako, UCLA’s vice chancellor for strategic communications, dismissed Agostini’s comments directly.
“Recent claims of a projected $425-million deficit for UCLA’s fiscal year 2025–26 are inaccurate,” Osako said. “The figure includes funds that are not committed for expenditure, including items that have been proposed or discussed but not approved. As such, it does not represent the university’s projected operating deficit.”
Osako said the deficit was “substantially lower,” but did not say by how much. A UCLA spokesperson on Tuesday also declined to release a deficit number.
Osako said budget challenges were caused not by academic programs but instead “reflect broader institutional and external factors affecting higher education.”
“The university’s financial strategy has evolved under successive campus leaders in response to changing economic conditions, state funding levels and operational priorities,” she said. Also, “in spite of current strains, UCLA has the financial strength to maintain its excellence while adapting to new financial realities and opportunities.”
She also said allegations suggesting long-term financial mismanagement were incorrect. “Chancellor Frenk is confident in the integrity of UCLA’s leadership, past and present, and their financial oversight and decision-making processes. Statements suggesting otherwise are unfounded and do not reflect his or UCLA’s position.”
Financial challenges are common at U.S. universities, which have grappled with shifting enrollment, rising costs and funding pressures as well as lingering effects of pandemic-era financial declines. Harvard, which has faced major federal funding clawbacks since last year, recently said it has a $113-million deficit. UC Santa Cruz — where the operating budget is a fraction of UCLA’s — recently reported a $95-million deficit.
UCLA leaders say the university is facing increasing costs and unpredictable state and federal support — including $584 million in federal research grant suspensions from the Trump administration that are currently blocked in court. The UC initiated a systemwide freeze on most hires last year and UCLA has made several cuts since then.
At UCLA, changes include layoffs at the extension school, and reduced courseloads or a lack of contract renewals among some part-time faculty. The cuts are not uniform, with areas of the campus scaling back in different ways. Last year, the math department reported cutting paid graders and instituting reduced hours for teaching assistants. Lower-enrollment and less commonly taught foreign-language courses have also faced reductions. Faculty in other departments said their travel and conference budgets were reduced.
UCLA, which is preparing to host the Olympic Village in 2028 and has invested tens of millions into athletics since joining the Big Ten, has also faced internal criticism for heavy spending on sports programs that have run in the red.
A UCLA Academic Senate report released last month called for a “phased plan toward break-even or substantially reduced subsidy” for university money funneled toward athletics. The senate represents thousands of faculty members.
Overall, the report said there was “incomplete data” and “major gaps in transparency” over financial matters.
Speaking Tuesday, Megan McEvoy, a professor in the Institute for Society and Genetics who chairs the Academic Senate, said she was, “heartened that Chancellor Frenk took seriously the ongoing and serious concerns raised on campus about the now-former CFO.”
But McEvoy said she and her colleagues still had questions.
“Senate faculty need full, trustworthy accounting of decisions and policies that caused the current campus budget deficit,” she said. “Without accountability, we are concerned that the administration may repeat the same sort of decisions that led to the deficit. Senate faculty want to understand how the administration will balance the budget in ways that preserve the academic mission. The recent allegation that we can’t trust prior financial statements is worrisome, if true.”
Anna Markowitz, president of the UCLA Faculty Assn. — an independent campus group that sued the Trump administration over its $1.2-billion UCLA settlement demand — said she had similar concerns.
“We want to know how much money has been paid to subsidize athletics; on policing costs that have no clear goals or accountability structures; on real estate purchases; administrative consultants; and for high-level leadership who did not take action last year when our school was under grave threat,” said Markowitz, an associate professor in UCLA’s School of Education and Information Studies.
UCLA is not the only Southern California campus to face financial hurdles. Last year, USC laid off roughly 1,000 employees as it faced down a $230-million deficit. Speaking to The Times this month, USC President Beong-Soo Kim said the university was in a “much stronger financial position now” and that he was “optimistic” about its financial outlook.
Authorities served a search warrant at a home in Tucson on Friday night in connection with the disappearance of Nancy Guthrie, who investigators say was kidnapped from her nearby home 13 days ago.
A SWAT team converged on a house about two miles from Guthrie’s Arizona residence and removed two people from inside, law enforcement sources told The Times.
A man and a woman complied with orders to exit the home, News Nation reported. It is unclear what role, if any, the people may have played in Guthrie’s disappearance, which has flummoxed investigators for almost two weeks.
A Pima County Sheriff’s Department spokesperson confirmed late Friday that there was “law enforcement activity underway” at a home near E Orange Grove Road and N. First Avenue related to the Guthrie case, but declined to share additional information.
The FBI did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Around midnight, federal agents and sheriff investigators focused their attention on a silver Range Rover SUV parked outside a restaurant about two miles away from the home that was being searched. After taking photographs of the vehicle, agents opened the trunk of the SUV using a tarp to block onlookers view inside the vehicle, video shows.
It is not clear what, if anything, was found.
Investigators got their first major break in the case Tuesday with the release of footage showing an armed man wearing a balaclava, gloves and a backpack approaching the front door of Guthrie’s home and tampering with a Nest camera at 1:47 a.m. the night she was abducted.
“Today” host Savannah Guthrie with her mother, Nancy, in 2023.
(Nathan Congleton / NBC via Getty Images)
Later Tuesday, authorities detained a man at a traffic stop in Rio Rico, a semirural community about 12 miles north of the U.S.-Mexico border, in connection with the investigation. Deputies and FBI forensics experts and agents searched his family’s home overnight but did not locate Guthrie. The man was released hours later and has denied any involvement in her disappearance. The Times is not naming him because he has not been arrested or accused of a crime.
Nancy Guthrie, the 84-year-old mother of “Today” host Savannah Guthrie, was discovered missing Feb. 1 after she didn’t show up to a friend’s house to watch a church service. She was taken from her home without her heart medication, and it’s unclear how long she can survive without it.
A day after Guthrie disappeared, news outlets received identical ransom notes that investigators treated as legitimate. Days later, a note was sent directly to the Guthrie family, allegedly from a man living in Hawthorne, that authorities say was an impostor.
Another ransom note was sent to a television station in Arizona last week.
Sources told The Times that authorities have no proof the person who authored the ransom notes has Guthrie. But they also said the Feb. 2 note felt credible because it included details about a specific damaged piece of property and the placement of an accessory in the home that had not been made public.
On Friday, TMZ said it received a letter from someone claiming to know the identity of the person who abducted Guthrie and demanding the $100,000 FBI reward in bitcoin. The person wrote they don’t trust the FBI, which is why they’re sending the communication through TMZ, the website’s founder, Harvey Levin, told CNN.
“The manhunt of the main individual that can give you all the answers be prepared to go international,” the letter reads, according to Levin.
Authorities have released limited details about other evidence in the case.
A woman walks her dog past a Pima county sheriff’s vehicle parked in front of Nancy Guthrie’s home on Tuesday, Feb. 10, 2026 in Tucson, Ariz.
(Ty ONeil / Associated Press)
However, the Pima County Sheriff’s Department said Friday that investigators located several gloves, including some found about two miles from Guthrie’s home, that are being tested.
Authorities also found DNA evidence that does not belong to Guthrie or members of her family at her home. Investigators are working to identify whom the DNA belongs to, according to the sheriff’s department.
Staff writer Hannah Fry contributed to this report
A week after Nancy Guthrie was abducted from her Tucson home, investigators spent the weekend searching at least two residences as more details emerged about a ransom note.
The frantic search comes as Nancy’s daughter, NBC News anchor Savannah Guthrie, issued a second video appeal to the kidnappers. Sources told The Times the ransom note felt credible because it included details about a specific damaged property and the placement of an accessory in the home.
The Times has not reviewed the note, but sources said it sought millions of dollars for her return.
On Saturday, Savannah Guthrie made a new video plea to the kidnappers of her mother, saying “we will pay” for her safe return.
“We received your message, and we understand,” Guthrie said in the new video posted Saturday afternoon. She sat next to her brother and sister. “We beg you now to return our mother to us so that we can celebrate with her. This is the only way we will have peace. This is very valuable to us, and we will pay.”
Authorities were at Nancy Guthrie’s home again this weekend as well as at the property of another family member, sources said. They also removed Guthrie’s car from her home. The sources spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to comment publicly.
Guthrie was last seen by her family just after 9:45 p.m. last Saturday, which officials said matched with when her garage door opened and closed that night.
About four hours later, at 1:47 a.m., officials said her doorbell camera disconnected. An empty frame for the camera had been previously noted at her home.
Then at 2:12 a.m., the security camera software at Guthrie’s home detected a person — or an animal — on one of the home’s cameras, but Pima County Sheriff Chris Nanos said they have not been able to recover that footage and don’t know which camera recorded the movement.
About 15 minutes later, at 2:28 a.m., Nancy’s pacemaker app shows a disconnect from the phone, Nanos said. That appears to be exactly when she left her home, as her phone was left behind.
Her family went to check on her at home just before noon Sunday, after she hadn’t shown up for church. They found she was missing and almost immediately called 911, Nanos said.
There has been no “proof of life” offered by the abductors, officials said several days ago. But Nanos said Thursday officials believed she was still alive.
The letter, sent to TMZ and a local TV station in Tucson, contained a first deadline of 5 p.m. Thursday and a second demand with a Monday deadline, said Heith Janke, the special agent in charge of the FBI’s Phoenix division. He declined to say what, if anything, was requested at each deadline, or whether there was a threat if the deadlines weren’t met.
On Friday, the fifth day since Guthrie disappeared, Arizona news outlet KOLD reported it received a new note from the alleged abductor. The station did not report details from the new letter, but said that “the new note contains information the senders seem to think will prove to investigators they’re the same people who sent the first note.”
Nancy Guthrie‘s children have been trying to publicly communicate with the abductors.
Her son, Camron Guthrie, issued a video pleading with the kidnapper Thursday afternoon, around the time of the ransom letter’s first deadline.
“Whoever is out there holding our mother, we want to hear from you,” he said. “We haven’t heard anything directly. We need you to reach out and we need a way to communicate with you so we can move forward.”
Southern California Edison sued Los Angeles County, water agencies and two companies including SoCalGas Friday, saying their mistakes contributed to the deadly and destructive toll of last year’s Eaton wildfire.
Edison now faces hundreds of lawsuits by victims of the fire, which claim its transmission line started the devastating fire that killed at least 19 people and destroyed thousands of homes in Altadena. The cost of settling those lawsuits could be many billions of dollars.
Doug Dixon, an attorney who represents Edison in the fire litigation, told the Times that Edison filed the lawsuits “to ensure that all those who bear responsibility are at the table in this legal process.”
The utility’s two legal filings in L.A. County Superior Court paint a picture of sweeping mismanagement of the emergency response on the night of the fire.
Edison blames the county fire department, sheriff’s department and office of emergency management for their failure to warn Altadena residents west of Lake Avenue to evacuate.
The Times revealed last January that west Altadena never received evacuation warnings, and orders to evacuate came hours after flames and smoke threatened the community. All but one of the 19 who died in the Eaton fire were found in west Altadena.
Edison also sued L.A. County for failing to send fire trucks to the community. A Times investigation found that during a critical moment in the fire, only one county fire truck was west of Lake Avenue.
The electric company also filed suit against six water agencies, including Pasadena Water & Power, claiming there were insufficient water supplies available for firefighters.
“Compounding the unfolding disaster, the water systems servicing the areas impacted by the Eaton Fire failed as the fire spread, leaving firefighters and residents with no water to fight the fire,” the lawsuit states.
Another lawsuit aims at SoCalGas. Edison says the company failed to turn off gas lines after the fire started, making the disaster worse.
“SoCalGas did not begin widespread shutoffs for four days—until January 11, 2025—in the area affected by the Eaton Fire,” the complaint states. “In the meantime, the Eaton Fire continued to spread fueled by natural gas.”
“ The risks and deficiencies with SoCalGas’s system that led to it spreading the fire were long known to SoCalGas, and yet it nevertheless failed to adequately account for them in designing, building, and maintaining its system,” the complaint said. “The result was catastrophic.”
Edison also sued Genasys, a company that provides the county with emergency alert software.
In addition, the utility sued the county for failing to remove brush, which it claims made the fire hotter and spread faster, causing more damage.
In March, L.A. County filed suit against Edison, claiming that its transmission line sparked the blaze, requiring the county to incur tens of millions of dollars responding to the fire and its aftermath. The county is seeking compensation for destroyed infrastructure and parks, as well as for cleanup and recovery efforts, lost taxes and overtime for county workers.
Edison’s new cross claims will be heard in the consolidated Eaton fire case in Superior Court, which is also handling the lawsuit that the county and other public agencies have filed against the electric utility.
Officials from the county and water agencies, as well as from the two companies, could not be immediately reached.
The water agencies that Edison sued also include the Sierra Madre City Water Dept., Kinneloa Irrigation District, Rubio Canyon Land & Water Association, Las Flores Water Company and Lincoln Avenue Water Company.
The government investigation into the fire, which is being handled jointly by L.A. County Fire and the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, has not yet been released.
Edison has said that a leading theory is that its unused, century-old transmission line in Eaton Canyon somehow became re-energized on the night of Jan. 7, 2025 and sparked the blaze.
The fire roared through Altadena, burning 14,021 acres and destroying more than 9,400 homes and other structures.
The off-duty federal immigration agent who shot and killed a Los Angeles man on New Year’s Eve allegedly whipped his sons with a belt and made racist and homophobic remarks in the past, according to documents obtained by The Times.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Officer Brian Palacios shot Keith Porter Jr. late on Dec. 31 at a Northridge apartment complex, according to a sworn declaration submitted by attorney Michelle Diaz in a custody dispute between Palacios’ girlfriend and her ex-husband, which was made public Thursday.
The document alleges that Palacios is the shooter “based on information and belief,” citing records and testimony identifying him as an ICE agent who lives in the complex.
A review of court transcripts, proof of service documents and motions related to the custody battle shows Palacios is an ICE agent and confirms that he lives in a unit at the Village Pointe Apartments. The unit number reflects an apartment that is just a short distance from the location where neighbors say Porter was killed.
Stacie Halpern, an attorney representing Palacios, said her client acted in self-defense the night that Porterwas killed. She denied that he had ever made racist remarks and provided reports from the L.A. County Department of Children and Family Services and Los Angeles police that deemed the child abuse allegations to be “unfounded.”
No one answered the door at the apartment listed for Palacios on Friday. An LAPD spokesman declined to comment and a DCFS spokeswoman said she was barred from discussing the case by state law.
Friends and advocates say Porter — a 43-year-old Compton native and father of two — was firing a gun into the air to celebrate the new year on the night of his death.
Tricia McLaughlin, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s assistant secretary of public affairs, initially said a suspected “active shooter” was killed following an exchange of gunfire with an off-duty ICE agent. In her statement, McLaughlin said the agent “bravely responded to an active shooter situation at his apartment complex.”
McLaughlin did not address questions about the agent’s identity on Friday or the past allegations against him. Halpern said her client remained on-duty for ICE as of Friday afternoon.
Los Angeles police said no one else was injured in the incident.
Jamal Tooson, an attorney for Porter’s family, said in a statement: “Should this individual be confirmed as the person responsible for Keith’s death, based on his deeply disturbing past allegations it is unimaginable that any human being with a conscience on this earth could regard him as a hero.”
Later on Friday, Tooson suggested the killing was a racially motivated hate crime and said he was considering asking for California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta to launch an independent investigation.
A spokesperson for the L.A. County district attorney’s office said the incident is under investigation by the Justice System Integrity Division, which investigates killings by law enforcement officers.
A meeting of the Los Angeles Police Commission was packed last week with angry activists and residents, many of whom called for authorities to release the ICE agent’s name. Although the names of LAPD officers involved in fatal use-of-force incidents are normally made public within weeks, there is no such rule for federal agencies.
The document filed this week sought to temporarily bar Palacios’ girlfriend from seeing her daughter from her first marriage, based on the potential danger posed by the ICE agent’s alleged involvement in the shooting. According to L.A. County court orders reviewed by The Times, a judge barred Palacios from having any contact with the children from his previous marriage last February. That order was upheld last June, even after DCFS and LAPD dismissed the abuse allegations, the county court filings show.
“Palacios is presently prohibited by Court Order from being in the presence of the parties’ minor children because of his abusive conduct,” read the Thursday filing from Diaz, who represents the ex-husband of Palacios’ girlfriend. “There is a very valid concern that the stress of having shot and killed another man on 12/31/2025, and the ongoing aftermath, will materially and substantially impair Mother’s mental health, and impact her ability to provide a safe and stable parenting schedule for their youngest child.”
The fatal New Year’s Eve incident follows several others in recent weeks in which ICE agents have used deadly force against U.S. citizens.
Last week, ICE agent Jonathan Ross shot and killed 37-year-old Minneapolis woman Renee Nicole Good. President Trump and other federal officials have accused Good of obstructing immigration efforts and said she tried to hit Ross with her car, but cellphone video from the scene shows Good was trying to drive away and that Ross shot at her through the driver’s side window. The killing has drawn widespread condemnation and protests; Trump administration officials have staunchly defended the agent and accused Good of weaponizing her vehicle in “an act of domestic terrorism.”
Unlike the Minnesota incident, which was captured on multiple videos, no recordings have surfaced from the confrontation that led to Porter’s killing.
It remains unclear exactly what happened in Northridge around 10:40 p.m. on New Year’s Eve. Palacios was off duty, so there is no body camera video. None of the building’s security cameras captured the shooting either, according to a message from the property management company.
Two law enforcement officials, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing investigation, told The Times that Porter was found in possession of a rifle.
One of those officials said investigators also found evidence of two bullet impacts behind where the agent would have been standing at the time of the shooting, which would support federal authorities claims that he was fired upon by Porter. The official also said the agent identified himself as law enforcement before opening fire. Halpern also said Friday that there is evidence that Porter shot at Palacios during the encounter.
Asked about those issues on Friday, Tooson maintained that no witnesses have come forward to corroborate claims that the agent faced any danger that night.
Porter’s friends and family have argued he was firing a gun in the air to celebrate the new year. Los Angeles police officials have warned people against the practice for years, and doing so is a felony. Still, Porter’s supporters contend that the agent overreacted and should have waited for the LAPD to respond.
Halpern said those outraged over the killing have been far too quick to dismiss the danger that Porter posed by shooting a gun in a dense residential area.
“This person was shooting a firearm in his community. What goes up must come down,” she said, alluding to past incidents where celebratory gunshots have injured bystanders.
Palacios had an “absolute right to self-defense,” she said.
Last year, a Los Angeles County judge barred Palacios from being around his girlfriend’s children from a previous marriage in the wake of allegations that he had whipped his biological sons with a belt, according to a transcript of a 2025 hearing.
Through an attorney, the children also accused Palacios of using homophobic slurs and making racist remarks about Black and Latino people, according to a court transcript. Palacios also referred to the children’s biological father as an “illegal alien,” according to the allegations contained in court records.
Omar Escorcia, the ex-husband of Palacios’ girlfriend, told The Times that Palacios routinely made disparaging remarks about Latinos before and after custody hearings, referring to them as “wetbacks.” Halpern denied her client made any such comments.
Escorcia also described an alleged incident in which Palacios showed up to a youth soccer game carrying a gun, which was visible to other parents and left several people upset and concerned for their kids’ safety.
“What law enforcement officer who is mindful of gun safety, shows up to a children’s sporting event with a gun that is not holstered, but stuck in their waistband, and they’re holding a toddler?” asked Escorcia’s attorney, Diaz, according to a transcript of a 2025 court hearing. “There are all kinds of red flags here.”
If you’re planning to visit one of the 11 most popular national parks in the U.S. — two of which are in California — staff might ask a question that could be disquieting: Are you an American citizen?
A spokesperson for the Department of the Interior said that the question is being posed only to confirm whether the visitor will have to pay a nonresident fee — which is hefty.
The updates to visitor verification and fees was announced in November by the Trump administration, which said that beginning Jan. 1 it would implement “America-first” entry fee policies.
“U.S. residents will continue to enjoy affordable pricing, while nonresidents will pay a higher rate to help support the care and maintenance of America’s parks,” according to the announcement.
When you present your pass, or if you purchase one at a park entrance, staff must ask for your identification and determine your citizenship status.
According to an internal National Park Service directive obtained by the Washington Post, staffers are instructed to ask visiting groups, “How many people visiting are not U.S. citizens or residents?” The document also stated that “the fee collector does not need to check the identification of every visitor.”
The Times reached out to staff at Yosemite and Sequoia & Kings Canyon national parks for comment; both parks referred questions to the National Park Service.
When is Park Service staff checking a visitor’s citizenship status?
You will only be asked your citizenship status, by way of ID verification, when buying or using an annual pass, officials say.
“National Park Service staff are not checking immigration status, citizenship, or residency beyond what is necessary to confirm eligibility for a specific entrance fee or pass,” said Elizabeth Peace, spokesperson for the office of the secretary of the U.S. Department of the Interior.
Peace told The Times in an email that the Park Service had “long required staff to confirm that the name on the interagency pass or fee-based credential matches a valid photo ID.”
The agency’s updated policy is that all digital-pass holders must show a photo identification matching the name on the pass. Acceptable forms of ID include:
U.S. passport
U.S. state or territory-issued driver’s license
state ID
permanent residency card
You can only use a U.S. birth certificate to validate your identity for an Access Pass, which is for residents who have a permanent disability.
Visitors who do not have a U.S. government-issued ID will be asked to purchase a nonresident annual pass, Peace said. Those passes are much more costly.
How much do the passes cost?
The cost of an annual pass, which covers entrance to thousands of recreation areas but not other amenities including camping and parking is:
$80 for U.S. residents
$250 for nonresidents
If a non-U.S. resident is looking to purchase a day-of entrance, it will cost an additional $100 on top of the regular admittance fee, which is $20 to $35.
The increased fees have sparked controversy. The National Parks Conservation Assn. said it backs efforts to increase funding that will support parks but doesn’t want fees to become a barrier “that keeps people from experiencing America’s most iconic places.”
“Charging international visitors more is not uncommon globally,” said Theresa Pierno, president of the association, in a letter to the Department of the Interior, “but any such policy must be designed thoughtfully to ensure it doesn’t cause barriers or even longer lines at entrances.”
In its report, the Post noted that the fees had resulted in longer lines at parks.
Another concern Pierno voiced was how the verification process would affect an already understaffed workforce.
The National Park Service staff has been reduced by 24% since January of last year, which means fewer fee collectors and IT specialists who she said are needed as the new fees are implemented.
Which parks are affected?
The 11 parks that are subject to additional fees for those who are non-U.S. citizens include:
California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta announced Sunday that he would not run for California governor, a decision grounded in his belief that his legal efforts combating the Trump administration as the state’s top prosecutor are paramount at this moment in history.
“Watching this dystopian horror come to life has reaffirmed something I feel in every fiber of my being: in this moment, my place is here — shielding Californians from the most brazen attacks on our rights and our families,” Bonta said in a statement. “My vision for the California Department of Justice is that we remain the nation’s largest and most powerful check on power.”
Bonta said that President Trump’s blocking of welfare funds to California and the fatal shooting of a Minnesota mother of three last week by a federal immigration agent cemented his decision to seek reelection to his current post, according to Politico, which first reported that Bonta would not run for governor.
Bonta, 53, a former state lawmaker and a close political ally to Gov. Gavin Newsom, has served as the state’s top law enforcement official since Newsom appointed him to the position in 2021. In the last year, his office has sued the Trump administration more than 50 times — a track record that would probably have served him well had he decided to run in a state where Trump has lost three times and has sky-high disapproval ratings.
Bonta in 2024 said that he was considering running. Then in February he announced he had ruled it out and was focused instead on doing the job of attorney general, which he considers especially important under the Trump administration. Then, both former Vice President Kamala Harris and Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) announced they would not run for governor, and Bonta began reconsidering, he said.
“I had two horses in the governor’s race already,” Bonta told The Times in November. “They decided not to get involved in the end. … The race is fundamentally different today, right?”
The race for California governor remains wide open. Newsom is serving the final year of his second term and is barred from running again because of term limits. Newsom has said he is considering a run for president in 2028.
Former Rep. Katie Porter — an early leader in polls — late last year faltered after videos emerged of her screaming at an aide and berating a reporter. The videos contributed to her dropping behind Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, a Republican, in a November poll released by the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies and co-sponsored by The Times.
California hasn’t elected a Republican governor since 2006, Democrats heavily outnumber Republicans in the state, and many are seething with anger over Trump and looking for Democratic candidates willing to fight back against the current administration.
Bonta has faced questions in recent months about spending about $468,000 in campaign funds on legal advice last year as he spoke to federal investigators about alleged corruption involving former Oakland Mayor Sheng Thao, who was charged in an alleged bribery scheme involving local businessmen David Trung Duong and Andy Hung Duong. All three have pleaded not guilty.
According to his political consultant Dan Newman, Bonta — who had received campaign donations from the Duong family — was approached by investigators because he was initially viewed as a “possible victim” in the alleged scheme, though that was later ruled out. Bonta has since returned $155,000 in campaign contributions from the Duong family, according to news reports.
Bonta is the son of civil rights activists Warren Bonta, a white native Californian, and Cynthia Bonta, a native of the Philippines who immigrated to the U.S. on a scholarship in 1965. Bonta, a U.S. citizen, was born in Quezon City, Philippines, in 1972, when his parents were working there as missionaries, and immigrated with his family to California as an infant.
In 2012, Bonta was elected to represent Oakland, Alameda and San Leandro as the first Filipino American to serve in California’s Legislature. In Sacramento, he pursued a string of criminal justice reforms and developed a record as one of the body’s most liberal members.
Bonta is married to Assemblywoman Mia Bonta (D-Alameda), who succeeded him in the state Assembly, and the couple have three children.
Times staff writer Dakota Smith contributed to this report.
The primary federal contractor entrusted with purging fire debris from the Eaton and Palisades fires may have illegally dumped toxic ash and misused contaminated soil in breach of state policy, according to federal government reports recently obtained by The Times.
The records depict harried disaster workers appearing to take dangerous shortcuts that could leave hazardous pollution and endanger thousands of survivors poised to return to these communities.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers allocated $60 million to hire personnel to monitor daily cleanup operations and document any health and safety risks. The Times obtained thousands of government oversight reports that detail these federal efforts to rid fire-destroyed homes of toxic debris between February and mid-May.
The records, which were obtained on a rolling basis over several months, include dozens of instances in which oversight personnel flagged workers for disregarding cleanup procedures in a way that likely spread toxic substances.
The latest batch of reports — turned over to The Times on Dec. 1 — contained allegations of improper actions involving Environmental Chemical Corp., the primary federal contractor, and the dozens of debris-removal crews it supervised.
For example, on April 30, federally hired workers were clearing fire debris from a burned-down home in the Palisades burn scar. According to the Army Corps of Engineers, after the last dump truck left, an official with Environmental Chemical Corp., a Burlingame, Calif., company hired to carry out the federal debris removal mission, ordered workers to move the remaining ash and debris to a neighboring property.
The crew used construction equipment to move four or five “buckets” worth of fire debris onto the neighboring property. It’s unclear if that property was also destroyed in the Palisades fire, and, if so, whether it had been already remediated.
“I questioned if this was allowable and then the crew dumped material into the excavator bucket and planned to move it on the lowboy with material in bucket,” a federal supervisor wrote in a report intended to track performance of contractors. “Don’t think this is allowed.”
According to the report, the workers also left glass, ash and other fire debris on the property the crew had been clearing, because they “were in a rush to get to the next site.”
Experts who reviewed the reports said the behavior described may amount to illegal dumping under California law. Other reports obtained by The Times describe federal cleanup workers, on multiple occasions, using ash-contaminated soil to backfill holes and smooth out uneven portions of fire-destroyed properties in the Palisades burn scar. If that were true, it would be a breach of state policy that says contaminated soil from areas undergoing environmental cleanup cannot be used in this way.
The reports also cite multiple occasions where workers walked through already cleared properties with dirty boot covers, possibly re-contaminating them. The inspectors also reported crews spraying contaminated pool water onto neighboring properties and into storm drains, and excavator operators using toothed buckets that caused clean and contaminated soil to be commingled.
“Obviously, there was some really good work done,” state Sen. Ben Allen (D-Pacific Palisades) said about the federal cleanup. “But it appears that we’ve got some folks who are knowingly breaking the law and cutting corners in their cleanup protocol.
“We’ve got to figure out how widespread this was, and anybody who was responsible for having broken a law in this area needs to be held accountable.”
The Army Corps did not respond to requests for comment. An ECC executive said that without information such as the properties’ addresses or parcel numbers, he could not verify whether the accusations made in the oversight reports were substantiated by the companies’ own investigations or if any issues raised by the inspectors were resolved. Such specifics were redacted in the version of the reports sent to The Times.
“At a high level, ECC does not authorize the placement of wildfire debris or ash on neighboring properties, does not permit the use of contaminated material as fill, and operates under continuous [Army Corps] oversight,” said Glenn Sweatt, ECC’s vice president of contracts and compliance.
Between February and September, the Army Corps responded to nearly 1,100 public complaints or other inquiries related to the federal fire cleanup. Over 20% of grievances were related to quality of work, according to the Army Corps assessment of complaints.
Some of these complaints point to the same concerns raised by the inspectors. For example, a resident in the Eaton burn scar filed a complaint on June 19 that “crews working on adjacent properties moved fire debris and ash onto his property after he specifically asked them not to.”
Other property owners in Altadena filed complaints that crews had left all sorts of fire debris on their property — in some cases, buried in the ground.
The Army Corps or ECC ordered crews to go back and finish up the debris removal for some properties. Other times, the officials left the work and costs to disaster victims.
A Palisades property owner complained on May 7 that after the Army Corps supposedly completed cleaning his property, he found “parts of broken foundation [that] were buried to avoid full removal.” He said it cost him $40,000 to hire a private contractor to gather up and dispose of several dumpsters of busted-up concrete.
James Mayfield, a hazardous materials specialist and owner of Mayfield Environmental Engineering, was hired by more than 200 homeowners affected by the fires to remove debris and contaminated soil — including, in some cases, from properties already cleared by Army Corps contractors.
When Mayfield and his workers excavated additional soil from Army Corps-cleared properties, he said they occasionally uncovered ash, slabs of burned stucco, and other debris.
“All you have to do is scoop and you can see the rest of the house underneath the ground,” Mayfield said. “It was never cleared at all.”
After January’s wildfires, local health authorities warned the soil could be riddled with harmful pollutants from burned-down homes and cars, including lead, a heavy metal that can cause irreversible brain damage when inhaled or ingested by young children.
Soil testing has been standard practice after major wildfires in California since 2007. Typically, after work crews clear away fire debris and several inches of topsoil from burned-down homes, federal or state disaster officials arrange for the same contractors to test the soil for lingering contamination. If they find contamination above state benchmarks, they are required to excavate another layer of that soil and conduct additional rounds of testing.
But the aftermath of the Eaton and Palisades fires has been different. The Federal Emergency Management Agency has repeatedly refused to pay for soil testing in California, insisting the practice is not necessary to remove any immediate threats after the fires. The Newsom administration unsuccessfully petitioned FEMA to reconsider conducting soil testing to protect returning residents and workers. But as pressure mounted on the state to fund soil testing, the California Environmental Protection Agency secretary downplayed public health risks from fire contamination.
Indeed, the vast majority of wildfire cleanups in California are managed by state agencies. Since the January wildfires, California officials have been noticeably guarded when questioned about how the state will respond when the next major wildfire inevitably strikes.
Asked whether the state will continue to adhere to its long-standing post-fire soil sampling protocols, the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services wouldn’t directly answer whether it would pay for soil testing after future wildfires. Its director, Nancy Ward, declined to be interviewed.
“California has the most advanced testing systems in the nation, and we remain committed to advocating for the safe, timely removal of debris after a wildfire,” an agency spokesperson said in a statement. “Protecting public health and the well-being of impacted communities remains the state’s foremost priority.”
Some environmental experts and lawmakers worry that abandoning long-established wildfire protocols, like soil testing, may set a precedent where disaster victims will assume more costs and work to ensure that their properties are safe to return to and rebuild upon.
U.S. Rep. Brad Sherman (D–Los Angeles) called for the Army Corps to review the results of large-scale soil testing initiatives, including data from USC, to determine which contractors were assigned to clean properties where heavy contamination persists. Such an analysis, he said, might help the federal government figure out which contractors performed poor work, so that they they aren’t hired in future disasters.
“I’m going to press the Army Corps to look at where the testing indicates there was still contaminants and who is the contractor for that, to see whether there are certain contractors that had a high failure rate,” Sherman said.
“I want to make sure they’re … evaluating these contractors vis-à-vis the next disaster,” he added. “And, ultimately it’s in the testing.”
Throughout much of Altadena and Pacific Palisades, thousands of empty lots are awaiting permits to rebuild. But many property owners fear the possibility of contamination.
The Department of Angels, a community-led nonprofit formed after the January wildfires, surveyed 2,300 residents whose homes were damaged or destroyed by the Eaton and Palisades blazes. About one-third of respondents said they wanted testing but had not received it.
“The government abandoned testing and left us on our own,” one victim wrote. “We have each had to find out what is the best route to test and remediate, but without standardization and consistency, we are a giant experiment.”
Notre Dame and BYU were the first two teams on the outside of the College Football Playoff this season, and the programs are beefing up their nonconference schedules for the next two seasons by playing one another.
Both schools announced the series Monday that will see the first game played in Provo, Utah next season and the latter in South Bend, Ind., in 2027.
Notre Dame finished 11th in the CFP rankings this season and BYU was No. 12. Miami, at No. 10, was the last at-large team to make the 12-team field.
‘We are excited to announce this home-and-home series between BYU and Notre Dame for the 2026 and 2027 seasons,’ BYU athletic director Brian Santiago said in a news release. ‘We have tremendous respect for Notre Dame. … These will be competitive football games, and will highlight coaches Kalani Sitake (BYU) and Marcus Freeman (Notre Dame), two of the best leaders and coaches in college football.’
The game in Provo completes Notre Dame’s 2026 schedule, and knocks longtime rival Southern California off the schedule. Notre Dame and USC have played every season since 1946, except when the 2020 game was cancelled due to COVID-19.
The two teams were slated to play in 2026 in Los Angeles but that contest is now off and the series is indefinitely halted.
‘USC and Notre Dame recognize how special our rivalry is to our fans, our teams, and college football, and our institutions will continue working towards bringing back The Battle for the Jeweled Shillelagh,’ Notre Dame and USC said in a joint statement. ‘The rivalry between our two schools is one of the best in all of sports, and we look forward to meeting again in the future.’
According to reports, USC has expressed it no longer wants to host Notre Dame in late November and would prefer the game be played earlier in the season. Games in the series at Notre Dame typically are played in October.
Also, USC now plays in the Big Ten and makes multiple trips to the Midwest or East and is concerned about having another long trip every other season.
Notre Dame and BYU have played nine times with the Fighting Irish prevailing seven times. The most recent contest came in 2022 when Notre Dame beat the Cougars 28-20 in Las Vegas.
The teams have split two meetings in Provo, while the Irish are 5-1 against the Cougars in South Bend.
The addition of Notre Dame completes BYU’s schedules for the 2026 and 2027 seasons.
Notre Dame (10-2) opted not to play in a bowl game after being passed over for the postseason. BYU (11-2) will face Georgia Tech (9-3) in the Pop-Tarts Bowl in Orlando on Dec. 27.
For months after the Palisades fire, many who had lost their homes eagerly awaited the Los Angeles Fire Department’s after-action report, which was expected to provide a frank evaluation of the agency’s handling of the disaster.
A first draft was completed by August, possibly earlier.
In one instance, LAFD officials removed language saying that the decision not to fully staff up and pre-deploy all available crews and engines ahead of the extreme wind forecast “did not align” with the department’s policy and procedures during red flag days.
Instead, the final report said that the number of engine companies rolled out ahead of the fire “went above and beyond the standard LAFD pre-deployment matrix.”
Another deleted passage in the report said that some crews waited more than an hour for an assignment the day of the fire. A section on “failures” was renamed “primary challenges,” and an item saying that crews and leaders had violated national guidelines on how to avoid firefighter deaths and injuries was scratched.
Other changes in the report, which was overseen by then-interim Fire Chief Ronnie Villanueva, seemed similarly intended to soften its impact and burnish the Fire Department’s image. Two drafts contain notes written in the margins, including a suggestion to replace the image on the cover page — which showed palm trees on fire against an orange sky — with a “positive” one, such as “firefighters on the frontline,” the note said. The final report’s cover displays the LAFD seal.
The Times obtained seven drafts of the report through the state Public Records Act. Only three of those drafts are marked with dates: Two versions are dated Aug. 25, and there is a draft from Oct. 6, two days before the LAFD released the final report to the public.
No names are attached to the edits. It is unclear if names were in the original documents and had been removed in the drafts given to The Times.
The deletions and revisions are likely to deepen concerns over the LAFD’s ability to acknowledge its mistakes before and during the blaze — and to avoid repeating them in the future. Already, Palisades fire victims have expressed outrage over unanswered questions and contradictory information about the LAFD’s preparations after the dangerous weather forecast, including how fire officials handled a smaller New Year’s Day blaze, called the Lachman fire, that rekindled into the massive Palisades fire six days later.
Some drafts described an on-duty LAFD captain calling Fire Station 23 in the Palisades on Jan. 7 to report that “the Lachman fire started up again,” indicating the captain’s belief that the Palisades fire was caused by a reignition of the earlier blaze.
The reference was deleted in one draft, then restored in the public version, which otherwise contains only a brief mention of the previous fire. Some have said that the after-action report’s failure to thoroughly examine the Lachman fire reignition was designed to shield LAFD leadership and Mayor Karen Bass’ administration from criticism and accountability.
Weeks after the report’s release, The Times reported that a battalion chief ordered firefighters to roll up their hoses and leave the burn area on Jan. 2, even though they had complained that the ground was still smoldering and rocks remained hot to the touch. Another battalion chief assigned to the LAFD’s risk management section knew about the complaints for months, but the department kept that information out of the after-action report.
“A full understanding of the Lachman fire response is essential to an accurate accounting of what occurred during the January wildfires,” Bass wrote.
Fire Chief Jaime Moore, who started in the job last month, has been tasked with commissioning the independent investigation that Bass requested.
The LAFD did not answer detailed questions from The Times about the altered drafts, including queries about why the material about the reignition was removed, then brought back. Villanueva did not respond to a request for comment.
A spokesperson for Bass said her office did not demand changes to the drafts and only asked the LAFD to confirm the accuracy of items such as how the weather and the department’s budget factored into the disaster.
“The report was written and edited by the Fire Department,” the spokesperson, Clara Karger, said in an email. “We did not red-line, review every page or review every draft of the report. We did not discuss the Lachman Fire because it was not part of the report.”
Genethia Hudley Hayes, president of the Board of Fire Commissioners, told The Times that she reviewed a paper copy of a “working document” about a week before the final report was made public. She said she raised concerns with Villanueva and the city attorney’s office over the possibility that “material findings” were or would be changed. She also said she consulted a private attorney about her “obligations” as a commissioner overseeing the LAFD’s operations, though that conversation “had nothing to do with the after-action” report.
Hudley Hayes said she noticed only small differences between the final report and the draft she reviewed. For example, she said, “mistakes” had been changed to “challenges,” and names of firefighters had been removed.
“I was completely OK with it,” she said. “All the things I read in the final report did not in any way obfuscate anything, as far as I’m concerned.”
She reiterated her position that an examination of missteps during the Lachman fire did not belong in the after-action report, a view not shared by former LAFD chief officers interviewed by The Times.
“The after-action report should have gone back all the way to Dec. 31,” said former LAFD Battalion Chief Rick Crawford, who retired from the agency last year and is now emergency and crisis management coordinator for the U.S. Capitol. “There are major gaps in this after-action report.”
Former LAFD Asst. Chief Patrick Butler, who is now chief of the Redondo Beach Fire Department, agreed that the Lachman fire should have been addressed in the report and said the deletions were “a deliberate effort to hide the truth and cover up the facts.”
He said the removal of the reference to the LAFD’s violations of the national Standard Firefighting Orders and Watchouts was a “serious issue” because they were “written in the blood” of firefighters killed in the line of duty. Without citing the national guidelines, the final report said that the Palisades fire’s extraordinary nature “occasionally caused officers and firefighters to think and operate beyond standard safety protocols.”
The final after-action report does not mention that a person called authorities to report seeing smoke in the area on Jan. 3. The LAFD has since provided conflicting information about how it responded to that call.
Villanueva told The Times in October that firefighters returned to the burn area and “cold-trailed” an additional time, meaning they used their hands to feel for heat and dug out hot spots. But records showed they cleared the call within 34 minutes.
Fire officials did not answer questions from The Times about the discrepancy. In an emailed statement this week, the LAFD said crews had used remote cameras, walked around the burn site and used a 20-foot extension ladder to access a fenced-off area but did not see any smoke or fire.
“After an extensive investigation, the incident was determined to be a false alarm,” the statement said.
The most significant changes in the various iterations of the after-action report involved the LAFD’s deployment decisions before the fire, as the wind warnings became increasingly dire.
In a series of reports earlier this year, The Times found that top LAFD officials decided not to staff dozens of available engines that could have been pre-deployed to the Palisades and other areas flagged as high risk, as it had done in the past.
One draft contained a passage in the “failures” section on what the LAFD could have done: “If the Department had adequately augmented all available resources as done in years past in preparation for the weather event, the Department would have been required to recall members for all available positions unfilled by voluntary overtime, which would have allowed for all remaining resources to be staffed and available for augmentation, pre-deployment, and pre-positioning.” The draft said the decision was an attempt to be “fiscally responsible” that went against the department’s policy and procedures.
That language was absent in the final report, which said that the LAFD “balanced fiscal responsibility with proper preparation for predicted weather and fire behavior by following the LAFD predeployment matrix.”
Even with the deletions, the published report delivered a harsh critique of the LAFD’s performance during the Palisades fire, pointing to a disorganized response, failures in communication and chiefs who didn’t understand their roles. The report found that top commanders lacked a fundamental knowledge of wildland firefighting tactics, including “basic suppression techniques.”
A paperwork error resulted in the use of only a third of the state-funded resources that were available for pre-positioning in high-risk areas, the report said. And when the fire broke out on the morning of Jan. 7, the initial dispatch called for only seven engine companies, when the weather conditions required 27.
There was confusion among firefighters over which radio channel to use. The report said that three L.A. County engines showed up within the first hour, requesting an assignment and receiving no reply. Four other LAFD engines waited 20 minutes without an assignment.
In the early afternoon, the staging area — where engines were checking in — was overrun by fire.
The report made 42 recommendations, ranging from establishing better communication channels to more training. In a television interview this month, Moore said the LAFD has adopted about three-quarters of them.
The distinctive former headquarters of the Christian media company Trinity Broadcasting Network in Costa Mesa has sold for $44.5 million, clearing the way for new housing.
The purchase of the ornate palazzo-style structure by Meritage Homes was expected after city officials in August approved Meritage’s plan to build 122 townhouses and 20 single-family homes on the site just south of the 405 Freeway.
Trinity, one of the world’s largest religious television networks, sold its Costa Mesa complex in 2017 after describing it as obsolete. The center dates to 1978.
It was most recently owned by Khoshbin Co., a Costa Mesa real estate company that positioned the property as an event venue.
Khoshbin paid $22 million for the six-acre property in 2021, according to real estate data provider CoStar.
“We’ve spent over $1 million improving the site, beautifying it, and I think the neighborhood really enjoys seeing some life [come back] into the property,” Manny Khoshbin told the city Planning Commission last year.
“We’ve been getting a lot of requests for events, weddings and birthdays, because it’s such a beautiful landscape,” he said.
The structure across the freeway from South Coast Plaza on Bear Street will be torn down to make way for the new housing. It has been a subject of fascination for years.
“With its classical columns, mirrors, faux gold and white marble everything, the Trinity compound’s look is ‘Gone With the Wind’ meets Caesars Palace,” The Times wrote in 1998.
“White walls are adorned with gold-framed floor-to-ceiling mirrors. Visitors climb the sweeping white marble stairway and come upon a 15-foot-tall statue of Michael the Archangel, his wings spread, his left foot planted on Satan’s head, hovering over the gilded grandeur,” the Times article said back then.
The gold-painted dome ceiling has a florid original mural of angels that Trinity Broadcasting founder Paul Crouch called “Orange County’s own Sistine Chapel.”
It will take about two years to redevelop the site as housing, Meritage told the city.
Planning commissioners credited Meritage’s plan for providing more housing in Costa Mesa, where 60% of residents rent their dwellings. There is high demand for housing in the coastal city and costs are climbing, the Daily Pilot said.
Meritage will designate seven units for very low-income occupants.
The new complex aims to provide housing for “the missing middle,” a segment of the population looking to move beyond renting but who cannot yet afford single-family homes, by offering townhouses that enable buyers to build equity, then move up the housing pyramid, the Daily Pilot said.
A U.S. Border Patrol agent who was found dead in a Riverside County home earlier this year following an arrest in Long Beach overdosed on cocaine and was dealing with depression, according to an autopsy report made public Tuesday.
Isaiah Hodgson, 29, was found dead in his bedroom in Hemet in late August with white “powder-like residue” near him, according to investigative documents released by the Riverside County Sheriff’s Office in response to a public records request from The Times.
Authorities ruled Hodgson’s death to be accidental and found three plastic bindles, which are normally used to hold drugs, in his stomach, according to the coroner’s report. Riverside County sheriff’s officials previously said there were no signs of foul play at the scene, and the report confirmed Hodgson had not sustained any injuries or defensive wounds. His official cause of death was described as “cocaine toxicity.”
In early July, Hodgson was arrested in Long Beach for fighting with city police. Prosecutors charged Hodgson with three counts of resisting arrest, one count of battery causing injury to a police officer and several misdemeanor weapons offenses after he scuffled with officers responding to a restaurant in Shoreline Village. Staff had kicked Hodgson out, reporting he drunkenly wandered into the women’s restroom while armed with a handgun.
In dramatic body cam video reviewed by The Times, Long Beach police officers approached Hodgson on July 7 after a 911 call made by a security guard who reported Hodgson had shown him a gun.
“He showed me a freaking clip,” the caller said in the 911 audio recording obtained by The Times.
When officers approached Hodgson, they yelled, “Get on the ground” and “Put your hands up.”
Hodgson put his hands up but would not get on the ground. He suggested to officers that he worked for a police department: “Are you stupid, I’m PD,” he said.
It took several officers to get Hodgson to kneel on the ground. One officer repeatedly used a Taser on him.
Charges against Hodgson are expected to be dismissed at a court hearing next month, according to a spokesman for the Los Angeles County district attorney’s office.
Hodgson became a visible face of the Trump administration’s sweeping immigration enforcement efforts in Southern California in June, as an unmasked agent involved in the controversial detention of Walmart employee Adrian Martinez, a U.S. citizen. Martinez was accused of interfering with Border Patrol agents’ attempts to detain one of his co-workers. Martinez was indicted and is awaiting trial.
Hodgson was part of a group of officers who rushed Martinez and shoved him to the ground. Although video from the scene did not show Hodgson physically contact Martinez, his name quickly became public as he appeared to be the lone agent involved in the controversial arrest who was not wearing a mask.
Hodgson was supposed to meet his parents at the beach the day he died but never showed up, according to the coroner’s report. His cousin went to Hodgson’s home to conduct a welfare check and found his body.
Hodgson’s parents told police their son “had been depressed since being on administrative leave, but they stated he was not suicidal and did not have any suicidal ideations,” according to the report. Hodgson previously struggled with cocaine and alcohol abuse, his family said, according to the documents. But, they said, Hodgson had been attending Alcoholics Anonymous for about two months, according to the coroner’s report.
A handwritten note found in Hodgson’s car was originally thought to be a suicide note but later was determined to be “a character witness statement for Hodgson dated back from June of 2025,” according to the coroner’s report. Hodgson had been “receiving death threats” after his personal information was posted online, the report states.
As Hodgson was being processed by police officers after his arrest, body cam video showed he said he was dealing with stress and the consequences of being identified publicly on the internet.
Bodycam footage provided by the Long Beach Police Department.
“Have you ever had your personal information put up online and on the f— news,” he said. “Have you ever had f— people stand up at your parents’ house because you’re over here in Los Angeles doing everything, dude, that’s the f— guy I am.”
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has repeatedly claimed its officers are facing a surge in death threats as protests against the Trump administration’s sprawling immigration raids in major cities including Los Angeles and Chicago have ramped up. Recently, the government sued California over a law that seeks to bar all local and federal law enforcement officers from wearing masks when performing official duties in public.
Representatives for the Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Border Patrol did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Times staff writer Brittny Mejia contributed to this report.
The Jimmy Butler two-show Florida reunion tour kicks off Tuesday night when the former Miami Heat standout takes center stage as the Golden State Warriors visit the Orlando Magic.
Dealt early last February from the Heat to the Warriors, Butler joined Golden State in time for both its visits to Florida last season, which came on separate Southeast excursions.
The first of the two saw him play a complementary role in new teammate Stephen Curry’s 56-point explosion in a 121-115 win at Orlando in late February. Butler had only five points in the game but tied Brandin Podziemski for game-high assist honors with seven.
Four of Butler’s assists came on Curry 3-pointers as the all-time distance-shooting king buried 12 in all, including four in a 22-point third-quarter flurry.
Butler assisted on two of the third-quarter threes then a last one that extended Golden State’s lead to 111-104 lead with 2:37 to go.
Butler himself inflicted pain upon the Magic many times during his days with the Heat, going for 20 or more points on five separate occasions, including 38 in a visit in March of 2023. He has 358 points, 93 assists and 43 steals in games at Orlando in his career.
Golden State visits Miami on the second night of a back-to-back on Wednesday.
Butler took time after his last visit to Orlando to describe Curry’s impact on the Warriors.
‘It makes everyone want to be great on the defensive side,’ he told reporters after the game, ‘so we can get him the ball back and watch him do something incredible. In a weird way, isn’t it kind of expected?’
Curry had 46 and 49 points last week when the Warriors, after falling at Oklahoma City, rebounded with a pair of victories at San Antonio. They then won a third in a row Sunday at New Orleans, riding Moses Moody’s 32 points to a 124-106 win.
The Orlando visit is a reunion of sorts for Moody as well. He played his final two prep seasons at Montverde Academy near Orlando, where he joined Scottie Barnes, Cade Cunningham and Day’Ron Sharpe on a 25-0 club in 2020.
The Magic has won three of their last four, seeing a winning streak come to an end in a 117-113 overtime loss at Houston on Sunday night.
The head-to-head with Golden State will be the first for Desmond Bane since he was acquired from the Memphis Grizzlies via trade in June. He’s averaged 22.3 points over the last four games, connecting on multiple 3-pointers in each of the last three.
Bane faced the Warriors 22 times during his days with Memphis, including in the 2022 playoffs, when he outshot Curry 48.5% to 32.9% on 3-pointers in the Grizzlies’ 4-2 loss to the eventual champs in the Western semifinals.
With star Paolo Banchero out for a second straight game with a groin injury, Bane found the ball in his hands with a chance to play hero at the end of regulation at Houston. However, he had his driving attempt blocked by Alperen Sengun with five seconds left and later wished he had it to do over again.
‘Something that we’ve talked about — getting the last shot of the game. I went a little bit too fast,’ he admitted to reporters. ‘We had our opportunities. Hopefully we learn from those moments and become better because of it.’
WASHINGTON — For more than a year, detainees at a California immigrant detention center said, they were summoned from their dorms to a lieutenant’s office late at night. Hours frequently passed, they said, before they were sent back to their dorms.
What they allege happened in the office became the subject of federal complaints, which accuse Lt. Quin, then an administrative manager, of harassing, threatening and coercing immigrants into sexual acts at the Golden State Annex in McFarland. A person with that name worked in a higher-ranking post, as chief of security, at the Alexandria Staging Facility in Louisiana until August — the same month The Times sent questions to the company that operates the facilities.
The Department of Homeland Security said it could not substantiate the allegations. According to an attorney for one of the detainees, the California attorney general’s office opened an investigation into the matter.
Immigrant advocates point to the case as one of many allegations of abuse in U.S. immigration facilities, within a system which they say fails to properly investigate.
In three complaints reviewed by The Times that were filed under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), to a watchdog agency and with DHS, detainees accused Quin of sexual assault, harassment and other misconduct. The complainants initially knew the lieutenant only as “Lt. Quinn,” and he is referred to as such in the federal complaints, though the correct spelling is “Quin.”
The complaints also allege other facility staff knew about and facilitated abuse, perpetuating a culture of impunity.
The Golden State Annex, a U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement detention facility, in McFarland last year.
The California and Louisiana facilities are both operated by the Florida-based private prison giant, the GEO Group.
A Dec. 10, 2024, post on Instagram Threads appears to allude to issues Quin faced in California. The post pictures him standing in front of a GEO Group flag and states: “Permit me to reintroduce myself … You will respect my authority. They tried to hinder me, but God intervened.”
Asked about the accusations, Tricia McLaughlin, the assistant Homeland Security public affairs secretary, said in a statement that allegations of misconduct by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement employees or contractors are treated seriously and investigated thoroughly.
“These complaints were filed in 2024 — well before current DHS leadership and the necessary reforms they implemented,” McLaughlin wrote. “The investigation into this matter has concluded, and ICE — through its own investigation reviewed by [the DHS office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties] — could not substantiate any complaint of sexual assault or rape.”
The GEO Group did not respond to requests for comment.
Advocates for the detainees say they are undeterred and will continue to seek justice for people they say have been wronged.
Advocates also say the potential for abuse at detention facilities will grow as the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown brings such facilities to record population levels. The population of detained immigrants surpassed a high of 61,000 in August, according to TRAC, a nonpartisan research organization.
The allegations against Quin by a 28-year-old detainee are detailed in his FTCA complaint, a precursor to a lawsuit, filed in January with DHS. The complaint seeks $10 million for physical and emotional damages.
The Times generally does not identify alleged victims of sexual abuse and is referring to him by his middle initial, E.
McLaughlin’s response did not address the FTCA complaint that details E’s sexual assault allegations.
Reached by phone, Quin told The Times, “I don’t speak with the media,” and referred a reporter to the Golden State Annex. After being read the allegations against him and asked to respond, he hung up.
E alleged abuse in interviews with The Times, and in a recorded interview with an attorney, which formed the basis for the FTCA complaint.
In the complaint, he said that beginning in May 2023, Quin would call him into a room, where no cameras or staff were present, to say he had been given a citation or that guards had complained about him.
One day, the complaint alleges, Quin rubbed his own genitals over his pants and began making sexual comments. E told Quin he felt uncomfortable and wanted to go back to his dorm. But Quin smirked, dragged his chair closer and grabbed E in the crotch, the complaint says.
After E pushed Quin away and threatened to defend himself physically, the complaint alleges, Quin made his own threat: to call a “code black” — an emergency — that would summon guards and leave E facing charges of assaulting a federal officer.
Instead, E said, Quin called for an escort to take him back to his dorm.
After that, the late-night summons — sometimes at midnight or 2 a.m. — increased, E said in his complaint. Each time, Quin continued to rub his genitals over his clothes, according to the complaint.
The complaint alleges Quin repeatedly offered to help with E’s immigration case in exchange for sexual favors. Then Quin found out E is bisexual and E alleged Quin threatened to tell his family during a visit. Afraid of his family finding out about his sexuality, E said in the complaint, he finally acquiesced to letting Quin touch his genitals and perform oral sex on him.
“I just, I ended up doing it,” E said in a recorded interview with his attorney.
Afterward, the complaint says, Quin told E that he would make sure to help him, and that no one would find out.
The complaint alleges that Quin brought E contraband gifts, including a phone, and, around Christmas, a water bottle full of alcohol.
“I feel dirty,” E said in the recorded interview. “I feel ashamed of myself, you know? I feel like my dignity was just nowhere.”
E said in his complaint that a staff member told him in December 2023 that a guard had reported Quin to the warden after noticing E had been out of his dorm for a long time; the guard had reviewed security cameras showing Quin giving E the bottle of alcohol.
E said the staffer told him that Quin was temporarily suspended from interacting with detainees, and the late-night summons stopped for a while.
Lee Ann Felder-Heim, staff attorney with the Asian Law Caucus, which filed a complaint with the federal government alleging mistreatment of detainees at the Golden State Annex in McFarland.
(Maria del Rio / For The Times)
A second, earlier complaint alleging mistreatment at the McFarland facility was filed on E’s behalf in August 2024 by the Asian Law Caucus with the DHS Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties (CRCL).
That complaint alleges that other GEO Group staff targeted him with sexually harassing and degrading comments. It does not address E’s sexual assault allegations, because E said he was initially too afraid to talk about them.
Once, when E was lying on his stomach in his cell, a guard commented loudly to other staff that he was waiting for a visit from Quin; the guard made a motion of putting her finger through a hole, insinuating that E sought to engage in sexual intercourse, the complaint states.
The broader issue isn’t one person, “but rather a system of impunity and abuse,” said Lee Ann Felder-Heim, a staff attorney at the Asian Law Caucus. “The reports make it clear that other staff were aware of what was going on and actually were assisting in making it happen.”
In addition to detailing E’s own experiences, the complaint also details abuse and harassment of five other detainees. One detainee is transgender, a fact that would play a role in how federal officials investigated the complaint.
In February and March, CRCL sent Felder-Heim letters saying it had closed the investigations into all but one case of alleged sexual abuse and harassment — including those regarding Quin — citing, as justification, Trump’s First-Day executive order concerning “gender ideology extremism.” The order prohibits using federal funds to “promote gender ideology,” so Felder-Heim said it appears the investigations were shut down because one of the complainants is transgender. The other case was closed earlier on the merits.
She called the investigation process flawed and “wholly inadequate.”
E filed a third complaint with another oversight body, the Office of the Immigration Detention Ombudsman. To his knowledge, no investigation was initiated.
In March, the Trump administration shut down three internal oversight bodies: CRCL, OIDO and the Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) Ombudsman. Civil rights groups sued the following month, prompting the agency to resurrect the offices.
But staffing at the offices was decimated, according to sworn court declarations by DHS officials. CRCL has gone from having 147 positions to 22; OIDO from about 118 to about 10; and the CIS Ombudsman from 46 to about 10.
“All legally required functions of CRCL continue to be performed, but in an efficient and cost-effective manner and without hindering the Department’s mission of securing the homeland,” said McLaughlin, the DHS spokeswoman.
Michelle Brané, who was the immigrant detention ombudsman under the Biden administration, said the civil rights office generally had first dibs on complaints about sexual assault. She recalled the complaint about Quin but said her office didn’t investigate it because the civil rights office already was.
Brané said the decrease in oversight amid increased detention will inevitably exacerbate issues such as allegations of sexual assault. Worse conditions also make it harder to hire quality staff, she said.
Around the same time that E was held at Golden State Annex, a gay couple from Colombia reported in April 2024 to the OIDO that Quin had sexually harassed them.
D.T., 26, and C.B., 25, were separated upon arrival at Golden State Annex. D.T. began to experience severe anxiety attacks, they said in the Asian Law Caucus complaint and in an interview with The Times. The couple asked to be placed in the same dormitory.
Before granting their request, Quin asked what they would give him in return, the couple recounted in the complaint. Afterward, the complaint alleges, he frequently invited them to his office, saying they owed him.
“We never accepted going to his office, because we knew what it was for,” C.B. told the Times.
In their complaint, they allege that Quin asked D.T. if he wanted to have sex and told C.B., “You belong to me.”
The couple became aware that Quin had also harassed other detainees and gave preferential treatment to those who they believed accepted his requests for sexual favors, according to the complaint; one detainee told them that he had grabbed Quin’s hand and placed it on his penis to avoid being taken to solitary confinement for starting a fight.
D.T. said in an interview with The Times that he believes “below him are many people who never said anything.”
In a Dec. 2, 2024, internal facility grievance from Golden State Annex reviewed by The Times, another detainee alleges that Quin retaliated against him for speaking out against misconduct.
In the grievance and in an interview with The Times, the detainee said he spoke up after, on several occasions, watching another man walk to Quin’s office late at night and come back to the dorm hours later. He also said in the grievance that Quin brought in marijuana, cellphones and other contraband.
Another witness, Gustavo Flores, 33, said Quin recognized him as a former Golden State Annex detainee when he was briefly transferred to the Alexandria facility, just before his deportation to El Salvador in May.
Quin pulled Flores aside and offered to uncuff him and get him lunch in exchange for cleaning the lobby; after he finished, Quin brought him into his office, where he peppered Flores with questions about Golden State Annex, Flores said.
Flores said he asked about certain staffers and detainees. He told Flores people wanted to sue him, calling them “crybabies.”
“He’s telling me everything, like, ‘Oh yeah, I know what goes on over there,’” Flores said.
When E tried to end the sexual encounters, his complaint says, Quin threatened to have him sent to a detention facility in Texas or have his deportation expedited.
In October 2024, E was transferred to the Mesa Verde ICE Processing Center in Bakersfield.
Heliodoro Moreno, E’s attorney, said the California Attorney General’s Office confirmed to him in February that it was investigating. An investigator interviewed E in April and again in May, he said, and the investigation remains open.
California Department of Justice spokesperson Nina Sheridan declined to comment on a potential investigation. But in a statement she said the office remains vigilant of “ongoing, troubling conditions” at detention facilities throughout California.
“We are especially concerned that conditions at these facilities are only set to worsen as the Trump Administration continues to ramp up its inhumane campaign of mass deportation,” she wrote.
E, who had a pending claim for a special status known as withholding of removal, dropped his case in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Moreno said his client wished to no longer be detained.
“It’s very unfortunate that he’s in these circumstances,” Moreno said. His client was forced to forgo his appellate rights and leave “without really getting a conclusion to receiving justice for what happened to him.”
WASHINGTON — Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York is facing mounting pressure to step aside as leader of the Senate Democratic caucus after eight members voted against his wishes Sunday, joining Republicans in a bid to end the longest government shutdown in history.
The vote was just the latest development in a troubling week for the 74-year-old Schumer, who, after eight years as the top Senate Democrat, has faced growing calls from within the party to make way for a new generation of leadership.
Elections last week revealed the emergence of a growing progressive movement in Schumer’s hometown, where the longtime senator declined to endorse Zohran Mamdani in his successful bid for New York City mayor.
National progressive organizations on Monday urged him to step down and have encouraged a popular congresswoman in the state, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, to run for his Senate seat in 2029. Polls show Schumer faces the lowest approval numbers of any national leader in Washington.
His leadership troubles come on the heels of Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco), the first female speaker of the House, announcing her retirement, a decision that generated praise across the political aisle last week reflecting on her shrewd ability to control a sprawling House Democratic caucus during high-stakes votes.
“Schumer is no longer effective and should be replaced,” Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Fremont) wrote on X after the Sunday night vote. “If you can’t lead the fight to stop healthcare premiums from skyrocketing for Americans, what will you fight for?”
Hakeem Jeffries of New York, the top Democrat in the House, told reporters Monday that he strongly disapproved of the emerging deal in the Senate, where seven Democrats and one independent who caucuses with the party voted to proceed with government funding.
For seven weeks, House and Senate Democrats said they would not vote for legislation to reopen the government unless they were able to secure an extension of health insurance subsidies. But the deal reached in the Senate indicated how some Democrats gave in on that bottom-line negotiation.
Schumer reiterated his disapproval of the spending deal in a speech from the floor Monday. He criticized the compromise as a “Republican bill” even though members of his party helped broker the deal.
“Republicans now own this healthcare crisis,” Schumer said. “They knew it was coming. We wanted to fix it and they said no, and now it is on them.”
As Schumer delivered his speech, Jeffries spoke to reporters at a news conference on the other side of the Capitol.
Asked whether he thought Schumer remained an effective leader and should remain in his position, Jeffries replied, “yes and yes.”
When pressed to elaborate, Jeffries said “the overwhelming majority of Senate Democrats led by Chuck Schumer waged a valiant fight,” and turned his disapproval to the Democrats who voted with Republicans on the bill.
“I am not going to explain what a handful of Senate Democrats have decided to do,” Jeffries said. “That’s their explanation to offer to the American people.”
Now that the effort turns to the House, Jeffries said Democrats in the chamber will try to block a deal that does not address healthcare costs.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom offered harsh criticism of Senate Democrats on Monday, who he said had “rolled over.”
After speaking at the Milken Institute’s Global Investors’ Symposium in São Paulo, Newsom told The Times that the move blunted the momentum his party was experiencing following a string of victories last week.
“You don’t start something unless you’re going to finish,” said Newsom, who next heads to the climate summit known as COP30 in Belém, Brazil. “Why the hell did we do this in the first place? We could have gotten this deal in 20 minutes. … Honestly, I don’t know what’s going on with my party.”
Zach Wahls, a Democratic candidate for Senate in Iowa, said Schumer had “failed to lead this party in one of its most critical moments,” calling for him to step down. And Rep. Seth Moulton, a Democrat from Massachusetts, wrote that an effective leader would have been able to keep party members in line.
“Tonight is another example of why we need new leadership,” Moulton wrote on X.
The eight members who voted to reopen the government — 15% of the Senate Democratic caucus — voted directly against Schumer, who voted against the measure.
Wahls speculated that the moderate members who voted with Republicans were privately given Schumer’s blessing to do so.
“The fact that he voted against this deal, while he clearly gave it his blessing in private, is a perfect illustration of why people no longer trust the Democratic Party,” Wahls said, “and as long as he stays in a leadership role, it is going to be impossible for anybody — whether it’s in Iowa or any other swing state — to win a majority.”
Times staff writers Wilner and Ceballos reported from Washington, and Gutierrez contributed from São Paulo.
This week voters across California received a suspicious text message saying they’d failed to turn in their ballots for the Nov. 4 statewide special election on redistricting.
The message may appear official. It includes the voter’s name and address and links to an official website providing information on early voting and vote-by-mall ballot drop-off locations.
But it’s not from the state, and officials urge caution.
The office of the California secretary of state received numerous reports from voters of “inaccurate text messages from Ballot Now,” according to a news release.
“This has caused voters to believe their returned ballots have not been received or processed by county elections officials,” Shirley Weber, secretary of state, stated in the release. “Let me be clear: Ballot Now is not in any way affiliated with the California Office of the Secretary of State.”
Weber’s office told The Times it doesn’t know the intent behind the Ballot Now text messages, and “we are trying to get to the bottom of it.”
Ballot Now did not respond to The Times’ request for comment.
Where voters can get trustworthy answers to their elections questions
Voters can find accurate information on elections and voting at the state secretary’s website or at their county election office. The secretary’s website includes the complete list of county election offices.
Questions that the secretary of state’s website can assist with include:
How do I check my voter status? By entering some personal information, you can see if you are registered to vote, where you’re registered, and check that your political party and language preference are correct at the website’s voter status page.
How do I track my ballot? You can sign up to track your ballot through the state’s online site Ballottrax.
By signing up on Ballottrax, voters receive automatic updates when their county elections office: mails their ballot to them, receives their ballot, counts their ballot, or when the office has any issues with the ballot.
Updates are available in 10 languages — including Spanish, Japanese and Tagalog — and you can choose to be texted, emailed or called with voice alert updates.
If you believe you’re the victim of election fraud or have witnessed a violation of the California Elections Code, you can submit a complaint form or call the secretary of state’s office.
Fill out an online form, download a PDF version of the form and mail it, or call the office — English speakers can call (916) 657-2166 or (800) 345-8683; Spanish speakers can call (800) 232-8682.
The physical form can be mailed to the California Secretary of State Elections Division at 1500 11th St., 5th Floor, Sacramento, CA 95814 or faxed to (916) 653-3214.
Los Angeles County residents are encouraged to call the Los Angeles County registrar-recorder/county clerk’s call center with any questions or concerns they have, said Mike Sanchez, spokesperson for the office.
The registrar of voters can be reached at (800) 815-2666, and the number for voter center information is (800) 815-2666; choose option No. 1.
The Gloucester Daily Times aims to be accurate. If you are aware of a factual error in a story, please call Times Editor Andrea Holbrook at 978-675-2713.
A quotation in a story, “At-large candidates debate spending,” published Monday online and in print, requires correction. “So there is not a lot of slack to play with,” said incumbent Councilor at-Large candidate Jason Grow during a debate at the Lanesville Community Center on Thursday, Oct. 16.
David Doherty was standing at his desk inside the Los Angeles headquarters of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration when a supervisor from another office stormed in hurling profanities.
Doherty testified at a preliminary hearing in a San Fernando courtroom earlier this year that a fellow agent, James Young, got “face to face” with Doherty and challenged him to a fight without provocation.
Doherty said he tried to deescalate by hugging Young and saying it was “all good brother,” according to his testimony. But then, Doherty said, he felt Young’s DEA-issued handgun jammed against his midsection.
“I got you motherf—,” Doherty recalled Young saying.
Young then aimed the weapon at Doherty’s face, according to the agent’s testimony.
James Young allegedly pointed a gun at a fellow federal agent during a 2022 incident at the Drug Enforcement Agency office in Los Angeles.
(Al Seib / For The Times)
Staring down the barrel of a gun wielded by an official who, at that time in 2022, oversaw roughly 30 officers in the DEA’s Ventura County office, Doherty told the court, he wrestled Young to the ground and disarmed him.
It was one of several bizarre moments that led Young to exit the DEA — but only after the agency promoted him twice despite documented concerns about his behavior and mental health.
The Times reviewed a Los Angeles police report Doherty filed about the alleged attack along with DEA disciplinary records and internal e-mails.
The records show DEA officials were well aware of Young’s concerning behavior, yet still gave him increased responsibilities. One high-ranking DEA official even tried to dissuade Doherty from reporting the attack to police, according to the agent’s testimony and the LAPD report.
After Doherty’s preliminary hearing testimony, Young was held to answer on on multiple charges for crimes he allegedly committed between 2022 and 2024, including a road rage incident, domestic violence and illegal possession of a stockpile of guns, ammo and grenades.
Young, who remains free on bond, has pleaded not guilty to all charges. He declined to comment. His defense attorney, Jeff Voll, said he plans to ask a judge to grant Young entry into a diversion program due to mental health issues, but offered no further details about his client or the case.
A DEA spokeswoman said she could not respond to media inquiries because of the federal government shutdown, though the agency has previously declined to comment on The Times reporting about Young.
Young’s first issues at the DEA arose in 2012, while he was on assignment in Tokyo. That year, he was sent home after a “medical evaluation” that determined he had issues that were “preventing or impeding his ability to perform the requisite tasks and duties of his position,” according to a treatment agreement between Young and the DEA reviewed by The Times.
Young was required to attend therapy for “mental health issues” and “alcohol abuse,” the document shows.
Young was also suspended for two days due to “improper operation of a government vehicle and poor judgment” while in Tokyo, according to a DEA disciplinary notice.
Young was reassigned to Los Angeles in 2013 and eventually put in charge of the DEA’s satellite office in Ventura County, according to Doherty’s testimony.
In 2021, an agent filed a complaint against Young accusing him of making “volatile, unprofessional phone calls” and “inappropriate comments” toward subordinates, according to an e-mail reviewed by The Times. It was not clear what, if anything, the DEA did about the complaint.
Two federal law enforcement officials who requested anonymity because they are not authorized to speak publicly told The Times that many agents sensed something was “off” with Young, with both recounting stories of colleagues concerned about how he handled firearms.
Doherty testified that after the gun incident at the DEA’s L.A. office in 2022, he felt like higher-ups at the agency tried to protect Young.
“I didn’t feel like it was being handled appropriately, and I kind of saw the writing on the wall, that it was something DEA was trying to brush under the rug,” Doherty said in court.
Doherty made a report at LAPD’s Central Division station shortly after the shooting. In it, he said another DEA official in L.A., Assistant Special Agent in Charge Brian Clark, tried to discourage him from going to police. Clark warned Doherty that Young could actually seek to press assault charges against him, according to the report, which did not explain Clark’s rationale.
Clark, who is now the special agent in charge of the Los Angeles field office, did not respond to an e-mail seeking comment.
The LAPD investigation stopped when the head of the DEA’s Los Angeles field office, Bill Bodner, called then-LAPD Deputy Chief Al Labrada and claimed jurisdiction over the incident, according to the police report.
Bodner left the DEA in 2023, according to his LinkedIn profile. He and Labrada did not respond to questions from The Times. A spokesperson for the LAPD did not respond to an inquiry about the case.
The U.S. Justice Department’s Office of the Inspector General eventually presented a criminal case to local prosecutors in December 2022, according to a spokeswoman for the Los Angeles County district attorney’s office. But the assault charges related to the attack at the field office weren’t filed until June 2025. The spokeswoman declined to explain the delay.
Young retired from the DEA in 2024, but was allowed to collect a paycheck on administrative leave for roughly 18 months after the alleged attack on Doherty, according to two federal law enforcement officials.
In September 2024, Young allegedly got into an argument with a driver on the 405 Freeway, bumped the other vehicle with his car and then brandished a handgun at the victim, according to a criminal complaint.
The day after the road rage incident, Young allegedly attacked his wife and placed her in a wrestling hold, applying pressure to her head and neck, authorities said. A subsequent search of Young’s Saugus home by L.A. County sheriff’s deputies turned up 30,000 rounds of ammunition, several grenades, a sawed-off shotgun and modified credentials to make it appear that Young was still an active DEA agent.
Investigators also found what was described in court filings as a video of a “gang-style execution” being played on a loop on a large screen.
If convicted as charged, Young faces up to 29 years in state prison.
In the Doherty incident, text messages displayed in court show Young claimed he didn’t realize why pulling his gun was wrong until after it happened.
“Brother I love you. I would die for you. I’m sorry for not reading things right. I thought we were playing, but I know I f— up and misread the situation,” Young wrote to Doherty. “Pls forgive me … I’ll never do anything to hurt you. Please forgive me for pulling my gun. You can file against me. I concede that.”
Exposing years-old concerns about California’s resilience to wildfires, a government whistleblower and other witnesses in a recent state trial alleged that cleanup operations after some of the largest fires in state history were plagued by mismanagement and overspending — and that toxic contamination was at times left behind in local communities.
Steven Larson, a former state debris operations manager in the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services, failed to convince a jury that he was wrongly fired by the agency for flagging those and other issues to his supervisors. After a three-week trial in Sacramento, the jury found Larson was retaliated against, but also that the agency had other, legitimate reasons for dismissing him from his post, according to court records.
Still, the little-discussed trial provided a rare window into a billion-dollar public-private industry that is rapidly expanding — and becoming increasingly expensive for taxpayers and lucrative for contractors — given the increased threat of fires from climate change.
It raised serious questions about the state’s fire response and management capabilities at a time when the Trump administration says it is aggressively searching for “waste, fraud and abuse” in government spending, proposing cuts to the Federal Emergency Management Agency and clashing with state leaders over the best way to respond to future wildfires in California.
The allegations raised in the trial also come as FEMA and the Army Corps of Engineers are overseeing similar debris removal work — by some of the same contractors — following the wildfires that destroyed much of Pacific Palisades and parts of Altadena in January, and as fresh complaints arise around that work, as The Times recently reported.
Steve Larson poses for a portrait at Elk Grove Park on Sept. 1. Larson, who was a former state debris operations manager in the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services, is a whistleblower alleging widespread problems in California fire cleanups.
(Andri Tambunan / For The Times)
During the trial, Larson and other witnesses with direct knowledge of state fire contracts raised allegations of poor oversight and sloppy hiring and purchasing practices by CalRecycle, the state agency that oversaw multiple major cleanup contracts for CalOES; overcharging and poor record-keeping by contractors; toxic contamination being left behind on properties meant to have been cleared; and insufficient responses to those problems from both CalOES and FEMA officials.
The claims were buttressed at trial by the introduction into evidence of a previously unpublished audit of cleanup operations for several large fires in 2018. They were mostly rejected by attorneys for the state, who acknowledged some problems — which they said are common in fast-paced emergency responses operations. They broadly denied Larson’s allegations as baseless, saying he was an inexperienced and disgruntled former employee who was fired for poor performance.
The allegations were also dismissed by CalOES and by Burlingame-based Environmental Chemical Corp., which was the state’s lead contractor on the 2018 fires and is now the Army Corps of Engineer’s lead contractor on cleanup work for the Palisades and Eaton fires, which is nearing completion.
Anita Gore, a spokeswoman for CalOES, defended the agency’s work in a statement to The Times. While acknowledging some problems in the past, she said the agency is “committed to protecting the health and safety of all Californians, including in the aftermath of disasters, and is unwavering in its desire to maintain a safe and inclusive workplace where everyone can feel respected and thrive.”
In its own statement to The Times, ECC said it followed the directives and oversight of state and federal agencies at all times, and “is proud of its work helping communities recover from devastating disasters.”
“We approach each project with professionalism, transparency, and a commitment to delivering results under extraordinarily challenging conditions,” the company said.
Maria Bourn, one of Larson’s attorneys, told The Times that while her client lost at trial — which they are appealing — his case marked a “win for government accountability and the public at-large” by revealing “massive irregularities by wildfire debris removal contractors” who continue to work in the state.
“The state’s continued partnership with these companies when such widespread irregularities were identified by one of its own should alarm every taxpayer,” Bourn said.
A Malibu home lies in ruins after the Woolsey fire. Many questions were raised about the response.
(Al Seib / Los Angeles Times)
Camp, Woolsey and Hill fires
The allegations centered in large part around the state-run cleanup efforts following the Camp fire in Northern California, which killed 85 people and all but erased the town of Paradise in November 2018, and the contemporaneous Woolsey and Hill fires in Southern California, which ripped through Malibu and other parts of Los Angeles and Ventura counties.
FEMA has reimbursed the state more than $1 billion for costs associated with those cleanup efforts.
In a July 28, 2019, email entered as evidence in the trial, Larson wrote to CalOES chief of internal audits Ralph Zavala that he wanted to talk to him about “potential fraud” by Camp fire contractors, including ECC.
“I cannot say for sure, but something sure smells fishy,” Larson wrote in the email. “Either their contract was not in fact the lowest bid or they are creating fraud in the way they collect debris.”
Larson wrote in the same email that ECC was “supposedly the lowest bidder” but was “costing more” than the lower bids, which he wrote “doesn’t make sense.” At trial, Larson and his attorneys repeatedly claimed that instead of properly investigating his claims, his supervisors turned against him.
Other current and former state officials testified that they had raised similar concerns.
Todd Thalhamer, a former Camp fire area commander and operations chief who still works for CalRecycle, testified during the trial that he’d told Larson he believed ECC had low-balled its bid to win the work, then overcharged the state by millions of dollars. He said he had “dug very deep into the tonnage cost that they were charging, how they were charging, how they were cleaning it up,” and believed that ECC had been able to “game the system” by reporting that it was hauling out more of the debris types for which it could charge the most.
ECC denied manipulating bids or overcharging the state, and said that “all debris types and volumes are 100% inspected by and determined by CalRecycle and its monitoring representatives and systems, not by ECC or its subcontractors.”
Thalhamer testified that he’d sent an “email blast” out to top CalOES and CalRecycle officials telling them of his findings. He said that led to internal discussions and some but not all issues being resolved.
Further concerns were raised in records obtained by Larson’s attorneys from the prominent accounting firm EY, formerly known as Ernst & Young, which the state paid nearly $4 million to audit the Camp, Woolsey and Hill fire cleanup work.
According to those records, which were cited at trial, EY found that CalRecycle was “unable to produce documentation that fully supports how the proposed costs were determined to be reasonable when evaluating contractor proposals,” and didn’t appear to have “appropriate controls or oversight over the contractor’s performance.”
EY flagged $457 million charged by the contractors through 89 separate “change orders” — or additional charges not contemplated in their initial bids. It said the state lacked an adequate approval process for determining whether to accept such orders, couldn’t substantiate them and risked FEMA rescinding its funding if it didn’t take “immediate corrective action.”
EY specifically flagged $181 million in change orders for the construction of two “base camps” near the burn areas, from which the contractors would operate. It said the state only had invoices for $91 million of that spending, and that even those invoices were not itemized. EY executive Jill Powell testified that the firm believed such large contract changes were likely to be flagged as questionable by FEMA.
ECC — one of two contractors EY noted as having made the base camp change orders — defended its work.
The company said change orders are a necessary part of any cleanup operation, where the final cost “depends on the final quantities of debris that the Government directs the Contractors to remove and how far the material has to be transported for recycling or disposal.”
Such quantities can change over the course of a contract, which leads to changes in cost, it said.
As for the base camps, ECC said the state had explicitly stated in its initial request for proposals that it would “develop the requirements” and negotiate their cost through change orders, because details about their likely location and size were still being worked out when the bids were being accepted.
“Bidders could not know at the time of bid, which area of Paradise they would be assigned, how many properties would be assigned to the bidder, and therefore the exact size of the workforce that the Government would want housed in a Base Camp,” ECC said.
ECC said it “submitted invoices with supporting documentation in the format requested” by CalRecycle for all expenditures, and was “not aware of any missing invoices.”
“We cannot speak to what EY was provided from the State’s files or how the State provided those materials for EY’s review,” the company said. “Any gap in what EY reviewed should not be interpreted as meaning ECC failed to submit documentation.”
ECC said state officials only ever complimented the company for its work on the 2018 fires. And it said it continues to work in Southern California “with the same professionalism and care we bring to every project.”
SPSG, the second contractor EY flagged as being involved in the base camp change orders, did not respond to a request for comment.
Attorney James F. Curran, who represented the state at trial, said in his closing arguments that the work was not “running perfect” but was coming in on schedule and under budget. He said state officials were not ignoring problems, just cataloging non-pressing issues in order to address them when the dust cleared, as is common in emergency operations.
Curran said many of Larson’s complaints were based on his unfamiliarity with such work and his refusal to trust more experienced colleagues. He said Larson was fired not for flagging concerns, but because of “misconduct, arrogance, communication style problems, and performance problems.”
Gore, the CalOES spokeswoman, said CalRecycle awarded the contracts “through an open, competitive procurement process with oversight from CalOES and FEMA,” and that CalOES worked to address problems with contractors before Larson ever voiced any concerns.
Gore said CalOES hired EY to identify any potential improvements in the contracting and reimbursement process, and changed its policy to pay contractors per parcel of land cleared rather than by volume of debris removed in part to address concerns about potential load manipulation.
She said the agency could not answer other, detailed questions from The Times about the debris removal process and concerns about mismanagement and alleged overcharging because the Larson case “remains pending and subject to appeal,” and because CalOES faces “other, active litigation” as well.
The EY audit also flagged issues with several other contractors, including Tetra Tech and Arcadis, according to draft records obtained from EY by Larson’s attorneys and submitted as evidence at trial.
The EY records said Tetra Tech filed time sheets for unapproved costs, without sufficient supporting information, with questionable or excessive hours, with digital alterations that increased hourly rates, and without proper supervisor approvals. It said it also charged for work without providing any supporting time sheets.
The EY records said the company also used inconsistent procedures for sampling soil and testing for asbestos, used billing rates that were inconsistent between its contract and its invoices, charged for “after hours” work without supporting documentation, filed questionable, per-hour lodging costs, appeared to have digitally edited change orders after they were signed and dated, and relied inappropriately on questionable digital signatures for approving change orders.
Tetra Tech did not respond to a request for comment.
The EY records said Arcadis filed change orders for costs that appeared to be part of the “normal course of business,” filed invoices for work that began before the company’s state contract was signed, and relied inappropriately on digital signatures.
Arcadis referred all questions to CalRecycle. CalRecycle provided a copy of its own “targeted” audit of Arcadis’ work, which found the company had complied with the requirements of its nearly $29-million contract with the state. CalRecycle otherwise referred The Times back to CalOES.
A recovery team searches for human remains after the Camp fire.
(Marcus Yam / Los Angeles Times)
North Bay fires
Concerns about cleanup work following major fires in Sonoma, Santa Rosa and other North Bay counties in 2017 — under both CalOES and the Army Corps of Engineers — also arose at the trial.
Sean Smith, a former 20-year veteran of CalOES and a prominent figure in California debris removal operations to this day, alleged in an email submitted at trial that ECC and other contractors hired to clear contaminated debris and soil from those fires over-excavated sites in order “to boost loads to get more tonnage and money.”
ECC denied Smith’s claims, saying it “does not perform excessive soil removal” and that it followed “the detailed debris removal operations plan requirements” of the Army Corps of Engineers, which had its own quality assurance representatives monitoring the work.
In a deposition, Smith also testified that, in the midst of spending more than $50 million to repair that over-excavation, state officials identified lingering contamination at “what would be considered hazardous waste levels.”
“They hadn’t finished the cleanup in all spots, and we found it, and we recorded it,” he said.
Smith testified that those findings were presented to high-ranking CalOES and FEMA officials during a meeting in San Francisco in October 2018. At that meeting, CalOES regional manager Eric Lamoureux laid out all the state’s contamination findings in detail, “but nobody wanted to hear it,” Smith said.
During his deposition, Smith alleged that the “exact words” of one FEMA attorney in attendance were, “We have to find out how to debunk the state’s testing” — which he said he found surprising, given the testing was based on federal environmental standards.
“I don’t know how you’d debunk such a thing,” Smith said.
FEMA officials did not respond to requests for comment. CalOES also did not answer questions about the alleged meeting.
ECC said that Smith, who managed and signed its contracts with CalOES, gave ECC “a very positive performance review” when it completed the Sonoma and Santa Rosa work — describing its work as “exceptional.”
Smith said he quit his post working on those fires after the San Francisco meeting, though he continued working for the agency in other roles for a couple more years. Smith more recently formed his own debris removal consulting firm — which has been involved in soil testing for the state after other recent fires.
CalOES did not respond to questions about Smith’s claims or separation from the agency.
