OC Marathon draws thousands for scenic route

• May 4, 2025

Each runner had their own pace, their own stride and their own reasons for hitting the pavement.

Thousands of runners joined the OC Marathon, some showing up at dawn to do the full 26.2 miles, others opting for the shorter half marathon.

And while each had their own goals, for a few hours on Sunday, May 4, they were all part of a collective group who would cross the same finish line at OC Fair & Event Center, fatigued but accomplished, for the event marking its 21st year.

Lake Forest’s Xavier Smith and Stephanie Mundt, of Tempe, Arizona, were the overall winners in the men’s and women’s divisions of the marathon. The half-marathon winners were Ellie Stevens of Las Vegas and Kristoffer Mugrage of Alamosa, Colorado.

Race director Gary Kutscher said the largest number of runners participated, with an estimated 3,600 runners in the marathon and 10,000 in the half marathon.

READ ALSO: Racer marks 58th marathon in honor of 58 ‘angels’ killed in Route 91 Music Festival shooting

The previous evening, an estimated 4,000 runners participated in Southern California’s largest nighttime race for the Hoag OC 5k and 6,500 youngsters were registered for the “Kids Run The OC” race.

The marathon entrants came from 47 states and 27 countries for the scenic race, which at times offered ocean views, some of the course weaving through the quaint streets of Corona del Mar.

The weekend’s festivities started on Friday with The OC Lifestyle and Fitness Expo, featuring 60 vendor booths and exhibits for racers to check out.

There’s been a surge in running clubs that have sprouted up since the coronavirus pandemic, Kutscher said, in part the reason participation numbers have been up in recent years.

He’s seen the resurgence in running interests come and go through the years, but this latest wave of running enthusiasts is stronger than ever, he said. More than 150 clubs joined the run.

There’s not only the social aspect of getting together with like-minded people, but there are countless stories of people with fitness goals, doing runs in the name of loved ones, or because they have overcome their own health obstacles, he noted.

Hoag Hospital came on as this year’s title sponsor, both with a shared goal of promoting a healthy lifestyle, Kutscher said.

Others use the run as a fundraiser, a chance to raise money for nonprofits they are passionate about, with 30 official charities joining as this year’s beneficiaries.

Since its inception, more than $9.5 million has been raised through the event for a wide range of charities and nonprofit organizations.

“It really runs the gamut of why people do this,” he said. “The fact that it’s a daunting distance — for many people, it changes their life, for the rest of their life.”

​ Orange County Register 

Nuggets dominate physical Game 7, sending Clippers home pondering lost opportunity

• May 4, 2025

With 10:16 left to play in Game 7 on Saturday, Kawhi Leonard sat on the bench and stared at nothing. He spoke to no one, and he looked at no one. The Clippers star wing player appeared lost in thought, no doubt pondering, like many around the team, what might have been if the team had shown up in the final game.

Against the more physical Denver Nuggets, the Clippers didn’t display the kind of fight that had gotten them to a decisive game in their best-of-seven first-round NBA Playoff series. The teams were even and the first six games were intense where every possession mattered, all living up to the hype between the Nos. 4 and 5 seeds.

But when push came to shove, and there was plenty of that in the physical match-up, the Clippers were again left on the outside looking in as the Nuggets advanced to the second round with a resounding 120-101 victory Saturday in Denver.

They have not reached the second round in three seasons.

And yet, there was no visible urgency Saturday to extend their postseason. James Harden, who had played spectacularly in his 16th season, scored seven points in 36 minutes, then left the arena without explanation.

Guard Norman Powell, who had struggled to regain his shooting touch after missing 11 games because of two different injuries, finished with nine points, missing all three of his 3-point attempts.

Even the usual steady Ivica Zubac, who had 59 double-doubles this season, had a quiet game with 10 points and 14 rebounds.

“Tough loss,” Clippers coach Tyronn Lue told reporters in Denver. “Not playing our best game in a situation like this – a lot of emotions.”

This wasn’t like two seasons ago when the Clippers were eliminated convincingly by the Phoenix Suns in five games, or last season when they were bounced by the Dallas Mavericks in six games after Leonard suffered a knee injury that kept him out of the Olympics and the first 34 games of this season.

This season, starting from day one, the Clippers had overachieved, and overcome low expectations, to get to the playoffs. They were not predicted to win more than 30-35 games.

With Leonard indefinitely on the shelf to start, Harden, Powell and Zubac carried the team to a 19-15 record, setting the stage for the return of the two-time MVP Finals forward, who played his first game Jan. 4.

From there, the Clippers cruised to 50 wins, including a crucial overtime victory against the Golden State Warriors in the regular-season finale that locked down the No. 5 seed.

“It’s hard because when you lose the last game and you get eliminated, it’s tough to think about all that,” Lue said of the season overall. “(We were) supposed to win 35 games and we win 50 games, get to the fifth seed, and play against a really good team. We had our opportunities, and then tonight, like I said, it was a tough loss for us.”

Now that the season is over, there’s bound to be plenty of finger pointing, none of which should be directed at Leonard.

Leonard was a difficult assignment for the Nuggets, averaging a series-leading 25.0 points to go with 7.6 rebounds and 4.7 assists, while shooting 53.7% from the field and 40.5% on 3’s. He didn’t come out with a series victory, but Leonard came out of it healthy for the first time since 2020, which is something the Clippers can build upon going forward.

​ Orange County Register 

TCU defeats LMU for NCAA Women’s Beach Volleyball title

• May 4, 2025

TCU’s Daniela Alvarez and Tania Moreno came from behind to win the final match as the second-seeded Horned Frogs wrapped up their first NCAA women’s beach volleyball championship with a 3-2 victory over No. 4 seed Loyola Marymount on Sunday at Gulf Shores, Ala.

TCU (32-5) is the first school other than USC and UCLA to win the title. The Trojans won the first two and the previous four, while the Bruins won two straight in 2018-19.

Alvarez and Moreno, who took a year off to play in the Olympics, returned to finish unbeaten in four years as a duo. Alvarez and Moreno dropped the first game 18-21 to LMU’s Michelle Shaffer and Anna Pelloia before rallying to win the final two 21-15 and 15-6.

The Lions (38-7) eliminated No. 5 seed USC in the quarterfinals and top-seed UCLA in the semifinals.TCU No. 3 pair Sofia Izuzquizal and Allanis Navas earned a point with a 21-16, 21-13 sweep of Abbey Thorup and Lisa Luini.

Anhelina Khmil and Ana Vergara also swept their way to a point with 21-14 and 21-19 win over Isabelle Reffel and Magdalena Rabitsch at No. 4.

The TCU duo finished 21-0 this season.

The Olympians finished off the championship as the Horned Frogs won 12 straight to end the season.

LMU twos pair Chloe Hooker and Vilhelmiina Prihti earned a point with a 21-16, 21-17 sweep of Hailey Hamlett and Maria Gonzalez, as Prihti surpassed Jessie Pritchard as LMU’s all-time winningest player with 110 wins.

At No. 5, LMU’s Tanon Rosenthal and Giuliana Poletti Corrales defeated Stacy Reeves and Denie Konstantinova 21-16, 21-16 to set up a decisive match on the final court.

TCU, which defeated No. 6 Cal Poly and No. 7 Texas to reach the final, completed its historic season 32-5, winning its final 12 matches.

LMU, which defeated No. 5 USC and No. 1 UCLA on Saturday to reach the final, finished 38-7.

The Lions are just the second program in school history to play in a National Championship event, joining the 2004 women’s water polo program.

The 38 wins are a program record and John Mayer became the first coach in school history to be named National Coach of the Year. The team also became the first in school history to win six consecutive conference titles.

​ Orange County Register 

Orange County baseball stat leaders through May 3

• May 4, 2025

Support our high school sports coverage by becoming a digital subscriber. Subscribe now

Orange County baseball stat leaders through Saturday, May 3.

To be included, teams must have their stats up to date on the MaxPreps.com leaderboards.

BATTING AVERAGE

RUNS BATTED IN

RUNS

EARNED-RUN AVERAGE

STRIKEOUTS

​ Orange County Register 

100 days of Trump only learning the hard way

• May 4, 2025

President Donald Trump’s first 100 days in office have not exactly gone to plan. So many of the policies coming out of the White House should strike one as absurdities that are either blatantly illegal or obviously won’t work. That hasn’t stopped Trump from trying and, where most can simply reflect for a moment to learn that those policies are idiotic, he has had to learn the hard way by way of market backlash and over 200 lawsuits.

After months of blustering about bringing China and the world to heel with tariffs, he is now learning that even as leader of the most powerful nation, he does not have that capacity. The only explanation for his actions so far is that he figured that the rest of the world would simply fall in line. It’s generally good practice to avoid turning others into caricatures but in this case, Trump is doing it to himself. I can almost see a thought bubble over Trump’s head reading, “I have the biggest military and the biggest economy so everyone has to do what I say.” 

Most countries are more than happy to work with us, but if given no other option, they’ll go without in order to avoid being forced into unfair trade conditions. This is the order that Trump gave Canada for example: Curb the imaginary flood of fentanyl crossing our border or we will impose tariffs. Canada responded with tariffs of their own and in recent elections, handed the Conservative Party a defeat despite them having held a 25 point advantage earlier this year. 

After repeatedly claiming that he would end the Russo-Ukrainian war in a day, he’s now at the point of expressing anger at Putin for his attacks on Kiev. Far from ending the war in a single day, he’s learned that he can’t just waltz into such a complicated geopolitical conflict and dictate his preferred ending – in February, he went so far as to attempt to negotiate an end with Russia without a Ukrainian delegation present. Trump now claiming that the US may step away from negotiations certainly reveals that he has failed to accurately appraise his own abilities. Apparently, he was kidding when he said he would end the war in a day. It is funny but not in the way that he thinks.

Yet another hard lesson that most people have no need to experience to understand is that if you put unqualified idiots in charge of important government departments, they will inevitably reveal their shortcomings. Like one would expect a car salesman to botch a root canal, we should also expect an ex-Fox News presenter to do something like accidentally text war plans to a reporter.

The White House began to walk back international student visa cancellations, promising to restore thousands of student visas. For many years, countries around the world have suffered from brain drain – their young and intelligent people leave for the US to increase their earning potential. 

Between 2020 and 2023, during the “invasion,” 46% of immigrants were college educated. The US hosts 1.1 million international students, approximately 41% of which remain in the country long term to enrich the American workforce with talent. Here we have another existing state of affairs that is perfectly beneficial to the US. Instead of simply leaving it alone, Trump chooses to terrorize international students, making the US substantially less attractive for highly-skilled immigrants. 

Trump is also in the process of learning that you cannot destroy the rule of law and upend Americans’ ability to receive legal representation by black listing firms who have the audacity to represent those who disagree with your policies. First amendment protections guarantee that we have the substantive right to petition the government for redress and this right is diminished if law firms are afraid to represent individuals who are challenging the executive. Courts have been consistently handing this particularly dictatorial strategy defeat after defeat.

One might almost feel bad for all of those poor Department of Justice lawyers who have to walk into court, shoulders slumped, with laughable arguments whose only function is to test the limits of a federal judge’s tolerance for bad-faith desperation. Last week, in a suit against New York’s congestion pricing, a DOJ lawyer mistakenly filed an internal memo that essentially admitted that their argument had no shot of persuading the judge. I’d feel sorry for them if they weren’t spineless hacks who lack the self-respect to resign rather than assist the corrupt goals of the administration.

That is the story of Trump’s first 100 days – ridiculous idea after ridiculous idea, all crashing after reality imposes its undefeated will. Ideas like deporting US citizens to foreign prisons should immediately sound insane to any person of sound mind – not to Trump. Like a child who has to burn himself on a hot stove, Trump’s mind doesn’t have a mechanism for discerning the obvious.

Rafael Perez is a columnist for the Southern California News Group.

​ Orange County Register 

Here’s how to find a doctor who prescribes medical-aid-in-dying drugs

• May 4, 2025

When my last day finally comes — hopefully, not until I’m 105 or so — I want to be in full control of my own death. I do not want my last minutes on this agonizingly beautiful planet to be lost in a paralyzing morphine haze, devoid of food and water, diapered and gasping, until some final crescendo where every system shuts down. Ouch. Eek. No, no, no.

I’ve heard from so many readers who feel the same way — but, even though death with dignity has been the law of the land in California for nearly a decade, we remain mystified about how, exactly, to access this kind of care. Hospitals can, and do, refuse to provide it on moral and religious grounds. Doctors who object have no obligation to refer us to doctors who support it. And even with entire websites devoted to the law’s intricacies, finding an actual practitioner, near you, when you need it, can be a confoundingly baffling exercise, especially in the grief of the moment.

We’re going to fix that today. In this story, we’ll direct you to medical-aid-in-dying assistance in California (bookmark the pages in case you need them someday). We’ll tell you what it’s like from the physician’s vantage point. We’ll tell you how it works and what to expect — and we’ll hope that we all pass peacefully in our sleep at 105 and never need it.

Called to service

In 2016, when the End of Life Option Act became law, psychiatrist Jeff Levine was preparing for retirement. He had watched, broken-hearted and helpless, as his father suffered through his final days, “not being able to do what he wanted — which was to get it over with,” Levine said.

It’s a horrible, horrible feeling that I recently endured with my dad. But Levine was in a position to do something about it. Perhaps, he thought, he might be able to spare others that singular agony.

So he contacted Lonny Shavelson, the Berkeley emergency room physician/journalist who wrote “A Chosen Death: The Dying Confront Assisted Suicide” back in 1995 and was a leading proponent of the new law. “Extraordinary portraits of five dying people who contemplate ending their own lives, sensitively and movingly written by a physician who has thought long and hard about the issue of assisted suicide,” Kirkus Reviews said of his book.

Shavelson was organizing Bay Area colleagues to step up and fulfill the new law’s promise. Levine wanted to do the same for Orange County and Southern California.

“I started cold-calling doctors — and got a horrible response,” he said with something between a laugh and a wince. “‘We don’t kill our patients!’ ‘Haven’t you heard of the Hippocratic oath?’”

Why yes, yes, he had. But sometimes, the most humane and compassionate care a doctor can give at the end of life is to help fulfill a patient’s wish for the pain to stop. California’s lack of such a law in 2014 forced Brittany Maynard to leave her home in California for Oregon, where death with dignity was legal. She was only 29, but had terminal brain cancer. She feared pain, personality changes “and verbal, cognitive and motor loss” even with palliative medication. “Because the rest of my body is young and healthy, I am likely to physically hang on for a long time even though cancer is eating my mind,” she wrote. “I probably would have suffered in hospice care for weeks or even months. And my family would have had to watch that.” Maynard was the moral force pushing California’s End of Life Option Act over the finish line in 2015.

Levine had these conversations with doctor after doctor, and found an empathetic ear in Susan Gardner, a friend of a friend. She had recently retired after 35 years as an emergency room physician in Los Angeles. She had seen so many very elderly, very sick people who were, simply put, not allowed to die. “I love saving people,” she said. “But for some, especially for some very old people, it was torture for them. Literal torture.”

But this new law was uncharted waters. She worried. She tried to say no to Levine — numerous times — but, deep down, knew how important the work was.

“Let’s just do one case together,” Levine said. “Just one.”

Twist, twist, twist went the arm. Reluctantly, she agreed.

‘Scared’

Their first patient was a woman with metastatic breast cancer. She was, as the law requires, terminally ill, with less than six months to live. She was, as the law requires, of sound mind when she made her first request for the drugs. She was, as the law required, of sound mind when she asked for the drugs again two weeks later. (Since then, the period between the two asks has shortened to 48 hours.)

Interviews with patients typically start with a question designed to see how cognizant they are, such as, “Do you understand why I’m talking to you today?” The answer is usually something like, “Yes. You’re the doctor who’s going to help me get medicine so I can die.”

That’s really what you want? Why? The answers are often a catalog of miseries: debilitating pain that gets worse every day; an acute inability to sleep — tossing and turning through the night only to meet daylight with profound exhaustion; difficulties eating and drinking; mounting indignities. They’re just done, Levine said. They don’t want to do it anymore. They know they’re going to die, and soon, and they simply want to exert a little control over the bitter end to make it not quite so bitter.

There’s reflection. They’ve had good lives, people say. They’re grateful. They’re ready.

A combination of a cardiotonic, opioid and sedative drugs is the most common prescription for medical aid in dying, according to the California Department of Public Health. Patients usually drink it, and it has to be self-administered — which means, literally, no one is forcing their hand.

Their first patient set a date. Her whole family gathered a week beforehand to spend that time with her. When the day finally came, everyone crowded into the room, saying goodbye, good night, thank you, I love you. There were tears, but the patient was at peace.

Levine and Gardner, however, weren’t quite exactly at peace. It was, honestly, a bit scary.

Death does not come instantly. It takes hours for the body to shut down. The doctors made regular calls to Northern California to make sure that everything was unfolding as it should.

After the first hour or so, the woman’s family started telling stories. “Remember when…?” There was laughter. Soon, there were jokes. It wound up being an incredibly profound experience, the doctors said.

“Some thought they were going on to a better place, but many did not. Would I have the courage?” Gardner mused. “It was very inspiring.”

Peace of mind

Sometimes, patients were denied: It wasn’t clear their lives would end within six months, or they were of sound mind when they began the process but not when it was time for next steps.

And there were times, though rare, when the patient wanted the drugs but family members were vehemently opposed. Ugly things were said. The doctors had to calmly explain, often to adult children, that they weren’t the patient — their parent was.

Usually, though, those battles had been fought and settled long before the doctors entered the picture. Often, finding a doctor to help was such an ordeal that families met them with gratitude and relief.

When the law took effect in June 2016, there were more than 113,000 licensed physicians in California. Only 173 of them were writing prescriptions for medical-aid-in-dying drugs, according to data from the state.

In the first six months, 258 people started the process. Doctors wrote 191 prescriptions. Only 111 people used them and died.

Since then, the number of prescribing doctors has essentially doubled —  to 337 — but that’s still an incredibly small fraction of California’s 125,000 licensed physicians. And doctors can still be a challenge to find.

To make that easier, Levine created a website to help people access help in Southern California: socalendoflifeoptions.com, which is now run by another doctor. There’s also the Academy of Aid In Dying Medicine at aadm.org (click on the “For Patients and Families” tab, then “Find a Provider.” You’ll find a form there which will get you to a referral). And in Northern California, Shavelson’s Bay Area End of Life Options can be accessed at bayareaendoflifeoptions.com.

If you or someone you love is in a hospital or hospice and you ask for medical-aid-in-dying drugs but are refused — this happened to Marie-Noële Anne Tusler at Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian in 2021 — these resources can direct you to the help you seek.

Meantime, California’s law is slated to sunset in 2031; a bill pending in Sacramento by Sen. Catherine Blakespear, D-Encinitas, would extend it indefinitely.

The doctors will be watching. They’ve retired from their retirement work, satisfied that they’ve provided peace of mind to people at the culmination of life — whether patients wound up using the prescriptions or not.

Mission accomplished, Levine said. But his friends joke that he’d better not die before they do.

​ Orange County Register 

Advocates push for mandatory retrofitting of existing homes in fire zones

• May 4, 2025

For years, fire prevention groups have pushed residents to harden homes in wildfire-prone areas.

With the frequency and severity of such blazes on the rise, people need to replace old vents, roofs and windows with upgrades that protect their home against a whirlwind of heat and embers during a conflagration, they say.

Yet limited incentives exist to spur homeowners to take on the expense of such upgrades.

Now, with the memory of Los Angeles County’s firestorms still fresh, public interest groups are urging local leaders to make such retrofits mandatory.

Last month, the Insurance Institute for Business and Home Safety called on L.A. city and county leaders to require retrofits for surviving homes in Altadena and Pacific Palisades.

Also see: What is ‘home hardening’? Fire-resistant walls, roofs, windows and landscaping

“Existing homes that survived the Palisades and Eaton fires also contribute to Los Angeles’ wildfire risk,” the insurance institute said in an open letter April 8. “At minimum, these homes must take … mitigation actions to contribute to a more survivable and insurable future.”

The insurance-backed research group also called for incentives and financial assistance to cover homeowners’ retrofitting costs.

In March, the Urban Land Institute issued a report called “Project Recovery,” calling on state and local leaders to “bridge the gap” in fire-hardening building codes.

While new construction in fire zones must comply with California’s wildfire building code, existing homes do not, said the report, which was prepared in conjunction with UCLA and USC.

Also see: California rules will require more fire resistant homes in Palisades, Altadena

More than 90% of the Altadena and Pacific Palisades homes were built before the wildfire building codes fully took effect in 2008, U.S. Census figures show.

“If you have an old house and you’re doing minor renovation, it may not trigger that upgrade,” said Darcy Coleman, a commercial real estate executive who worked on the Project Recovery report. “There is a major risk gap there.”

The January fires destroyed more than 11,000 homes, according to the Los Angeles County Assessor’s Office.

But 38%-42% of the houses in the Palisades and Eaton fire zones — more than 7,300 single-family homes — escaped with little to no structural damage.

New state fire maps released in recent months show that roughly 3.7 million people — or one out of 10 Californians — live in areas prone to wildfires, according to a CalMatters report.

In Southern California, at least 1,766 square miles have been designated as having a “high” or “very high” wildfire risk, accounting for almost half of the state’s most fire-prone areas.

Related: Newsom tells forestry board to speed up rules for ember-free zones

Retrofitting older homes can be expensive. A minimal retrofitting can range from $10,000 to $15,000 for a 2,000-square-foot house, according to a 2024 study by Headwaters Economics.

Such a retrofit would include installation of flame- and ember-resistant vents, metal flashing where walls meet the ground or decks, metal guards covering rain gutters and replacing bark mulch with gravel next to a house.

The cost to completely retrofit a 2,000-square-foot home, the study found, would be $23,000 to $40,000.

The insurance institute urged city and county leaders to develop a grant program to assist homeowners in paying for retrofits.

“These fires aren’t anomalies, … and we really need to be prepared for when they do occur,” said Steve Hawks, a former Cal Fire official now serving as the insurance institute’s wildfire director. “If a home needs a significant number of retrofits, that could be costly. Some homeowners would likely need some financial assistance.”

Inspection uptick

Several homeowners agreed they couldn’t pay for retrofits without assistance.

“That’s a big ask, especially when insurance is not stepping up to do anything,” said Kambiz Kamdar, a Pacific Palisades builder whose own home survived the wildfire but needs several upgrades. “If the state or the city or whoever wants to step in and provide grants or funds or whatever, I’m sure people will be happy to take it.”

On the other hand, others are willing to pay out of pocket if it means surviving a nightmare like January’s firestorms.

Lisa and Ken Drew recently spent thousands creating a non-flammable buffer around their two-story house in Upland, tearing out beach daisies and aloe plants next the house, widening a cement walkway and replacing bark mulch with gravel.

On April 24, the Drews paid more than $500 to have Trident Inspection Group evaluate their home in hopes of getting a small insurance discount. They had more than money on their minds.

“We’re worried about the hills up there,” Lisa Drew, 69, a retired teacher, said while pointing north to the San Gabriel Mountains. The very-high fire zone ringing those mountains lies just 2 miles from the Drews’ house, the same distance as homes that burned in Altadena.

Last September, the Drews watched in horror as flames from the 56,000-acre Bridge fire crested the ridge atop those nearby mountains.

Should a firestorm erupt in their neighborhood, said Drew, a firefighter’s daughter, “we would like to be the ones whose house is still standing.”

The Drews aren’t the only ones fire-hardening their homes.

Trident has seen an uptick in inquiries and inspections since the L.A. firestorms, said Jeff Clark, the company’s owner. The Orange County firm conducted more than a dozen inspections at homes that survived the fires in Pacific Palisades and Altadena.

Business has doubled for another wildfire firm, All Risk Shield, said company owner Joe Torres.

“Those fires kind of gave folks a reality check,” Torres said of the January blazes. “It doesn’t matter where you are, where you live, here in California there’s high susceptibility to fire risks. … People are realizing, I should do something about this.”

‘Hardening the envelope’

To make a home fire resistant, you need to “harden the envelope,” retrofitting guides say.

The insurance institute recommends that at a minimum, existing homes should have:

— A Class A, fire-resistant roof, with metal rain gutters, downspouts and gutter covers.

— Ember-resistant vents with one-eighth-inch mesh.

— Six inches of noncombustible material at the base of all exterior walls to keep accumulating embers from igniting the walls.

— A 100-foot zone of “defensible space” outside the home, including a five-foot non-flammable buffer surrounding the dwelling.

Tests at fire labs show that these upgrades can improve a home’s survivability, Hawks said.

The internet offers a wide array of retrofitting guides from such agencies as the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (or Cal Fire) to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) and the insurance institute’s Wildfire Prepared program.

In addition, there’s pending legislation to help homeowners pay for retrofitting.

The California Safe Homes grant program, backed by the state Insurance Department, would create grants for low-income homeowners who install fire-safe roofs or create a five-foot noncombustible zone around their homes.

Two others would create state and federal tax credits for fire-hardening.

The Fire Safe Home Tax Credits Act would create state tax breaks through 2030 covering half the cost of retrofitting against fires. Homeowners could get up to $5,000 in high fire hazard zones and up to $10,000 in very-high fire hazard zones. The credits are limited to single filers earning up to $70,000 a year and to couples earning up to $140,000 a year.

The Firewall Act, co-sponsored by U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff, would create a federal tax credit for half of the cost for improvements to protect against wildfires and other natural disasters, maxing out at $25,000 for homeowners earning less than $200,000 a year, with gradually smaller maximums for those earning up to $300,000 a year.

A 2021 report by the Southern California nonprofit Environment Now found that less than 4% of California’s wildfire budget that year was designated for “community hardening.”

“Even though home retrofits offer some of the most effective tools for increasing public safety during wildfires,” the report said, “that approach is still getting the crumbs from the actual expenditures.”

‘We’re lucky’

Pacific Palisades resident Peter Cohan installed 22 ember-resistant vents at his home around five or six years ago. He also landscaped his yard with succulents and installed stone terraces and pebbles around the perimeter of his house. 

When the smoke cleared in January, his house was still standing.

The vents alone cost $4,200. But he credits the upgrades with saving his home.

“I would do it every day of the year,” he said.

Another homeowner, Robert Dickey, 66, couldn’t tell you why his 76-year-old home survived.

“We’re lucky,” Dickey said. “About four or five houses down, everything’s gone.”

The Dickeys plan to replace all their attic and crawl-space vents with modern, ember-resistant versions. They’re also considering other retrofits, but only up to a point.

“We don’t have unlimited funds to do this,” he said.

And he wonders whether a thorough retrofit will be worth the money for him and his wife.

Schools, churches and stores are gone, he said. By the time the neighborhood comes back, “we will probably be really old by then.”

“So, to do a retrofit proactively that’s going to help us for the next 30 years, I don’t think we would probably do that.”

Vulnerable to fire

It took Trident’s Jeff Clark 90 minutes to evaluate the Drews’ house. He launched a drone, crawled up on the roof and walked all around the yard with a tape measure and a clipboard.

“Your house is well prepared,” he told the Drews afterward. But, he added, “if I had to give it a grade, it would be a B.”

The home, Clark said, still has vulnerabilities.

Shrubs beneath a backyard sycamore need to be removed to keep flames from “laddering” up into the tree branches, Clark said. Pine needles need to be cleaned out from under the solar panels at least twice a year.

In addition, metal covers are needed to keep dry leaves out of rain gutters. Vents need updating. And while the Drews have dual-pane windows, they’re made from safety glass, instead of shatter-resistant tempered glass.

But, Clark conceded, there are limits to what any homeowner can accomplish. At a minimum of $50 per linear foot, enclosing the eaves could be a budget buster, costing $9,000 or more.

“That’s where budget and practicality comes in,” Clark said.

The Drews said they would do what they could to make their home more survivable and lower their insurance costs.

“It’s the long-term benefits that we were looking at as climate change makes Southern California hotter and drier,” Lisa Drew said. “We want to make sure that we are doing everything possible to keep getting insured and to get the lowest rates they’re willing to offer.”

​ Orange County Register 

South and West school California in housing policy

• May 4, 2025

California lawmakers continue to fret about the state’s overly expensive housing market—something causing many renters and homeowners to be “cost burdened,” as the jargon puts it. Per the Public Policy Institute of California, “More than half of the state’s renters—and four in 10 mortgaged homeowners—spend 30% or more of their household income on housing.” We top the nation, but not in a good way.

The Legislature has for years been nibbling around the edges, passing a series of bills that deregulate some types of housing. We have applauded those efforts while noting they don’t go nearly far enough. They mainly exempt or streamline the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) or California Coastal Act provisions for high-density, urban infill projects.

The problem is most California Democrats don’t like suburban “sprawl” development and prefer that Californians live in small apartments and condos, where they can then rely on buses and rail rather than freeways to get around. High-density housing is fine, but the state needs more housing of all types. And most Californians prefer to live in single-family homes.

The latest high-profile effort is Assembly Bill 609 by Assembly member Buffy Wicks, D-Berkeley, which admirably exempts CEQA from much larger projects but, alas, it still mainly applies to multi-family and infill housing projects. If lawmakers are serious about addressing our housing crisis, they need to fix CEQA for all types of projects and stop trying to pick winners and losers.

Again, we support AB 609 — but it’s unlikely to do that much more than the current exemptions. Studies show that they haven’t created much new housing at all. California politicians like to think of the state as a leader especially vis a vis more conservative states in the Sun Belt and Mountain West, but this is a good time for them to start following policies that have worked so well in those places, especially with regard to housing.

A new study from the George W. Bush Institute look at the nation’s top 250 metro housing markets and provide a deeper analysis of 25 large metro areas in pro-growth states. It’s not going to shock readers of these pages, but those metros do a far better job than California in incentivizing housing construction. Because their regulations promote growth and are predictable and less cumbersome, housing prices — and we’re talking growing cities, not stagnant backwaters—are lower. This improves the economic condition of poor and working-class families.

“The nation suffers from a demand-supply mismatch: Demand for homes in wealthy, scenic Pacific Coast metros has been strong, but ultra-restrictive policies have blocked sufficient supply,” according to the report. “The leading Sun Belt metros have outperformed in adding housing supply because demand to live there has grown and policies have allowed housing supply to keep up.”

The analysis details specific policies, but they all come down to the basics: Make it easier for builders to construct market-rate housing and reduce zoning restrictions. There’s an important role for government, it notes, by “getting the basics right” on issues such as public safety, infrastructure and the efficient provision of public services. Indeed, the report echoes many of the YIMBY (Yes In My Back Yard) themes touted by California lawmakers. They just need to take those ideas much further.

​ Orange County Register