logo
California FEMA earthquake retrofit grants canceled, imperiling critical work, Schiff says

California FEMA earthquake retrofit grants canceled, imperiling critical work, Schiff says

Yahoo21-05-2025

The Trump administration has canceled $33 million worth of federal funds meant to help pay for earthquake retrofits in California — sparking "grave concern" and a call to reconsider from one of the state's highest elected officials.
In a letter dated Wednesday, Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) urged U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem to reinstate the funds, which would've been used to strengthen between 750 and 1,500 apartment buildings.
"In California, earthquakes are not a question of if, but when," Schiff wrote in his letter, addressed to both Noem and David Richardson, a senior official performing the duties of the FEMA administrator. "This move must be reversed before tragedy strikes next."
The grants — originally green-lit through the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which is part of Noem's department — were meant to help retrofit the kind of vulnerable apartment buildings that crushed people to death when they collapsed during California's last major urban earthquakes.
These types of apartment buildings are ubiquitous across California's major cities. They have flimsy supports on the ground story that prop up carports, garages or storefronts and can snap when shaken from side to side in an earthquake.
FEMA issued a statement on April 4 announcing the cancellation of the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities program, known as BRIC, that would have funded the California earthquake retrofits.
"The BRIC program was yet another example of a wasteful and ineffective FEMA program. It was more concerned with political agendas than helping Americans affected by natural disasters. Under Secretary Noem's leadership, we are committed to ensuring that Americans in crisis can get the help and resources they need," the agency's statement said.
Officials and scientists have known for decades of the earthquake danger posed by soft-story apartment buildings.
Read more: Despite active quake year, some California suburbs refuse to fix vulnerable buildings
Autopsy reports indicate that a number of those killed in these apartment collapses during the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake and the 1994 Northridge earthquake died from suffocation. The weight of debris made it impossible for them to breathe.
Accounts from the collapse of the three-story, 163-unit Northridge Meadows apartment building in 1994 describe some victims in ground-floor units slowly dying in their beds, not able to breathe as the weight of the upper two stories pressed upon them.
Sixteen people, ranging from age 14 to 80, died in the Northridge Meadows collapse. In all, that magnitude 6.7 earthquake seriously damaged or destroyed about 200 soft-story buildings across the Los Angeles area.
In San Francisco's Marina District, seven apartment buildings collapsed during the magnitude 6.9 earthquake in 1989. Three people died in a four-story apartment building in which the top two stories collapsed onto the second floor, according to coroner's documents. A couple, age 48 and 40, died. A 3½-month-old also died when a stairway collapsed as his mother tried to flee the building with him.
A U.S. Geological Survey report published in 1998 said that "soft-story" apartments were "surprisingly vulnerable to becoming uninhabitable" in both the 1989 and 1994 earthquakes. Of the 16,000 housing units rendered uninhabitable in the Loma Prieta earthquake, 7,000 were soft-story. The same was true of 11,000 out of the 48,000 units made uninhabitable in the Northridge quake.
The California Residential Mitigation Program was counting on federal FEMA grants to fund retrofit work on soft-story apartments. In late 2024, program officials said they hoped to offer grants to apartment owners in cities that already have mandatory retrofit laws for these buildings. The initial focus was planned to be on areas with socially vulnerable populations.
"By eliminating this critical source of federal funding, we are leaving those who can least afford it at the greatest risk of displacement, which could cost lives," Schiff wrote in his letter.
Southern California cities that have passed mandatory soft-story retrofit ordinances include Los Angeles, Torrance, Pasadena, Burbank, Santa Monica, Culver City, West Hollywood and Beverly Hills. In Northern California, they include San José, San Francisco, Oakland, Fremont, Berkeley, Albany and Mill Valley.
A common retrofit technique for soft-story buildings is to install steel frames on the ground story.
Read more: When it comes to earthquakes, Republicans and Democrats agree on L.A. retrofitting, poll finds
BRIC grant funds that haven't yet been distributed to states, tribes, territories or local communities would be returned to the U.S. Treasury or FEMA's Disaster Relief Fund, according to the agency. The statement said about $882 million will be returned or reapportioned by Congress in the next fiscal year.
"FEMA estimates more than $3.6 billion will remain in the Disaster Relief Fund to assist with disaster response and recovery for communities and survivors," the statement said.
BRIC was originally created in 2018 — during President Trump's first term — through the Disaster Recovery Reform Act, according to the American Society of Civil Engineers, which supported the program. The goal, that organization says, was "to ensure a stable funding source to support" projects that seek to reduce the risk from future natural disasters. BRIC replaced a similar FEMA program, called the Pre-Disaster Mitigation program.
"BRIC supported projects such as flood control systems, wildfire prevention, stormwater management upgrades, and strengthened building codes. The program typically covered up to 75% of project costs and awarded more than $5 billion in grants," according to the civil engineers society.
Read more: As climate hazards worsen, Trump moves to weaken FEMA and shift disaster response onto states
BRIC received a boost during the Biden administration following passage of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which authorized an additional $1 billion in funding over five years, the civil engineers society said.
The Biden administration in 2021 hailed the expansion of BRIC's funding as a way for states and other local governments "to proactively reduce their vulnerability to natural hazard events before they occur."
The California Governor's Office of Emergency Services has identified up to $870 million in BRIC projects statewide that will lose federal funding. In Southern California, potential losses include:
$46.3 million for San Bernardino County's Inland Empire recycled water and aquifer storage project
$36.4 million for San Bernardino County's Flood Control District Mission Channel project
$16 million for stabilization work for the landslide in Rancho Palos Verdes
$15 million for San Bernardino County's Cable Creek Basin flood mitigation project
$9.8 million for a shoreline adaptation project in Orange County
Read more: Rancho Palos Verdes is home to a Trump golf course. But his cuts are imperiling the city's landslide response
Other major projects statewide that stand to lose money include $29.7 million for climate change resiliency in Yuba County, $32 million for wildfire retrofitting in Nevada County, $35 million for wildfire mitigation in Napa County, $37 million for wildfire resiliency in Sonoma County, $37.9 million for wildfire resiliency in Mendocino County.
Also in jeopardy is up to $50 million in funding apiece for a Port of San Francisco coastal resilience project, a flood protection project for the Menlo Park area, a flood adaptation project in Oakland and Alameda, a Sutter Bypass levee project in the Central Valley, for water supply resiliency for the city of Riverbank in Stanislaus County, and for infrastructure resiliency for the city of Pacifica in San Mateo County.
Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week.
This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Judge puts temporary hold on Trump's latest ban on Harvard's foreign students
Judge puts temporary hold on Trump's latest ban on Harvard's foreign students

San Francisco Chronicle​

time34 minutes ago

  • San Francisco Chronicle​

Judge puts temporary hold on Trump's latest ban on Harvard's foreign students

WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge late Thursday temporarily blocked a proclamation by President Donald Trump that banned foreign students from entering the U.S. to attend Harvard University. Trump's proclamation, issued Wednesday, marked the latest attempt by his administration to cut off the nation's oldest and wealthiest college from a quarter of its student body, which accounts for much of Harvard's research and scholarship. Harvard filed a legal challenge the next day, asking for a judge to block Trump's order and calling it illegal retaliation for Harvard's rejection of White House demands. Harvard said the president was attempting an end-run around a previous court order. A few hours later, U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs in Boston issued a temporary restraining order against Trump's Wednesday proclamation. Harvard, she said, had demonstrated it would sustain 'immediate and irreparable injury' before she would have an opportunity to hear from the parties in the lawsuit. Burroughs also extended the temporary hold she placed on the administration's previous attempt to end Harvard's enrollment of international students. Last month, the Department of Homeland Security revoked Harvard's certification to host foreign students and issue paperwork to them for their visas, only to have Burroughs block the action temporarily. Trump's order this week invoked a different legal authority. If Trump's measure survives this court challenge, it would block thousands of students who are scheduled to come to Harvard's campus in Cambridge, Massachusetts, for the summer and fall terms. 'Harvard's more than 7,000 F-1 and J-1 visa holders — and their dependents — have become pawns in the government's escalating campaign of retaliation,' Harvard wrote Thursday. While the court case proceeds, Harvard is making contingency plans so students and visiting scholars can continue their work at the university, President Alan Garber said in a message to the campus and alumni. 'Each of us is part of a truly global university community,' Garber said Thursday. 'We know that the benefits of bringing talented people together from around the world are unique and irreplaceable.' ___ The Associated Press' education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at

Tesla Stock Plunges: Here's What Daniel Ives Predicts Next
Tesla Stock Plunges: Here's What Daniel Ives Predicts Next

Business Insider

time35 minutes ago

  • Business Insider

Tesla Stock Plunges: Here's What Daniel Ives Predicts Next

Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) shares plunged 14% today, marking their worst single-day drop since 2020. But the selloff had less to do with electric cars and everything to do with electric egos. What began as a policy disagreement quickly escalated into a high-stakes feud between Elon Musk and President Donald Trump. Confident Investing Starts Here: The fallout began with the administration's newly proposed 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act,' which aims to slash clean energy incentives, including the $7,500 tax credit for electric vehicles and solar subsidies. Musk called the bill a 'disgusting abomination,' warning it would set back American innovation. Trump fired back by threatening to cut off all federal contracts and subsidies for Musk's companies, including Tesla and SpaceX, claiming the move would save 'Billions and Billions of Dollars.' Musk responded by accusing Trump of betrayal and asserting that his prior support helped Trump win the presidency. He went even further, alleging that Trump's name appears in classified Epstein-related documents. But beyond the personal barbs, the proposed legislation poses real financial consequences for Tesla. Analysts estimate that eliminating the $7,500 EV tax credit could shave roughly $1.2 billion from Tesla's annual profits, nearly 19% of its earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT). On top of that, Tesla's $2.76 billion in revenue from selling regulatory credits in 2024 is also at risk, as the bill's rollback of clean energy incentives threatens this income stream. Wedbush analyst Daniel Ives, who's been bullish on Tesla for years, chimed in with his take on the situation, and offered a glimpse of where he thinks the stock could be headed next. 'The quickly deteriorating friendship and now 'major beef' between Musk and Trump is jaw dropping and a shock to the market and putting major fear for Tesla investors on what is ahead. This situation between Musk and Trump could start to settle down and the friendship continues but this must start to be calmed down on the Musk and Trump fronts and it's not good for either side. This feud does not change our bullish view of Tesla and the autonomous view but clearly does put a fly in the ointment of the Trump regulatory framework going forward. It's another Twilight Zone moment in this Musk/Trump relationship which now is quickly moving downhill,' Ives noted. That 'bullish view' comes with an Outperform (i.e., Buy) rating, and a $500 price target, which implies about 76% upside from TSLA's current levels. (To watch Ives' track record, click here) Generally speaking, however, the Wall Street analysts have a different idea. TSLA stock only claims a Hold (i.e. neutral) consensus rating, based on 16 Buy recommendations, 10 Holds and 11 Sells. Going by the $282.70 average price target, the shares will stay rangebound for the time being. (See TSLA stock forecast) To find good ideas for stocks trading at attractive valuations, visit TipRanks' Best Stocks to Buy, a tool that unites all of TipRanks' equity insights.

'London is back:' Mayor — and Trump critic — Sadiq Khan looks to lure businesses from the U.S.
'London is back:' Mayor — and Trump critic — Sadiq Khan looks to lure businesses from the U.S.

CNBC

time36 minutes ago

  • CNBC

'London is back:' Mayor — and Trump critic — Sadiq Khan looks to lure businesses from the U.S.

"London is back," the capital's Mayor Sadiq Khan told CNBC on Wednesday, laying out his ambition to attract investors, visitors and students who are looking for an alternative to the U.S amid an uncertain Trump 2.0 era. "At a time of growing international instability, at a time when there are, let's be frank, choppy political waters in the U.S., we're that rare thing — somewhere that's stable, that's open, that's diverse. A brilliant environment for innovation, creativity and business," the mayor of London told CNBC's Tania Bryer. U.S. President Donald Trump's often mercurial position on trade, immigration and visa policies have rattled markets as well as businesses, tourists and students looking to make the U.S. their base. Khan said the U.K. was seeing an increase in interest from American businesses and individuals looking to avoid more uncertain economic times and societal changes at home. "They're our closest ally ... so I don't see America as competition, I see them as our great partner and long may that continue, but I recognize the reality of the last few months which is that some American businesses, individuals and people in different sectors who, for a variety of reasons, are looking for somewhere new." "My message is very simple: actually in London we have everything you could possibly want, not only in terms of our stability, openness and diversity, but our values too." There's no love lost between Khan and Trump, with the former in 2019 calling the president a "poster boy" for the far right. Trump fired back at the time, calling the mayor "a stone cold loser who should focus on crime in London, not me." With Trump winning a second term in office last November, critics like Khan have had to take a more diplomatic stance as the U.K. government under the Labour Party, which Khan belongs to, has looked to build bridges with the Trump administration. Despite their political differences, Prime Minister Keir Starmer appears to have curried favor with Anglophile Trump, with the leaders seemingly getting on well and Starmer winning a much sought-after trade deal with the U.S. last month, averting many of the punitive trade tariffs facing other U.S. allies and adversaries alike. "What's important is for all of us to put aside out personal views when it's in the national interest to do so," Khan said, adding that "we can't escape the fact though that there are some things that the president has said or done that are controversial, and it's really important that we speak up on things we agree with, but also on things we disagree with."

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store