Gov. Gavin Newsom Praises Cleanup Progress in Altadena, Vows Swift Debris Removal
On Tuesday, California Gov. Gavin Newsom visited Altadena to commend the progress of the cleanup efforts following the devastating Eaton and Palisades fires. The governor emphasized the state’s commitment to completing debris removal at an “unprecedented, record-breaking speed.” Newsom highlighted that 65% of the initial hazardous-waste removal would be completed by the end of the week and assured residents that the temporary federal staging areas used to store hazardous materials from the fires are being closely monitored. He also stressed that these sites will be returned cleaner than they were found. While declining to provide a firm timeline for the completion of all debris removal, Newsom suggested that new construction could begin in a matter of weeks, faster than the cleanup efforts following previous major fires, such as the 2018 Woolsey and Camp fires.
Despite the progress, concerns persist among nearby communities about the environmental and health impacts of the temporary waste sites. Catalina Pasillas, a real estate agent living near one of the staging areas in Duarte, expressed worries that the hazardous materials could poison the air and exacerbate her asthma, which was already worsened by smoke from the fires. She and others feel that their neighborhoods were chosen for these sites because they are predominantly working-class Black and Hispanic communities, raising accusations of environmental injustice. These concerns underscore the growing tension over how to handle the immense amount of toxic waste left behind by the fires, which destroyed roughly 12,000 homes and left millions of tons of debris.
Communities Push Back Against Temporary Waste Sites
The debate over the placement of temporary waste sites has sparked intense emotions in the communities surrounding the fire zones. At a recent town hall in Duarte, where hundreds of residents gathered, mayors of four nearby cities faced off against representatives from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and state agencies. The meeting grew heated, with chants of “Find another place!” and demands for officials to “do the right thing.” Mayor Robert Gonzales of Azusa, one of the officials onstage, questioned whether his predominantly Latino community was being treated differently compared to wealthier, predominantly white neighborhoods like Palisades or Pasadena. “Our hearts go out to the folks in Altadena and Pasadena,” Gonzales said, “but in cleaning up one crisis, are we manufacturing a second one?”
Similar concerns have been raised in other communities where temporary waste sites have been established. For instance, in Baldwin Park, resident Veronica Gelles expressed concern about the potential environmental impact of a nearby waste site, emphasizing the responsibility of local leaders to inform residents about possible dangers. Meanwhile, in Topanga Canyon, a petition to remove a waste site near a creek that feeds into the ocean has garnered more signatures than there are residents in the area. Protesters there have held signs reading “No Toxic Debris,” arguing that the site’s location poses a risk to both the environment and public health due to wind and water currents.
EPA Assurances Fail to Alleviate Fears
Federal and state officials have repeatedly assured the public that the temporary waste sites pose no threat to public health or the environment. EPA Deputy Incident Commander Steve Calanog emphasized that crews are taking precautions, such as lining the areas with plastic, using proper containers for each type of waste, and testing the soil before and after processing. He stressed that the sites are temporary and could be removed within weeks. Former EPA Administrator Mike Stoker was even more direct, stating, “When the EPA says it is safe, it is safe.” However, these assurances have done little to ease community concerns.
Some residents have questioned the haste of the cleanup process, pointing to an executive order by President Trump that directed the EPA to clean up hazardous waste from the fires as quickly as possible. Critics argue that this rush could lead to shortcuts and potential risks. On the ground, workers at the Lario Park site in Duarte were seen unloading scorched waste from trucks, sorting hazardous materials into drums and plastic-lined boxes, and de-energizing lithium-ion batteries in a salt-and-bicarbonate solution. EPA On-Scene Coordinator Harry Allen acknowledged that the operation was running at an unusually fast pace, with Phase II of the cleanup beginning even before Phase I was fully completed.
A Growing Challenge of Wildfire Waste Disposal
The dispute over the Los Angeles cleanup highlights the broader challenge of managing wildfire debris in an era of increasing frequency and intensity of fires due to drought and climate change. The cleanup effort is one of the most complex in U.S. history, with the EPA and state agencies working to remove hazardous materials before tackling the bulk of the debris, including ash and damaged foundations. However, the process has been met with resistance in neighboring communities, mirroring patterns seen after other major wildfires.
For example, after the 2018 Camp fire in Northern California, the cleanup was delayed by opposition to a proposed temporary scrapyard. More recently, after the 2023 Maui fires, officials disposed of over 400,000 tons of ash and debris in a temporary landfill, despite fears that it could become permanent. In both cases, concerns about long-term environmental harm and perceptions of environmental injustice have fueled community backlash. As wildfires become more destructive, the question of where to place temporary waste sites—and how to ensure their safety—will continue to be a contentious issue.
Addressing Environmental Justice and Long-Term Solutions
As the cleanup efforts continue, the conversation must also address deeper issues of environmental justice and equity. Communities like Azusa and Duarte, which are already disproportionately affected by pollution and lack the resources to advocate for themselves, feel they are being unfairly burdened with the consequences of the fires. Gonzales’ question—whether his community is being held to a different standard than wealthier neighborhoods—strikes at the heart of this issue. Ensuring that all communities are treated fairly and that their concerns are heard will be crucial to building trust and finding long-term solutions.
At the same time, the urgency of the cleanup must not overshadow the need for careful planning and transparency. As the EPA and state agencies work to complete the cleanup as quickly as possible, they must also engage with local communities to address their fears and ensure that the temporary sites are indeed safe. This includes providing regular updates, conducting independent soil and air testing, and involving residents in decisions about where and how waste is stored. Only by balancing speed with accountability can officials hope to rebuild trust and create a model for future wildfire cleanup efforts that prioritizes both efficiency and environmental justice.
