A California wildfire recovery bill will be shelved until 2026, after a torrent of online conspiracy theories and confusion overwhelmed public discussion and policymaking, the Los Angeles Times reported.
State Sen. Benjamin Allen (D-Santa Monica) announced that he would pause S.B. 549 — legislation that would have created a local authority to buy lots destroyed in the recent wildfires and offer reconstruction assistance.
“If we’re going to do this, I want the time to do it right,” Allen said.
The move comes after weeks of social media outcry — much of it centered on claims that the bill was a vehicle for forcing low-income housing into Pacific Palisades, one of the neighborhoods devastated by January’s Southern California wildfires. None of the claims are true, the Times reported.
Online speculation reportedly spiked after reality TV personality Spencer Pratt — who lost his Palisades home in the fire — posted TikTok videos that accused the bill of enabling Los Angeles County to seize land and convert it into dense, low-income developments.
“I don’t even think this is political,” Pratt said in one video. “This is a common sense post.”
Pratt said he consulted an AI engine about the bill — which he claimed confirmed his fears. But the bill does not override zoning laws, force dense housing or contain provisions about specific developments.
“It’s become this total meme among the right-wing blogosphere and, unfortunately, picked up by some lazy-ass journalists that don’t bother to read the bill that say this bill seeks to turn the entire Palisades into low-income housing,” Allen told the Los Angeles Times. “People are saying I want to put a train line in there. It’s insane.”
Much of the confusion appears to stem from the legislative process. SB 549 originally focused on financing for low-income housing. Allen later amended it to include language establishing the new wildfire rebuilding authority — a move designed to meet a tight deadline for introducing new legislation.
At the same time, California Gov. Gavin Newsom announced the state would redirect $101 million in existing low-income housing funds to Los Angeles — prioritizing projects near burn zones that set aside units for fire survivors.
This separate effort also does not override zoning laws or force any development.
“Let’s be clear: The state is not taking away anyone’s property, instituting some sort of mass rezoning or destroying the quality and character of destroyed neighborhoods. Period,” Newsom said in a statement to the Los Angeles Times. “Anyone claiming otherwise is either misinformed or deliberately lying. That’s not just wrong — it’s disgraceful.”
Still, mistrust among residents persists.
Pratt has sued the city, claiming officials failed to maintain the infrastructure needed to fight the fire.
He said in a video, “We’re a fire-stricken community, not a policy sandbox. We do not support the county becoming a dominant landowner in the Palisades.”
Allen acknowledged the bill lacked consensus, especially on whether the new authority would apply to incorporated areas like the Palisades or only to unincorporated zones such as Altadena.
Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass also opposed the bill, saying the city had not been persuaded of its effectiveness.
English (US) · 