California redirects $369 million of wildfire relief to low‑income housing projects
California state officials announced on Oct. 19, 2026 that $368.7 million of federal wildfire assistance funds would be awarded to developers for dense, low‑income housing projects, rather than to the homeowners who lost their residences in the 2018 Camp and Woolsey fires.
The shift came after the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development allocated more than $1 billion to the state for post‑fire recovery. While $222.4 million was set aside for homeowners, only $38 million had been spent rebuilding homes by the end of 2023, according to state records.
Victims such as Mickey Schechter, a 62‑year‑old motivational speaker who lost his home in the Woolsey Fire, expressed anger that the grant money was flowing to apartments instead of to those still living in trailers or makeshift shelters. "That’s our money. We’re the ones that suffer for it," he told reporters.
Developers received the bulk of the funding with no guarantee that any units would be reserved for fire survivors. One award of $26.1 million went to National CORE for an 81‑unit project in Agoura Hills, despite the project’s low score and the lack of a requirement to house displaced residents.
State officials defended the allocation, arguing that new apartments replace homes lost to the fires. HCD spokeswoman Jennifer Hanson said displaced renters generally move to existing rental units, implying that new construction benefits the broader community.
Critics contend the move serves ideological goals: redistributing property, advancing a “green” agenda that discourages single‑family homes, and providing politicians a veneer of action on the housing crisis. The funding also raised safety concerns, as some of the new developments are located along narrow evacuation routes that proved problematic during past blazes.
Legal experts warned that diverting disaster relief money could erode public trust in future federal aid, especially after Governor Gavin Newsom blamed congressional inaction for insufficient funding after the 2025 Los Angeles wildfires.
Federal oversight of the program remains limited, and advocacy groups are calling for stricter monitoring to ensure that any remaining funds directly support rebuilding homeowners. The controversy is likely to influence upcoming HUD reviews of state recovery plans and could prompt congressional inquiries into the use of disaster assistance dollars.
