California Governor Gavin Newsom has issued Executive Order N-14-25, an emergency measure aimed at accelerating the rebuilding process and expanding access to temporary housing for survivors of the devastating Los Angeles-area wildfires.

The order, signed on January 27, 2025, reinforces previous suspensions of regulatory requirements under the California Coastal Act and streamlines access to hotel and short-term rental stays for displaced residents.

“As the state helps the Los Angeles area rebuild and recover, we will continue to remove barriers and red tape that stand in the way. We will not let over-regulation stop us from helping the LA community rebuild and recover.” -Governor Gavin Newsom

The executive order follows the destruction caused by multiple fires, including the Palisades, Eaton, Hurst, Lidia, Sunset, Woodley, and Hughes Fires, which have collectively burned over 47,900 acres and damaged or destroyed more than 16,100 structures.

With thousands of residents displaced and communities facing a long road to recovery, the governor’s latest action aims to eliminate bureaucratic delays and increase housing availability in the affected region.

Cutting Red Tape in Rebuilding

A key provision of Executive Order N-14-25 addresses the California Coastal Commission’s regulatory role, reinforcing previous suspensions of permitting and exemption requirements under the California Coastal Act. The order directly overrides guidance issued by the Coastal Commission, which had suggested that projects still required approval under certain exemption provisions, potentially delaying the rebuilding process.

“The guidance’s suggestion that a project for which any California Coastal Act permit requirement has been suspended by my Executive Orders are nonetheless subject to the statutory permit exemption process...is legally erroneous” -Executive Order N-14-25

By removing permitting roadblocks, the order allows homeowners, businesses, and communities to begin reconstruction efforts immediately, rather than waiting for lengthy environmental or zoning approvals. It also specifically directs the California Coastal Commission to cease issuing any guidance or imposing additional conditions that could interfere with the rebuilding process.

The potential upside of this provision is clear—faster recovery, less bureaucracy, and fewer legal hurdles for fire victims who need to rebuild. With previous executive orders already waiving California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements and streamlining the approval of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) for additional housing, this latest move further accelerates the rebuilding process.

However, the long-term ramifications remain uncertain. By sidelining traditional environmental and zoning protections, this order sets a legal precedent for future disaster recovery efforts—one that may lead to conflicts between state and local agencies over the balance between rapid recovery and environmental oversight.

Expanding Access to Temporary Housing

In addition to easing rebuilding regulations, Executive Order N-14-25 also takes aim at barriers that could prevent displaced residents from securing short-term housing. This builds on Executive Order N-6-25, which Newsom signed on January 12th.

Under normal California law, individuals who stay in hotels, motels, or other temporary lodgings for more than 30 days are granted tenant protections, which may discourage property owners from offering long-term stays to evacuees.

To address this, the executive order temporarily classifies displaced individuals as transient occupants for the duration of their stay, through March 8, 2025. This effectively exempts them from tenant protections and ensures that hotels, motels, and short-term rentals remain viable options for extended stays.

This measure is expected to help stabilize thousands of displaced residents, ensuring they do not face eviction or abrupt displacement from temporary shelters due to legal concerns over tenant status.

“A person displaced from their primary residence in Los Angeles County as a result of the emergency, and who is occupying a hotel, motel, residence club, or other facility...shall be deemed to have transient occupancy status for the entire duration of their stay through March 8, 2025.” -Executive Order N-14-25

This provision removes a major disincentive for hotels and rental properties, allowing them to offer longer-term stays to evacuees without concern over tenant protections or eviction complications. It also permits Los Angeles County and its cities to continue levying transient occupancy taxes, ensuring that local governments do not lose revenue from long-term hotel stays.

While the short-term benefit is clear—more housing options for those in need—the long-term implications could be significant. By suspending key tenant protections, the state may be creating a model that could be used in future housing crises, including beyond disaster recovery.

Potential Ramifications of Executive Order N-14-25

While Executive Order N-14-25 provides immediate relief to fire victims and removes bureaucratic barriers to rebuilding and housing access, it also raises questions about long-term policy impacts.

One of the most significant concerns is the order’s effect on the authority of the California Coastal Commission. By explicitly directing the commission to avoid issuing guidance or enforcing permitting requirements, the order sets a precedent for limiting the commission’s regulatory role during disaster recovery efforts. While this may speed up rebuilding, it could also undermine the state’s ability to enforce environmental and zoning laws in the future.

“The scope of destruction of these fires has created a need for immediate shelter and temporary housing,” the executive order states, acknowledging the necessity of fast action.

However, critics may argue that bypassing standard permitting processes—even temporarily—risks creating long-term environmental and legal complications, particularly in coastal areas where land-use regulations are designed to balance development with conservation.

Another potential consequence involves California’s tenant protection laws. While the order ensures that hotels and short-term rentals can offer extended stays without triggering tenant rights, this could lead to unintended consequences for the broader housing market.

Some housing advocates may worry that temporarily suspending tenant protections could create momentum for long-term deregulation, particularly if hotel and rental operators seek to maintain similar exemptions beyond the emergency period.

Additionally, the order allows local governments to continue collecting transient occupancy taxes on these extended stays, which may create financial incentives to prioritize short-term housing over longer-term rental solutions. If municipalities become dependent on these taxes, it could discourage efforts to transition displaced residents into permanent housing solutions.

There are also broader implications for how California handles future climate-related disasters. With wildfires becoming more frequent and destructive, emergency orders like this one may become more common. This raises the question of whether the state should develop permanent legislative solutions for disaster recovery rather than relying on executive orders that temporarily waive key regulations.

Conclusion

At its core, Executive Order N-14-25 is designed to address an urgent crisis by removing red tape and ensuring fire survivors have housing options. It achieves this by eliminating regulatory barriers that could slow recovery efforts and by creating flexibility in the short-term housing market.

However, the order’s broader impact on environmental policy, tenant protections, and state disaster response frameworks will likely be debated well beyond its expiration date.

As rebuilding efforts move forward, state officials and lawmakers may need to consider whether similar emergency measures should be institutionalized in state law or if they should remain temporary responses to individual disasters. Either way, the balance between rapid recovery and regulatory oversight will continue to shape California’s approach to disaster resilience in the years to come.