I’m an independent journalist with an uncertain road ahead. To support my work telling the story of the Eaton Fire and its aftermath, please consider a paid monthly subscription to my Patreon page. Thank you!

---

We all want to believe that if a disaster struck, we’d know what to do both during and afterwards. And we want to believe we’d have the fortitude to stick to it, never waver, and present rock-solid certainty to those struggling with difficult decisions.

But life does not present itself with easy opportunities for “rock-solid certainty” and never wavering. Existence is not an ad for low-risk investment vehicles. Instead, it’s a series of decisions that need to be made with little information and even less certainty. We do the best we can with what we have, try to consider the variables and the unknowns, and then ultimately we roll the bowling ball and hope it knocks down enough pins.

The immediate danger of the Eaton Fire has passed. And the smoke smell and toxic ash seemed to have abated, at least if you’re not directly in the fire zone. But the hard decisions from the fire are only getting started. And they will have repercussions for fire survivors for decades to come.

The most important and far-reaching choice we have to make is to either rebuild a new home once our land is cleared, or sell the land and start over somewhere else. Both choices are fraught with variables, unknowns, hidden traps, opportunities, and risks. Each presents a vision for a certain life that will unfold over the next years and decades – and a different life not lived. Only one road can be taken, and the choice has to be made in deep uncertainty.

Many Altadena residents immediately declared they were rebuilding. For someone who has spent their entire life here, and maybe lived in the house one of their parents grew up in, the choice to stay is easy – even if rebuilding itself is not.

Likewise, some people will sell their land at the first chance they get. At least some plots of land in Altadena have already gone up for sale. The first land sale sparked a flurry of posts on local social media and text chains – a lot that was listed for $450,000 and went for well over that after getting dozens of offers. It was owned by an investor who wasn’t interested in trying to rebuild, and got out fast – likely leaving a lot of money on the table by not waiting for debris removal.

But it’s not that easy for most of us.

Each choice has legitimate merits. Staying and rebuilding means that you get a say in your house’s design and building. It means sticking with your community, revitalizing your town, being there for your neighbors. It means ensuring that charming neighborhoods and modest streets aren’t taken over by glass boxes and nightmare condos. And it means that when this is all over, you’ll have stuck it out and seen the process through to the end. You’ll own a new home in one of the most coveted locales in America.

Leaving, of course, means being in a house sooner. And given the absurd expense of building and the cost of real estate in the Los Angeles area, it probably entails a bigger house on more land. It means getting out of whatever temporary arrangement you’ve cobbled together. You might not be able to fight the glass boxes and nightmare condos anyway, and if you leave, you don’t have to try. And it might mean walking away with a big pile of cash to go with your new house, depending on your insurance payout and land sale price.

Each choice begs considering the other one. Rebuilding will be a time-consuming and expensive process, one that might not be done for two to three years. Hiring an architect is expensive, and with a limited supply of qualified architects and designers, they’ll be able to charge top dollar for their services. Building a house from the ground up based on a bespoke design is hugely money-intensive, particularly in Los Angeles. It will be even more outrageous given the demand for materials and crews that 15,000 homes will require, between Altadena and the Palisades. The numbers I’m hearing are outrageous – anywhere between $600 and $1,000 per square foot. All told, if Trump’s tariffs jack up prices on materials, demand sends labor costs skyrocketing, and permitting drags on, you could be looking at about $1.5 million to built a “modest” 1,500 square foot house. There’s a reason why most folks I’ve talked to feel everyone in either fire zone is underinsured. We probably are.

And yet…the choice to take the money and run is fraught as well. For one, it feels like a betrayal of the community we love so much and the neighbors we’ve gotten to know so well. There are few guarantees of finding something you want in the place you want to go, unless you’re simply willing to roll the dice and move anywhere you can find a house – which is a choice nobody with kids is likely to make. People who have started over somewhere else will always be those people who left town when things got rough. And they will be outsiders and strangers in a new place. They will probably have to tell the story of their loss to every person they meet in their new town. And once you leave the L.A. real estate market, getting back in is almost impossible.

The timing is also crucial, and intricate. Selling your land for top dollar means waiting for it to be cleared. But that could take the better part of 2025, and real estate prices will only go up. Housing supply, at least in the L.A. area, isn’t going up to compensate – meaning staying in the LA area will be that much harder. If you wait to make the decision to finally not sell and start building, you might miss out on hiring an architect and getting the permitting going. The longer you wait, the longer it will take. Likewise, you don’t want to rush in and hire the first people you meet with – this is a recipe for regret and scammery.

If you dither on your choice, it might be too late to make the choice you want to go with. But how can anyone help but wait, given the variables and unknowns ahead? What if you start building and can’t afford it? What if you sell and hate where you moved to?

All the choices are right and wrong.

Many people intent on rebuilding are trying to even the odds a little, banding together with neighbors to form collectives to ensure design and construction consistency, and to lower costs. Some architects are proposing the old school catalog model, where you pick a home design from a menu of designs and try to drive down costs through mass production. Fraudulent contractors and shady developers are being named and shamed on Altadena social media. And meetings, webinars, and town halls are a constant in town, as we all share info and buck each other up for the road ahead.

We are taking part in a lot of these efforts, and as of now, rebuilding is our intention. But wavering is part of the process too, and we spend a lot of time wavering. How could we not, given the time and expense involved? Who wants to wait years to build a house to live in? Who wants to spend this much time and money on something they could just buy somewhere else? And the risk of another fire will always be top of mind, meaning there’s the distinct possibility a new house will never feel entirely safe.

I won’t shame anyone for selling and moving somewhere they can start over. Okay, I might shame someone who sells to an obviously ill-intended developer. But honestly, people have to do what’s right for them. The community and neighborhoods matter, but ultimately, nobody is going to have your best interests in mind more than you.

And yet, staying seems right. Why leave if you don’t want to?

Hopefully, we all make the right choices with the right information at the right time. Because we only get one chance to get it right, and there are no re-dos either way. No pressure, right?