WOODLAND, Calif. — A Yolo County Civil Grand Jury report released this week concludes that multiple local officials knew for years about an illegal fireworks operation in Esparto but failed to take action, allowing the business to expand unchecked until a deadly explosion in July 2025 killed seven workers.
The report, titled Esparto Fireworks Explosion: Officials Knew, None Acted, follows an eight-month investigation and finds systemic failures across county departments, including code enforcement, the Sheriff’s Office and the Board of Supervisors.
According to a companion press release, the grand jury determined that “although numerous local officials, including Sheriff’s deputies, fire officials, officials in the County building, code enforcement, planning and County Counsel’s offices, all knew about the fireworks businesses, none of them took any action” to stop the prohibited activity.
The explosion occurred on the evening of July 1, 2025, at a rural property near County Roads 23 and 86A in Esparto. The blast destroyed structures on the site, ignited a fire that burned approximately 78 acres and killed seven workers. The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection identified the incident as the Oakdale Fire and later cited “illegal activities” as a root cause.
The grand jury found that fireworks manufacturing and storage operations had been conducted at the site for years without required local permits or business licenses, despite a county ordinance banning dangerous fireworks in rural areas since 2001.
Public records reviewed by the grand jury show that county officials were aware of the illegal activity for at least three years prior to the explosion.
“Inexplicably, no code enforcement occurred,” the report states, adding that the lack of oversight allowed “unmitigated expansion” of the operation that ultimately led to the fatal incident.
The report details how the site evolved from a small-scale pyrotechnics operation into a larger commercial enterprise operated by Devastating Pyrotechnics and Blackstar Fireworks. Over time, additional storage containers for explosives were added, and a large metal building was constructed under an agricultural exemption that did not reflect the actual use of the property.
Despite clear indicators that the site was being used for a prohibited commercial fireworks business, county officials failed to intervene. Emails reviewed by the grand jury show that building officials were aware of the operation as early as June 2022 after receiving a tip and conducting a site inspection.
Following that inspection, officials discussed potential enforcement action, but those efforts quickly stalled. The report states that communication about the site “abruptly ceased,” and no further action was taken even as the operation continued to grow.
The grand jury could not determine a single definitive reason for the failure to act but identified several contributing factors, including understaffing, lack of coordination between departments and a culture of tolerance toward code violations.
“The Grand Jury has identified nearly a dozen County employees who knew over the years of the pyrotechnics operations at the Esparto site but failed to take any remedial action,” the press release states.
Among the systemic issues cited were a backlog of approximately 300 code enforcement cases, the absence of a formal prioritization system and reliance on the Sheriff’s Office for access to certain properties.
The report also notes that some officials may have been reluctant to pursue enforcement because the property was owned by individuals connected to the Sheriff’s Office.
In addition, the grand jury found that county officials may have assumed that state and federal agencies were responsible for oversight because those agencies had issued permits to the fireworks businesses. However, the report states there is no evidence that the county verified whether those agencies were actively monitoring the site.
The grand jury also criticized the Board of Supervisors, concluding that its policies and priorities contributed to the breakdown in enforcement.
“The Board of Supervisors over the years fostered a culture of tolerance of code violations that percolated through the County bureaucracy,” the report states.
The report further found that the board “has encouraged a laissez-faire attitude toward new construction and businesses located in unincorporated areas” and failed to provide adequate resources for enforcing building and safety codes.
The Sheriff’s Office was also cited for failures, including not enforcing fireworks ordinances and not adequately monitoring outside employment by its personnel. The report notes that individuals connected to the property were employed by the Sheriff’s Office, raising additional concerns about conflicts of interest.
In total, the grand jury issued 20 findings and 16 recommendations aimed at addressing the systemic failures identified in the investigation.
Among the key findings, the grand jury concluded that illegal fireworks businesses operated in violation of county ordinances for years and that enforcement of those ordinances “would have prevented death and destruction from the Esparto fireworks explosion.”
The report also found that the county’s code enforcement system is ineffective, lacks proper documentation and training, and is understaffed, with only one full-time code enforcement officer responsible for nearly 1,000 square miles of unincorporated area.
To address these issues, the grand jury recommended creating a county fire warden position, expanding code enforcement staffing, improving training for county employees and sheriff’s deputies, and implementing systems to track enforcement activities and ensure accountability.
Other recommendations include conducting aerial surveys to identify unpermitted construction, establishing formal procedures for code enforcement workflows and auditing outside employment by Sheriff’s Office personnel.
The Board of Supervisors has already acknowledged some of the issues identified in the report. In a statement issued in August 2025, the board said, “The County has launched an internal review of its code enforcement processes, procedures, and staffing. Findings and recommendations will be presented to the County Administrator’s Office and reported publicly to the Board of Supervisors for consideration and potential action.”
The board also stated, “The Board of Supervisors reaffirms its commitment to public safety, accountability, and transparency, and will continue to keep the community informed.”
In a response released Thursday, Yolo County said it “recognizes that this incident had a profound impact on the Esparto community” and extended “its deepest condolences to the families and loved ones of the seven individuals that lost their lives.”
County officials emphasized that the grand jury’s work is administrative in nature, stating, “Its findings and recommendations are administrative in nature and should not be confused with criminal investigations or potential charges, which are handled separately.”
The County noted that multiple investigations are ongoing or completed, including those by CalFire and the Yolo County District Attorney’s Office, and said those reviews “will evaluate far more information than was available to the Civil Grand Jury and provide a more complete understanding of the circumstances surrounding this incident.”
While acknowledging concerns raised in the report, the County framed it as part of a broader process. “While the Civil Grand Jury report raises important issues related to communication, coordination, and emergency response, it represents one part of a broader, ongoing process,” officials said.
The Board of Supervisors pushed back on one of the report’s central conclusions, stating it “respectfully disagrees with the report’s suggestion that the County does not take code enforcement seriously,” adding that it has “consistently supported and funded the County’s code enforcement program in recent years.”
County officials said they have already initiated internal reviews of code enforcement procedures and are working with fire agencies and regional partners to improve coordination and preparedness. They also pointed to an upcoming April 14 Board of Supervisors meeting that will include a review of agricultural building permit exemptions and related policies.
At the state level, the County highlighted pending legislation, Senate Bill 828, which would strengthen coordination and oversight of fireworks operations and allow local agencies to validate land use compatibility during the state licensing process.
The County said it will provide a formal written response to the grand jury within the required 90-day timeframe, outlining actions taken or planned and, where appropriate, “respectfully challenging conclusions that are speculative or otherwise unfounded.”
The explosion and its aftermath have triggered multiple parallel investigations. CAL FIRE completed its investigation in early 2026 and referred its findings to the district attorney, citing “illegal activities” at the site. The district attorney is considering potential criminal charges, and CAL/OSHA has issued 15 citations totaling $221,000 in penalties.
Families of those who died have filed a $35 million claim against Yolo County, state regulators and other entities, alleging widespread negligence in allowing the illegal operation to continue.
The grand jury emphasized that its investigation focused on administrative failures rather than criminal liability but left open the possibility of further action. Under state law, the grand jury has the authority to pursue accusations against public officials for willful or corrupt misconduct.
“Although numerous local officials … all knew about the fireworks businesses, none of them took any action,” the report states, noting what it describes as a systemic failure that ultimately resulted in preventable loss of life.
Follow the Vanguard on Social Media – X, Instagram and Facebook. Subscribe the Vanguard News letters. To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org/donate or give directly through ActBlue. Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.
“Deadly Esparto Explosion”? More than a bit too passive or vague, perhaps? This wasn’t a volcano or even a gas leak etc. in an otherwise formally safe operation…. arguably, “high level collusion between pyrotechnic industry and county government results in ‘unintentional homicide’” is more legit.
There’s an additional, equally important, but perhaps deeper issue: As the county-corporate homicide occurred right before July 4th, there were a lot of morally repugnant responses from municipalities in the region, primarily saying either “our supply of fireworks was not affected so that the celebrations can go on”, or apologies that they couldn’t – a more direct version of the latter would be “the explosives meant to entertain you were instead used to kill people not really accidentally.”
After a significant amount of not only regional attention on this matter from the media and various government agencies, the whole thing morphed into a conscious or psychologically normalized opinion that there are good fireworks and that there are bad fireworks.
Until about a week ago, the Davis City Council stayed completely silent on the matter. Then the final approval for the “Fourth of July Pyrotechnics Display” in Davis was in the Consent Calendar. This is formally disgusting because it is obviously a controversial matter.
Bapu Vaitla was participating remotely and said that he would not support that individual item, but somewhat unusually, it seems, he didn’t ask for it to be pulled for discussion. Then the whole council voted to approve the Consent Calendar.
Celebrate Davis already transitioned to a drone show. In recorded comments for that city council meeting, Connor Gorman eloquently stated that a drone show could actually be a great for the city to directly and clearly communicate its values and so on. The controversy, of course, is that it’s undeniable that fireworks are toxic crap thrown into the sky with harms pets, wild animals, and people with ADHD. The city has known about drone shows for years and there have been split votes in the council about the matter over the last four or five years at least.
I’m not sure what’s happening behind the scenes as far as intention or anything untoward in regards to resistance to changing the form of the visual and so on of the celebrations. The fact that the final decision was made via the Consent mechanism makes the ethics of the matter dubious. About all those Yolo County actors: many have relationships with people on the city council.
So, in conclusion, imagine yourself an AI image generator, creating a visual of at least four out of five council members wearing T-shirts with the text: #progressiveexceptforveterans (or wild animals or pets…).
Noise and other types of pollution disproportionately affect more modest households as they live in structures with less protection against these elements. Black and brown people are over-represented in modest households. Therefore, governmental decisions about things like this – with a clear bonus being all the illegal and non-transparent activity – are racist. No Kings Day!
Excellent post, but then noticed this:
Black and brown people are over-represented in modest households. Therefore, governmental decisions about things like this – with a clear bonus being all the illegal and non-transparent activity – are racist. No Kings Day!
Pretty sure that “black and brown people” are also over-represented regarding the population lighting off illegal fireworks.
So perhaps (on average), they’re more aligned with perpetrators, rather than victims of fireworks.
We could also examine the skin color of those “dealing in” illegal fireworks, if that helps. My guess is that white people are “under-represented” (overall) there, as well.
Bapu voted against approval of the consent calendar, but didn’t pull the item, which meant that I and other couldn’t comment on it because I arsumed (“Arse of Me”) that the item would be pulled. I appreciate that Bapu is against continuing the fireworks, but this was an odd move in that no statements from him or others in the community could be heard. Yes, if I’d understood in advance that this was how it would go down I could have made a statement in general public comments. So color me stupid, with a giant, colorful, explosive commercial firework.
This entire incident exposes deep shame and incompetence in corners and maybe even at the top of our county government. I am simply appalled by the knowing and hiding and excuses and coverup. This is one of those cases where the government just needs to apologize, fire everyone involved (with due process), and pay the families what they want, even if it bankrupts the County, and the county lawyers be damned.
I hope it’s OK to relay here, but from the start right up through the Grand Jury report, KCRA-3 has done a phenomenal job of reporting this. https://www.kcra.com/article/yolo-county-esparto-explosions-grand-jury-report/70857868