California to require insurance discounts for property owners who reduce wildfire risk
California to require insurance discounts for property owners who reduce wildfire risk
Municipalities are required by California’s 2018 Insurance Code and related guidance for public safety and public welfare to make certain financial contributions to organizations that reduce wildfire risk.
On July 9, California voters approved Proposition 1A, which included this provision in its approval by 64.3 percent of the state’s precincts.
“This is a remarkable victory for public safety and public welfare,” said David Friedman, director of the Wildland Fire Center, an environmental information and technology firm in Los Angeles that provided strategic planning support for the initiative. “We were able to get the proposition on the ballot with support from cities, counties, fire districts and businesses. And in Proposition 1A, we’re giving municipalities a much stronger voice at the table when it comes to making decisions for their communities’ wildfire risk.”
Proposition 1A was the third initiative to be approved by the state on the same day. The first one was Proposition 6A, which mandated statewide increases in the amount of money that cities and counties must spend on education, to address the state’s budget deficit. The second one, Proposition 7A, gave communities the opportunity to receive up to $25,000 in state grants to reduce wildfire risk.
Proposition 1A sets forth detailed policies and financial contributions for California cities and counties that are eligible to receive these grants. The initiative also allows cities and counties to choose what they submit for the grants. In most cases, these grants can exceed the amounts specified in Proposition 1A, depending on the cost of compliance with the program and the extent of compliance by the jurisdictions.
The program is designed to help cities, counties, and other public safety entities prepare to mitigate their wildfire risk. But how it works depends on the ability of each locality to comply with certain requirements and the available funds. For example, the program might allow a city to reduce its wildfire risk if it implements an advanced monitoring system that shows that in the last six years, wildfires have caused more than 500,000 pounds of structural damage to buildings, vehicles, and other structures totaling more than $20 million in economic damage.
The requirements also may be met by paying the costs of the program’s compliance in any one year, or by making a one-time payment.
Local government has
