Existing law requires the State Fire Marshal to classify lands within state responsibility areas into fire hazard severity zones, and, by regulation, designate fire hazard severity zones and assign to each zone a rating reflecting the degree of severity of fire hazard that is expected to prevail in the zone. Existing law requires the State Fire Marshal to periodically review designated and rated zones and, as necessary, revise zones or their ratings or repeal the designation of zones.

Existing law also requires the State Fire Marshal to identify areas in the state that are not state responsibility areas as moderate, high, and very high fire hazard severity zones based on consistent statewide criteria and based on the severity of fire hazard that is expected to prevail in those areas, and to periodically review and and, as necessary, make recommendations relative to very high fire hazard severity zones.

This bill would prohibit the State Fire Marshals determination of fire hazard severity zone, in both state responsibility areas and lands that are not state responsibility areas, from being based on risk mitigation activities. The bill would, as applied to both state responsibility areas and lands that are not state responsibility areas, authorize the State Fire Marshal, in periods between the State Fire Marshals review of areas of the state for recommendations regarding an areas fire hazard severity zone, to confer with entities, including, but not limited to, public agencies, tribes, nonprofit organizations, project applicants, and members of the public, on actions that may impact the degree of fire hazard in an area or the areas recommended fire hazard severity zone designation. The bill would authorize the State Fire Marshal to provide a written response to an entity on actions that may impact the degree of fire hazard, and would require this written response to be posted on the State Fire Marshals internet website.

This bill would authorize those entities to provide information to the State Fire Marshal on wildfire safety improvements or other actions the entity has taken or plans to take, and any information submitted to or by the department, as specified, before the next review that may impact the degree of fire hazard in an area or the areas fire hazard severity zone designation. The bill would authorize the State Fire Marshal to consider this information in the next review, and would require any documentation provided to the State Fire Marshal to be posted in a manner that is easily accessible on the State Fire Marshals internet website.

This bill would authorize the State Fire Marshal to require a fee from an entity that confers with the State Fire Marshal, or provides information to the State Fire Marshal, to cover the State Fire Marshals costs associated with these processes, as specified.

Existing law requires the State Fire Marshal to classify lands within state responsibility areas into fire hazard severity zones, and, by regulation, designate fire hazard severity zones and assign to each zone a rating reflecting the degree of severity of fire hazard that is expected to prevail in the zone. Existing law requires the State Fire Marshal to periodically review designated and rated zones and, as necessary, revise zones or their ratings or repeal the designation of zones.

Existing law also requires the State Fire Marshal to identify areas in the state that are not state responsibility areas as moderate, high, and very high fire hazard severity zones based on consistent statewide criteria and based on the severity of fire hazard that is expected to prevail in those areas, and to periodically review and make recommendations relative to very high fire hazard severity zones.

This bill would, as applied to both state responsibility areas and lands that are not state responsibility areas, authorize the State Fire Marshal, in periods between the State Fire Marshals review of areas of the state for recommendations regarding an areas fire hazard severity zone, to confer with entities, including, but not limited to, public agencies, tribes, nonprofit organizations, project applicants, and members of the public, on actions that may impact the degree of fire hazard in an area or the areas recommended fire hazard severity zone designation. The bill would authorize the State Fire Marshal to provide a written response to an entity on actions that may impact the degree of fire hazard, and would require this written response to be posted on the State Fire Marshals internet website.

This bill would authorize those entities to provide information to the State Fire Marshal on actions wildfire safety improvements or other actions the entity has taken or plans to take take, and any information submitted to or by the department, as specified, before the next review that may impact the degree of fire hazard in an area or the areas fire hazard severity zone designation. The bill would authorize the State Fire Marshal to consider this information in the next review, and would require any documentation provided to the State Fire Marshal to be posted in a manner that is easily accessible on the State Fire Marshals internet website.

This bill would authorize the State Fire Marshal to require a fee from an entity that confers with the State Fire Marshal, or provides information to the State Fire Marshal, to cover the State Fire Marshals costs associated with these processes, as specified.

Existing law requires the State Fire Marshal to classify lands within state responsibility areas into fire hazard severity zones, and, by regulation, designate fire hazard severity zones and assign to each zone a rating reflecting the degree of severity of fire hazard that is expected to prevail in the zone. Existing law requires the State Fire Marshal to periodically review designated and rated zones and, as necessary, revise zones or their ratings or repeal the designation of zones.

Existing law also requires the State Fire Marshal to identify areas in the state that are not state responsibility areas as moderate, high, and very high fire hazard severity zones based on consistent statewide criteria and based on the severity of fire hazard that is expected to prevail in those areas, and to periodically review and make recommendations relative to very high fire hazard severity zones.

This bill would, as applied to both state responsibility areas and lands that are not state responsibility areas, authorize the State Fire Marshal, in periods between the State Fire Marshals review of areas of the state for recommendations regarding an areas fire hazard severity zone, to confer with entities, including, but not limited to, public agencies, tribes, nonprofit organizations, project applicants, and members of the public, on actions that may impact the degree of fire hazard in an area or the areas recommended fire hazard severity zone designation. The bill would authorize the State Fire Marshal to provide a written response to an entity on actions that may impact the degree of fire hazard, and would require this written response to be posted on the State Fire Marshals internet website.

This bill would authorize those entities to provide information to the State Fire Marshal on actions the entity has taken or plans to take before the next review that may impact the degree of fire hazard in an area or the areas fire hazard severity zone designation. The bill would authorize the State Fire Marshal to consider this information in the next review, and would require any documentation provided to the State Fire Marshal to be posted on the State Fire Marshals internet website.

This bill would authorize the State Fire Marshal to require a fee from an entity that confers with the State Fire Marshal, or provides information to the State Fire Marshal, to cover the State Fire Marshals costs associated with these processes, as specified.

SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Senator Anna Caballero, Chair

2025 - 2026 Regular Session

AB 261 (Quirk-Silva) - Fire safety: fire hazard severity zones: State Fire Marshal

Bill Summary:

AB 261 authorizes the State Fire Marshal (SFM), in periods between the SFM’s review of state responsibility areas (SRAs) and non-SRAs regarding fire hazard severity zones (FHSZs), to confer with entities on actions that may impact the degree of fire hazard in that area and authorizes those entities to provide information to the SFM on wildfire safety improvements, as specified. AB 261 also authorizes the SFM to charge a fee from an entity that confers with the SFM.

Fiscal Impact:

The California Department of Forestry and Fire report costs of approximately $1.25 million in year one, $2.09 million in year two, and $2.07 in year three and ongoing (General Fund). Costs include four additional staff to address workload associated with monitoring and responding to requests for written responses from entities and reformatting and reviewing data for FHSZ modeling.

Background:

The mission of the SFM is to protect life and property through the development and application of fire prevention engineering, education and enforcement. The SFM supports the mission of CAL FIRE by focusing on fire prevention and provides support through a wide variety of fire safety responsibilities. Additionally, the SFM classifies certain lands within the state into FHSZs. Each zone is based on fuel loading, slope, fire weather, and other relevant factors present, including areas where winds have been identified by CAL FIRE as a major cause of wildfire spread. Unlike an insurance company’s risk assessment of a house in the woods, which might take into account its composite wood sidings, hazard maps only take into account the lasting facts about a location.

FHSZ maps evaluate “hazard” based on the physical conditions that create a likelihood and expected fire behavior over a 30 to 50-year period without considering mitigation measures such as home hardening, defensible space, vegetation management, or fuel reduction efforts. Within high FHSZs, newly constructed homes must meet heightened fire-resistant building standards. Anyone hoping to sell a home also has to alert would-be-buyers of the elevated danger with a disclosure form. For those in very high FHSZs, the law requires a 100-foot circle around a property free of brush, dead trees, and other flammable materials. Need subdivisions also need to be carefully designed with multiple evacuation routes, adequate water supply infrastructure, and built-in-fuel breaks in place.

Proposed Law:

• In the SFM’s identification of both SRAs and non-SRAs as moderate, high, and very high FHSZs, provides that a FHSZ shall not be based on risk mitigation activities.
• In periods between the SFM’s review of areas regarding an area’s FHSZ, authorizes the SFM to confer with public agencies, tribes, nonprofit organizations, project applicants, members of the public, and others, on actions that may impact the degree of fire hazard in an area. Authorizes the SFM to provide written responses to an entity on actions that may impact the degree of fire hazard. Authorizes these entities to also provide information to the SFM on wildfire safety improvements and other actions the entity has taken or plans to take that may impact the degree of fire hazard in an area.
  • Requires any letters provided by, and any documentation provided to, the SFM to be posted on the SFM’s website.
  • Authorizes the SFM to charge a fee to an entity that confers with the SFM to cover the SFM’s costs to provide that information.

Related Legislation:

AB 300 (Lackey, 2025) requires the SFM, at least once every five years, to review and update SRAs and non-SRAs FHSZ mapping classifications, as specified. AB 300 is pending in this committee.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION

Senator Steve Padilla

Chair

2025 - 2026 Regular

Bill No: 261 Hearing Date: 6/24/2025

SUBJECT: Fire safety: fire hazard severity zones: State Fire Marshal

DIGEST: This bill authorizes the State Fire Marshal (SFM), in periods between the SFM’s review of areas in the state regarding fire hazard severity zones (FHSZ), and as applied to both state responsibility areas (SRA) and non-SRA, to confer with entities on actions that may impact the degree of fire hazard in an area and authorizes those entities to provide information to the SFM on wildfire safety improvements, as specified. This bill additionally authorizes the SFM to require a fee from an entity that confers with the SFM, as specified.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Requires the SFM to classify lands within SRAs into FHSZs, and, by regulation, designate FHSZs and assign to each zone a rating reflecting the degree of severity of fire hazard that is expected to prevail in the zone.
2. Requires the SFM to periodically review designated and rated zones and, as necessary, revise zones or their ratings or repeal the designation of zones.
3. Requires the SFM to identify areas in the state that are not SRA as moderate, high, and very-high FHSZs based on consistent statewide criteria and based on severity of fire hazard that is expected to prevail in those areas, and to periodically review and make recommendations relative to very-high FHSZs.

This bill:

1. Authorizes, as applies to both SRA and areas in the state that are not SRA – in periods between the SFM’s review of areas of the state for recommendations regarding an area’s FHSZ – the SFM to confer with entities, including but not limited to, public agencies, tribes, nonprofit organizations, project applicants, members of the public, and others, on actions that may impact the degree of fire hazard in an area or the area’s recommended FHSZ designation.
2. Authorizes the SFM to provide a written response to an entity on actions that may impact the degree of fire hazard.
3. Authorizes, as applies to both SRA and areas in the state that are not SRA – in periods between the SFM’s review of areas of the state for recommendations regarding an area’s FHSZ – entities, including but not limited to, public agencies, tribes, nonprofit organizations, project applicants, members of the public, and others, to provide information to the SFM on wildfire safety improvements and other actions the entity has taken or plans to take, and any information to the SFM on wildfire safety improvements and other actions the entity has taken or plans to take, and any information submitted to or by the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) before the next review that may impact the degree of fire hazard in an area or the area’s FHSZ designation, as specified.
4. Authorizes the SFM, according to the SFM’s discretion, to consider the above information in the next review.
5. Requires the SFM to post any letters provided by the SFM pursuant to the above requirements and any documentation provided to the SFM to be posted on the SFM’s internet website in a manner that is easily accessible.
6. Authorizes the SFM to require a fee from an entity that confers with the SFM or provides information to the SFM to cover the SFM’s costs associated with this bill.

Background

Author Statement. According to the author’s office, “California is two million homes short and faces a housing crisis that demands urgent action. We cannot afford to build without wildfire resilience at the core of our decisions. Too many homes were built in an era when climate risk was an afterthought. That cannot continue. AB 261 ensures we use the best information available to guide development, protect homeowners, and strengthen our wildfire defenses, because in the face of rising threats, outdated maps and outdated thinking put Californian lives and livelihoods at risk.”

Office of the State Fire Marshal. The mission of the SFM is to protect life and property through the development and application of fire prevention engineering, education and enforcement. The SFM supports the mission of CaL FIRE by focusing on fire prevention and provides support through a wide variety of fire safety responsibilities. Additionally, the SFM classifies certain lands within the state into FHSZs. Each zone is based on fuel loading, slope, fire weather, and other relevant factors present, including areas where winds have been identified by CAL FIRE as a major cause of wildfire spread. Unlike an insurance company’s risk assessment of a house in the woods, which might take into account its composite wood sidings, hazard maps only take into account the lasting facts about a location.

AB 9 (Wood, Chapter 225, Statutes of 2021) established the Deputy Director of Community Wildfire Preparedness and Mitigation within the Office of the SFM to be responsible for overseeing defensible space requirements, establishment of FHSZs, and implementation of the minimum fire safety standards, among other responsibilities. AB 9 also augmented the SFM’s responsibilities by transferring and delegating certain duties related to fire safety and wildfire prevention from CAL FIRE to the SFM, including CAL FIRE’s local assistance grant program for fire prevention and home hardening education activities.

Fire Hazard Mapping. As of 2010, about one-third of California’s housing units were located in the WUI. Residential developments in the WUI and other wildfire prone areas can significantly increase the risks of wildfires and the risk to public safety. FHSZs fall into the following classifications: moderate, high, and very high based on consistent statewide criteria and based on the severity of fire hazard that is expected to prevail in those areas.

FHSZ maps evaluate “hazard” based on the physical conditions that create a likelihood and expected fire behavior over a 30 to 50-year period without considering mitigation measures such as home hardening, defensible space, vegetation management, or fuel reduction efforts. Within high FHSZs, newly constructed homes must meet heightened fire-resistant building standards. Anyone hoping to sell a home also has to alert would-be-buyers of the elevated danger with a disclosure form. For those in very high FHSZs, the law requires a 100-foot circle around a property free of brush, dead trees, and other flammable materials. Need subdivisions also need to be carefully designed with multiple evacuation routes, adequate water supply infrastructure, and built-in-fuel breaks in place.

Regulations were approved on January 31, 2024, for revised SRA FHSZs, which became effective April 1, 2024. This current revision only updates areas in the SRA, which are unincorporated, rural areas where wildfires tend to be frequent. Before the updated FHSZ regulations were approved, the FHSZ maps were last updated in 2007 when Cal FIRE updated the FHSZs for the entire SRA. Lands are removed from the SRA when they become incorporated by a city, change in ownership to the federal government, become more densely populated, or are converted to intensive agriculture that minimizes the risk of wildfire. While some lands are removed from SRA automatically, the Board typically reviews changes every five years. Existing law requires the SFM to periodically review very-high FHSZs that are not in the SRA, and designated and rated zones in the SRA.

Between 2008 and 2011, CAL FIRE worked with local governments to make recommendations of the Very High (VHFHSZ) within the local responsibility area (LRA), which includes incorporated cities, urban regions, agriculture lands, and portions of the desert where the local government is responsible for wildfire protection. This is typically provided by city fire departments, fire protection districts, counties, and by Cal FIRE under contract. Federal lands, which account for about 45% of the land in California, are managed by the federal government, and are not included in the state’s FHSZ maps.

SB 63 (Stern), Chapter 382, Statutes of 2021, requires CAL FIRE to adopt of all FHSZs in the LRA. Previously, only VHFHSZs were required for adoption in the LRA. CAL FIRE uses the same modeling data that are used to map the SRA to develop the FHSZs in the LRA. Cal FIRE works with local jurisdictions for validation of the mapping. The maps, along with a model ordinance, are then sent to the governing body for adoption. Then, a local agency is required to make the identified FHSZs available for public review and comment within 30 days of being notified by the SFM of the FHSZs.

FHSZ maps for the LRA, as required by SB 63, were released in four rounds earlier this year. According to reporting by CalMatters, high and very high FHSZs exploded across the state, increasing by 168% since 2011, all told, the size of the new high and VHFHSZs on the new maps is 3,632 square miles – an area nearly twice the size of Delaware. These zones are home to approximately 3.7 million people, or roughly one in 10 Californians that are now subject to an array of enhanced building code, defensible space, and real estate disclosure rules. Local governments are required to take public comment for 90 days, but must ultimately approve the maps without removing any hazard areas (though they are allowed to make additions).

These standards will make new construction significantly more costly. However, home hardening standards, which are periodically updated, have been shown to work. An analysis by the Sacramento Bee showed that approximately 51% of the 350 single-family homes built after 2008 in the path of the Camp Fire were undamaged. By contrast, only 18% of the 12,100 homes built prior to 2008 escaped damage. Factors that can cause post-2008 homes to combust include not having adequate defensible space and proximity to neighboring non-fire hardened homes.

Defensible Space. Defensible space is the buffer created between a building on a property and the grass, trees, shrubs, or any wildland area that surrounds it. This space is needed to slow or stop the spread of wildfire, and it helps protect structures from catching fire. A 2019 analysis done by CAL FIRE of the relationship between defensible space compliance and destruction of structures during the seven largest fires that occurred in California in 2017 and 2018 concluded that the odds of a structure being destroyed by wildfire were roughly five times higher for noncompliant structures compared to compliant ones.

According to the Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) report “Reducing the Destructiveness of Wildfires: Promoting Defensible Space in California,” inspections are the main type of activity state and local agencies take related to defensible space. During inspections, inspector visit properties to assess their compliance with defensible space requirements. State and local agencies vary in how they conduct inspections, which properties are prioritized for inspections, and the training provided to inspectors. At the time of the 2021 report, CAL FIRE had identified about 768,000 parcels within the SRA subject to defensible space inspections. Additionally, 35 local fire agencies provided data to the LAO showing an average inspection rate of roughly 35%. As with CAL FIRE, the inspection rates vary considerably across jurisdictions, with reported rates ranging from three percent to 100%.

Conferring with the SFM. This bill authorizes the SFM, in periods between the SFM’s review of areas within the SRA and non-SRA areas, to confer with entities on actions that may impact the degree of fire hazard in an area or an area’s recommended FHSZ designation. This bill specifically lists, but is not limited to, public agencies, tribes, nonprofit organizations, project applicants, and members of the public. This bill authorizes those entities to provide information to the SFM on wildfire safety improvements or other actions the entity has taken or plans to take before the next review that may impact the degree of fire hazard in an area or the area’s FHSZ designation.

Additionally, this bill authorizes the SFM to require a fee from an entity that confers with the SFM, or provides information to the SFM, to cover the costs associated with these processes.

Prior/Related Legislation

AB 300 (Lackey, 2025) requires the SFM to identify and re-review lands within state responsibility areas as FHSZ, and identify and re-review areas in the state as moderate, high, and very high FHSZs every five years. (Pending in the Senate Governmental Organization Committee)

AB 3150 (Quirk-Silva, 2024) would have transferred authorities related to designation of fire hazards from the Board to the SFM. (Held in the Senate Appropriations Committee Suspense File)

SB 610 (Wiener, 2024) would have eliminated the state’s fire hazard severity mapping for the SRA and LRA and require the SFM to designate Wildfire Mitigation Area, through regulations, for fire mitigation across the state. (Held in the Senate Appropriations Committee Suspense File)

AB 38 (Wood, Chapter 391, Statutes of 2019) requires specified disclosures for the sale of real property in a high or very high FHSZ related to fire safety including home hardening and defensible space, as specified.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:

SUPPORT:

California Building Industry Association (Source)

21st Century Alliance

BOMA California

Building Industry Association of San Diego

Building Industry Association of the Bay Area

Building Industry Association of the Greater Valley

Building Owners and Managers Association

California Apartment Association

California Apartment Association

California Building Officials

California Business Properties Association

California Chamber of Commerce

California Hotel & Lodging Association

California Retailers Association

CDP Rural Caucus

City of Indian Wells

City of Moorpark

City of Thousand Oaks

County of Orange

Home Builders Association of the Central Coast

Indian Wells; City of

League of California Cities

Mendocino and Humboldt Redwood Companies

NAIOP California

Orange County Business Council

Orange County Taxpayers Association

Rural County Representatives of California (RCRC)

South Orange County Economic Coalition

Southern California Leadership Council

OPPOSITION:

None received

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: The sponsors of the bill and a coalition of supporters jointly write that, “FHSZ map revisions occur intermittently, and this infrequency limits the ability for stakeholders to inform the Fire Marshal about mitigation actions that may impact and improve the degree of fire hazard within an area. Perhaps more importantly, AB 261 establishes a process to seek the advice of the Fire Marshal on measures these individuals or entities may implement to reduce the degree of fire hazard within an area. AB 261 offers a proactive solution by allowing a thoughtful dialogue between entities and the State Fire Marshal before the next state review. To ensure transparency, the correspondence and documentation exchanged between the State Fire Marshal and other entities would be made available on the State Fire Marshal's website for public access. A fee may be charged to entities that engage with the State Fire Marshal regarding their fire hazard severity zone assessments to offset associated costs of the implementation of the bill.”

Additionally, “AB 261 improves the development of FHSZ maps by increasing public participation in the process and by allowing the State Fire Marshal to engage in an information exchange between cycles. FHSZ maps impact millions of Californians, as they influence the availability and affordability of insurance, the information provided to property owners of the relative hazard they may face, and the cost of housing. AB 261 will support informed decision-making, encourage fire prevention efforts, and ultimately strengthen community resilience across California.”

DUAL-REFERRAL: Senate Committee on Governmental Organization and Senate Committee on Natural Resources & Water

ASSEMBLY THIRD READING

ATR Bill Id:AB 261

Author:(Quirk-Silva)

As Amended Ver:March 26, 2025

Majority vote

SUMMARY

Authorize the State Fire Marshal (SFM) to confer with entities and members of the public on wildfire safety improvements and other actions that may impact the degree of fire hazard in an area or the area's recommended fire hazard severity zone (FHSZ) designation, and authorizes the SFM to provide a written response to an entity on actions that may impact the degree of fire hazard, and would require this written response to be posted on the SFM's internet website.

Major Provisions

1. Authorizes the SFM, in periods between the SFM's review of areas of the state for recommendations regarding an area's FHSZ, to confer with entities on wildfire safety improvements and other actions that may impact the degree of fire hazard in an area or the area's recommended FHSZ designation.
2. Authorizes, during those periods, entities to provide information to the SFM on actions the entity has taken or plans to take before the next review that may impact the degree of fire hazard in an area or the area's FHSZ designation. Authorizes the SFM to consider this information in the next review.
3. Authorizes the SFM, in periods between the SFM's review of areas of the state regarding an area's FHSZ designation, to confer with entities on wildfire safety improvements and other actions that may impact the degree of fire hazard in an area or the area's recommended FHSZ designation.
4. Authorizes, in periods between the SFM's review of areas of the state regarding an area's FHSZ, entities to provide information to the SFM on actions the entity has taken or plans to take before the next review that may impact the degree of fire hazard in an area or the area's FHSZ designation. Authorizes the SFM to consider this information in the next review.
5. Authorizes the SFM to require a fee from an entity that confers with the SFM or provides information to the SFM to cover the SFM's costs.

COMMENTS

FHSZs fall into the following classifications: moderate, high, and very high based on consistent statewide criteria and based on the severity of fire hazard that is expected to prevail in those areas. FHSZ maps evaluate "hazard" based on the physical conditions that create a likelihood and expected fire behavior over a 30 to 50-year period without considering mitigation measures such as home hardening, defensible space, vegetation management, or fuel reduction efforts.

Regulations were approved on January 31, 2024, for revised SRA FHSZs, which became effective April 1, 2024. On March 10, CAL FIRE released maps that added thousands of acres of lands within FHSZs across 15 Central Valley counties that previously had no acres zoned for fire hazard. New maps for Southern California are expected to be released March 24.

Defensible space, in combination with home hardening, theoretically makes a home "ignition resistant" from embers, radiant heat, and flame impingement. Implementation of defensible space requirements works best, however, when they are applied to all structures in the areas where the requirements are intended to be applied. In other words, a resident in a rural, mountainous area may comply with all of the applicable defensible space requirements, but those clearances will only keep so much fire at bay if the adjacent structures are not managed and have surrounding vegetation that feeds a burning fire.

This bill authorizes the SFM to confer with entities, including public agencies, tribes, nonprofit organizations, project applicants, and members of the public on actions that may impact the degree of fire hazard in an area or the area's recommended FHSZ designation, and authorizes the SFM to provide a written response to an entity on actions that may impact the degree of fire hazard. Likewise, the bill authorizes those entities to provide information to the SFM on actions taken or plans to take that may impact the degree of fire hazard in an area.

To accurately assess areas with potentially reduced fire hazard risk based on landowner fire risk reduction efforts will necessitate ongoing inspections and thorough scientific assessment. To that end, the bill would allow the SFM to assess a fee on an entity submitting information for consideration of a FHSZ designation.

According to the Author

California is two million homes short and faces a housing crisis that demands urgent action. We cannot afford to build without wildfire resilience at the core of our decisions. Too many homes were built in an era when climate risk was an afterthought. That cannot continue. AB 261 ensures we use the best information available to guide development, protect homeowners, and strengthen our wildfire defenses, because in the face of rising threats, outdated maps and outdated thinking put Californian lives and livelihoods at risk.

Arguments in Support

The California Building Industry Association writes that FHSZ map revisions occur intermittently, and this infrequency limits the ability for stakeholders to inform the SFM about mitigation actions that may impact and improve the degree of fire hazard within an area. Perhaps more importantly, AB 261 establishes a process to seek the advice of the SFM on measures these individuals or entities may implement to reduce the degree of fire hazard within an area. AB 261 offers a proactive solution by allowing a thoughtful dialogue between entities and the SFM before the next state review.

Arguments in Opposition

None on file

FISCAL COMMENTS

According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, Should the SFM choose to exercise the authority granted by this bill, SFM estimates General Fund costs of approximately $1.3 million in year one and $2.1 million in year two and ongoing to hire an assistant chief, an assistant chief counsel, a research data specialist, and an associate governmental program analyst to monitor and respond to requests for written responses, post relevant documents online, reformat incoming data for FHSZ modeling, and manage regulatory activities and other administrative tasks. In addition to staffing, this estimate includes the cost associated with data modeling to validate information provided by entities and vehicle operating expenses. A portion of these implementation costs may be offset by fees paid by entities that confer with or provide information to the SFM.

VOTES

ASM NATURAL RESOURCES: 13-0-1

YES: Bryan, Alanis, Connolly, Davies, Flora, Garcia, Haney, Sanchez, Kalra, Muratsuchi, Pellerin, Schultz, Zbur

ABS, ABST OR NV: Wicks

ASM EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT: 7-0-0

YES: Ransom, Hadwick, Arambula, Bains, Bennett, Calderon, DeMaio

ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 14-0-1

YES: Wicks, Arambula, Calderon, Caloza, Dixon, Elhawary, Fong, Mark González, Hart, Pacheco, Pellerin, Solache, Ta, Tangipa

ABS, ABST OR NV: Sanchez

UPDATED

VERSION: March 26, 2025

CONSULTANT: Paige Brokaw / NAT. RES. / (916) 319-2092 FN: 0000562

Date of Hearing: May 7, 2025

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Buffy Wicks, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 261

Author:(Quirk-Silva) – As Amended Ver:March 26, 2025

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: No Reimbursable: No

SUMMARY:

This bill authorizes the State Fire Marshal (SFM) to confer with, and receive documentation from, entities on actions that may impact the degree of fire hazard in an area or the area’s recommended fire hazard severity zone (FHSZ) designation and authorizes the SFM to provide a written response to an entity.

Specifically, this bill, as applied to both state responsibility areas (SRAs) and areas in the state that are not SRAs:

1. Authorizes the SFM, in periods between the SFM’s review of areas of the state for recommendations regarding an area’s FHSZ, to confer with specified entities on actions that may impact the degree of fire hazard in an area or the area’s recommended FHSZ designation.
2. Authorizes the SFM to provide a written response to an entity on actions that may impact the degree of fire hazard, and requires the SFM to post the written response on its website.
3. Authorizes entities, in periods between the SFM’s review of areas of the state for recommendations regarding an area’s FHSZ, to provide documentation to the SFM regarding planned or implemented wildfire safety improvements and actions, as specified, that may impact the degree of fire hazard in an area or the area’s recommended FHSZ designation. Authorizes the SFM to consider this information in its next FHSZ review. Requires any documentation provided to the SFM be posted on the SFM’s website.
4. Authorizes the SFM to require a fee from an entity to cover the SFM’s implementation costs.

FISCAL EFFECT:

Should the SFM choose to exercise the authority granted by this bill, SFM estimates General Fund costs of approximately $1.3 million in year one and $2.1 million in year two and ongoing to hire an assistant chief, an assistant chief counsel, a research data specialist, and an associate governmental program analyst to monitor and respond to requests for written responses, post relevant documents online, reformat incoming data for FHSZ modeling, and manage regulatory activities and other administrative tasks. In addition to staffing, this estimate includes the cost associated with data modeling to validate information provided by entities and vehicle operating expenses.

A portion of these implementation costs may be offset by fees paid by entities that confer with or provide information to the SFM.

COMMENTS:

1) Purpose. According to the author:

California is two million homes short and faces a housing crisis that demands urgent action. We cannot afford to build without wildfire resilience at the core of our decisions. Too many homes were built in an era when climate risk was an afterthought. That cannot continue. AB 261 ensures we use the best information available to guide development, protect homeowners, and strengthen our wildfire defenses, because in the face of rising threats, outdated maps and outdated thinking put Californian lives and livelihoods at risk.

2) Background. The SFM is required to classify lands within the SRA and local responsibility areas (LRA) into FHSZs, which fall into the following classifications: moderate, high, and very high fire hazard. FHSZ maps evaluate “hazard” based on the physical conditions that create a likelihood and expected fire behavior over a 30- to 50-year period without considering mitigation measures such as home hardening, defensible space, vegetation management, or fuel reduction efforts. The SFM adopted final maps for the SRA on April 1, 2024, and released its final round of recommended LRA maps on March 24, 2025.

Creating fire hazard maps is laborious and requires scrutinizing detailed data across the state, including small pockets of potentially flammable wildlands within cities, and then coordinating with hundreds of local jurisdictions for validation of the mapping. Local agencies have 120 days from the receipt of the state’s recommendations to designate FHSZs by ordinance. A local agency may, at its discretion, increase the level of FHSZ identified by the SFM, or include areas within its jurisdiction into its FHSZ ordinance, but a local agency may not decrease the level of FHSZ identified by the SFM.

Writing in support, the California Building Industry Association and a coalition of organizations contends that FHSZ map revisions occur intermittently, and this infrequency limits the ability for stakeholders to inform the SFM that may impact and improve the degree of fire hazard within an area. The coalition argues that by establishing a process to seek the advice of the SFM on measures individuals or entities may implement to reduce the degree of fire hazard within an area, the bill “offers a proactive solution by allowing a thoughtful dialogue between entities and the State Fire Marshal before the next state review.”

Analysis Prepared by: Nikita Koraddi / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: April 28, 2025

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

Rhodesia Ransom, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 261 (

Author:Quirk-Silva) – As Amended Ver:March 26, 2025

SUBJECT: Fire safety: fire hazard severity zones: State Fire Marshal

SUMMARY: Authorizes the State Fire Marshal (SFM) to confer with, and receive documentation from, entities, as specified, on actions that may impact the degree of fire hazard in an area or the area’s recommended fire hazard severity zone (FHSZ) designation and authorizes the SFM to provide a written response to an entity, which must be posted on the SFM’s website along with any related documentation provided by an entity.

Specifically, this bill:

1. Authorizes the SFM, in periods between the SFM’s review of areas of the state for recommendations regarding an area’s FHSZ, to confer with entities, including, but not limited to, public agencies, tribes, nonprofit organizations, project applicants, members of the public, and others, on actions that may impact the degree of fire hazard in an area or the area’s recommended FHSZ designation.
2. Authorizes the SFM to provide a written response to an entity on actions that may impact the degree of fire hazard.
3. Requires the above written response to be posted to the SFM’s internet website.
4. Authorizes entities, in periods between the SFM’s review of areas of the state for recommendations regarding an area’s FHSZ, to provide documentation to the SFM regarding planned or implemented wildfire safety improvements and actions, as specified, that may impact the degree of fire hazard in an area or the area’s recommended FHSZ designation.
5. Requires the above documentation provided to the SFM to be posted to the SFM’s internet website.
6. Authorizes the SFM to consider information provided by entities in the next FHSZ review.
7. Authorizes the SFM to require a fee from an entity to cover costs associated with conferring and receiving documentation. on actions that may impact the degree of fire hazard in an area or the area’s recommended FHSZ designation
8. Requires all the provisions above apply to both Government Code § 51178 and Public Resources Code § 4204, provisions that require the identification of, and review, of FHSZ zones.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Establishes the State Fire Marshal (SFM) as a component of the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) to foster, promote, and develop ways and means of protecting life and property against fire and panic. (Health & Safety Code Section 13100 – 13100.1)
2. Requires the SFM to identify areas in the state as moderate, high, and very high fire hazard severity zones based on consistent statewide criteria and based on the severity of fire hazard that is expected to prevail in those areas. (Government Code Section 51178 & Public Resources Code Section 4202)
3. Establishes the Board of Forestry and Fire Protection (Board) to determine, establish, and maintain an adequate forest policy for the state, and protect all wildland forest resources in California that are not under federal jurisdiction. (Public Resources Code Section 740)
4. Requires the Board to classify all lands within the state, without regard to any classification of lands made by or for any federal agency or purpose, for the purpose of determining areas in which the financial responsibility of preventing and suppressing fires is primarily the responsibility of the state, commonly referred to as the “State Responsibility Area.” (Public Resources Code Section 4125 (a))
5. Provides that the following areas are not to be included in the State Responsibility Area:
   1. Lands owned or controlled by the federal government or any agency of the federal government; and
   2. Lands within the exterior boundaries of any city, except a city and county with a population of less than 25,000 if, at the time the city and county government is established, the county contains no municipal corporations, typically referred to as a local responsibility area. (Public Resources Code Section 4127)
6. Requires the SFM, by regulation, to designate FHSZs and assign to each zone a rating reflecting the degree of severity of fire hazard that is expected to prevail in the zone. Provides that no designation of a zone and assignment of a rating shall be adopted by the SFM until the proposed regulation has been transmitted to the board of supervisors of the county in which the zone is located at least 45 days before the adoption of the proposed regulation and a public hearing has been held in that county during that 45-day period. (Public Resources Code Section 4203)
7. Requires the SFM to periodically review zones designated and rated pursuant to current law and, as necessary, revise FHSZs or their ratings or repeal the designation of FHSZs. (Public Resources Code Section 4204)
8. Requires the Board to establish standards, based upon its determination of conditions which create an unreasonable hazard to life or property from fire, for what constitutes a hazardous condition in those instances not covered by state law. Such standards shall be established for each of CAL FIRE’s administrative districts after public hearing for which ample publicity is given. (Public Resources Code Section 4173)
9. Authorizes the Board, upon the written petition of the owners or authorized agents of more than 50% of the land, including public land, within the exterior boundaries of any area of not less than 10,000 acres in size, upon which a fire hazard exists due to the presence of flammable material or cover, to designate such area as a hazardous fire area, and requires the Board to declare the period of time during which the area shall be so designated. (Public Resources Code Section 4251)
10. Requires the Board to adopt regulations implementing minimum fire safety standards related to defensible space that are applicable to SRA lands under the authority of CAL FIRE, and to lands classified and designated as VHFHSZs. (Public Resources Code Section 4290)
11. Requires the Board to develop and maintain a “Fire Risk Reduction Community” list of agencies, communities, and neighborhoods located in the SRA or a VHFHSZ that meet best practices for fire hazard planning. (Public Resources Code Section 4290.1)
12. Requires a person who owns or operates a building or structure in specified lands with flammable materials to maintain defensible space of 100 feet from each side of the structure. Requires the Board to develop and update guidance for fuels management for defensible space compliance. Requires the SFM to make recommendations to the Board on vegetation management, and make reasonable efforts to provide notice to affected residents. (Public Resources Code Section 4291)
13. Requires CAL FIRE to establish a local assistance grant program for fire prevention and home hardening education activities in California, requires the local assistance grant program to establish a robust year-round fire prevention effort in and near fire-threatened communities that focuses on increasing the protection of people, structures, and communities. (Public Resources Code Section 4124.5)

FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown. A fiscal committee has not heard this bill.

COMMENTS:

Purpose of the bill: According to the author, “California is two million homes short and faces a housing crisis that demands urgent action. We cannot afford to build without wildfire resilience at the core of our decisions. Too many homes were built in an era when climate risk was an afterthought. That cannot continue. AB 261 ensures we use the best information available to guide development, protect homeowners, and strengthen our wildfire defenses, because in the face of rising threats, outdated maps and outdated thinking put Californian lives and livelihoods at risk.”

Equity Impact: According to the author’s staff, “Unfortunately, the concern with fires impact all Californians. However, our most vulnerable communities are impacted due to access to resources whether in prevention, during a fire, or after when they need to rebuild their lives.”

Background: Throughout California’s history the state has contended with destructive wildfires impacting communities that were constructed amongst or adjacent to timber and chaparral forests. These areas, commonly referred to as the “wildland urban interface,” have long been considered some of the most fire-prone areas in the state. In the last decade, unprecedented wildfires led to the deadliest wildfire in California’s history. The impacts of these wildfires cannot be understated, many lives were lost, thousands of homes were destroyed, and residents, in some cases entire communities, have been forced to relocate. Billions of dollars in damage was caused to homes, businesses, and infrastructure throughout the state.

The confluence of a changing climate, urbanization, and constraints on forest management has added urgency to the need to enhance our strategy to address this threat. The Legislature has made substantial investments to continue strengthening forest and wildfire resilience statewide to mitigate the ongoing impact of climate change on California’s wildlands, as it continues to drive critically dry fuel conditions and longer, more severe fire seasons. The 2021 and 2022 Budget Acts committed $2.8 billion over four years to continue strengthening forest and wildfire resilience statewide to mitigate the ongoing impact of climate change on California’s wildlands continues to drive critically dry fuel conditions and longer, more severe fire seasons.

In recent years, an increasing number of wildfires have burned outside of wildland areas and into more urban settings. While persons living in forested areas and those in the wildland urban interface, have long faced significant risks from wildfires, as a result of climate change, more Californians face wildfire risks than ever before.

Many of these areas have been classified by the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection as belonging to “very high fire hazard severity zones.” As a result of this designation, the properties within a very high fire hazard zone are subject to the strictest requirements from the building codes, “Fire Safe” regulations, and defensible space requirements. Properties not immediately in the wildland urban interface but subject to fire risks are now characterized as being in “high fire hazard severity zones.”

Wildfires: Wildfires are a severe and growing threat to lives, property, and infrastructure in California. The confluence of a changing climate, urbanization, and constraints on forest management has added urgency to the need to enhance our strategy to address this threat.

California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment projects that by 2100, if climate change continues on this trajectory, the frequency of extreme wildfires would increase, and the average area burned statewide would increase by 77 percent.

Wildfires that threaten thousands of homes are now an annual occurrence, as autumn days with severe fire-weather prone weather have more than doubled in California since the 1980s. Over the last four decades, the wildfires have increased in size and intensity with five of the eight largest fires in California history occurring in 2020 alone. Of the remaining three, two of the largest fires occurred since 2020. Additionally, 15 of California's 20 most destructive fires have occurred in the past decade. Collectively, these most recent fires have resulted in 180 deaths and the loss of 57,483 structures (homes, outbuildings, and commercial properties).

In Cal FIRE’s 2020 Fire Siege Report, the Director states, “at the end of 2020, we closed the book on, arguably, the worst fire year ever experienced on the west coast, and specifically in California. Since 2015, the term “unprecedented” has been used year over year as conditions have worsened, and the operational reality of a changing climate sets in. In California, the 2020 Fire Siege claimed the lives of 28 civilians and three firefighters, destroyed 9,248 structures and consumed 4.2 million acres. While fewer wildfires threatened California in 2023 due to the increased number of weather events and atmospheric rivers, the vegetative growth from the significant rainfall contributed to devastating wildfires in 2024 and 2025. In 2024, the Park Fire became the fourth-largest fire in California’s history. Despite aggressive initial attack suppression efforts, the fire rapidly expanded, ultimately consuming 429,603 acres across Butte and Tehama counties. The Park Fire led to the destruction of 709 structures and damage to 54 others, prompting widespread evacuations and the temporary closure of Lassen Volcanic National Park. In 2025, Los Angeles County experienced two of the most destructive wildfires in history (discussed below).

Palisades and Eaton Fires: At its height, the fires placed an estimated 331,335 people on an evacuation advisory, with nearly 192,000 residents facing mandatory evacuation and roughly 140,000 subject to warnings. The blazes burned a combined 37,469 acres and leveled entire communities in the Pacific Palisades and Altadena neighborhoods of LA County.

The Eaton Fire became the second most destructive fire in California history after destroying 9,418 buildings. The Palisades Fire is the third most destructive fire in state history with 6,837 structures destroyed. As firefighters were battling the largest conflagrations, additional fires broke out in the Los Angeles area. Crews were able to stop the forward spread and contain the blazes. These fires included the Lidia, Archer, Woodley, Sunset, Kenneth, Hurst and Auto fires, which burned close to 2,400 acres between them.

Two weeks after the initial fires, the Hughes Fire began near Castaic Lake in northern Los Angeles County on January 22 and quickly grew to over 10,000 acres. It was fully contained on January 30 after covering 10,425 acres.

Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ): As referenced above, Public Resource Code 4202 requires the SFM to classify lands within state responsibility areas into fire hazard severity zones. Each zone shall embrace relatively homogeneous lands and shall be based on fuel loading, slope, fire weather, and other relevant factors present, including areas where winds have been identified by the department as a major cause of wildfire spread. Under Government Code 51178, the SFM is required to identify areas in the state as moderate, high, and very high fire hazard severity zones based on consistent statewide criteria and based on the severity of fire hazard that is expected to prevail in those areas. Moderate, high, and very high fire hazard severity zones shall be based on fuel loading, slope, fire weather, and other relevant factors including areas where winds have been identified by the SFM as a major cause of wildfire spread.

How are FHSZs determined?: According to CAL FIRE, “the best available science and data were used to develop and field test a model that now serves as the basis of zone assignments. The model evaluated the probability of the area burning and potential fire behavior in the area. Many factors were included such as fire history, vegetation, flame length, blowing embers, proximity to wildland, terrain, and weather.”

Arguments in support: The California Building Industry Association writes in support, “This good government measure would strengthen the development of California’s Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ) maps by authorizing the State Fire Marshal to confer with individuals and entities, including public agencies, nonprofits, and tribes, regarding actions affecting fire hazard severity zones between official reviews. FHSZ map revisions occur intermittently, and this infrequency limits the ability for stakeholders to inform the Fire Marshal about mitigation actions that may impact and improve the degree of fire hazard within an area. Perhaps more importantly, AB 261 establishes a process to seek the advice of the Fire Marshal on measures these individuals or entities may implement to reduce the degree of fire hazard within an area. AB 261 offers a proactive solution by allowing a thoughtful dialogue between entities and the State Fire Marshal before the next state review. To ensure transparency, the correspondence and documentation exchanged between the State Fire Marshal and other entities would be made available on the State Fire Marshal's website for public access.”

Double referral: This bill passed the Assembly Committee on Natural Resources on March 24, 2025 on a 13-0-1 vote.

Prior and Related Legislation:

AB 300 (Lackey) of this session. Would require the SFM to review and update the following statutorily required actions every 5 years: identify areas as moderate, high, and very high severity zones, as specified; review the areas identified very high severity zones and make recommendations, as specified; classify lands within state responsibility areas into fire hazard severity zones; and review, and revise as necessary, zone designations, as specified. (Assembly Emergency Management Committee)

AB 3150 (Quirk-Silva, 2024). This bill would have revised existing fire safety laws by requiring the State Fire Marshal (SFM) to review and update fire hazard severity zones every five years, involve public agencies and other entities in fire hazard assessments, and adopt updated regulations for defensible space and fuel management. In addition, this bill would have shifted responsibilities for maintaining fire safety standards from the State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection (BOF) to the SFM and expand the definition of a person responsible for maintaining defensible space to include certain public agencies. (Held in Senate Appropriations)

SB 610 (Wiener, 2024) would have eliminated the state’s fire hazard severity mapping for the state responsibility area (SRA) and local responsibility area (LRA) and requires the State Fire Marshal to designate Wildfire Mitigation Area (WMA), through regulations, for fire mitigation across the state. (Held in the Senate Appropriations Committee).

AB 9 (Wood), Chapter 225, Statutes of 2021. Established the Deputy Director of Community Wildfire Preparedness and Mitigation in the Office of the SFM to be responsible for fire preparedness and mitigation missions of CAL FIRE.

SB 63 (Stern), Chapter 382, Statutes of 2021. Made multiple changes in state law to enhance fire prevention efforts by CAL FIRE, including, among other things, improved vegetation management and expanding the area where fire safety building standards apply.

AB 3074 (Friedman), Chapter 259, Statutes of 2020. Establishes, upon appropriation, an ember-resistant zone within five feet of a structure as part of the defensible space requirements for structures located in specified high fire hazard areas. This bill requires removal of material from the ember-resistant zone based on the probability that vegetation and fuel will lead to ignition of the structure by embers.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

21st Century Alliance

Boma California

Building Industry Association of San Diego

Building Industry Association of The Bay Area

Building Industry Association of The Greater Valley

California Apartment Assocation

California Building Industry Association

California Building Officials

California Business Properties Association

California Chamber of Commerce

California Hotel & Lodging Association

California Retailers Associaiton

Home Builders Association of The Central Coast

League of California Cities

Mendocino and Humboldt Redwood Companies

Naiop California

Orange County Business Council

Orange County Taxpayers Association

Orange; County of

South Orange County Economic Coalition

Southern California Leadership Council

Opposition

None on file.

Analysis Prepared by: Ryan Fleming / E.M. / (916) 319-3802

Date of Hearing: March 24, 2025

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES

Isaac G. Bryan, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 261 (

Author:Quirk-Silva) – As Introduced Ver:January 16, 2025

SUBJECT: Fire safety: fire hazard severity zones: State Fire Marshal

SUMMARY: Authorize the State Fire Marshal (SFM) to confer with entities and members of the public on actions that may impact the degree of fire hazard in an area or the area’s recommended fire hazard severity zone (FHSZ) designation, and authorizes the SFM to provide a written response to an entity on actions that may impact the degree of fire hazard, and would require this written response to be posted on the SFM’s internet website.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Establishes the SFM as an entity within the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) to foster, promote, and develop ways and means of protecting life and property against fire and panic. (Health & Safety Code 13100 – 13100.1)
2. Requires the SFM to identify areas in the state as moderate, high, and very high FHSZs based on consistent statewide criteria and based on the severity of fire hazard that is expected to prevail in those areas. Requires FHSZs to be based on fuel loading, slope, fire weather, and other relevant factors including areas where winds have been identified by the Office of the SFM as a major cause of wildfire spread. (Government Code (GC) 51178)
3. Requires a person who owns, leases, controls, operates, or maintains an occupied dwelling or occupied structure in, upon, or adjoining a mountainous area, forest-covered land, shrub-covered land, grass-covered land, or land that is covered with flammable material, which area or land is within a very high FHSZ (VHFHSZ) designated by the local agency to, at all times, maintain a defensible space of 100 feet from each side and from the front and rear of the structure, as provided. Requires the Board to adopt regulations for an ember-resistant zone for the elimination of materials that would likely be ignited by embers. (GC 51182)
4. Requires the SFM, by regulation, to designate FHSZs and assign to each zone a rating reflecting the degree of severity of fire hazard that is expected to prevail in the zone. Provides that no designation of a zone and assignment of a rating shall be adopted by the SFM until the proposed regulation has been transmitted to the board of supervisors of the county in which the zone is located at least 45 days before the adoption of the proposed regulation and a public hearing has been held in that county during that 45-day period. (Public Resources Code (PRC) 4203)
5. Requires the SFM to periodically review zones and, as necessary, revise FHSZs or their ratings or repeal the designation of FHSZs. (PRC 4204)
6. Requires a person who owns, leases, controls, operates, or maintains a building or structure in, upon, or adjoining a mountainous area, forest-covered lands, shrub-covered lands, grass-covered lands, or land that is covered with flammable material, to at all times maintain a defensible space of 100 feet from each side and from the front and rear of the structure, as provided. (PRC 4291.5)
7. Defines “home hardening” as the replacement or repair of structural features that are affixed to the property with features that are in compliance with Chapter 7A (commencing with Section 701A.1) of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations. (PRC 4291.5 (a)(1))
8. Defines “wildfire safety improvements” as wildfire resilience and fire safety improvements, including measures for home hardening, the creation of defensible space, and other appropriate fuel reduction activities, to residential, commercial, industrial, agricultural, or other real property identified by the SFM, in consultation with the director of CAL FIRE. (PRC 4291.5 (a)(3))

THIS BILL:

1. Authorizes the SFM, in periods between the SFM’s review of areas of the state for recommendations regarding an area’s FHSZ, to confer with entities, including, but not limited to, public agencies, tribes, nonprofit organizations, project applicants, members of the public, and others, on actions that may impact the degree of fire hazard in an area or the area’s recommended FHSZ designation. Authorizes the SFM to provide a written response to an entity on actions that may impact the degree of fire hazard.
2. Authorizes, during those periods, entities, including, but not limited to, public agencies, tribes, nonprofit organizations, project applicants, members of the public, and others, to provide information to the SFM on actions the entity has taken or plans to take before the next review that may impact the degree of fire hazard in an area or the area’s FHSZ designation. Authorizes the SFM to consider this information in the next review.
3. Authorizes the SFM to require a fee from an entity that confers with the SFM or provides information to the SFM to cover the costs associated with this bill.
4. Authorizes the SFM, in periods between the SFM’s review of areas of the state regarding an area’s FHSZ designation, to confer with entities, including, but not limited to, public agencies, tribes, nonprofit organizations, project applicants, members of the public, and others, on actions that may impact the degree of fire hazard in an area or the area’s recommended FHSZ designation. Authorizes the SFM to provide a written response to an entity on actions that may impact the degree of fire hazard.
5. Authorizes, in periods between the SFM’s review of areas of the state regarding an area’s FHSZ, entities, including, but not limited to, public agencies, tribes, nonprofit organizations, project applicants, members of the public, and others, to provide information to the SFM on actions the entity has taken or plans to take before the next review that may impact the degree of fire hazard in an area or the area’s FHSZ designation. Authorizes the SFM to consider this information in the next review.
6. Requires any letters provided by the SFM and any documentation provided to the SFM to be posted on the SFM’s internet website.
7. Authorizes the SFM to require a fee from an entity that confers with the SFM or provides information to the SFM to cover the SFM’s costs.

FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown

COMMENTS:

1. Author’s statement:

California is two million homes short and faces a housing crisis that demands urgent action. We cannot afford to build without wildfire resilience at the core of our decisions. Too many homes were built in an era when climate risk was an afterthought. That cannot continue. AB 261 ensures we use the best information available to guide development, protect homeowners, and strengthen our wildfire defenses, because in the face of rising threats, outdated maps and outdated thinking put Californian lives and livelihoods at risk.

1. Wildfires in California. Wildfires have been growing in size, duration, and destructivity over the past 20 years. Growing wildfire risk is due to accumulating fuels, a warming climate, and expanding development in the wildland-urban interface. The 2020 fire season broke numerous records. Five of California’s six largest fires in modern history burned at the same time, with more than 4.3 million acres burned across the state, double the previous record. The Los Angeles fires have burned an area nearly the size of Washington, D.C., killed 28 people and damaged or destroyed nearly 16,000 structures, according to CAL FIRE. AccuWeather projects damage and economic losses at more than $250 billion; others project the fires have damaged or destroyed $350 billion in public infrastructure alone.

Research from Stanford University (February 2022) on wildfire shows that vegetation in the West is drying out even faster due to climate change effects and increasing fire risk. The researchers found that a combination of plant and soil dehydration coupled with atmospheric dryness is creating what they’ve termed ‘double-hazard zones.’ The researchers identified 18 of these double-hazard zones across the Western U.S., including three in California. Their study further showed that the increased population growth in the wild-urban interface (WUI) is concerning as this landscape is often comprised of grasslands or chaparral, which is highly sensitive to drought, making it also highly vulnerable to extreme fire events. In California, more than 11 million of the state’s 40 million residents live in the WUI, which encompasses not only densely forested areas like Paradise, but also parts of the wooded coastal foothills around Silicon Valley, the brush-and-grass covered hills around Santa Barbara and Los Angeles, and neighborhoods in the Oakland Hills.

1. Fire hazard mapping. FHSZs fall into the following classifications: moderate, high, and very high based on consistent statewide criteria and based on the severity of fire hazard that is expected to prevail in those areas. FHSZ maps evaluate “hazard” based on the physical conditions that create a likelihood and expected fire behavior over a 30 to 50-year period without considering mitigation measures such as home hardening, defensible space, vegetation management, or fuel reduction efforts.

Regulations were approved on January 31, 2024, for revised SRA FHSZs, which became effective April 1, 2024. This current revision only updates areas in the SRA, which are unincorporated, rural areas where wildfires tend to be frequent.

Before the updated FHSZ regulations were approved, the FHSZ maps were last updated in 2007 when CAL FIRE updated the FHSZs for the entire SRA. Lands are removed from the SRA when they become incorporated by a city, change in ownership to the federal government, become more densely populated, or are converted to intensive agriculture that minimizes the risk of wildfire. While some lands are removed from SRA automatically, the Board of Forestry (Board) typically reviews changes every five years.

Between 2008 and 2011, CAL FIRE worked with local governments to make recommendations of the VHFSZ within the LRA, which includes incorporated cities, urban regions, agriculture lands, and portions of the desert where the local government is responsible for wildfire protection. This is typically provided by city fire departments, fire protection districts, counties, and by CAL FIRE under contract.

SB 63 (Stern), Chapter 382, Statutes of 2021, requires CAL FIRE to adopt of all FHSZs in the LRA. Prior to 2021, only VHFHSZs were required for adoption in the LRA.

CAL FIRE uses the same modeling data that are used to map the SRA to develop the FHSZs in the LRA. Creating maps is a laborious process that requires scrutinizing detailed data across the state, including small pockets of potentially flammable wildlands within cities, and then coordinating with hundreds of local jurisdictions for validation of the mapping. FHSZ maps for the LRA, as required by SB 63, have not yet been developed. CAL FIRE had drafts of the LRA maps, but the LA fires delayed their release. In February, CAL FIRE announced that the SFM will begin providing recommendations for the classification of FHSZs in LRAs in four phases, to certain local jurisdictions. On March 10, CAL FIRE released maps that added thousands of acres of lands within FHSZs across 15 Central Valley counties that previously had no acres zoned for fire hazard. New maps for Southern California are expected to be released March 24.

Local agencies will have 120 days from receipt of the state’s recommendations to designate FHSZs by ordinance. A local agency may, at its discretion, increase the level of FHSZ identified by the SFM, or include areas within its jurisdiction into its FHSZ ordinance, but a local agency may not decrease the level of FHSZ identified by the SFM.

1. Reducing wildfire risk. There are various measures (of which some are required) that can be implemented to reduce wildfire risk in a FHSZ, including the following:

Defensible space. Defensible space is the buffer created between a building on a property and the grass, trees, shrubs, or any wildland area that surrounds it. This space is needed to slow or stop the spread of wildfire, and it helps protect structures from catching fire. A 2019 analysis done by CAL FIRE of the relationship between defensible space compliance and destruction of structures during the seven largest fires that occurred in California in 2017 and 2018 concluded that the odds of a structure being destroyed by wildfire were roughly five times higher for noncompliant structures compared to compliant ones.

The defensible space for all structures within the SRA and VHFHSZ is 100 feet. CAL FIRE additionally requires the removal of all dead plants, grass, and weeds, and the removal of dry leaves and pine needles within 30 feet of a structure. In addition, tree branches must be 10 feet away from a chimney and other trees within that same 30 feet surrounding a structure. AB 3074 (Friedman), Chapter 259, Statutes of 2020, established an ember-resistant zone within 5 feet of a structure as part of revised defensible space requirements for structures located in FHSZs. The Board has not yet promulgated regulations effectuating that defensible space requirement (known as Zone 0).

Home hardening. Home hardening includes vegetation management compliance and building materials used to resist the intrusion of flames or embers projected by a wildland fire. It can be applied to new construction or for retrofitting an older home. Home hardening considers the relationship between a structure and its exposure to nearby combustible features such as vegetation, vehicles, accessory buildings, or even miscellaneous structures like a fence.

California’s wildfire building code (known colloquially by its citation reference as Chapter 7A) went into effect in 2008 and mandates fire-resistant siding, tempered glass, vegetation management, and ignition-resistant roofs, standards for vents, decks, under eves, siding, windows, gutters, vents for attics and crawlspaces designed to resist embers and flames. These standards, which are periodically updated, have been shown to work. An analysis by the Sacramento Bee showed that approximately 51% of the 350 single-family homes built after 2008 in the path of the Camp Fire were undamaged. By contrast, only 18% of the 12,100 homes built prior to 2008 escaped damage. Factors that can cause post-2008 homes to combust include not having adequate defensible space and proximity to neighboring non-fire hardened homes.

Grading. Site grading is the alteration of the topography of a construction site to meet design requirements for drainage, stability, and functionality. It involves precisely manipulating the earth's surface to ensure proper runoff, prevent erosion, and accommodate various structural needs. Construction grading can reduce wildfire risk by creating defensible spaces around buildings, avoiding steep slopes or narrow canyons, and ensure there is space between a structure and wildland vegetation on ridgelines.

Invasive species removal. Removing invasive species can help reduce the risk of wildfires by reducing the amount of flammable fuel available for fires.  Rapidly growing annual weeds like invasive grasses, mustards and thistles dry out quickly after completing their life cycle. When these plants outcompete native species, they can significantly increase the amount of flammable material available to burn during a fire. The presence of invasive plants can also change the behavior of wildfires, making them more intense and faster-spreading due to their high flammability. Native plants often retain moisture longer into the dry season and can be more resistant to wildfires. Furthermore, landscaping with drought-tolerant, native species can increase fire resistance to homes and structures.

1. Can we create meaningful “herd immunity” with these actions? Defensible space, in combination with home hardening, theoretically makes a home “ignition resistant” from embers, radiant heat, and flame impingement.

The state does not bear the primary responsibility for defensible space. Instead, the creation and maintenance of defensible space around private properties is an owner responsibility. When homeowners or other property owners fail to maintain defensible space, however, they can put their neighbors and the larger community at greater risk of devastating wildfires, which can have myriad negative impacts on the state.

Implementation of defensible space requirements works best, however, when they are applied to all structures in the areas where the requirements are intended to be applied. The Legislative Analysist’s Office 2021 report on defensible space explains, “While homeowners benefit from defensible space on their properties, the benefits extend to others, as well. For example, when homeowners maintain defensible space, their homes are less likely to ignite other nearby homes, overwhelm firefighters, and ultimately threaten larger communities with wildfire disasters. As such, an individual homeowner’s decision to create and maintain defensible space can help protect communities, governments, and insurers from the significant costs of wildfire disasters.” In other words, a resident in a rural, mountainous area may comply with all of the applicable defensible space requirements, but those clearances will only keep so much fire at bay if the adjacent structures are not managed and have surrounding vegetation that feeds a burning fire.

There are no definitive data or research studies measuring the success of defensible space requirements based on landowner participation. In other words, it isn’t known how many structures in FHSZs need to implement and maintain defensible space (and other actions) in order for it to be effective. A September 2019 article, Factors Associated with Structure Loss in the 2013–2018 California Wildfires (Alexandra D. Syphard and Jon E. Keeley), analyzed an extensive dataset of building inspectors’ reports documenting homeowner mitigation practices for more than 40,000 wildfire-exposed structures from 2013–2018. The authors found that, overall, structural characteristics (home hardening) explained more of a difference between survived and destroyed structures than defensible space distance.

This bill authorizes the SFM to confer with entities, including public agencies, tribes, nonprofit organizations, project applicants, and members of the public on actions that may impact the degree of fire hazard in an area or the area’s recommended FHSZ designation, and authorizes the SFM to provide a written response to an entity on actions that may impact the degree of fire hazard. Likewise, the bill authorizes those entities to provide information to the SFM on actions taken or plans to take that may impact the degree of fire hazard in an area.

To accurately assess areas with potentially reduced fire hazard risk based on landowner fire risk reduction efforts will necessitate ongoing inspections and thorough scientific assessment. To that end, the bill would allow the SFM to assess a fee on an entity submitting information for consideration of a FHSZ designation.

1. Double referral. This bill is also referred to the Assembly Emergency Management Committee.
2. Committee amendments. The Committee may wish to consider the following amendments:
   1. GC 51178 (b)(2) In periods between the State Fire Marshal’s review of areas of the state for recommendations regarding an area’s fire hazard severity zone, pursuant to Section 51181, entities, including, but not limited to, public agencies, tribes, nonprofit organizations, project applicants, members of the public, and others, may provide information to the State Fire Marshal on wildfire safety improvements and other actions the entity has taken or plans to take, and any information submitted to or by the department pursuant to PRC 4291.5, before the next review that may impact the degree of fire hazard in an area or the area’s fire hazard severity zone designation. The State Fire Marshal, according to the State Fire Marshal’s discretion, may consider this information in the next review.
   2. GC 51178 (b)(3) Any letters provided by the State Fire Marshal pursuant to paragraph (1) and any documentation provided to the State Fire Marshal pursuant to paragraph (2) shall be posted and easily accessible on the State Fire Marshal’s internet website.
3. Related legislation:

AB 300 (Lackey) requires the SFM to review the FHSZ maps every 5 years. This bill is being heard in the Assembly Natural Resources Committee on March 24.

AB 3150 (Quirk-Silva, 2024) would have transferred authorities related to designation of fire hazards from the Board to the SFM. This bill was held in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

SB 610 (Wiener, 2024) would have eliminated the state’s fire hazard severity mapping for the state responsibility area (SRA) and local responsibility area (LRA) and requires the State Fire Marshal to designate Wildfire Mitigation Area (WMA), through regulations, for fire mitigation across the state. This bill was held in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

California Building Industry Association

Opposition

None on file

Analysis Prepared by: Paige Brokaw / NAT. RES. /