Of the dozens of wildfire-related bills that legislators were quick to introduce in the wake of the wildfires that ravaged greater Los Angeles in January, roughly half of the ones tracked by Southern California News Group have passed out of the legislature and are awaiting Gov. Gavin Newsom‘s signature in order to become law.
The topics of these bills run the gamut, from home hardening measures meant to reduce the likelihood of a house catching on fire, to streamlining home construction permit approval processes, to mortgage forbearance and additional compensation and incentives for inmate firefighters.
Newsom has already made some decisions. Late last month, he signed AB 493, by Assemblymember John Harabedian, D-Pasadena, to ensure that homeowners recovering after a disaster receive at least 2% interest on home insurance payouts held in escrow, thus closing a loophole that had allowed banks to keep the interest. The new law took effect immediately.
Overall, we monitored nearly four dozen wildfire-related bills this legislative session. Here is a sampling of a few that are awaiting the governor’s signature, as well as a brief look at some that did not make it to his desk. Newsom has until Oct. 13 — an extra day since the legislature concluded a day late — to decide on these bills.
Home hardening
The state’s increasing fire risks have made it more challenging for property owners to get their homes insured, as insurance companies have stopped offering coverage to hundreds of thousands of Californians over the years.
Two bills dealing with home hardening to protect properties from catching fire, which in turn could result in a discount on home insurance policies, are before the governor.
AB 888, known as the California Safe Homes Act, would establish a state grant program for homeowners to help pay for measures like installing a fire-resistant roof or clearing vegetation to reduce the chances that their property will catch fire. To qualify for a grant, a homeowner must be considered “low-income” for the county in which they live, reside within a “high or very high fire hazard severity zone,” and have home insurance.
A separate bill, AB 1, would require the state Department of Insurance to periodically consider updating its “Safer from Wildfires” regulations, to give property owners who harden their homes and carry out other wildfire mitigation measures a discount on their insurance policies.
California Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara endorsed both AB 888, from Assemblymember Lisa Calderon, D-Whittier, and AB 1, from Assemblymember Damon Connolly, D-San Rafael.
Permits to build
AB 253 would expedite the process for obtaining building permits for small residential projects, including homeowners looking to rebuild after the wildfires. The bill would allow a property owner to hire a private, third-party professional to check plans submitted as part of the building permit application, to ensure compliance with state laws or local ordinances, if the city or county’s own building department can’t complete the check within 30 business days.
Assemblymembers Christopher Ward, D-San Diego, and Sharon Quirk-Silva, D-Fullerton, introduced the bill along with Speaker Robert Rivas, D-Salinas.
“California cannot afford to let bureaucracy stand in the way of housing. AB 253 cuts through the red tape, ensuring that when homes are ready to be built, government delays do not stand in the way,” Quirk-Silva said earlier this year.
Another bill aimed at quickening the review process for home building is AB 301, introduced by Assemblymember Pilar Schiavo, D-Chatsworth, and Rivas.
This one would accelerate the state permit review process for housing projects by requiring state agencies to follow specific timelines, as local governments must do. Speeding up the timeline for building new homes would not only help address the state’s housing crisis but also benefit those who lost their homes in the Southern California wildfires.
There is also AB 462, to expedite the building of accessory dwelling units, or ADUs, in the state’s coastal zone.
Normally, a certificate of occupancy wouldn’t be issued for an ADU until the main dwelling had been issued a similar certificate. But this bill would require a local agency to issue the certificate for the ADU, even if the main house hasn’t received the same approval, if the unit is located in a county that the governor declared to be in a state of emergency on or after Feb. 1, 2025. The following would also have to apply: the main dwelling was substantially damaged or destroyed by whatever caused the state of emergency (such as a wildfire) and the ADU has been issued construction permits and passed all required inspections.
In addition, the local government or California Coastal Commission must approve or deny a coastal development permit application for the ADU within 60 days of receiving a completed application.
“This legislation helps increase housing availability in high-cost areas while maintaining important protections for our coastal environments,” Assemblymember Josh Lowenthal, D-Long Beach, who introduced the bill along with Rivas, said in a statement. “As Los Angeles recovers from the catastrophic fires that occurred earlier this year, this will be an incredibly important tool to help in that recovery effort.”
Mortgage forbearance
The Mortgage Deferment Act, or AB 238, would allow homeowners facing financial hardships as a direct result of the January wildfires to request mortgage forbearance. The bill would require a mortgage provider to offer payment forbearance for up to 90 days initially. The forbearance period could then be extended in 90-day increments, up to 12 months.
A previous version of the bill proposed an initial forbearance period of up to 180 days, with the option of extending it another 180 days.
“For too long, wildfire survivors have faced the impossible burden of paying rent for temporary housing and a mortgage on homes destroyed or unlivable. AB 238 will ease that burden by allowing families to pause mortgage payments for up to a year while they rebuild their lives,” Harabedian, who introduced the bill along with Assemblymember Jacqui Irwin, D-Thousand Oaks, wrote in a recent social media post.
Incarcerated firefighters
During the wildfires that ravaged greater Los Angeles early this year, hundreds of incarcerated firefighters — if not more than 1,100, according to at least one estimate — helped with the fire response. Their contributions led to calls from many, including from reality star Kim Kardashian, for greater compensation or other support for this group of first responders.
The legislature’s passage last week of AB 247, to increase pay for incarcerated firefighters, was expected, given that Newsom and state legislators had already included $10 million in the 2025-26 state budget in anticipation of raising wages for inmate firefighters.
The bill by Assemblymember Isaac Bryan, D-Los Angeles, would raise the pay of incarcerated firefighters in the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s Conservation (Fire) Camp Program to $7.25 an hour, which is the federal minimum wage. The rate would be adjusted annually.
Bryan previously sought to set their pay at $19 an hour, but that figure got revised during the legislative process.
These firefighters currently earn $5.80 to $10.24 per day, plus an extra $1 per hour when responding to an active emergency. That amounts to $29.80 a day during an active emergency for an individual at the bottom of the pay scale.
In addition to addressing wages for incarcerated firefighters, the legislature also passed AB 812, which would allow eligible incarcerated firefighters to file petitions for recall or resentencing. Upon request by the inmate, a court could consider reducing the individual’s sentence or vacating convictions or sentences for lower-level crimes.
Supporters say the bill would reward bravery and public service, encourage rehabilitation and may save money down the road by lowering the chances of someone being reincarcerated.
Lowenthal, who introduced the bill, has described AB 812 as “a ‘second chance’ opportunity for incarcerated firefighters who risk their lives fighting wildfires.”
Bills that didn’t pass
Not every wildfire-related bill has made it to the governor’s desk. Some never got close — including several pieces of legislation largely pushed by Republicans.
Examples include a bill that would allow prosecutors to charge someone with a felony for impersonating a police officer or firefighter during a state of emergency. There was another bill classifying a burglary, including looting, committed during a state of emergency as a felony, and a third that would add sentencing enhancements for individuals convicted of arson if their actions led to the burning of at least 500 acres of forestland.
Legislation to provide a tax credit to homeowners who harden their homes or manage the vegetation around their property also did not get very far. Nor did a bill that would have given financial aid to local agencies, community organizations and individuals to cover certain expenses, including shelter, evacuation and safety updates, and supplies to people impacted by a disaster.
