Californians Approved $1.5 Billion for Wildfire Prevention. How Will the State Spend it?

Go broad or go deep? That’s one of the big questions state lawmakers are debating as they grapple with how to most effectively use $1.5 billion that voters approved last year for projects to reduce the impact of California wildfires.

That money comes from Proposition 4, the November ballot measure that authorized a $10 billion bond to pay for climate-related projects such as water systems and wildfire mitigation.

In his January budget proposal, Gov. Gavin Newsom recommended that $325 million of the bond money should be allocated in the upcoming fiscal year to a variety of wildfire prevention programs. The remainder would be spent over the next five years.

But Democratic Assemblymember Steve Bennett, chair of the budget subcommittee on climate, energy and transportation, told the administration in a hearing on Wednesday that the state should pursue a focused strategy to make the most use of limited resources.

“It can’t be a little bit here, and a little bit here, and a little bit here,” said Bennett, who represents Oxnard. “We need a comprehensive plan to say these are the resources we have; by linking these things together, this is how we could maximize our effectiveness.”

Robyn Fennig, assistant director for Hazard Mitigation for the state’s Office of Emergency Services,  described the proposal for the upcoming fiscal year as one part of a broader strategy that might include trying to secure matching federal funds.

Bennett also noted that the state faces an enormous challenge to address the threats from climate change.

“There has been a sea change in terms of what’s happening as a result of climate change,” Bennett said. “The home insurance crisis was serious, but it’s now going to be unmanageable for California if we don’t find a way to decrease our losses when these wildfires sweep it near or into communities.”

State Fire Marshal Daniel Berlant, defended the administration’s approach.

“I completely agree that [home-hardening] has to be a focal point, but our strategy has to be doing all of these things together,” he told lawmakers. “If we’re not managing the forest, we’re going to have large forest fires that burn right into our communities. ”

The bond measure language, approved by the Legislature last year, offers some flexibility on how to spend the money, Rachel Ehlers, a policy analyst with the Legislative Analyst’s Office, said at the hearing.

But that flexibility leaves some questions for lawmakers, she said, flagging a  proposal in the governor’s budget plan to add an additional $9 million to a pilot program that gives homeowners financial assistance to make their homes more fire-resistant.

“Do you want the funding to go deep and have fewer structures that are protected, but have more of them covered? Or do you want it wide, where you’re giving smaller grants that won’t protect the whole structure, but maybe more properties get access to it? What regions of the state do you want to focus on?”

For the pilot program, established in 2019,the administration’s approach was to target the most vulnerable communities, Berlant said.

Six counties currently are participating in it, based on factors including population health and age, as well as wildfire risk and other climate data. The state reports 17 homes have completed the fire-proofing process and another 23 are in progress. The additional money could expand the program to two more counties.

The selection process could be similar for one of the new programs proposed under the Prop. 4 funding: providing financial assistance to vulnerable Californians to create a five-foot zone around their home that could protect it from burning down.

“You talked about, how do we prioritize? We can’t help everybody,” said Berlant. “We can educate everybody, but those that are most vulnerable who can’t physically do this work, who can’t financially afford to do this work, this program will provide funding to assist them.”

The administration noted that Newsom’s budget proposal is a work in progress — one that was drafted prior to the Southern California wildfires.

“I recognize we have to do all the above and I recognize it is fiendishly difficult to try to figure out, “Do we do 10% here, etcetera there,” Bennett said at the hearing. “In my mind, there has not been enough focus yet on (home) hardening and I think we’re starting to recognize that.”