California to require insurance discounts for property owners who reduce wildfire risk
The California Public Utilities Commission’s latest report on fire risk management was released recently. It includes recommendations to make public buildings safer. Among them was to impose higher fire insurance rates on property owners to cover their increased fire risks. It’s a good idea.
There is no reason that a property owner should pay more for fire insurance than anyone else. In fact, any property owner who owns a building that is not on fire will pay less for property insurance than anyone else in the community because the risk of fire is generally not spread by just one person. It spreads by being set on fire by other people who are not taking it seriously.
So a property owner whose building is located in a populated area should pay less for insurance, and thus receive less income for property taxes, for having a single building that is not on fire. And as stated above, that is true even if that building is not in a fire zone.
Why not get rid of the requirement to list what is not on fire in your building codes, and to charge more for any buildings that are on fire? Or why not allow private fire inspectors and property insurance carriers to decide by their own criteria that what is on fire is part of the risk of having a building.
Those two options would make the law more complicated, but also would achieve the very result that you want.
The California Public Utilities Commission’s latest report on fire risk management was released recently. It includes recommendations to make public buildings safer. Among them was to impose higher fire insurance rates on property owners to cover their increased fire risks. It’s a good idea.
There is no reason that a property owner should pay more for fire insurance than anyone else. In fact, any property owner who owns a building that is not on fire will pay less for property insurance than anyone else in the community because the risk of fire is generally not spread by just one person. It spreads by being set on fire by other people who are not taking it seriously.
So a property owner whose building is located in a populated area should pay less for insurance, and thus receive less income for property taxes, for having a single building that is not on fire. And as stated above, that is true even if that building is not in a fire zone.
