- Throughout last legislative session’s negotiations over a sweeping wildfire bill, Gov. Gavin Newsom pointed to high power costs as one reason to consider limiting utilities’ payouts after utility-caused wildfires.
- That bill died in the Assembly last month, but could return if the governor calls a special legislative session.
- Some fire country residents are wary of the bill’s proposals, even those lawmakers and the governor could agree on.
Throughout the negotiations between Gov. Gavin Newsom and California lawmakers over last month’s failed wildfire response bill, Newsom cited high energy costs as a reason to consider limiting how much power companies that spark wildfires must pay survivors and insurers.
But some living in high-fire-risk towns see that issue differently: the extreme energy costs they’re already paying should entitle them to collect without hurdles from Pacific Gas & Electric if they survive a fire the utility giant starts.
“We pay our utility bills,” Mira Zollars, a Placerville shop owner, said.
Sign Up for the Morning Newsletter
The Abridged morning newsletter lands in your inbox every weekday morning with the latest news from the Sacramento region.
On average, Placerville faces a greater likelihood of wildfires than 96% of communities in the country.
“In paying our utility bills, we are paying PG&E to upgrade … their equipment,” Zollars said. If that equipment starts a fire, “they are not doing their due diligence.”
Penalties for starting fires
Introduced in the state legislature in February, in its final form the wildfire bill would’ve limited utility executives’ compensation in years when the utility’s equipment starts a fatal fire. It also would’ve banned the sale of wildfire claims to private equity firms, and started a Wildfire Relief Fast-Pay Program for survivors.
It would not have included the limits on power companies’ payments to survivors that Newsom had proposed. But the governor and California Senate and Assembly agreed to the bill in late August. Then, on the last day of the legislative session, the bill effectively died after the Assembly chose not to vote on it.
In the aftermath, the governor argued the bill hadn’t fully addressed wildfires’ financial impacts on utilities.
“The reforms in this bill, while important, did not address the underlying structural problems driving this crisis, as the initial market reaction this week demonstrates,” he said, referring to PG&E and Edison’s stock price drops during the process.
The wildfire bill may return: the governor didn’t rule out convening a special legislative session to arrive at a new deal.
But some fire country residents are ambivalent even about proposals in the final bill some might assume would be popular with people living with extreme fire risk.
“Nothing’s for free,” Placerville artist Georgina Gilmore said of the fast-pay program, which would have aimed to pay survivors settlements for certain wildfire-related costs within months of the fire, according to the text of the wildfire bill.
A history of fire
Fear of fire is central to Placerville’s history.
Three fires in 1856 razed many businesses. Several years later, the city’s historic Bell Tower was built to house a huge fire bell. In the 1970s, the bell was replaced with an electronic siren — installed by the historic Western States Gas and Electric Co., now part of PG&E.
In 2021, the Caldor Fire destroyed more than 200,000 acres, including in El Dorado County. Some survivors are still waiting for payment from the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Zollar said.
“If the state was investing in (fast relief), that’s probably a good thing,” bookstore employee Diana West said.
On the other hand, she wished lawmakers would focus on improving California FAIR, the state’s last-resort property insurance option.
“Fire insurance here is a huge issue. Have them put the money into figuring that out,” West said.
As for whether the fast relief program would be effective, cafe owner Cherie Cornelison was skeptical.
“It really depends,” she said. “We have some really good nonprofits in the area that will help out the community when needed.”
Some hoped the upcoming gubernatorial election would bring a change in the state’s approach to wildfire accountability.
“I’m ready for a government change,” West said.
