More regulation of addiction treatment and sober living proposed for 2025

• February 23, 2025

My hard cold heart has been ripped, yet again, by another mother whose hope for her son’s recovery in California turned into the agony of planning his funeral. He overdosed while in treatment. There were doves, and promises, and the consuming conviction to make things better, as there are all too often.

A slew of new bills in Sacramento aims to nudge that conviction along.

Local officials are mounting a charm offensive to convince legislators of the need for closer regulation of the world of addiction recovery. And, after a state audit of the Department of Health Care Services (which licenses and regulates treatment centers) found “serious problems,” Assemblymember Diane Dixon, R-Newport Beach, seeks a new audit of yet another agency that licenses programs that treat addiction: the Department of Social Services.

That department licenses, among other things, “social rehabilitation facilities.” Addiction treatment providers have started opening such homes to escape toothier new requirements enacted to reign in addiction programs licensed by Health Care Services. Billions of Proposition 1 mental health dollars could be available to these programs.

Are these the best places to treat people with life-threatening conditions?

The “serious problems” uncovered in the audit included the practice of clustering so-called treatment “campuses” in residential neighborhoods. This arguably results in the “re-institutionalization” of patients that community-based mental health care was supposed to end.

The audit also found that it took Health Care Services more than a year to investigate many complaints, and that the department didn’t always follow up on facilities that were in violation.

“The state’s own auditor has confirmed what cities have been saying for years: There is a lack of transparency, accountability, and information available to our communities when concerns over recovery housing facilities arise,” said League of California Cities Executive Director and CEO Carolyn Coleman in a prepared statement.

Many of the new bills in Sacramento aim to remedy the flaws exposed in the audit. The League of California Cities has thrown its weight behind three of them: Senate Bill 329, Assembly Bill 424 and Assembly Bill 492, which we’ll tell you about in a minute.

“Are people getting well?” asked Dixon. “We genuinely want people to get well….It really is heartbreaking, if you get a chance to talk to people who were in these facilities.”

Wendy Bucknum, mayor pro tem of Mission Viejo and co-chair of the California Sober Living and Recovery Task Force, is hopeful. “We’re on the verge of breaking through the dam,” she said.

Legislative Rx

Let’s start with the three League-sponsored bills.

There’s SB 329, by Sen. Catherine Blakespear, D-Encinitas, and co-authored by Sen. Tom Umberg, D-Santa Ana. That it takes the state more than a year to investigate some complaints about addiction treatment facilities is simply unacceptable, she said. This bill would require more timely investigations: Health Care Services would have to assign complaints to staff within 10 days of receipt, and complete investigations within 60 days. “If an alcohol or drug treatment facility is not following state regulations and jeopardizing the health or safety of its residents or neighbors, the state should act promptly,” Blakespear said in a statement.

Assemblymember Laurie Davies, R-Laguna Niguel, gives us AB 424, which also aims to address the crazy lag on complaints. It would require Health Care Services to better communicate with people who lodge complaints, acknowledging their receipt within 30 days and then informing those folks when the investigation is done — and tell them if any violations were discovered.

Facilities open and close with some regularity, but local governments are often in the dark about precisely where they are and who owns them. AB 492, by Assemblymember Avelino Valencia, D-Anaheim, with coauthor Umberg, would require the state to notify the city or county that a license has been issued in its boundaries. It would have to include the name and mailing address of the person holding the license, as well as the facility’s location.

Several other bills also are aimed at raising the bar.

Right now, licensed residential (i.e., live-in) programs must embrace the American Society of Addiction Medicine treatment criteria (or something very similar) as a minimum standard of care (which was a huge upgrade from the almost nothing they were required to do before). But outpatient programs — where most treatment happens and where, in an extremely bizarre move, the state decided don’t need licensing — could still pretty much do whatever they liked. AB 425, by Davies, would change that, requiring outpatient treatment to adopt ASAM-esque standards of care as well. “Patients should be getting evidence-based treatment, rather than who-knows-what in some of these places,” Davies said.

Another Davies bill, AB 423, aims to keep rehab dropouts off the streets. It would require facilities to create discharge and continuing care plans for each patient, ensuring they can get back home after they finish treatment or are kicked out. Facilities would also have to schedule a follow-up meeting with a mental health professional for the patient no more than 7 days after discharge.

And on the “battling re-institutionalization” front, Dixon’s AB 3 would require physical distance between recovery or treatment homes. Such businesses wouldn’t be considered “residential use of property” if they’re within 300 feet of another such facility; the facilities share the same owner, director, programs or amenities; and the total number of residents in both facilities is greater than six.

“I hope, when I present my bill, it will make people understand they’ve been reinstutitionalized,” Dixon said. “Forty, 50 years ago, (in the institutions), they got medical care. They’re not getting medical care now.”

More legislation is in the works, including a bill that would require disclosing to health insurers that these addiction programs do not provide medical care; one that would use state mental health bond money to boost oversight of facilities; and AB 448 by Assemblymember Darshana Patel, D-San Diego, which would require that the parent or guardian of an underage kid in a California treatment program is physically in the state for the duration of the youth’s treatment.

Charm offensive

The California Sober Living and Recovery Task Force, started several years ago by the city of Mission Viejo, has grown to include other SoCal cities grappling with these issues. The task force wants to build more momentum behind change, and it is partnering with the League of California Cities and the Association of California Cities-Orange County on a “call to action” to elected officials, asking them to support bipartisan legislative reform.

The task force “was born out of your strong leadership and desire to create a coalition of cities and counties impacted by the lack of oversight in business-operated residential drug and alcohol rehabilitation homes,” one letter says. “The purpose of this task force is to speak as one voice with a united message. We are incredibly grateful for all your ongoing efforts to increase awareness of the rampant issues in this unregulated lucrative industry, as are the patients and their families who have experienced tragedies at the hands of operators who act irresponsibly.”

Cities have the law on their side now, the letters point out.

Trailblazer Costa Mesa, which enacted rules for sober living homes a decade ago and has been defending them in court ever since, had a major win in December. The city’s laws do not discriminate against recovering addicts, but may actually benefit them, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit said in a precedent-setting decision.

That case isn’t over, but that victory could have far-reaching implications in Southern California and throughout the nation, as communities struggle with proliferating sober homes that have turned some neighborhoods into veritable treatment campuses and put recovering residents at risk.

“Rather than focusing on enforcement and neighborhood impacts, we are asking that our state representatives consider supporting bills that protect individuals seeking care, increase standards for safety and fraud, and prioritize treatment beds for California residents,” the task force letter says. “These changes have the potential to transform a broken system that victimizes this vulnerable population, which also benefits our communities.”

The request is signed by Mission Viejo’s Bucknum; Lauren Kleiman, mayor pro tem of Newport Beach; and Stephanie Klopfenstein, mayor of Garden Grove.

Is there any cogent argument one can make against better regulation of addiction treatment and sober homes? Many programs in California are in tract homes or apartment complexes, overseen by recovering addicts without long histories of sobriety themselves. And overdoses are tragically common: There was Frankie Taylor. And Dean Rea. And Benjamin Barragan. And Emmanuel Mitchell. And so many more.

“This is about our kids,” said a tearful Susan Rea, whose son Dean survived an overdose at a celebrity sober home in Palm Springs, was booted out with no care plan, and later died behind a gas station.

“This is about our community, and this is about making a difference,” she said. “None of this should be happening. This has got to stop.”

The feds are doing way more than the state on this front. Last week, Juan Carlos Gutierrez, 34, a.k.a. “Johnny G,” of Montebello, was sentenced to 20 years in federal prison for distributing fentanyl that killed a client in a Long Beach drug treatment facility.

Dylan lyrics spring to mind. “….(H)ow many times must a man look up before he can see the sky? …. how many ears must one man have before he can hear people cry?… how many deaths will it take till he knows that too many people have died?”

The answer, my friends, may be as close as Sacramento.

​ Orange County Register 

After wildfires and mudslides, a scam text tests my nerves

• February 23, 2025

“ALERT!!” the text message read.

Considering my recent past, the word was enough to make me think I should grab my “go bag” and prepare to evacuate again.

Only this alert was to warn me that a malicious virus had infected my phone. If I didn’t act immediately, it claimed, the phone would send out photos of me to a pornography website. To avoid this, all I had to do was click on the link below. We all know how that would’ve turned out. Sorry, hackers, you’ll have to do better than that to get the attention of my already rattled nerves.

A bird chirped outside my window as I was reading the message. I am not sure if it was singing or laughing with me. I burst into a rendition of “When the red, red, robin comes bob, bob, bobbin’ along, along.”

I don’t think the bird was a robin, but that was the first song that came into my head.

The birds were back. Well, at least one was breaking the eerie silence that followed the fires.

Even wildlife was too stunned to make a sound.

I am not a great fan of coyotes, but I felt a sense of relief when I heard a pack of them howling into the night, an irritating cry of normalcy.

Even the piles of carefully crafted dirt, indicating that the gophers had returned to my front yard, struck me as a positive sign. It wasn’t all that long ago that I had scattered sound pipes on the lawn to deter them. The sound the pipes emitted was thought to be unpleasant to their furry little ears. But my gophers took a liking to the sound, and settled happily into their underground condos that now provided continuous concerts.

Welcome home, gophers. I should have known that even a catastrophic firestorm and a few mudslides would not keep you away.

Altadena folks are a strong lot.

Email [email protected]. Follow her at patriciabunin.com

​ Orange County Register 

Prefab builder offers free homes to wildfire victims after $15 million donation

• February 23, 2025

A nonprofit created by businessman Rick Caruso is partnering with a startup to offer potentially dozens of prefabricated, fire- resistant homes at no cost to low-income residents devastated by the wildfires in Altadena and the Pacific Palisades.

The initiative, the first for Caruso’s newly formed Steadfast LA, is backed by a $15 million pledge from Airbnb co-founder Joe Gebbia, whose company Samara will build, install and handle the permitting for the factory-built homes. Gebbia will donate the initial $5 million toward the effort and match up to $10 million in additional donations, according to an announcement.

“This initiative is about keeping communities intact,” said Caruso, chairman of Steadfast LA, in a statement. “Many of the people struggling the most right now are those who have lived in these neighborhoods for decades. They built their homes many years ago, they’re underinsured or lack insurance, and now they have lost everything. We’re giving these victims a realistic way to stay on their properties and quickly return to their lives at a time when the deck is stacked against them.”

Samara’s models range from a 420-square-foot studio to a 950-square-foot, two-bedroom home. The largest unit runs about $261,000, with the price tag roughly doubling once installation, permitting and other setup costs are added in, according to Mike McNamara, Samara’s CEO.

The prefabs feature metal roofs and fire-resistant exterior walls, dual-pane glass windows and an HVAC system capable of filtering out particles as small as 0.5 microns, such as smoke, according to Samara’s website.

50 to 100 homes envisioned

Steadfast and Samara expect to build about 50 homes for residents, but are hopeful that with enough donations — and cost waivers from Los Angeles city and the county — that figure could grow to 100 on the high end. Samara will not take any profits from the project.

“The more help we can get, the more homes we can put in the ground,” McNamara said.

Los Angeles County is currently investigating the feasibility of waiving fees during the reconstruction phase.

At the end of January, the Board of Supervisors asked for a report back within 30 days on that possibility. The county also recently held a two-day workshop with members of the building industry to “explore new and innovative rebuilding solutions, including those championed by the Steadfast LA and Samara partnership,” according to a statement from the county’s Coordinated Joint Information Center.

‘Fresh ideas’ encouraged

“Los Angeles County Public Works and its partner in the County’s Rebuilding Task Force, LA County Planning, welcome fresh ideas and encourage creative approaches to rebuilding stronger and more resilient communities,” the statement reads. “Provided they are approved by the California Department of Housing and Community Development, prefabricated and manufactured homes can be used for both temporary and permanent housing.”

McNamara said he does not expect any roadblocks to permitting Samara’s prefab homes as they come “pre-California certified.” The majority of the necessary inspections, short of the final connections on-site, occur before the home is shipped, he said.

“We can have everything already pre-inspected and drop it onto the foundation and connect it,” McNamara said.

Samara builds each home in a factory in Mexico, ships it to the site and then lowers it onto the foundation using a crane. The rest of the installation takes as little as a “few weeks of minimal on-site work,” per Steadfast’s announcement.

6-month process

Samara will handle every part of the process, including the permitting, and estimates it will take about five to six months from receiving approval to build until the moment the keys are turned over to the homeowner. McNamara described it as not gifting a house, but rather a “home.”

“We think the whole concept of a public-private partnership to get people back into their homes is the right way to go after it,” McNamara said.

The Eaton fire in Altadena and the Palisades fire in the Santa Monica Mountains in January destroyed roughly 16,000 structures, including at least 10,000 homes. The reconstruction effort is expected to place a tremendous strain on labor and construction resources across the region.

As costs surge, insurance payouts may struggle to keep up. A significant number of those impacted by the wildfires “will not be able to cover the cost of rebuilding through insurance alone,” according to Steadfast.

Because Samara’s homes are built outside of the Los Angeles market, their construction won’t be impacted by such constraints. “We actually use a completely different supply chain,” McNamara said.

Though Samara is its primary partner, Steadfast has invited other modular home companies to participate in the program.

Steadfast is expected to announce the organization that will administer the initiative in the next few weeks. Interested homeowners can submit their information and learn more about the program on the nonprofit’s website. Eligibility will be based on “financial need and other objective criteria,” the organization said.

​ Orange County Register 

Are all-inclusive resorts worth the money?

• February 23, 2025

By Noreen Kompanik, TravelPulse

I admit that prior to the COVID pandemic, I was not a big fan of the all-inclusive resort. And to be honest, the idea of an all-inclusive can be a bit polarizing.

On our vacations with family and friends, traveling to a destination always meant exploring all that the destination had to offer. This included history, culture and, of course, the local cuisine. The idea of having all our meals at one resort wasn’t something we were really interested in, and it didn’t hold much appeal.

At the time, it seemed that only “certain types of travelers” benefited from an all-inclusive.

Then came COVID. When travel began to open up again, I stayed at my first all-inclusive resort in Mexico. If nothing else, safety played a huge factor in opening my eyes to the benefits of an all-inclusive, especially with my background in nursing.

The experience was positive and since that visit, I and my family and friends have chosen to book some of our vacations in an all-inclusive. But “some” is definitely the operative word here.

And it still brings up the question, are all-inclusives worth the cost? The answer is, “It depends.”

Working with a handful of travel agents who book both all-inclusive and non-inclusive travel, we discussed the pros and cons of the all-inclusive and the type of traveler most likely to book this type of vacation.

Here are the benefits of an all-inclusive:

• Great fit for families and groups
• An overall stress-free vacation in places designed to feel like paradise
• Opportunity to relax, unplug and truly enjoy a vacation experience
• A staff more fluent in English, making for easier communication
• Comprehensive packages that include meals, drinks, alcoholic beverages and activities
• Way to break into an unfamiliar destination in a safe, secure way
• Cost effective and the ability to stay more “on budget”
• Numerous on-site activities for those who love to stay busy ranging from fitness classes to tennis and beach volleyball
• May eliminate the need for your own personal transportation

Now, let’s look at the cons:

• Not a good fit for the non-alcohol drinker or one that’s only a casual imbiber
• The food may be pedestrian, catering more to the North American traveler with options to include pizza, burgers, hot dogs, spaghetti and meatballs. This isn’t a criticism of the menu options, but when you’re in Mexico or the Dominican Republic, do you really want the cuisine you can get anywhere in the U.S.?
• Restaurant choices may be limited. Some all-inclusives offer several different dining venues. Others may not. And non-resort dining in the local economy could be considerably less expensive.
• Inability to authentically experience local culture and cuisine.
• Not a good fit for the adventure traveler who may easily be bored after a few days at the resort
• Negative impact on the local community as some all-inclusives have come under fire for low wages, poor working conditions for local staff and not being environmentally conscious.
• Hidden charges that include higher prices for premium alcohol or other menu items to include lobster and certain cuts of high-quality meats not included in the program.

So, what should travelers look for in an all-inclusive?

It’s wise to work with a seasoned travel agent who has visited the resort or has in-depth knowledge of the destination. There’s nothing more disappointing than spending money on a vacation that doesn’t meet your expectations.

“Know before you go” and be sure to read the fine print of a package before you arrive (though ideally before you book).

Travelers should look for a variety of dining options which encompass a range of venues while still embracing the local food culture. Dining is one of the highlights of a vacation and should be satisfying and enjoyable.

Most all-inclusive resorts are in stunning locations known for their weather, culture and picturesque surroundings. While some travelers may want to just chill at their resort, it’s great to research off-property options that may include Mayan ruins, eco-tourism and other unique adventure opportunities should you decide to do some exploring.

Finding the right all-inclusive resort in the right destination with the perfect balance of food, culture and activities that meet your needs and budget makes all the difference on how you’ll view and value your vacation experience.

©2025 Northstar Travel Media, LLC. Visit at travelpulse.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

​ Orange County Register 

Newsom’s repeated attempts to gaslight the public are catching up with him

• February 23, 2025

To listen to Gavin Newsom tell it, California is “not only dominating but paving the way for the future of jobs and the American economy.” If only it were true.

He continues to brush off bad press – and even worse data – that tells a much different story about the state of California. But Newsom’s repeated attempts to gaslight the public are catching up with him.

Perhaps most egregious is Newsom’s claim that his ill-advised $20 fast food minimum wage law has been a “win-win-win” for the state. He claims it’s “not only lifting up working families but also strengthening our economy. Let’s fact check that.

For months, data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics has shown job losses in our state’s fast food sector. Multiple surveys also found that fast food establishments across the state slashed workers’ hours, drastically increased prices, and even shuttered completely. The most recent report from the Berkeley Research Group shows the state lost over 10,000 jobs from June 2023 to June 2024.

Newsom has tried to defend his bad law, calling these government statistics “fake numbers.” (It’s worth noting Newsom himself has cited this same data.) Despite his denials, the data shows that workers have suffered due to his law. No amount of PR spin will pull the wool over the eyes of employees who find themselves with less hours or out of work entirely. 

Unfortunately, this is far from the only time Newsom has denied the facts to better fit his own narrative. When a media storm kicked up surrounding President Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), Newsom jumped into the press noting that “California’s been a leader in [the government efficiency] space.” He couldn’t be further off. 

In his tenure, Newsom doubled the staff in the governor’s office, oversaw a 63 percent budget increase since 2019, and ballooned the current budget to over $100 billion more than it was before he took office.

It doesn’t stop there. After facing criticism over the state’s homelessness problem, Newsom claimed that California has “dramatically slowed and reduced the growth of homelessness” in the state. 

If Gavin spent less time running his mouth and more time fact checking, he’d see the reality: California’s homeless totaled over 186,000 in 2024. That’s a 5,000-plus increase since 2023 and a 30,000 increase since 2019, when he took office.

This is after the state spent $24 billion on efforts to combat homelessness, according to a state auditor, with some localities such as Los Angeles receiving a $875 million budget. According to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) California is also the worst state in the country for homelessness.

But wait – here’s more! He’s also misled the public when it comes to the proposed high speed rail system, to misleading a constituent about being on the phone with President Biden during his response to the terrible Los Angeles fires, and various other issues. 

Until Newsom decides to wake up and face facts, Californians need the tools to hold him accountable. My organization recently launched a fact-checker that is calling out Newsom for his untruths, and we will continue to call out his misleading statements.    

Tom Manzo is president and founder of the California Business and Industrial Alliance

​ Orange County Register 

Early signs that Trump has overplayed his hand

• February 23, 2025

One of the more specious arguments in the early weeks of the second presidency of Donald Trump was the question of whether or not he had a mandate to do whatever he wanted.

Supporters of the president believed that because he overcame a lot to win decisively, and had with him a Republican-held Congress, he effectively had a mandate.

Opponents of the president fixated on the fact that he didn’t quite get 50% of the popular vote and that his margin of victory wasn’t impressive by historical measures.

Of course, Trump is not a king, but a president in a system with divided responsibilities, divided powers and constitutional constraints. Talk of a mandate only comes across as reasonable if it’s talked about in the sense of “political capital.”

Which is true — Trump assumed office with a great deal of political capital. Unburdened by the prospect of chasing another term, he made quick work of pushing significant changes across a host of issues.

A flurry of executive orders, declarations and controversial cabinet selections were just the start. Early polling showed he had the support of a majority of Americans. Data from polling aggregator RealClearPolitics shows that there was as high as an 8.5% difference in his favorability and unfavorability ratings.

But that has gradually been coming down, with the RealClearPolitics average putting his level of support as of Feb.  21 at 49.1% with 47.8% viewing his presidency unfavorably.

No doubt part of this is just the natural wearing off of the honeymoon period new presidents get as Americans give them the benefit of the doubt before paying attention to what’s actually happening.

But there are also reasons to suspect Trump has miscalculated politically on a number of fronts. While he has aggressively sought to advance tariffs as either a tool for negotiations or an end in themselves, Americans have not been convinced that they are in their best interests.

Polling in January from Quinnipiac University found that just 42% thought tariffs would help the economy, while more recent polling from the Washington Post found that 69% of Americans  think tariffs will make goods more expensive.

The average American, it turns out, has more economic sense than the president when it comes to trade. Tariffs, after all, are taxes paid by importers. Imposing taxes on goods from abroad only means that businesses will pass along the costs of the tariffs to customers. The average American understands this, but Trump doesn’t.

The more he pushes tariffs, which will raise prices, the more he will annoy Americans who elected him in part because they thought he could do a better job of handling the economy. Years of harsh inflation and the higher prices seen by everyone everywhere hurt. Making that worse with tariffs is obviously the wrong thing to do.

Elsewhere, Trump took heat for his selection of polarizing figures like Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Pete Hegseth and Tulsi Gabbard to join his cabinet.  Setting aside their individual merits and granting that they may be right on some issues, it was a risky play for Trump to select such people. But he did it and is probably in part paying the price for it.

Trump’s declaration that the United States would take over Gaza likely did him no favors. Polling from CNN indicates 58% of Americans called it a bad idea, with a plurality of Republicans staying neutral on it. Negotiating ploy or not, it sounded nuts to most Americans because it is an absurd idea.

These sorts of things will continue to pile up. As will backlash and sour feelings, most likely, to the outsized involvement of Elon Musk.

Trump risks overplaying his hand because he thought he had a mandate to do whatever he wanted. You know who also thought that? Joe Biden, who let his win get to his head and steered him away from being the moderate, normal Democrat people expected to trying (and failing) to be the next Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

Time will tell if Trump can catch himself.

​ Orange County Register 

California rules will require more fire resistant homes in Palisades, Altadena

• February 23, 2025

A blizzard engulfed Michael Kovac’s house as the Palisades fire approached on Jan. 7 — “an absolute blizzard of embers,” he recalled.

But by the time the smoke cleared, the 2 1/2-level, 3,500-square-foot residence was the only house on the block still standing.

That wasn’t by chance. An architect, Kovac designed his ridge-top home with fire in mind.

Outer walls are fashioned from fiber cement that’s impervious to fire. The roof is protected by an ignition-proof membrane, with one section covered by vegetation in 4 inches of soil. Decks are made from a flame-resistant Brazilian hardwood.

See also: Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass fires Kristin Crowley as city’s fire chief

It includes a fire-suppression system to spray Phos-Chek retardant over the yard. There are no overhangs to trap embers. And the garden of agave and Little Ollie cacti is covered with lava rock instead of mulch.

“We were aware of the wildfire history in California and wildfires having happened right in the immediate area of the Palisades,” said Kovac, 62. “When the time came to build a new home, we had twin goals of both being a very environmentally friendly, sustainable home, but also one that was very resilient in the face of what we thought was an inevitable wildfire event.”

As thousands of residents in Altadena and the Pacific Palisades prepare to rebuild homes demolished in last month’s firestorms, Kovac’s house could serve as an example.

Constructing a fire-hardened home is not only within reach for most fire victims, experts say, it’s in the building code.

Unless Gov. Gavin Newsom suspends fire-safety rules, all new homes in areas designated as very-high fire risks zones or abutting to wilderness must be built to one of the nation’s most stringent set of fire-resistant standards, known as the WUI code (pronounced wooo-ie).

Adopted in 2005 and gradually strengthened over the past 17 years, the wildland-urban interface building code requires new homes to include flame-repellent designs and materials.

While studies show fire-hardening improves the odds of a home’s survival, some Los Angeles County fire victims are wondering how much extra it will cost them when they rebuild.

The WUI code includes things like exterior walls that can withstand fire for up to an hour; dual-pane windows with shatter-proof glass; attic vents that block embers and seal off when exposed to heat; roof and deck materials that are hard to ignite; and landscaping designed to buffer homes from an approaching fire.

“It’s about building with resilience in mind so that when a fire like this happens again, you have a home that you can come back to and resume life,” said Steve Hawks, director of wildfire for the Insurance Institute for Business & Home Safety. “Building with a higher level of resilience is affordable and achievable.”

Red tape

Five days after the firestorms began, Newsom ordered state officials to recommend by March 13 which parts of the building code should be suspended to speed up reconstruction. The goal was to streamline rebuilding in the L.A. County fire zones by cutting red tape.

More than 16,000 homes, businesses and other structures were destroyed in blazes that consumed whole communities in less than two days.

As of Feb. 5, more than 33,700 insurance claims had been filed and $6.9 billion in claims had been paid, according to the state Department of Insurance. In January, CoreLogic estimated insured losses could total $35 billion to $45 billion.

See also: LA City attorney investigating 900 price-gouging complaints following wildfires

Industry observers doubt the governor will suspend any fire safety standards as part of a building code streamlining. It’s more likely Newsom could suspend the 2020 requirement that all new homes have solar power, as he did in Paradise following the Camp fire.

“I really doubt seriously that the fire marshal is going to roll back any of the fire hardening standards, or actually, any fire safety standards for that matter. I just don’t see that happening,” said Bob Raymer, building code consultant for the state Building Industry Association and the California Apartment Association. “I do see the Energy Commission rolling back a couple of things.”

California updates its building code every 18 months, with major tweaks occurring in the WUI code since 2010, Raymer said.

Since more than 95% of all homes in Altadena and Pacific Palisades were built before 2009, it’s likely that most fire victims will have to include upgrades for roofs, rain gutters, attic vents, windows, doors, siding and landscaping.

A separate part of the building code added the requirement that new homes built after 2011 have indoor fire sprinklers.

“Nothing is going to make a building fireproof,” Raymer said. “(But) what we’ve done with these standards is figure out sort of a cost-effective way to make them incredibly fire resistant compared to their older counterparts.”

Raymer co-authored a 2022 study that looked at property losses from the state’s nine worst fires since 2017.

Homes built after 2010 — when WUI standards were in force — accounted for 7% to 9% of buildings in those fire-ravaged areas, the study found. But less than 1% of those homes experienced property loss, versus entire blocks of older homes.

“The fire-hardening standards, along with the defensible space, really showed a very beneficial effect,” Raymer said.

‘A real tension’

Accompanied by her 12-year-old son, a desert tortoise, a gecko and two dogs, Louise Hamlin drove through fire to escape the Eaton blaze early on Jan. 8.

Trapped behind an electric gate after her home’s power got cut, Hamlin couldn’t evacuate until she dismantled the rusted, bulky barrier. By then, it was 5:30 a.m, and flames were licking at houses on either side of her property.

Heavy smoke made it hard to see the road, and winds buffeted the car as she drove.

By the time she made it to safety, Hamlin knew her 100-year-old home in the Janes Village section of Altadena was gone.

Now, as she thinks about rebuilding, Hamlin wrestles with her desire to restore her close-knit, “heavily forested” neighborhood and the need to build back safer.

“It’s a real tension between fire hardening and bringing back a livable neighborhood,” said Hamlin, 51. “We need trees to cool our houses, to provide wildlife habitat, to provide mental health benefits to all of us. … It’s probably one of my primary worries. How do we build back in a way that’s going to work and resist the next disaster?”

Fire survivor Heather Flood shares that concern. As dean of the Woodbury University school of architecture, she considers resilience and fire hardening to be a priority for her family’s reconstruction plans.

But the Altadena resident also worries about the cost of building fire-resistant homes for thousands of fellow victims who are struggling with insurance coverage, paying the mortgage on their burnt homes and current living expenses.

“There are so many unknown costs,” said Flood, 53, who lost the home she got married in just over a year ago. “ … I’m all for rebuilding in a sustainable way, in a fire-resistant way, but I’m also keenly empathetic with the thousands of people who cannot afford to wait and concerned the additional regulations will cost the people impacted by this disaster money and time.”

See also: Newsom tells forestry board to speed up rules for ember-free zones

How much will the WUI code add to the cost of rebuilding?

Researchers say the cost of fire-safety upgrades is relatively small for homes built from scratch — perhaps 2% of the total rebuilding costs, said Kimiko Barrett, a senior wildfire researcher and policy analyst with Headwaters Economics in Bozeman, Montana.

That estimate came from a 2018 study of building costs in the inland portions of the Western U.S.

Building a home that meets the WUI code “does not significantly add to the costs of building a more traditional non-compliant home,” Barrett said in an email. “You are effectively swapping out flammable ‘combustible’ materials with noncombustible products.”

In the Northern California community of Paradise, where nearly 19,000 homes and businesses perished in the 2018 Camp fire, residents are familiar with the WUI code.

“Every stick-built home has to have fire sprinklers inside. We all have to have a composite roof or better. … And then, all the siding has to be (fire-resistant) Hardie board or better,” said Jen Goodlin, executive director of the Rebuild Paradise Foundation. ” … It’s not cheap.”

Paradise fire victim Gary Ledbetter, 61, estimated that home hardening adds about $20,000 to the cost of rebuilding a typical-sized home.

But it’s worth it, he said.

“Now is not the time to short that fire hardening on a new build,” Ledbetter said. “My recommendation is aim up. Go above and beyond the building code. Focus on best practice. (That’s) exactly what I did. I went way beyond what was required.”

Above and beyond

Many customers of Huntington Beach-based Embers Protection Services also go above and beyond the minimum, spending big bucks on the company’s patented “automated wildfire defense system,” which includes roof-top and landscape sprinklers.

The system uses satellite data to track wildfires near a property. When a fire approaches, sprinklers spray fire retardant across the grounds, and roof-top sprinklers shoot 50-foot streams of water over the house.

It uses swimming pools or water tanks to provide a backup water supply. When the water runs out, the system will coat the roof with firefighting foam. There’s also a generator or solar batteries in case the municipal power fails.

“Essentially, we’re always having a fail safe in place,” said company founder and owner Chris McDonald.

McDonald’s protection systems cost about $50,000 to $70,000 for a 2,500-square-foot home. Most of his installations have been on larger, luxury homes, he said.

“We’ve had several homes in the recent Franklin and Palisades fire that were in direct path of the fire that survived. We’ve never lost a home,” McDonald said.

Kelly Berkompas believes the WUI code is adequate for protecting homes.

Her Lake Forest company, Brandguard, makes ember-resistant attic, rooftop and foundation vents that she says will keep a home from catching on fire.

In one section of Malibu devastated by the Palisades Fire, 14 of the 15 homes that did survive had ember-resistant vents, Berkompas said.

“During a wildfire your attic vents are like open windows,” Berkompas said. “The embers will blow right through your traditional vents and start the attic on fire. And once the attic is on fire, there’s nothing that the firemen can do to save it.”

Kovac said he and his wife are having some “survivor’s guilt” about their home withstanding the Palisades fire. Sheltering in his west Los Angeles office, Kovac watched the fire’s progress on home security cameras so he knew when to deploy sprinklers that coated his backyard slope with in flame-retardant Phos-Chek.

But in the process, he ended up watching as houses on all sides of his home burned.

“We never thought it would be the entire community on fire at once,” Kovac said. “Watching that footage, we knew that entire life was gone. … We’re happy the house is there, but there’s no good outcome of this at the moment.”

The couple was able to stash their art and personal treasures in a fire-safe room downstairs. But smoke impregnated the furniture and coated home electronics with residue than can short out lights, appliances and gadgets.

“All of that stuff is going to ultimately need to be replaced,” he said.

“It’s still going to be a really sobering experience to be the lone house standing on the hill,” Kovac added. “It’s not like you’re going back to the community you left.”

​ Orange County Register 

What is ‘home hardening’? Fire-resistant walls, roofs, windows and landscaping

• February 23, 2025

Home hardening means using fire-resistant building materials and landscaping to protect buildings from heat, flames and a blast of embers during a firestorm.

Here’s a brief overview of what that involves:

Roofs: “Class A” roofing, which provides the best fire protection, includes asphalt fiberglass composition shingles, concrete or clay tiles and some metal roofing materials. Gaps and ends need to be plugged.

Rain gutters: Fire-resistant gutters are made from metal or another non-combustible material. A non-combustible gutter cover also reduces debris. A metal drip edge covers the space between the roof and the gutter.

Exterior walls: Siding needs to be able to withstand flames and heat for up to an hour. Noncombustible siding includes stucco, steel, fiber cement and specially treated wood.

Windows: Dual-pane windows with one pane using tempered glass that won’t shatter during a fire. Screens can catch embers and reduce heat.

Vents: Ember and flame-resistant vents come equipped with mesh enclosures of 1/16th to 1/8th of an inch. Some vents use “intumescent” material or paint that expands when exposed to high heat and seals off the opening.

Eaves: Boxed in eaves using ignition-resistant or noncombustible materials eliminate space wheres embers can can collect.

Decks: Use fire-resistant material and enclosed openings around the perimeter to keep embers from collecting underneath.

Landscaping: Reduce flammable materials and vegetation within 100 feet of the home. Defensible space is divided into three zones:

—The ember-free zone, or Zone 0 (within 5 feet of the home): Use non-combustible material like stone, pavers or concrete around the home’s perimeter. Replace flammable fences, plants and furniture next buildings with non-flammable materials.

—The green zone (from 5 to 30 feet of the home): Plant just a small amount of vegetation in separate islands and keep it green. Remove dead vegetation and flammable materials.

—The reduced fuel zone (from 30 to 100 feet of the home): Remove dead plants, shrubs, small trees, lower tree branches and other “ladder fuels.” Locate storage buildings, sheds and propane tanks at least 30 feet from the home and create an ember-resistant zones around them.

For more information, see the state Fire Marshall’s products handbook.

Sources: CalFire’s home-hardening websites, which can be found here and here; the Insurance Institute for Business and Home Safety; the Wildfire Home Retrofit Guide; Bob Raymer, building code consultant for the California Building Industry Association and the California Apartment Association; and Kelly Berkompas of Brandguard.

​ Orange County Register