Skip to main content
Evergreen Ledger

SSB 6079

In Committee

Senate

Wildfire risk

Reducing nonrenewal and cancellations of insurance policies due to wildfire risk.

This status may be delayed. See Action History below for the latest updates.

How does a bill become law?
  1. Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
  2. Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
  3. Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
  4. Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
  5. Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
  6. Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
Introduced: February 3, 2026
Last Action: March 12, 2026
Status: S Rules 3
View Bill Text (HTML) (opens in new tab)View Bill Text (PDF) (opens in new tab)

AI Analysis

This analysis was generated by AI and may contain errors. It is not legal advice. Always refer to the official bill text for authoritative information.
People & CommunitiesPeople-leaningCorporate & Wealthy Interests

This bill creates the 'strengthen Washington homes program' to provide grants for wildfire-resilience upgrades to homes and neighborhoods, aiming to reduce wildfire damage and stabilize insurance markets. It also bars insurers from denying coverage based solely on wildfire risk if a property meets current resilience standards.

  • Establishes the 'strengthen Washington homes program' to provide grants for wildfire risk mitigation on insurable dwellings (e.g., homes, modular homes) that meet wildfire-resilience standards from the Insurance Institute for Business & Home Safety or equivalent.
  • Creates a dedicated 'strengthen Washington homes program account' in the state treasury to receive and manage funding, with expenditures limited to program purposes only.
  • Requires grants to be contingent on property owners obtaining required permits, inspections, and formal wildfire-resilience designations (e.g., 'Wildfire Prepared Home' or 'Wildfire Prepared Neighborhood').
  • Prohibits insurers from denying property insurance coverage solely because a property is in a wildfire-prone area, if the property has a current wildfire-resilience designation.
  • Authorizes the Insurance Commissioner to adopt rules, conduct pilot projects, and set eligibility criteria—including funding for low- and moderate-income homeowners via nonprofits.
  • Adds the 'strengthen Washington homes program account' to the list of state accounts that receive a share of investment earnings from the state treasury.

Who is affected

  • Homeowners and property owners — Homeowners and property owners in wildfire-prone areas can receive grants to retrofit their homes to meet wildfire-resilience standards, potentially lowering insurance risk and costs.
  • Building contractors and contractors — Contractors and construction professionals who perform wildfire mitigation work on homes must meet state-established qualifications and follow specific standards to be eligible for grant-funded projects.
  • Nonprofit organizations — Nonprofit organizations can apply for grants to help low- and moderate-income homeowners make wildfire-resilience improvements to their homes.
  • Insurance companies — Insurance companies must accept properties with current wildfire prepared home or neighborhood designations as eligible for coverage, and cannot deny coverage solely based on wildfire risk if those designations are in place.
  • State government agencies — State agencies, especially the Office of the Insurance Commissioner and the State Treasurer, will administer and manage the program and related accounts.
Effective: July 1, 2026Fiscal impact: The program is funded through a new 'strengthen Washington homes program account' in the state treasury, which receives federal and state grants, legislative appropriations, and interest earned on investments. Surplus funds from the insurance commissioner's regulatory and fraud accounts may also be used for the program. There is no new tax or fee created by this bill, but insurers may pass on administrative costs to policyholders through surcharges.Sunset: July 1, 2028 (for most sections); earlier or later dates apply to specific sections (e.g., some expire when RCW 74.76.040 expires)
Model: Intel/Qwen3-Coder-Next-int4-AutoRoundGenerated: Mar 20, 2026 at 2:43 AM

Pro/Con Analysis

Stronger case for benefits

Potential Benefits (5)

  • The program authorizes grants to nonprofit organizations to improve wildfire resilience of homes occupied or owned by low- and moderate-income individuals—directly targeting resource-constrained households who otherwise could not afford mitigation. This is a rare policy mechanism to reduce exposure to catastrophic risk for economically vulnerable residents.

    HousingPeopleRef: Sec. 3(2), Sec. 6(2)(b)

  • By prohibiting insurers from denying coverage solely based on wildfire risk when a property meets current resilience standards, the bill helps prevent insurance redlining in high-risk areas and expands access to coverage—protecting households from being uninsured or underinsured during increasing wildfire seasons.

    Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 7

  • The program account receives investment earnings, and surplus funds from the insurance commissioner’s fraud and regulatory accounts may be used to fund it—creating a more stable and self-sustaining funding mechanism than pure legislative appropriation alone. This improves long-term program viability without requiring new taxes.

    FinancialPeopleRef: Sec. 4(2), Sec. 10(6)(b)

  • The program provides direct grants to homeowners, contractors, and nonprofits for wildfire-resilience upgrades—including structural retrofits, defensible space, and community-level mitigation—reducing physical risk to homes and neighborhoods. This directly lowers the likelihood of total loss in a wildfire, protecting household wealth and community continuity.

    HousingPeopleRef: Sec. 3(1), Sec. 6(1)-(5)

  • The program creates demand for qualified contractors performing wildfire mitigation work and authorizes pilot projects to develop the necessary workforce. This may stimulate local green-collar jobs in construction and home retrofitting, especially in rural and fire-prone communities.

    Business & EmploymentLean peopleRef: Sec. 5, Sec. 6(2)(a)
Potential Concerns (5)

  • Grant eligibility requires a formal wildfire-resilience designation (e.g., 'Wildfire Prepared Home') and compliance with specific standards, which may be costly and time-consuming to obtain—particularly for low-income, elderly, or rural homeowners without access to qualified contractors or technical assistance. This creates a procedural barrier that could limit actual uptake despite the program's intent.

    HousingRef: Sec. 2(4), Sec. 6(2)(c)

  • The program is funded through a dedicated account that receives federal/state grants, legislative appropriations, and investment earnings—but no new dedicated revenue stream is created. Over time, reliance on general fund surpluses and legislative appropriations may make funding unstable, risking program inconsistency or underfunding relative to need, especially as wildfire risk intensifies.

    Public SafetyRef: Sec. 4(1), Sec. 10(6)(b)

  • Insurers may recoup regulatory and fraud surcharges—including those used to fund the program—through policyholder surcharges or rate increases, potentially offsetting net savings for homeowners. If insurers pass administrative costs to consumers, low- and middle-income households may see little or no net benefit despite reduced insurance risk classification.

    Business & EmploymentRef: Sec. 10(7)(a), Sec. 10(7)(d)

  • The program explicitly states it does not create an entitlement and funding is contingent on availability—meaning demand is likely to far exceed supply, especially in high-risk areas. Without explicit prioritization for vulnerable populations beyond the vague reference to low/moderate-income homeowners, the program may disproportionately benefit higher-income homeowners who can navigate application processes and secure qualified contractors faster.

    HousingRef: Sec. 3(5), Sec. 6(2)(a)-(c)

  • While insurers cannot deny coverage solely based on wildfire risk if a property has a current designation, the bill does not prohibit insurers from charging higher premiums for properties in high-risk zones—even if they meet resilience standards. This may limit insurance affordability for lower-income households in high-risk areas, undermining the program’s goal of stabilizing insurance markets.

    Business & EmploymentRef: Sec. 7

Who Is Most Affected

Low- and moderate-income homeowners in wildfire-prone areasMixed Impact

Low- and moderate-income homeowners in wildfire-prone areas stand to benefit significantly if they can access grant-funded retrofits through nonprofits. However, procedural barriers (permits, inspections, contractor vetting) and lack of guaranteed funding may limit actual uptake, especially for those without housing stability or technical support.

Higher-income homeowners in wildfire-prone areasPositive Impact

Homeowners with higher equity or income are more likely to qualify for and complete the permitting, inspections, and contractor coordination required for grants. They may also benefit more from reduced insurance premiums and avoided catastrophic loss, though the bill does not explicitly prioritize them.

Nonprofit organizationsPositive Impact

Nonprofits serving low-income homeowners gain new funding opportunities to conduct mitigation work, but must navigate complex application and compliance requirements. Their ability to scale depends on staffing, technical capacity, and continued legislative funding.

Building contractors and contractorsMixed Impact

Contractors who meet state-qualified standards may see increased demand for mitigation work, but must invest in training and certification. The program does not set wage standards, so benefits may accrue more to larger firms than to small, local contractors.

Insurance companiesMixed Impact

Insurers must accept properties with current resilience designations, limiting risk-based exclusions. While this expands coverage availability, it may compress margins if premiums are not adjusted to reflect actual risk reduction—potentially leading to higher surcharges passed to policyholders.