California’s Wildfire Discounts Set the Standard, But Oregon’s Plan Falls Short
When it comes to tackling wildfire risks, California’s approach hits where it matters most—for homeowners, that’s their wallets. Under the state’s wildfire mitigation program, insurers like State Farm, Allstate, and USAA are required to offer discounts for homeowners who take steps to safeguard their properties. It’s a system that encourages proactive measures and provides tangible financial incentives. Oregon? Well, its plan had promise, but it stumbled by leaving out the one thing homeowners can’t ignore—a savings boost.
What Does California Get Right?
California’s “Safer from Wildfires” framework is simple but effective. It ties homeowners’ actions directly to their insurance premiums. When you protect your property by creating defensible space, installing a fire-resistant roof, or upgrading to ember-resistant vents, you can see a discount, although it may not be huge, still something. State Farm, for example, offers discounts of up to 10.1% for completing all 12 mitigation steps. It’s no surprise that these incentives encourage widespread participation.
Here’s the kicker, though—not all discounts are massive. Basic steps, like fireproofing windows, can result in smaller savings (sometimes as little as 0.1%). But that’s still better than nothing. And California goes beyond individual properties. Community-wide efforts, such as achieving Firewise USA recognition, can unlock additional savings for everyone.
Ultimately, California has crafted a program that makes it hard for homeowners to shrug off wildfire defenses. Why? Because there’s money at stake.
The Oregon Plan
Oregon also wants to boost wildfire preparedness, but its wildfire certificate program lacks some critical components. The state partnered with the Insurance Institute for Business and Home Safety to offer certificates to homeowners who’ve taken steps to reduce wildfire risk. Homeowners can pay $125 to apply, providing proof, through photos, that they’ve cleared a 5-foot buffer around their homes. Sounds straightforward so far, right?
The problem? Oregon’s legislation didn’t require insurers to provide discounts. Instead, it left it up to individual companies to decide whether participation in the certificate program would factor into premiums. And as you may guess, most homeowners aren’t going to spend time and money on a certificate that doesn’t guarantee financial relief.
Senator Jeff Golden, who championed the legislation, wanted to create a system where community-level wildfire risk reductions could result in insurance perks. But the idea of mandatory discounts was left out of the bill. Instead, insurers were merely encouraged to “consider” mitigation actions when setting rates or planning coverage adjustments. Without a firm requirement, the state had little leverage to push for discounts.
Where Oregon’s Plan Fell Short
Here’s the crux of the issue. Home hardening is expensive. Replacing siding, retrofitting vents, or building ember-resistant zones can rack up thousands of dollars in costs. Without financial motivations, many Oregonians are unlikely to invest in these changes. And even though the average home insurance premium in Oregon sits at an affordable $1,039 per year (well below California’s higher tiers in wildfire zones), rates are climbing. Oregon homeowners have seen premium hikes of up to 50% in recent years, especially in rural, high-risk areas.
Compare this to California, where insurance providers actively tie discounts to mitigation efforts. The direct connection means people are more likely to act because they can see the payoff in their next bill. Oregon’s program lacks that clarity, which leaves well-meaning homeowners stuck asking, “What’s in it for me?”
Why Financial Incentives Matter
Look, people want to protect their homes. Wildfire season is no joke, and every year it’s getting worse. But when folks are already stretched thin by rising premiums, mortgages, and other expenses, spending upwards of $20,000 on fireproofing upgrades feels like a pipe dream. Financial incentives like California’s show that the state understands what motivates behavior.
Meanwhile, Oregon misses the mark by relying solely on voluntary participation. It’s a great framework on paper, but without discounts or tax credits tied into the system, the state’s wildfire certificates risk becoming just another good idea that people ignore.
Moving Forward
Oregon isn’t wrong to push for wildfire mitigation. The intentions are solid, and creating the wildfire certificate program is a proactive step. But to see results, there has to be more than just certificates and hope. Financial incentives like discounts, grants, or tax breaks are the glue that binds policy to action.
California has provided a clear roadmap for success. Yes, the program isn’t perfect. Yes, some discounts are on the small side. But it works because it meets homeowners where it matters most—in their wallets.
Oregon can still turn its wildfire efforts into a success story. But first, state lawmakers, insurers, and communities need to work together to ensure there’s a real carrot at the end of the stick. Because without meaningful savings, even the best plans won’t catch fire.