Board adopts state-updated fire hazard maps; officials promise phased inspections and outreach

Los Angeles County supervisors on Tuesday adopted an ordinance aligning county fire-hazard maps with the state’s updated fire hazard severity designations and approved related implementation steps, including phased inspections and an outreach campaign for newly affected property owners.

The board’s action, approved 4–0, follows state mapping updates by CAL FIRE that alter which parcels fall into very high, high and moderate fire hazard zones in the county’s Local Responsibility Area (LRA). The ordinance amends county Code Title 32 to reflect those state determinations and sets the framework for how the county will phase in inspections, fees and public education.

Chief Malcolm Moroney, Los Angeles County Fire Department chief, told supervisors the state’s mapping process considers “ember cast, fire history, flame length, terrain, slope, local weather, and the potential fuel load with over a 50 year period.” He said the department performed about 129,000 defensible‑space inspections in 2024 and expects that number to fall to about 114,000 in 2026 because some areas (notably parts of the Palos Verdes Peninsula) were removed from hazard zones in the update.

Why it matters: the map changes add and remove parcels from the county’s defensible‑space inspection program. Supervisors pressed the fire department on outreach, fee fairness, and how the county will help owners who cannot afford clearance work.

Key details and next steps - Phase‑in of inspections and fees: Chief Moroney said the county will “stair‑step” inspection fees as it previously did, and that fees for newly covered parcels will be phased in over a three‑year period. The standard fee under the current program is $151 per inspection; the county told the board it elected to keep that rate after a recent fee study recommended increases. - Scale: County staff told the board that roughly 100,000 parcels have been newly designated as very high hazard under the updated state maps; exact parcel counts vary by supervisorial district. Fire Department staffing and inspection planning will be adjusted to accommodate the change. - State rules and Zone 0: Supervisors asked about AB 3074 (state law governing certain building hardening and defensible‑space standards) and revisions under the Board of Forestry rule‑making. Moroney said the board of forestry’s current rule‑making (deadline Dec. 31, 2025) is trending toward allowing some existing nonconforming elements (for example, certain wood decks) to remain for existing homes while focusing new requirements on new construction. He described a likely outcome as: “no combustible vegetation within five feet of the structure” while allowing potted plants and maintaining a more flexible approach for existing nonconforming residences. - Costs and assistance for low‑income owners: Supervisors repeatedly pressed county staff to propose pathways for property owners who are willing to comply but lack the funds to do clearance work. Forestry Division Chief Ron Durbin said the department has facilitated volunteer clearance in a few cases and suggested partnerships with community groups. Supervisor Holly Mitchell asked the CEO’s office to return in 60–90 days with options to partner with NGOs and potential relief programs for clearance and fee affordability; Moroney and staff agreed to prepare a report. - Cities and adoption: County staff said most incorporated cities had adopted the maps; Lancaster publicly opposed the methodology and has notified the county it may not adopt the state maps. County staff said that even where a city refuses to adopt, the County Fire Department will still perform defensible‑space inspections and collect the inspection fee when it is contracted to do so.

What was decided - The board adopted the ordinance amending county Code Title 32 to incorporate the state’s updated fire hazard severity zones for the LRA and directed staff to proceed with the phased enforcement and outreach approach. Motion carried 4–0.

Discussion, not resolved - The board asked staff to return with an outreach and assistance plan that lists cities that adopted the maps, explains notification strategies, and explores NGO partnerships or targeted subsidies for owners who cannot afford clearance or mitigation. Staff committed to a report back to the board.

Public comment and concerns - Multiple public speakers, including Eric Previn and local residents, urged clearer notice to homeowners and questioned the fairness and burden of new fees and clearance requirements.

Implementation note: the ordinance’s operational details remain dependent on state rule‑making (Board of Forestry) and on forthcoming staff proposals to the board on assistance options and outreach schedules.