Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Wildfire Hazard Map Repeal topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Lawmakers consider repealing statewide wildfire hazard map and associated rules

3205353 · May 6, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Senate Bill 83a would repeal the statewide wildfire hazard map and remove many statutory references tied to it, including elements of defensible‑space requirements, WUI designations, building‑code links and property disclosure language; supporters said repeal will reduce public confusion and restore local trust.

Senate Bill 83a would repeal the statewide wildfire hazard map and remove many statutory references tied to it, including elements of defensible‑space requirements, the wildland‑urban interface designation, certain building‑code applications, property disclosure language and program prioritization. Supporters told the House Climate, Energy and Environment Committee on May 6 that repealing the map would address public confusion and restore local trust; backers and agency staff also emphasized retaining model standards and local authority to adopt mitigation codes.

The map’s repeal was proposed after years of controversy about how the statewide model designated properties, how insurance market impacts coincided with the map’s rollout, and persistent public misunderstanding about what the map required. Senator Jeff Golden, who chairs the Senate Natural Resources and Wildfire Committee, said the map’s modeling created a perception that the state was imposing uniform on‑the‑ground requirements regardless of a parcel’s actual characteristics. “That flaw ... led to just certainty that this map had to go,” Golden said, arguing repeal would remove a source of division and allow renewed focus on on‑the‑ground mitigation, outreach and funding.

The bill deletes the statutory wildfire hazard map and its references, removes the statutory definition of the wildland‑urban interface (WUI) and redefines WUI in the bill text as “a geographic area in which there is a concentration of dwellings in the urban or suburban setting near wildland.” The measure also removes statewide defensible‑space mandates but keeps the R327 model defensible‑space and home‑hardening standards as available model codes for local adoption; similarly, enhanced building‑code provisions would remain available for local adoption rather than apply automatically where the map had previously designated high hazard.

Derek Wheeler, legislative director for the Oregon Department of Forestry, told the committee staff had to “take a scalpel out” to remove map references while preserving other productive programs. Wheeler confirmed the bill includes a declaratory provision that ODF orders assigning property to wildfire hazard zones are null and void once the map is repealed.

Legislators from rural districts emphasized constituent concerns about insurance cancellations or premium increases that coincided with the map’s rollout and said repeal would provide relief to homeowners. Representative Virgil Osborne and Representative Greg Smith described constituent frustration in largely rural districts and urged repeal as a way to pause and reassess how wildfire risk is addressed without penalizing private property owners.

Supporters said the bill also adds two seats to the Wildfire Program Advisory Council — an insurance industry representative and a wildland firefighting representative — and adjusts reporting deadlines for the Wildfire Programs Director. Committee members asked questions about how model building codes and home‑hardening standards would remain flexible; Alana Cox, administrator of the Building Codes Division, said the statute locks in the R327 reference but that the referenced model standard can evolve over time (for example, what qualifies as a Class A roof) so long as the code‑development process continues to update definitions.

Opponents were not prominent at the May 6 hearing; proponents stressed the need to continue funding mitigation, forest management and homeowner outreach. Senator Golden and Department of Forestry staff emphasized that repeal does not eliminate mitigation work or the state’s role in wildfire prevention — the bill removes the map as a statutory trigger and aims to restore local engagement and reduce a source of public mistrust.

The committee closed the hearing without a final vote. Members and witnesses flagged follow‑up needs, including ensuring funding to implement prevention programs and continued coordination with federal forest managers to reduce landscape fuels.