Committee advances bill to require insurers to disclose wildfire risk‑score methods and account for mitigation

The House Business and Labor Committee advanced House Bill 11‑82, a measure aimed at increasing transparency in wildfire risk scoring used by insurers and at ensuring that homeowner and community mitigation efforts are reflected in insurance availability and premiums.

"This bill requires insurers to provide information to policyholders and the state about the wildfire models and scores," Representative Marc Titone told the panel in opening remarks, summarizing the sponsors' stated goal of increased transparency and accountability in wildfire risk modeling.

Sponsors said Colorado homeowners and local governments are investing millions in mitigation — fuels treatments, defensible‑space work and home hardening — but lack a clear pathway to have those investments reflected in private insurers' risk assessments. Testimony from county and local officials documented large scale community mitigation projects and described homeowners who could not sell properties because insurers labeled the houses high‑risk or denied renewal.

La Plata County Commissioner Marsha Porter Norton told the committee that many of her constituents "cannot afford fire insurance to protect the investment of their home" after multiple regional wildfires, and urged passage so insurers would properly recognize mitigation. Plaintiffs and community representatives said they had examples of inaccurate model inputs, such as properties assigned incorrect roof materials or mislocated GPS points.

The Colorado Division of Insurance supported the bill while noting technical changes were needed. Insurance Commissioner Michael Conway said during testimony that the division heard directly from Coloradans during a state town‑hall process and that the bill would "give us the ability to ensure that the work that homeowners and communities are doing to make their homes and communities safer is reflected in the availability and affordability of their homeowners insurance." The commissioner and sponsors also said the bill would include an appeal process for policyholders.

Third‑party model providers and industry trade groups supported the transparency goals but asked to narrow requirements to address different model types and to avoid requiring disclosure of proprietary catastrophe models; in response, sponsors offered a set of stakeholder amendments during the hearing. Amendments adopted at the committee hearing removed a requirement that carriers incorporate statewide mitigation into models, exempted reinsurers from some requirements, delayed the bill's effective date to give the industry time to comply, and clarified confidentiality and filing procedures for model documentation.

After amendment and debate, the committee moved the bill to the Committee of the Whole with a favorable recommendation. The vote recorded in the hearing was 8 in favor, 4 opposed and 1 excused.

Why it matters: Colorado lawmakers and local officials have identified homeowner insurance availability and rising premiums as a pressing affordability issue in wildfire‑prone areas. HB 11‑82 would require new insurer disclosures, create an appeals path for policyholders and ask insurers to account for verifiable mitigation; the insurance commissioner and industry will play central roles in implementation and rulemaking.

Next steps: The bill was advanced to the Committee of the Whole; sponsors and stakeholders expect additional drafting and technical work before a possible floor vote, and fiscal and regulatory details will be examined in subsequent committee stages.