Trinity County survey finds many homeowners on California Fair Plan; supervisors urged to push for outreach and state advocacy

Skyler Fisher, coordinator of the Trinity County Fire Safe Council at the Trinity County Resource Conservation District, told the Trinity County Board of Supervisors on Jan. 7 that an anonymous survey of 381 local homeowners identified unusually high dependence on the California Fair Plan, widespread premium increases and frequent policy cancellations or nonrenewals.

Fisher said the survey, conducted Nov. 4–Dec. 4, 2024 and promoted through the Fire Safe Council’s social channels, community pages, a newsletter and county supervisors, found that “over a quarter of respondents in the survey reported that they are on the California Fair Plan, and 13% reported that they had no homeowners insurance,” and that roughly 30–32% reported either cancellation or nonrenewal in the prior three years.

The survey was presented as a snapshot rather than a statistically weighted sample. Fisher noted a striking contrast with statewide data: “in our research for this presentation, we found, at least as of 2021, it was reported that about 3% of the overall residential insurance policies in California were for the Fair Plan,” and said Trinity County’s reported share was materially higher in the council’s 2024 snapshot.

Why it matters

Officials and residents told the board the findings matter because insurance access affects home sales, mortgages, rehabilitation and household finances in a county with lower median home values than the state average and significant wildfire exposure.

What the survey found

- Responses and method: 381 anonymous responses collected Nov. 4–Dec. 4, 2024. Fisher cautioned some respondents dropped out over later questions and percentages can vary by question. - Policy source: 27% reported the California Fair Plan; 60% reported traditional private-market coverage; 13% reported having no homeowners insurance. - Cancellations/nonrenewals: About 30–32% said they had been canceled or nonrenewed in the prior three years; Fisher and others noted that some respondents may conflate nonrenewal and midterm cancellation. - Premiums and affordability: Fisher compared local answers to the National Association of Insurance Commissioners’ 2021 California average premium of $1,441 and said a majority of local respondents reported paying more than that or had no insurance. She emphasized the county’s lower median home values and the limitations of direct comparisons to statewide averages. - Discounts and mitigation: 62% of respondents had not applied for insurer discounts tied to home hardening or defensible-space work. Fisher said more respondents reported applying for discounts and not receiving them than reported applying and receiving discounts. - Mitigation behavior: Many respondents reported making defensible-space or home-hardening changes; Fisher called attention to lower public familiarity with “home hardening” versus defensible-space work and flagged outreach as a priority.

Recommendations and board response

Fisher urged better local education and outreach about discount programs—highlighting the California Department of Insurance’s wildfire-related initiatives and Firewise USA community discounts—and recommended the county use the survey to advocate to state and regional entities. “We think that it’s the responsibility of these local organizations to kind of advocate and gather this data as much as possible so that we can hand it off to, folks like the board of supervisors so that you can continue advocating for us and what’s happening here,” Fisher said.

Board members pressed for clarification about the 13% reporting no insurance and whether that reflected homeowners who own homes free and clear of mortgages. Supervisors and staff discussed sharing the survey template and results with regional organizations (RCRC, CRC, CSAC) and state contacts including the California Department of Insurance and United Policyholders. One county official present said the county’s Rural County Representatives of California contacts were willing to circulate the final survey to 40 member counties for broader participation.

No formal board action or vote was recorded on the item; supervisors and staff described next steps as coordinating outreach, sharing the survey template with regional partners and drafting advocacy materials for state regulators and associations.

What officials will do next

Fisher said the Fire Safe Council will continue outreach about Firewise community status and renewal and aims to improve public awareness of insurer discounts tied to defensible-space and home-hardening work. County staff and several supervisors said they would pursue distribution to regional partners and consider drafting letters or briefing materials for the California Department of Insurance and other boards and coalitions.

Ending

The presentation concluded with supervisors expressing support for continued work and for translating the survey’s findings into coordinated advocacy and local education. Fisher offered to provide further data and contact information for the Fire Safe Council’s materials and Firewise community renewal status for 2025.