California Assembly Bill AB642

California 2021-2022 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/12/21
• Refer: 2/25/21
• Report Pass: 3/25/21
• Refer: 3/25/21
• Refer: 5/12/21
• Report Pass: 5/20/21
• Engrossed: 5/27/21
• Refer: 5/28/21
• Refer: 6/9/21
• Report Pass: 6/14/21
• Refer: 6/14/21
• Report Pass: 6/29/21
• Refer: 6/30/21
• Report Pass: 7/6/21
• Refer: 7/6/21
• Report Pass: 8/16/21
• Refer: 8/16/21
• Refer: 8/23/21
• Report Pass: 8/26/21
• Enrolled: 9/9/21
• Chaptered: 9/28/21
• Passed: 9/28/21

Caption

Wildfires.

Impact

This legislation imposes additional responsibilities on local agencies by requiring them to act upon the new classifications of fire hazard severity zones made by the state's Director of Forestry and Fire Protection. It is projected that these changes may result in a heightened level of public education and awareness about wildfire risks, thus potentially reducing the impact of wildfires on communities. The bill includes provisions for enhanced public safety initiatives, such as expanding cultural burning practices, which can be crucial in managing land and reducing fire risks.

Summary

Assembly Bill 642, also known as the Wildfires Bill, aims to address wildfire risks in California through several key amendments to existing legislation. One of the primary changes includes the requirement for the Director of Forestry and Fire Protection to classify areas not just as very high fire hazard severity zones but also as moderate and high fire hazard zones. This modification is intended to improve awareness and public comment opportunities regarding wildfire risks within local communities. By expanding the categorization of fire hazard zones, the bill seeks to enhance the state's preparedness and response to wildfire threats.

Sentiment

Overall sentiment around AB 642 has been predominantly positive, especially among environmental groups and communities that would benefit from improved public education and fire resilience strategies. However, there are concerns regarding the additional burdens placed on local agencies, which some members of the public and local governments view as potentially overwhelming. Additional scrutiny focuses on the need for adequate funding and resources to ensure these amended responsibilities can be effectively implemented.

Contention

Despite the support for the bill's objectives, there are notable points of contention surrounding the effectiveness of prescribed burning as a mitigation strategy. Critics argue that the success of prescribed burns must be adequately evaluated, particularly in light of climate change and its implications on fire behavior. Moreover, the bill's requirement for increased cultural engagement with California Native American tribes to align on burning practices raises questions about the integration of traditional ecological knowledge in modern fire management practices.