A single question has framed the start and culmination of California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s nearly eight years in office: who ought to pay for devastation caused when utility equipment triggers a wildfire?
Just two days after Newsom won the governorship in 2018, the most destructive wildfire in the state’s history erupted in Northern California, killing 85 people and destroying over 18,000 buildings. Investigators traced the cause to Pacific Gas & Electric equipment. Burdened by tens of billions in liability, the massive power provider filed for bankruptcy weeks after Newsom was inaugurated.
Newsom later signed legislation creating a $21 billion fund, financed by utility shareholders and ratepayers, helping power companies cover future damages if safety standards are met
open image in galleryNow, as the final legislative session of his governorship ends, Newsom is trying to broker a deal with lawmakers aimed at further shielding utilities from financial trouble if their equipment sparks a wildfire. His push comes as another major utility, Southern California Edison, faces claims from the state’s second-most destructive blaze, a 2025 fire that killed 19 people outside of Los Angeles. Investigators ruled this month that it was sparked by one of the company’s transmission towers.
Newsom’s plan could limit the amount electric and gas companies have to pay victims and attorneys. One of the goals is to stabilize the state’s electricity rates, which are among the highest in the nation and have continued to climb in recent years. Utilities have raised rates to pay for wildfire prevention and recovery as climate change has made the blazes more intense and frequent. Six of the state’s 10 most destructive wildfires have been caused by utility equipment.
Newsom says the state needs to act quickly because he expects the wildfire fund to run out soon. His plan would require survivors to get paid by utilities sooner.
“Status quo is not going to work,” Newsom recently told reporters. “It’s not going to work for victims, who consistently are last in line. And that’s at the core of this reform.”
But some of those victims are pushing back. They’ve said Newsom’s plan prioritizes utilities over the needs of fire survivors. Meanwhile, insurance companies are concerned they would foot more of the bill for property damage. A coalition including the state’s major utilities — PG&E, Southern California Edison, and San Diego Gas & Electric — has been urging lawmakers to pass the plan. The last-minute legislative battle could help shape Newsom’s legacy as he considers a run for president in 2028.
open image in galleryNewsom says his plan strikes a fair balance
Under California law, utilities have to pay damages for fires ignited by their equipment, even if a judge doesn’t find them negligent. Home insurers that pay for policyholders’ rebuilding expenses can try to get reimbursed by utilities.
Newsom’s plan could change that by making insurance companies cover more of the cost of property damage. The proposal would also require utility CEOs to forfeit bonuses if their company sparks a wildfire resulting in more than $1 billion worth of damage. And utility shareholders could be fined up to $10 million for violating wildfire prevention requirements, according to the governor’s office, which hasn’t released the full details.
Personal Insurance Federation of California, a group representing property insurers across the state, said insurance rates will increase if the plan is implemented. The onus should remain on utilities to pay, said Rex Frazier, the federation’s president.
“Being responsible for your actions is something that parents tell children,” he said in a statement. “Hopefully the Legislature will tell this to the utilities.”
Fire survivors are also frustrated with the plan, which could limit their payouts. Joy Chen, executive director of Every Fire Survivor’s Network, a group of survivors of the 2025 Los Angeles-area fires, blasted it at a virtual town hall this month.
open image in gallery“This is overall a massive transfer of liability for the three for-profit utility monopolies that have continued to burn down communities across California,” Chen said.
The Legislature has until Aug. 31 to pass a plan. If they don’t, Newsom could call them back for a special session.
Democratic legislative leaders say the state needs to address the issue but haven’t specified what a deal could include. Newsom proposed another $18 billion last year to supplement the wildfire fund, which the Legislature approved.
An economist says the state should reduce utility liability
California’s longstanding requirement that utilities cover the cost of wildfire damages regardless of whether they were negligent is based on the fact that they are providing a public service, said Meredith Fowlie, an economist who co-directs an energy institute at the University of California, Berkeley.
But as climate change has fueled more frequent and destructive fires, the state should rethink how to distribute the ballooning costs of recovering from those blazes, she said.
“Utilities can start fires, but they don’t by themselves create catastrophe,” Fowlie said.
Other factors make wildfires turn into catastrophes, such as failing to clear vegetation or upgrade homes to make them more fire-resistant, she said. The question of who should be held responsible — and by how much — is “a critical, core issue that we have not dealt with and is not going away,” Fowlie said.
Newsom says he’s prepared to tackle the issue he’s kept revisiting since he took office.
“I’m not going to walk away and hand a real mess to the next governor,” he said last week.