More California Communities Adopting Zone 0 Policy for Fire Safety

Here are the morning’s top stories on Wednesday, July 8, 2026

• In the aftermath of a catastrophic wildfire we often ask, how do we stop this from happening again? Fire experts and the insurance industry have an answer to this. But there’s a tradeoff. It calls for getting rid of something we often love very much – our plants. Officials are now slowly phasing in this step called “Zone Zero,” but the strongest push may come from insurance companies themselves. 
• A federal judge has rejected a Trump administration effort to shift how states spend federal homelessness money. It’s a win for California in what’s been an ongoing legal battle. 

Insurance companies pushing homeowners to adopt Zone 0 policy for wildfire safety

Catastrophic wildfires have devastated California in recent years. In the aftermath, we often ask ourselves – how do we make sure this doesn’t happen again?

State officials are slowly phasing in one of the next steps in better protecting homes – it’s called Zone Zero. That’s the area of bare dirt around homes which is considered a defensible space. It’s a bubble – the first 5 feet around the house – where there is nothing likely to catch fire. While other defensible space codes have been about slowing oncoming flames or providing a safe space for firefighters to work, this one is about preventing embers from catching the house on fire. Embers are responsible for up to 90% of homes burning down in a fire. It’s a hot topic in policy and research circles where people talk about how to save homes and make insurance more affordable.

Studies indicate more than half of homes could be saved during a wildfire if the whole neighborhood took this step. The state has dragged its feet for years on implementing this standard. And it won’t apply to existing homes in very high fire risk areas for another 3 years. But some cities are moving faster, including San Diego, Berkeley and Orinda-Moraga. Some residents are on board, some really are not.

Insurance companies could become the ones who really drive adoption. Amy Bach, from United Policyholders, a nonprofit that helps insurance customers, told state lawmakers people want guarantees. “If I don’t go on vacation and I use that money to get rid of my beautiful bushes and all the other things you’re telling me I need to do, replace my wooden fence with a metal fence, then I’m not going to have to worry about my insurance again,” she said.

Judge shoots down Trump’s homeless funding shift

California scored another win against the Trump administration in their battle over how to address the homelessness crisis here and nationwide.

A federal judge last week shot down the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development’s 2025 attempt to divert money away from permanent housing and instead fund temporary shelters and programs that require sobriety. But the judge stopped short of banning the Trump administration from making such changes in the future. “The federal court’s decision to reject the Trump-Vance Administration’s attempt to disrupt essential housing services for people experiencing homelessness, including families, seniors, veterans, and people with disabilities, is both appropriate and just,” Renee Willis, chief executive of the National Low Income Housing Coalition, wrote in a news release.

In November, the Department of Housing and Urban Development said jurisdictions applying for about $4 billion in federal Continuum of Care funding can’t spend more than 30% of it on permanent housing – a move that would result in a significant cut to the type of long-term housing that for years has been a cornerstone of the fight against homelessness. Last year, California communities spent about 90% their share of that money on permanent housing.

A group of states, including California quickly sued. San Francisco, Santa Clara County and a group of national homelessness nonprofits filed a separate lawsuit. In December, a federal judge in Rhode Island temporarily blocked the changes. In February, Congress ordered HUD to renew grants from 2025 under the old rules. Last week, U.S. District Judge Mary McElroy partially granted the plaintiffs’ request for summary judgement in both cases. She ruled that the federal agency did not try to foresee the harm its “breakneck” transition away from the country’s longstanding “housing first” model – which prioritizes getting people into housing without first forcing them to seek treatment – would have on the country’s homeless individuals.