XyloPlan Co-Founder Dave Winnacker joined Moraga-Orinda Fire District Chief Jeff Isaacs and Fire Marshal Casey Irving to explain how California’s fire safe laws work in practice, where local governments can go further, and how implementation and enforcement reduce wildfire loss.
In the third session of The Institute for Local Government (ILG)’s Advanced Wildfire Risk Reduction series, Dave Winnacker was joined by Moraga-Orinda Fire District Chief Jeff Isaacs and Fire Marshal Casey Irving for a practical discussion focused on turning wildfire risk reduction from policy into action.
While all will agree that wildfire entering communities is unacceptable, local leaders often struggle with what state law requires, where local discretion exists, and how to translate regulations into measurable results. This webinar addressed those challenges by grounding mitigation in how fire actually reaches and ignites the built environment, and by connecting fire behavior, regulatory authority, and real-world compliance strategies that can reduce large-scale structure loss.
Understanding California’s Fire Safe Framework
A central goal of the webinar was to demystify California’s fire safe laws, which are often misunderstood and inconsistently applied.
The presenters reviewed the major regulatory components local agencies should understand, including:
- Defensible space requirements in State and Local Responsibility Areas, including how property-line limitations affect dense neighborhoods
- Vegetation management plans for new construction, emphasizing that these plans are binding conditions of approval
- Enhanced building standards under Chapter 7A and the forthcoming WUI Code, including how new construction or major remodels can trigger defensible space requirements even when surrounding homes are not subject to those requirements
- Approved materials and assemblies listed by the State Fire Marshal, which provide a practical reference for residents and contractors
A key takeaway was that state requirements establish minimum standards. They create a regulatory floor, not a ceiling. California law explicitly authorizes local agencies to adopt more restrictive fire and life safety requirements when supported by documented local wildfire conditions.
Using Local Authority to Reduce Risk
Chief Isaacs explained how local governments can use existing authority to apply defensible space more broadly, establish clearer inspection standards, advance effective dates for requirements such as Zone Zero, and address constraints created by small parcels and older neighborhoods built before modern fire standards.
To promote additional resilience through the adoption of more restrictive measures, agencies must document local wildfire conditions through formal findings that consider vegetation, wind-driven fire behavior, topography, ignition sources, and fire history. These findings provide the legal and practical foundation for tailoring wildfire requirements to local risk.
Hazard Is Not Risk
The session also clarified the purpose and limitations of Fire Hazard Severity Zone maps.
Hazard refers to the physical conditions that influence fire behavior, including fuels, weather, and topography, and reflects the likelihood that an area will burn over a long planning horizon. Fire Hazard Severity Zone maps are designed as land-use planning tools to indicate where state fire safe minimums apply. They do not change based on mitigation and are not intended to measure loss potential.
Risk, by contrast, reflects the potential damage fire can cause to values at risk, including structures, based on vulnerability and exposure. Risk can be reduced through mitigation, even when hazard remains unchanged. Because of this distinction, Fire Hazard Severity Zone maps should not be treated as risk maps.
Speakers also addressed a common misconception related to insurance. Fire Hazard Severity Zones are not used for pricing or underwriting. Insurers rely on catastrophe models that estimate expected loss based on structural vulnerability and insured value, reinforcing the importance of mitigation strategies that measurably reduce risk rather than focusing on map designations alone.
Zone Zero and Ember Exposure
The webinar included an update on Zone Zero, which reduces ember-driven ignition in the first five feet around a structure, where ignition most often occurs during wind-driven fire events.
Zone Zero focuses on removing receptive fuel beds and ignition vulnerabilities immediately adjacent to structures. When combined with complementary measures such as ember-resistant vents and maintained gutters, Zone Zero reduces the probability of ignition and slows the rate at which homes ignite during wind-driven fire events. The discussion acknowledged that Zone Zero is often questioned, particularly when viewed against extreme fire behavior, but emphasized that ember-driven ignition at the structure occurs through specific, well-understood mechanisms at close range that these measures directly interrupt. From that perspective, delaying implementation maintains the status quo, leaving the same ignition conditions in place that have driven repeated structure loss.
From Rules to Results
The session concluded with implementation lessons from Moraga-Orinda Fire District, drawing on Dave Winnacker’s experience as former Fire Chief and Jeff Isaacs’ experience as Fire Marshal during the district’s rollout of more restrictive wildfire standards in established neighborhoods. They noted that education alone was not sufficient to achieve meaningful risk reduction. While outreach and information-sharing were important, measurable progress required pairing education with clear standards, verification through inspections, and consistent follow-through.
Winnacker and Isaacs explained that early attempts to inspect broadly across the community diluted impact and strained capacity. Over time, the approach shifted toward prioritizing the areas where fire was most likely to enter the community, concentrating inspections geographically, and returning consistently until compliance was achieved. This focus improved efficiency, reduced confusion, and helped build neighborhood-level momentum.
They also emphasized the importance of providing practical pathways to compliance, including phased timelines, modifications, and alternate means and methods where appropriate. By combining enforcement with flexibility and support, Moraga-Orinda achieved higher compliance and more durable risk reduction than through voluntary programs alone.
Advancing Fire-Adapted Communities
This session underscored that wildfire loss at the community scale is not inevitable. It is driven by specific conditions that allow fire to move quickly into neighborhoods and ignite structures faster than suppression forces can respond. Local governments already have the legal authority, technical understanding, and practical tools to change those conditions.
By aligning mitigation with how fire actually behaves, focusing on fuel-driven entry points, reducing ignition vulnerability at the structure, and following through with consistent implementation, communities can meaningfully reduce the likelihood of urban fire. The lesson from Moraga-Orinda is not that wildfire risk can be eliminated, but that it can be managed in ways that measurably change outcomes when fire reaches the built environment.
Ready to apply these insights in your community?
Learn how localized fire behavior analysis and prioritized mitigation strategies can help reduce ignition risk, support compliance, and strengthen community resilience.
Watch the full webinar to explore the complete discussion and learn how local governments can strengthen their wildfire risk reduction plans.
Ready to apply these insights in your community?
Learn how localized fire behavior analysis and prioritized mitigation strategies can help reduce ignition risk, support compliance, and strengthen community resilience.
Contact us to learn how localized fire behavior analysis and prioritized mitigation strategies can help reduce ignition risk, support compliance, and strengthen community resilience.
About the Institute for Local Government
The Institute for Local Government (ILG) empowers local government leaders and delivers real-world expertise to help them navigate complex issues, increase their capacity, and build trust in their communities. The Institute for Local Government is the nonprofit training and education affiliate of three statewide local government associations (Statewide nonprofit affiliated with The League of California Cities, California Special Districts Association and the California State Association of Counties). Their mission is to help local government leaders navigate complexity, increase capacity and build trust in their communities.