In 2011, when the U.S. Census Bureau began publishing a measure of poverty that included the cost of living, the results made obvious a problem that was hiding in plain sight. Because of the extreme cost of housing, it turned out that California — not Mississippi, not West Virginia, not New Mexico — had the nation’s highest rate of poverty.

Ever since then, the appreciation that there’s an urgent need to add housing stock has slowly built to the point where housing is now the top issue in the state Capitol. Finally, there’s broad recognition that state government needs to encourage home building — not just subsidize affordable housing programs that amount to lotteries because they benefit a small percentage of those in need. To make it easier to add housing stock, there have been a series of efforts to reduce the control that NIMBYs have over the local planning process, and more are under way.

But as big a challenge as this is, the newly retired director of the state Department of Forestry and Fire Protection has done the state a service by pointing out the obvious: The record-setting wildfires of recent years show the urgent need for new thinking about where and how housing is built. In an interview with The Associated Press, former Director Ken Pimlott said that approving — or rebuilding — subdivisions in forested mountains or in fire-prone canyon areas is asking for trouble. If such projects are approved in fire zones, new standards are needed to make buildings much more fire-resistant — not just for homes but for commercial and government structures that are likely to be used for shelter during fire emergencies.

Pimlott also said that both government officials and the public need to recalibrate their views about fire risks. More areas should have automated phone warning systems and emergency sirens. New communities should only be built with easy evacuation routes. And, for their part, state residents must take “red flag” fire danger announcements much more seriously — seeing them as ominous personal threats, not general warnings.


“The reality of it is, California has a fire-prone climate and it will continue to burn,” Pimlott told the AP. “Fire is a way of life in California and we have to learn how to live with it, we have to learn how to have more resilient communities.”

Given that the Golden State already has among the strongest — and most expensive — construction standards in the world, Pimlott’s call for even more sweeping rules is sure to alarm home builders. For one thing, it runs counter to the common view that one of the easiest ways to increase housing stock is by reducing regulations.

But if local authorities continue to allow housing projects in risky areas — such as the newly approved 19,000-home project in the remote Tejon Ranch area north of Los Angles — public safety must be an elevated concern. With five of the state’s nine most destructive wildfires occurring since 2015, that is the only responsible position to take.

There also shouldn’t be an overreaction to Pimlott’s call for tougher fire rules and increased public awareness. A 2016 McKinsey study of California’s housing crisis argues that it’s entirely possible the state could build the minimum of 180,000 new homes a year it needs — if the political will existed to change laws not just to promote transit-oriented housing but to increase zoning density and encourage construction of “granny flats” in existing urban areas that are generally not fire risks.


Unfortunately, that’s a very big “if.” NIMBYs aren’t a lethal threat like wildfires. But they’re definitely a threat to the health of the state.

Twitter: @sdutIdeas

Facebook: San Diego Union-Tribune Ideas & Opinion