Survivor advocates say the written proposal does not clearly establish the financial responsibility utilities would face after causing a wildfire. Lolita Lopez reports for the NBC4 News on Thursday, Aug. 13, 2026.
Local wildfire survivors and advocates are raising concerns about a proposal from Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office that they say could protect electric utilities from paying the full costs of future fires caused by their equipment.
The governor’s office says the proposed changes would not affect survivors of the Eaton Fire and would apply only to future utility-caused wildfires. Officials also say the proposal would protect victims’ access to recovery funds and would not restrict compensation for their economic losses.
Stream Los Angeles News for free, 24/7, wherever you are.
WATCH HEREBut survivor advocates say the written proposal does not clearly establish the financial responsibility utilities would face after causing a wildfire. They are particularly concerned that future legislation could restrict compensation for pain, suffering and other noneconomic damages.
Relevant content:
A written outline of the proposal emerged after weeks of indications that Newsom’s office was negotiating legislation addressing wildfire recovery and utility liability. The legislation could be introduced before the end of the current state legislative session.
The proposal comes after Los Angeles County fire investigators determined earlier this month that Southern California Edison equipment started the Eaton Fire in Altadena.
Under the proposal, CEOs of utility companies such as Edison could be required to forfeit bonuses if their companies are found responsible for starting a fire.
“This does not affect Eaton Fire survivors,” the governor’s office said in a statement to NBC Los Angeles. “The reforms apply only to future fires. That has been true from the outset, and it’s a nonnegotiable part of the proposal.”
The office said the goal is to ensure that victims of future utility-caused fires can access the money they need to recover. It also said the proposal “does not limit survivor economic damages in any way.”
Joy Chen of the Every Fire Survivor's Network said she recently met with representatives from the governor’s office but remains concerned about the lack of publicly available legislative language.
“The governor himself refuses to come out and publicly present this bill,” Chen said. “They refuse to release the language of the bill.”
Chen said a proposal she was told about by the governor's office would narrow the circumstances under which survivors could receive compensation for noneconomic damages.
“The entire concept of pain and suffering or noneconomic damages here under the governor’s proposal will be limited just to the stress of running away that night, if you happen to still be home when the fire came and later your home burned down,” Chen said.
She argued that such a restriction could prevent survivors from being compensated for the long-term trauma associated with losing their homes and communities.
Los Angeles County Supervisor Kathryn Barger also urged Newsom to prioritize victims as his office develops the proposal.
“I respectfully ask that survivors be the central focus of any proposal,” Barger wrote in a letter to the governor.
She also asked that future legislation ensure survivors receive “the full financial resources necessary to recover and rebuild.”
Newsom’s office said the proposal would limit certain claims made by corporations, allowing more recovery money to go directly to survivors.
Wildfire Victims First, a coalition that includes utility companies, told NBCLA that hedge funds, insurance companies and trial lawyers should not receive priority over individual victims, as the group says can happen under the current system.
