City Ember-Resistant Zone (Zone Zero/0) Policy / Compliance, Implementatoin, and Current City Code Analysis / Cost of Compliance for Owners and City Outreach and Enforcement / Exemptions / AB 3074 / SB 504 / AB 1455 / Executive Order N-18-25
Council File 25-1428-S1
Under review — the city is analyzing its fire-safety zone rules for high-risk areas, examining compliance costs for property owners and how local requirements align with state law. Two committees are studying the issue.
This is the City Clerk's status for the council file itself, not the outcome of the measure. A file often stays open after the Council has already adopted an item. The summary above reflects the latest recorded action.
Brief
Introduced by Councilmember Traci Park and seconded by Adrin Nazarian, this motion directs an analysis of Los Angeles's ember-resistant zone (Zone Zero/0) policy, including current code compliance requirements, implementation costs for property owners, city enforcement mechanisms, and exemptions. The file also examines alignment with state legislation including AB 3074, SB 504, AB 1455, and Executive Order N-18-25. The motion is pending review in the Planning and Land Use Management Committee and Public Safety Committee as of mid-September 2026.
Full summary
This motion, introduced by Councilmember Traci Park, creates a comprehensive directive for the City to analyze and assess its ember-resistant zone policy framework in high-fire-risk areas of Los Angeles. The file addresses multiple dimensions of the policy: the substantive requirements of Zone Zero/0 designations, the financial and practical burden of compliance on property owners, the City's current and proposed enforcement mechanisms, and available exemptions for affected properties. The motion also directs analysis of how Los Angeles's local code aligns with relevant state legislation. AB 3074, SB 504, and AB 1455 are state bills that address defensible space and fire-resistant building standards, while Executive Order N-18-25 signals potential state-level direction on wildfire preparedness. By examining these together, the motion seeks to identify gaps, overlaps, or conflicts between local ordinance and state law, and to understand whether the City's current approach is sufficient, overly burdensome, or misaligned with state intent. A key concern appears to be the cost and feasibility of compliance for homeowners and building owners. The motion directs analysis of what compliance actually costs and whether the City's outreach and enforcement strategies are clear, fair, and effectively communicated to the affected community. As of mid-September 2026, the motion was formally referred to two committees: Planning and Land Use Management Committee and Public Safety Committee. No further action has been recorded. The file does not expire until September 2028, giving committees a two-year window to conduct analysis and return findings to the full Council.
Activity (1)
- 2026-09-16 Motion referred to Planning and Land Use Management Committee; Public Safety Committee.
Documents (1)
- 2026-09-16 Motion · motion