Predicting how wildfire will impact an area is incredibly complex. While it was commendable that the Orinda News would attempt to report on it, its effort missed the mark. Below are comments specific to what was reported. Also on this site are more thorough discussions of wildfire modeling and prevention and wildfire prevention in Orinda.

The Orinda News reported on a proposal to model wildfire risk throughout Orinda so that resources could be focused on areas of high risk. The article called the proposal

A "Controversial" Plan
The only "controversy" about the plan was that the City Manager, David Biggs, opposed the recommendation of the SSTOC, which had spent months understanding the wildfire prevention issue and having heard from Dr. John Radke at three separate meetings. Mr. Biggs opposed the proposal, stating in his October 11, 2022 staff report: "As an individual city with limited resources, we question the value of funding what is pure research, especially when we have competing priorities for use of Measure R funds. In addition, the proposal relies extensively on crowdsourcing of data we are uncertain if sufficient numbers of residents would participate to make the effort worthwhile."

Limited Resources: By October 2022, when the Council was presented the Radke proposal, Measure R had been in effect for 18 months and had generated about $5 million in revenue. The proposal was for a two-year project, during which time Measure R would generate an additional $7 million. $12 million to fund a $600,000 project to identify where the wildfire risk was in Orinda and set up the platform to continually monitor it. Note: at least 2,000 property owners have lost their insurance because the City cannot show that it is not at an extreme fire risk. They have been forced into the state's FAIR plan and are now paying an additional $8,000 a year for fire insurance. The cost to the residents of Orinda, $16 million a year because the City would not invest $600,000.

Pure Research: The main analytical tool used by Radke to measure wildfire risk is FlamMap. This has been in use since 2006 by the industry. Hardly "research".

We Have Other Priorities: 65% of Measure R's revenues have been allocated to infrastructure projects; road and storm drain maintenance. This was not the residents' priority when they voted for measure R.

Can we make Orinda fireproof?
Dr. Radke NEVER told the reporter that we can make Orinda FIREPROOF. To say that he did is irresponsible. Starting an article like this discredits everything that follows.

One Orindan thinks he can
A lot more than one. The SSTOC thought the proposal was viable. At the City Council's 10/11/22 meeting discussing the proposal, six letters of support were received. As it is, Orinda has no idea if what it is doing is effective, however, the insurance companies say it is not.

He even worked as a firefighter in Spain
He was embedded with Spanish firefighters to get a better understanding what fighting wildfires was really about, he was not a firefighter in Spain. (He does have his firefighter’s credentials,)

He "maintained" that his plan ….
This is a derogatory insinuation regarding a world expert on the topic. "And if you believe that, I have a bridge to sell you." The one example contained in the proposal showed that one neighborhood could have 18 foot flames, generating heat that is beyond the level where firefighters can work. If this does not make residents understand that their property is at risk unless they, or the government using your tax dollars, removes fuel to lower the risk, then we don't know what will.

Radke initially broke Orinda down into three fire risk areas
This is not true. Radke has identified approximately 100 individual "firesheds" defined by the topology of the landscape (mostly "gullies") where fire will "run", with the heat energy intensified by the shape of the gully (like a parabolic mirror), not three. What he did do is then take three of these 100 firesheds and worked with one of Orinda's major brush clearing firms to estimate what it would cost to fully mitigate the firesheds (minimizing risk), and then how much it would cost annually to maintain that state. While Radke's computer modeling identifies the risk potential for any particular fireshed, this type of "boots on the ground" inspection is what is needed to determine what it will cost to reduce the wildfire risk, fireshed by fireshed, each one unique. (see Wildfire Prevention in Orinda - An Example)

He has studied the proposal extensively and estimates ….
This refers to Orinda resident Steve Cohn. Mr. Cohn is not a wildfire expert; however he did take Radke's graduate course at UC Berkeley on wildfire prevention in the spring semester of 2023. During the course, the class created a wildfire prevention plan for the Sea Ranch, similar to what Radke proposed to Orinda. Sea Ranch approached Radke after seeing his proposal to Orinda. But Mr. Cohn did not make the $12 million cost estimate to mitigate vegetation in Orinda to reduce its risk of wildfire, possibly to a level no greater than any other city in the Bay Area. It was Radke who identified three representative firesheds. Then the local fuel mitigation expert estimated the cost to clean each one out ($346,000 cleanup for all three; $63,000 annual maintenance). They then grossed this up to all 100 firesheds to come up with $11.5 million for cleanup and $2.1 million for annual maintenance. The estimate was by wildfire prevention experts.

The City Council studied the plans
The City Council did not "study" the plan. It read the recommendation by the City Manager and acted per his recommendation. No one on the City Council talked with John Radke other than during the one council session the proposal was discussed. And no one on the city council knows anything about wildfire prevention. Council member Dennis Fay was a little more involved. Before Radke ever met with the SSTOC, in early 2022, he sat down with Fay and gave him a "wildfire prevention 101" overview. After that, other than at public meetings (three SSTOC meetings and one Council meeting) no one from the city ever spoke with Radke. A total lack of interest.

The Council's decision to not move forward with the proposal was actually a postponement, and not a rejection. This is because Mr. Biggs applied for a grant to fund the majority of the $600,000 cost. Radke was not consulted in preparing the proposal. After the grant proposal was rejected, the council never re-examine the wildfire prevention plan proposal to see if maybe they were willing to spend two months of Measure R revenue on it.

It would have very much depended on residents clearing out their property
This is not true. Orinda residents are more than willing to pay taxes so that the government can afford to provide services. In 1997 Orindans voted to form MOFD in order to use their property taxes, which had been subsidizing other communities in the county, to be used exclusively to provide enhanced service to Orinda. They even approved an additional parcel tax. In 2012 they voted for a sales tax to repair the roads; in 2014 and 2016 $45 million in road bonds to complete the repairs; and in 2020 they voted to double the sales tax to fund, among other things, wildfire prevention. The sales tax is generating $4 million a year and the property taxes going to MOFD, $22.5 million, are $4.5 million in excess of what it costs MOFD to provide service to Orinda. That leaves $8.5 million a year "available" for the government to clear out excess vegetation. IF they would identify where the mitigation is needed and provide a plan to the residents for the government to provide mitigation on their properties. The residents asked the government to do this. They pay taxes to allow the government to afford to do it. To state that Radke's proposal " depended on residents clearing out their property" is false.

California is currently funding a program similar to Radke’s
The Orinda News should have asked Radke about that. He says it is not. And claiming it is actually a better plan because it extends beyond Orinda into the open spaces, is not necessarily true. We have always known that if a fire starts in the Briones open space, and is fanned by high NE winds (Sonoma's Tubbs Fire in 2017 had winds of 70 mph), the fire would roar, unstoppable, into North Orinda and, with the current condition of vegetation in North Orinda, storm through it too. But we have no model of this potential once the fire hits Orinda. Modeling the open space, with relatively homogeneous vegetation, is a lot easier than modeling the "WUI" (Wildland-Urban Intermix) with varying vegetation and structures. That is why Radke's model looks at a much finer resolution, to better describe the fuel load than other models.

There is no evidence that the adoption of this proposal would have changed anything in regard to the crisis in Orinda
The "crisis" referred to is the "crisis" of "affordable" insurance. 2,000 Orindans have had their insurance canceled. Most are now insured by the state's FAIR Plan. Not great insurance. Very expensive (for many the cost tripled), but maybe this is what State Farm would have charged if it was allowed to base its cost on the risk. FAIR says that they do price according to risk so maybe that is the "fair" price based on risk.

But the real CRISIS is that Orinda is extremely at risk. Insurance may be expensive, but it is available (at least up to $3 million). THAT is the crisis. Making the 100 firesheds in Orinda minimally dangerous is the challenge. They will not be fireproof, but if the vegetation is reduced, as the mitigation expert who priced out the three firesheds we explored knows how to do, then the risk would be greatly reduced and a fire storm averted. This is what "the government" needs to do. This is what the media needs to explain.

One factor some have cited for the large number of cancellations and non-renewals is the high cost of homes in the city
Maybe, but not the main factor. In Orinda, State Farm canceled "only" 55% of its policies. Did it have a model that showed 55% at a greater risk than the remaining 45%? Probably not. It probably picked on the most expensive homes.

But how does Orinda compare to other communities? Here is the comparison of median home prices (Redfin) and percent cancellation by State Farm

Orinda $2.0mm 55%
Moraga $1.8mm 12%
Lafayette $2.0mm 30%
Alamo $2.8mm 15%

Orinda homes are comparable to Moraga's and Lafayette's in price, but experienced 2-4 times the cancellations. And they are 30% less costly than Alamo's but suffered almost 4 times the cancellations. State Farm considers Orinda a much higher FIRE risk, not just a PRICE risk.