Subterms
Pepper Salter Edmiston had given birth to her last child, her seventh, when she decided to take up the hobby. It started with a cookie jar in the shape of a plump woman in a vintage bathing suit, looking skyward as she nibbled on a treat. Then came the Santa Clauses, Humpty Dumptys, cats and […] More
A proposed new law would release homeowners from the onerous process of listing every object lost in a destroyed home.California’s insurance commissioner joined with state legislators on Friday to propose a new law that would force insurers to pay homeowners 100 percent of the coverage for belongings inside destroyed homes, releasing them from the mentally taxing process of listing every object they lost — a requirement of many insurers, and one that consumer advocates say only compounds the trauma.If passed, the legislation would make California the only state in the country requiring 100 percent insurance payouts without such itemization. Similar legislation in Oregon and Colorado following catastrophic fires in those states require insurers to pay 70 and 65 percent of the coverage limit, without an inventory, according to Emily Rogan, a senior program officer for United Policyholders, which supports the rights of consumers.The bill applies only to homes that were destroyed in a disaster and calls on insurance companies to pay a homeowner’s total contents coverage without forcing them to provide an inventory, according to the bill’s sponsor, California Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara, and the bill’s author, State Senator Ben Allen.“The idea here is, we say, ‘Look, this is the insurance plan that you own. You have a total loss, and we’re not going to require you to draw up this itemized list in this moment of incredible pain and vulnerability,’” said Mr. Allen, whose district includes the Pacific Palisades burn zone.Forcing homeowners to account for every last item in their former house is “inhumane,” said Mr. Lara, adding that he was inspired to name the bill “Eliminate ‘The List’” after The New York Times published an article detailing the experience of a homeowner in Altadena, Calif., as she attempted to itemize every T-shirt burned in the flames. “It’s hard to describe the agony in people’s faces,” he said.The proposed law comes a week after Mr. Lara issued a bulletin imploring insurance companies to voluntarily pay 100 percent of the contents coverage for homes destroyed in the recent fires. That notice did not have the force of law, and the commissioner said that “it’s clear that we need to go further,” based both on the Times’s reporting and on the feedback his office has received from distressed homeowners.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More
Federal and state officials say the temporary sites for processing hazardous waste pose no threat, but residents are worried about their air and water.Gov. Gavin Newsom of California visited Altadena on Tuesday to praise the progress of the cleanup after the devastating Eaton and Palisades fires, vowing to complete debris removal at “unprecedented, record-breaking speed.”Catalina Pasillas has a problem with the debris, but her home is far from Altadena. She lives near one of the four federal staging areas where hazardous materials from the rubble are being stored.Ms. Pasillas, a real estate agent who lives in Duarte, about a mile from one of the sites in the San Gabriel Valley east of Los Angeles, said smoke from the fires had exacerbated her asthma. Now, she worries that the waste site, in Lario Park, will poison the air even more.“I understand they need to put the toxic waste somewhere,” she said. “But it feels like they chose our city because they thought we wouldn’t say anything.”Near the ruins of the Los Angeles fires, a new battle has been emerging over how to dispose of the toxic waste left behind.Federal officials said the four temporary sites processing the debris pose no threat to public health or to the environment. But some local leaders and residents worry that their neighborhoods could suffer long-term environmental harm and accuse officials of selecting them because they are working-class Black and Hispanic communities.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More
