This bill adds a new section to chapter 48.18 RCW directing that fire districts and insurance providers should collaborate to develop incentives that promote wildfire mitigation best practices related to agricultural activities. Any incentive developed is described as optional for insurance providers to offer and voluntary for policyholders to accept, so the language is advisory rather than an explicit mandatory requirement in the excerpt provided. The incentives may apply to holders of crop insurance, holders of fire insurance, or both. Example mitigation practices listed include installation and maintenance of defensible space or fire breaks, proper equipment storage, installation and maintenance of water tanks, ownership of wildfire mitigation equipment (including a firefighting apparatus, tractor, or disc harrow), and notification for local red flag warnings. The excerpt does not include formal definitions of key terms such as “agricultural activities,” “incentives,” “fire districts,” or “insurance providers.” The document excerpt does not specify enforcement mechanisms, funding, deadlines, which specific entities must participate, or other procedural details, so it is unclear whether or how the provision would be implemented or made binding beyond the advisory “should” language. Bill ID S-3580.1 (Senate Bill 5919), 69th Legislature, 2026 Regular Session; prefiled 12/19/25, read first time 01/12/26, referred to the Committee on Business, Trade & Economic Development; sponsors Senators Schoesler and Short.

If enacted, the law would encourage local fire districts and insurance companies to work together to create optional incentives for farmers and other agricultural policyholders to adopt wildfire mitigation measures such as creating defensible space, storing equipment properly, installing water tanks, or owning firefighting equipment. Practically, that means some agricultural customers could see new opportunities for lower premiums or other benefits if insurers choose to offer them and the customer chooses to participate, while fire districts may be asked to help design or promote those programs. Because the bill uses nonbinding language ("should") and does not define key terms or set deadlines, participation by insurers and fire districts would likely vary, and there is no guaranteed funding or enforcement. Fire districts could face modest new workload for outreach and coordination without specified state support, insurers would have the option but not the obligation to offer incentives so their costs are voluntary, and agricultural policyholders would gain more options to reduce wildfire risk but no guaranteed discounts or program availability.