Business
California's home insurer of last resort sees enrollment surge, raising concerns over its finances
With home insurers scaling back coverage in the state, enrollment is surging in California’s backstop insurance plan — as is the plan’s risk of sustaining losses that it can’t cover.
Victoria Roach, president of the FAIR Plan Assn., told lawmakers this week that property owners even in areas with low wildfire risk were finding it difficult to keep their homes insured as companies increased rates, limit coverage or left areas susceptible to natural disasters amid climate change.
That has prompted thousands of Californians to purchase coverage through the state insurer as a last resort. Funded by the insurers doing business in California, the Fair Access to Insurance Requirement plan provides a limited policy as a fallback for property owners unable to find conventional coverage they can afford.
Roach said the Fair Plan set a new record last month when it added 15,000 new policyholders.
The FAIR plan has about 375,000 policyholders, and the insurer’s total risk exposure was $311 billion as of December 2023; it was $50 billion in 2018.
“We’re one of the largest writers in the state right now in terms of new business coming in,” Roach said. “As those numbers climb, our financial stability comes more into question.”
Roach said homeowners and businesses are typically insured by any of the state’s 118 standard insurers or 132 surplus line insurers, which specialize in high-risk insurance.
“Unfortunately, as you know with the current state of the market, I think this is often reversed because there’s not a lot of options out there for people,” Roach told lawmakers during Wednesday’s Assembly Insurance Committee. “Instead, the FAIR plan is quickly moving to be the first resort for a lot of people.”
She said consumers who would never have sought insurance through the FAIR plan in years past were now among the new policyholders, many of whom were not living in wildfire areas.
The insurer’s expansion is the latest wrinkle in California’s ongoing insurance crisis, and it mirrors a similar trend across the country of major companies dropping customers in areas prone to wildfires, flooding and hurricanes.
Florida’s state insurance of last resort, known as the Citizens Property Insurance Corp., has become the largest property insurer there, adding about 11,000 new policies in the last two weeks, according to local reports.
In Louisiana, state officials have been trying to address an insurance crisis following a series of hurricanes in 2020 and 2021 that caused insurance companies to stop renewing policies or leave the state.
Since 2022, at least eight insurers, led by State Farm and Allstate, have announced plans to stop offering home insurance to new customers or withdraw from the state entirely. Some blamed a spike in the cost of reinsurance — insurance policies that insurance companies buy to cover their big losses — and financial strains caused by inflation that have made materials and labor for home repair and rebuilding costly.
The potential loss of insurers prompted Gov. Gavin Newsom to issue an executive order commanding the insurance commissioner to take action to address issues with the insurance market and expand coverage options for consumers.
Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara’s response to the crisis is a set of new rules still being implemented that would allow insurers to raise rates to cover reinsurance costs and projected losses from catastrophic fires, but also require them to provide coverage for more homes in the canyons and hills. The proposals, which aim to move people off the FAIR plan and slow the increase in premiums, have won support from insurance industry trade groups and some consumer groups, but criticism from other consumer advocates.
Under the existing system, insurers need to apply to the Department of Insurance to raise their average rates across the state and prove that the price hike is justified. The process allows consumer advocates to intervene to contest the insurer’s claims.
This system was created when California voters approved Proposition 103 in 1988, but the insurance department went a couple of steps further than the ballot measure. Its rules barred insurance companies from including the cost of reinsurance in their rates and allowed the use only of historical loss data, rather than forward-looking simulations, to support a hike in premiums.
Insurance industry representatives have been trying to lift both of those restrictions for years, but their calls have intensified as insurers have pulled back coverage in California.
On Thursday, Lara proposed a regulation that would allow insurers to use catastrophe modeling that takes into account the projected impacts of climate change and other shifting factors when asking to raise rates.
“We can no longer look solely to the past as a guide to the future,” Lara said in a statement. “My strategy will help modernize our marketplace, restoring options for consumers while safeguarding the independent, transparent review of rate filings by Department of Insurance experts, which is a bedrock principle of California law.”
The proposed regulation comes a week after the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors approved a motion demanding that Lara investigate the compliance measures that insurance companies require from homeowners to keep their coverage.
“It’s no secret that insurance providers have become more conservative due to increased wildfire threats statewide,” said Supervisor Kathryn Barger, who introduced the motion, in a statement. “As a result, homeowners are increasingly being put in a very tough position: pay higher premiums and comply with varied, costly, and inconsistent mitigation requirements or lose your insurance.”
She added: “I’ve heard from many of my constituents district wide who are facing steep cost increases or being dropped altogether by their insurance carriers and left to fend for themselves. That’s simply unacceptable.”
In response to proposed expansion of catastrophe models, Consumer Watchdog, a consumer advocacy group that often intervenes in proposed rate hikes, said Lara’s proposed regulation limits transparency.
“Black box catastrophe models are notoriously contradictory and unreliable, which is why public review and transparency are key before insurance companies are allowed to use them to raise rates,” the group wrote in a statement. “Commissioner Lara’s proposed rule appears drafted to limit the information available to the public about the impact of models on rates in violation of Proposition 103.”
The group contends that the rule fails to spell out how the Department of Insurance would assess a model’s bias or accuracy and instead creates “a pre-review process that appears primarily focused on determining what information companies must disclose and what they may conceal from public view.”
“California needs a public catastrophe model to ensure climate data is transparent and to prevent insurance price-gouging and bias.”
Staff writer Sam Dean contributed to this report.
SpaceX stock dropped below its initial public offering price for the first time on Wednesday, signaling dwindling hype around the Elon Musk company.
Shares dipped below their IPO price of $135 on Wednesday morning for the first time since listing, a humbling loss for the stock, which had skyrocketed more than 50% in its first days of trading last month.
The shares regained some ground later in the day, closing at $135.27.
The initial offering gave the company a market cap of $2.2 trillion, making it one of the world’s most valuable public companies. For a short period, the IPO also made owner Elon Musk the world’s first trillionaire, though his net worth now is about $800 billion.
On July 7, the company was added to the Nasdaq-100 after a rule change allowed companies to join 15 days after their IPOs.
SpaceX raised a total of $86 billion after underwriters exercised their right to sell additional shares, on top of the $75 billion initially raised. It was the largest IPO in history.
SpaceX, based near Austin, Texas, is the leading launch services company in the world, with its Falcon 9 rocket accounting for the vast majority of satellites launched last year.
It is also the leading satellite-based broadband provider with its Starlink service. The extraordinary interest in the IPO was driven by Musk’s plans to make the company an AI leader — including plans to launch orbiting satellite data centers powered by the sun that crunch AI data.
The company’s headquarters moved from Hawthorne to Texas in 2024, but it retains large operations in the South Bay city and blasts off regularly from Vandenberg Space Force Base in Santa Barbara County.
Since the IPO, SpaceX has used its newfound wealth to expand in the AI space.
It announced last month that it was acquiring the AI coding startup Cursor for $60 billion, with the deal expected to close in the third quarter. The San Francisco company, founded in 2022, enables engineers to instruct software in English to run coding tasks autonomously.
Musk also merged his xAI artificial intelligence company into SpaceX earlier this year. The combined entity recently announced it was leasing computing power to rivals Anthropic and Google at two terrestrial data centers it has constructed.
Since the IPO, investors have expressed concerns about the company’s spending plans and debt load.
Even with the volatility of the last month, there’s still more uncertainty to come.
The stock could fall further as locked-up shares held by current and former employees are released.
At least 20% of the shares will be released after second-quarter results are disclosed sometime in the coming months, with all the lockups expiring in December.
But Space X isn’t the only megacap stock to experience ups and downs early on.
Shares of Meta, then named Facebook, fell significantly below the IPO price of $38 before recovering. After its May 2012 launch, shares plummeted by nearly 50% and hit a record low of $19.69 in August 2012.
The company took more than 14 months to rebound, finally surpassing its $38 IPO price in July 2013.
In the latest lawsuit against Paramount Skydance, a corporate shareholder has alleged corruption at the highest levels of the company, which is battling to complete its $111-billion takeover of rival Warner Bros. Discovery to create a new media behemoth.
Controlling shareholders Larry Ellison and his son David have presided over a firm that allegedly made “illegal promises and payments to secure regulatory approval,” for the Ellison family’s Paramount purchase last summer, according to the shareholder lawsuit filed this week in Delaware court.
Larry Ellison allegedly discussed with President Trump how Paramount’s pending Warner Bros. acquisition would result in a shake-up at CNN, states the lawsuit filed by Paramount shareholder Paul Robbins.
“The Ellisons [won] the bidding war for Warner Bros. by promising sweeping changes at CNN and other personal benefits to President Trump,” according to the 59-page complaint.
The case was brought on Robbins’ behalf by the nonprofit Public Integrity Project and the advocacy group Freedom of the Press Foundation, which has been critical of the Trump administration‘s policies toward the media.
The complaint noted that Netflix withdrew from the bidding in February — the same day Co-Chief Executive Ted Sarandos met at the White House with then-Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi and another top official.
The lawsuit suggests Netflix dropped out after recognizing the challenges of dealing with the Trump administration and that Trump always wanted to see the prize go to Paramount because of his close ties to the Ellison family, who have ushered in more favorable news coverage of Trump and the departure of late-night comedian Stephen Colbert.
Robbins does not appear to have firsthand accounts supporting his claims, which are based on public documents and media reports about dealings between the Ellisons and Trump. He has owned Paramount stock since 2021, but the lawsuit does not say how many shares he owns.
He could not be reached for comment.
Paramount, in a statement, pushed back against his claims, saying the “lawsuit recycles allegations that have already been reported and already addressed.”
“As we’ve said consistently: No commitments from either David or Larry Ellison have been made to any government body, state AG or federal agency regarding the future of CNN or any other news property, other than the goal to deliver truth-based journalism,” Paramount said.
It’s the third lawsuit lobbed at Paramount this week. On Monday, California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta led a coalition of 12 Democratic state attorneys general that filed a federal antitrust lawsuit seeking to block the Paramount-Warner merger due to concerns about consolidation in movie distribution and cable channels.
The Writers Guild of America added another antitrust lawsuit against Paramount on Tuesday, alleging the massive merger would result in fewer jobs and lower pay for writers.
Many in Hollywood are opposed to the deal due to fears that another studio consolidation would bring more layoffs, programming cutbacks and a fragile business environment due to the heavy debt burden — nearly $80 billion — that Paramount would have to take on to buy Warner Bros.
The shareholder lawsuit noted that Paramount participated in a raucous event with UFC fighters on the White House lawn in June to celebrate Trump’s 80th birthday and the nation’s 250th anniversary. Paramount has UFC broadcast rights.
The event came two days after Trump’s Justice Department wrapped its regulatory review of Paramount’s Warner Bros. proposal, giving the merger a key green light.
Justice Department investigators reportedly did not have a chance to express potential antitrust concerns when high-level Justice Department officials closed the inquiry — a major win for Paramount and the Ellisons, the lawsuit states.
“There have been some line attorneys in the DOJ that have reviewed this [merger] and have some concerns,” New York Atty. Gen. Letitia James said Tuesday during a virtual town hall with opponents of the merger. “Their analysis of this particular case was ignored by the front office, if you will, at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. [the White House] That’s the front office.”
Ellison’s Skydance Media emerged with its deal to buy Paramount two years ago. Previous controlling shareholder Shari Redstone was desperate for an exit and Trump was mounting his White House comeback by battling then-President Biden, then Vice President Kamala Harris.
Trump declined an invitation to appear on CBS’ “60 Minutes,” then under Redstone control. He became infuriated by an October 2024 interview with Harris on “60 Minutes.”
Trump filed a $10-billion lawsuit against CBS (he later upped it to $20 billion). After Trump won the election, he had considerable sway over Paramount because it needed his administration’s approval for the sale to the Ellisons.
Paramount agreed to pay Trump $16 million to end his “60 Minutes” lawsuit, allowing the sale to go forward. The Ellisons acquired Paramount in August, then set their sights on Warner Bros. Discovery, which owns CNN.
“The Ellisons proceeded to remake CBS in the President’s image, bought properties he enjoyed, and even hosted events to honor him,” the lawsuit said. “This helped the Ellisons, but it appears to have hurt Paramount and its media outlets.”
On Wednesday, Paramount said Ellison and other high-level executives had dealings with administration officials but “throughout … the review of the proposed acquisition of Paramount, Skydance has fully complied with all applicable laws, including our nation’s anti-bribery laws.”
In late April, David Ellison hosted an elaborate dinner in Washington to honor the “Trump White House,” according to invitations to the event, “even though President Trump continually insulted journalists at CBS and elsewhere,” the lawsuit said.
On Wednesday, during a confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill, Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) blasted acting Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche for his attendance at the dinner while his agency was reviewing the Paramount deal.
Also on Wednesday, the nonprofit news site ProPublica reported Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr has accepted $63,000 in free tickets from CBS in recent years — while Paramount mergers were pending.
Times staff writer Ben Wieder contributed to this report.
Grocery Outlet is opening new locations across California, rebuilding its network in the Golden State after closing stores early this year.
A new branch in Ontario Ranch is scheduled to open July 23, and more openings are planned for later this summer.
The location will be operated by independent owners Gloria and Jason Pineda. By the end of August, the discount grocery retailer plans to open stores in Ramona, San Francisco, Clovis and Petaluma as well.
The Emeryville, Calif.-based chain announced the closure of 36 stores in March, including nine California locations. The closures were an attempt to roll back an overexpansion in the wrong markets, resulting in a loss in 2025. Grocery Outlet did not announce which locations would be closed at the time, but they were listed for sublease by advisory firm Gordon Bros.
Among those listed was an Ontario location closer than seven miles from the soon-to-open site.
Five other Southern California locations were marked for closing in Azusa, Brawley, El Cajon, La Habra, Ontario and Poway. In Central California, the Kerman, Patterson and Ridgecrest stores were also listed for sublease. Outside of California, stores in Idaho, New Jersey, Maryland, Ohio and Pennsylvania also were listed.
In an earnings call in May, Grocery Outlet Chief Executive Jason Potter said the restructuring was helping boost the company’s profit.
“These closures are now complete and have improved fleet quality and will strengthen the earnings profile of the business over time,” he said.
Grocery Outlet was founded in San Francisco in 1946 as a discount grocery store chain selling overstock of limited-time or holiday food items. There are about 280 Grocery Outlet locations in California, accounting for more than half of its total store count.
Though Grocery Outlet has cultivated a dedicated consumer base on TikTok and other social media posts from grocery bargain hunters, it faces fierce competition from other budget grocery chains, including Aldi, which is set to open 180 stores in 2026. It also competes with Trader Joe’s, Walmart and Amazon, which have steadily gained customers.
Last year it was also hurt by the lapse in federal food assistance during the 43-day government shutdown.
In the wake of rising grocery prices and economic anxiety, some low-income customers who would once have shopped at budget grocery chains such as Grocery Outlet are turning to food banks instead. According to Los Angeles Regional Food Bank, 1.2 million people visit its food banks per month.
Grocery Outlet’s net sales rose 4% in the first quarter from a year earlier to $1.17 billion. It recorded a net loss of $180 million for the period.
It said it had closed locations as part of its optimization plan. It also underwent a store refresh program, changing products and is clustering locations to boost profit and customer traffic.
“Our value-oriented product offering continues to resonate with consumers. While we’re encouraged by the progress we’re beginning to see, we’re not satisfied with our current level of performance and are focused on the work we have in front of us,” Potter said on the earnings call.
Grocery Outlet shares have fallen more than 25% over the last 12 months. The Dow Jones industrial average has climbed more than 15% during the same period.
-
Indianapolis, IN29 seconds agoBusinesses await next steps after Braun ends diversity program
-
Pittsburg, PA6 minutes agoPittsburgh-area family finds large void under garage of house built by Ryan Homes
-
Augusta, GA13 minutes agoDriver taken into custody after chase, rollover crash in Augusta
-
Washington, D.C18 minutes agoIndyCar announces start time for highly anticipated Freedom 250 Grand Prix on the streets of Washington, DC
-
Cleveland, OH24 minutes agoDangerous air quality, wildfire smoke descends on Cleveland – The Land
-
Austin, TX31 minutes agoMore dangerous Texas floods expected after at least 2 killed and hundreds of people rescued in high water, governor says – WTOP News
-
Alabama36 minutes agoSoccer officials needed in Alabama
-
Alaska42 minutes ago
Natural gas supplies ‘not looking good’ for Southcentral Alaska this winter, Enstar says
