By Tricia Toney
As Colorado counties wrestle with whether to comply with the state’s newly adopted Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) code, a different approach to wildfire and disaster mitigation is emerging at the federal level—one that emphasizes incentives rather than mandates.
The WUI code, adopted by the state of Colorado in July, establishes stricter building requirements for new construction in wildfire-prone areas. While supporters say the measures are necessary to reduce wildfire risk, county leaders across Colorado argue that the code fails to account for alternative building materials, fails to respect the expertise of fire mitigation specialists and mandates costly new administrative burdens without providing funding for them.
In Saguache County, the debate has played out publicly for nearly a year. Commissioners have not yet announced a final decision on whether to implement or reject the code, although discussions are leaning towards one of two options: joining with other counties to present a united front against this unfunded mandate; or quietly declining to comply.
Counties may opt out by invoking Colorado Revised Statute 29-1-304.5, which allows local governments to treat state mandates as optional if no funding accompanies them. While the statute has never been tested in court, multiple counties, including Saguache, have already sent formal notices to state officials asserting their right to decline implementation.
Meanwhile, in mid-December, federal lawmakers reintroduced the Shelter Act, a bipartisan bill that many see as a response to the growing resistance to unfunded state and local mandates. Although the legislation does not explicitly reference Colorado’s WUI code, it addresses the same underlying concern: who pays for disaster mitigation.
Introduced by U.S. senators Michael Bennet, of Colorado and Bill Cassidy, of Louisiana, the Shelter Act would establish a first-of-its-kind federal disaster mitigation tax credit. Under the proposal, families and small businesses could deduct 25 percent of qualifying mitigation expenses—up to $3,750 per taxpayer—for improvements that reduce risks from wildfire, flooding, wind, hail and other natural disasters.
Unlike the WUI code, which prescribes specific building standards, the Shelter Act relies on voluntary participation. Supporters argue that incentives empower property owners to take proactive steps toward resilience without forcing compliance or overburdening local governments.
Colorado officials and organizations have voiced support for the bill. The Colorado Resiliency Office described the measure as a tool that could help communities of all sizes prepare for increasingly frequent and severe natural hazards. Fire Adapted Colorado, a statewide nonprofit focused on wildfire resilience, said tax incentives have already proven effective in encouraging fuel reduction and other mitigation efforts in wildfire-prone areas.
National organizations representing home builders, realtors, insurers, and architects echoed that support, emphasizing that mitigation costs far less than post-disaster recovery. Advocates note that every dollar invested in resilience can save as much as $13 in recovery costs. In 2024 alone, the United States experienced 27 weather and climate disasters, each causing more than $1 billion in damages.
For counties like Saguache, the contrast between the two approaches is striking. The WUI code places enforcement and compliance squarely on local governments, while the Shelter Act seeks to reduce risk by offsetting costs for individual property owners. Together, the policies highlight a broader debate over how wildfire resilience should be achieved—and who should bear the cost.
Meanwhile, Saguache County commissioners must decide how to respond to the state mandate. During the December 16 commissioners’ meeting, Commissioner Tom McCracken called for a coordinated response through Colorado Counties Incorporated (CCI), arguing that counties would be stronger presenting a unified front. Commissioner Lynne Thompson said that the county should simply decline to implement the code, having already sent notice to the state reminding officials that unfunded mandates are optional.
The discussion grew tense at times, marked by overlapping interruptions and visible frustration.
Ultimately, commissioners agreed to authorize McCracken to raise the issue with other county leaders through CCI. Counties have until April 1 to either adopt or reject the WUI code.
Questions raised by the WUI Code and the Shelter Act extend beyond wildfire mitigation and disaster preparedness. They challenge the best approach for balancing governance, equity and the limits of unfunded mandates. These issues are now playing out from county commission chambers to the halls of Congress.