A Solution-Focused Companion to Reporting by Murphy Woodhouse
This story begins with journalism.
In recent reporting by Murphy Woodhouse of Boise State Public Radio, a growing problem facing homeowners across the Mountain West was brought into the open. Insurance premiums are rising at alarming rates. Policies are being canceled or not renewed. In many cases, homeowners are left with little explanation as to why.
Woodhouse’s reporting did what good journalism is meant to do. It took a quiet, technical problem and forced it into public view.
What followed was a community response and the beginning of a search for solutions.
A Community Looking for Answers
On Wednesday evening, residents of Garden Valley gathered for a community meeting organized by Faye Thompson. In attendance were Representative Brooke Green, Monica Church, and a senior official from the Idaho Department of Insurance.
The purpose of the meeting was straightforward. Residents were asked to share real-world experiences so those realities could be carried into an upcoming legislative session where potential solutions can begin to take shape.
The meeting was active and engaged. One by one, community members stood to speak. They described insurance policies being canceled or premiums increasing by what many called astronomical amounts, often with little explanation from insurers.
One elderly homeowner shared that his insurance had been canceled twice over the years. Each time, he managed to secure replacement coverage, but always at sharply higher cost. Living on a fixed income, he described the combined pressure of rising insurance premiums and property taxes as increasingly difficult to absorb.
Another concern raised involved the Garden Valley Senior Center. A representative of the nonprofit organization explained that insurance costs have risen to the point where they now consume a significant portion of the center’s operating budget. While this was not the central focus of the meeting, the example underscored a broader issue. Rising insurance costs are affecting not only individual homeowners, but also community institutions that provide essential services to elderly residents.
Taken together, the testimonies reflected a common concern. Longtime residents are increasingly uncertain whether they can afford to remain in the communities they helped build.
The Transparency Gap
During the meeting, the representative from the Idaho Department of Insurance explained that insurers are relying on internal risk assessment models to determine premiums, non-renewals, and coverage decisions.
The concern raised by residents, and acknowledged by the regulator, is not the existence of models. It is their opacity.
These models are created by insurance companies and are not shared publicly. Even regulators receive limited insight into how they are constructed or how specific risks are weighted. The representative further explained that insurers are increasingly using models that reflect wildfire losses in other states, including California, Washington, and Oregon, when evaluating risk and setting rates in Idaho.
This is occurring despite the fact that Idaho has experienced a significantly lower rate of structure loss from wildfire when compared to those states. Idaho’s actual fire history shows far fewer homes lost, even in years with active fire seasons.
Nevertheless, insurers are requesting rate increases of up to sixty percent based on these broader regional models.
Without transparency, neither regulators nor the public can meaningfully evaluate whether increases are driven by legitimate, localized risk or by assumptions imported from regions with vastly different outcomes. This lack of visibility weakens accountability and erodes trust.
The Obvious Alignment Everyone Is Missing
This is where the conversation should turn toward solutions.
Rural fire and emergency medical service districts across Idaho and throughout the West are chronically underfunded and heavily reliant on volunteer responders. Equipment is often old, though well maintained. Staffing depends on availability. Response capability is constrained not by willingness, but by resources.
At the same time, insurance companies have a direct financial interest in fires being contained quickly and losses being minimized. Fewer losses mean fewer claims. Lower losses mean more stable insurance risk.
Yet the burden of early suppression and emergency response is carried almost entirely by local communities with limited budgets.
That disconnect makes little sense.
We already accept a similar model in public safety. A small portion of telephone service fees helps fund the 911 system. It is preventative. It spreads cost broadly. It strengthens response capacity before emergencies escalate.
A comparable approach deserves serious consideration in the insurance space.
If insurance companies choose to insure rural and forested communities and profit from doing so, they should share in the cost of protecting those communities. A modest contribution toward local fire and emergency medical service readiness would reduce losses, lower overall risk, and make communities safer.
This is not punitive. It is practical.
Transparency Before Regulation
Some will argue the answer is increased regulation. Regulation has a role, particularly where markets fail. But regulation alone is not the central issue.
Capitalism requires transparency. Markets function only when consumers can understand pricing, evaluate risk, and make informed choices. Insurance is often mandatory for homeownership, leaving consumers with little ability to opt out.
When prices are driven by undisclosed models, the public cannot distinguish between legitimate risk-based adjustments and profit-driven increases.
This concern is not limited to Idaho. At the federal level, similar issues are being examined in congressional hearings, including recent questioning of the insurance industry by Senator Josh Hawley.
What is happening nationally is being felt locally, and most acutely by elderly residents living on fixed incomes.
A Solution Worth Taking Seriously
Murphy Woodhouse’s reporting brought this problem into the light. The Garden Valley meeting was a continuation of that work and a step toward moving from discovery to solutions.
Greater transparency in insurance modeling is one step. Strengthening local fire and emergency medical service capacity is another.
If insurers want to reduce risk, the most effective investment is not only in models, but in the communities they insure.
If insurance profits from risk, it should also help pay to reduce it.
