Three years since the Tubbs fire, there have been some notable improvements for homeowners who are wrangling with their insurance carriers in the aftermath of a wildfire loss.

The state Legislature enacted some reforms, such as boosting rental living expenses from a maximum of two years to three years after a disaster while a homeowner waits for their home to be rebuilt. Last month, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed legislation that required carriers to provide initial payments of at least 25% of their personal property that was destroyed without having the homeowner detail their entire inventory.

Yet there is still no solution for the most vexing problem of all: How to ensure that homeowners have sufficient coverage to rebuild their house and that they actually receive that amount?

In California, the onus is on the homeowner to ensure they have the right coverage amount to rebuild — a figure that only a local contractor would likely know. And most residents don’t reach out to a builder when pricing or updating their coverage.

That was proven after the 2017 wildfires when a survey by the consumer group United Policyholders found about two-thirds of those fire victims were underinsured — with some in pricey Fountaingrove facing a shortfall of more than $1 million. That number likely hasn’t changed much, said Amy Bach, executive director of the San Francisco-based consumer group. It is a cold reality that will soon be discovered by hundreds of homeowners in the wake of the Glass fire, which destroyed or damaged about 800 single-family homes.

“At this point, I’m convinced that insurers don’t want to solve the problem,” Bach said.

As the problem lingers, a Santa Rosa firm is attempting to help homeowners protect themselves. BW Builder Inc. assists homeowners in the aftermath of a fire by preparing detailed

Congress has done little to address the issue. A group of Oregon lawmakers introduced a bill in September that would make federal disaster funding available to the cannabis industry, but it has little chance of passing in the waning days of this Congress. Separate legislation would create better access to banking — potentially allowing some small business owners to borrow money to pay for insurance or to cover losses — but it would not give farmers access to federal crop subsidies or encourage insurers to cater to the industry.

Since May, cannabis businesses from Oregon to Massachusetts have dealt with both natural and man-made disasters. As protests over racial injustice erupted across the country, so did looters — many targeting cannabis dispensaries in cities including Portland and Oakland, Calif. Then, wildfires destroyed farms and spewed ash at sensitive crops from Central California to northern Washington state. Many of the small business owners, like Haworth, are facing one or both of these crises without insurance.

Some advocates and industry leaders have called for state governments to create insurance or disaster funds for companies where there are legal marijuana markets, but no state has done so at this point. Others say the only thing that will solve this problem is federal legalization of marijuana.

Thirty-three states have legalized recreational or medical marijuana, but the federal government still lists it as a Schedule I drug under the Controlled Substances Act — a category that includes heroin and means the drug does not have any medical value and can be highly addictive.

The classification means marijuana does not qualify for any federal funding — including crop insurance or FEMA disaster assistance. And crop insurance without federal funding can be prohibitively expensive.

For most other agricultural commodities — like avocados, tea and maple syrup —