Nearly two years since Hurricane Helene wreaked havoc in western North Carolina, and a year and a half after wildfires devastated many neighborhoods in Los Angeles, survivors are still waiting for the green light to rebuild. While the disasters captured headlines for weeks, the bureaucratic hurdles have persisted far longer.
For families who lost their homes, the main hurdle now isn’t the aftermath of floods or fires, but rather the complex maze of permits and approvals that stand in the way of reconstruction. Each month of delay adds to costs, extends trauma, and forces many into temporary housing — a situation that deeply affects children.
We should explore innovative solutions, perhaps “Trump Zones,” which could be extensions of Opportunity Zones and other streamlined areas on federal and private lands, aimed at speeding up housing construction and restoring stability.
Misguided officials hindered local residents from helping each other in North Carolina and even restricted property owners in California from cleaning up their own land. For instance, a volunteer pilot involved in rescue missions after Helene faced the threat of arrest from local authorities, complicating efforts to deliver crucial aid.
This pattern of overreach extends into California, where stringent regulations dictate that wildfire debris can only be cleared via approved methods. This effectively prevents property owners from managing their own clean-up and rebuilding efforts without extensive bureaucratic guidance.
The matter has grown politically volatile, with fire victim Spencer Pratt launching a surprising campaign for Los Angeles mayor focused on cutting through this red tape, indicating that constituents are fed up with the situation. Excessive bureaucratic requirements stall community resilience, leaving victims in a state of limbo.
President Donald Trump’s vision of deregulation, particularly through the proposed Trump Zones, presents a bold way forward.
Building on the concept of Opportunity Zones from his 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which encouraged investment in struggling areas, Trump has suggested creating similar zones on federal lands to expedite permitting processes. States could replicate this on private properties to facilitate rapid housing development.
Trump’s 2025 executive order regarding Los Angeles wildfire recovery is a solid initial move, employing federal self-certification to minimize local delays, though these proposed zones could enhance the effort even further. His executive order aimed at restoring America’s maritime dominance includes Maritime Prosperity Zones, designed to foster investment in waterfront communities affected by disasters, which would include housing and other developments.
To make this concept viable, it’s essential to address the notorious delays stemming from the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which typically adds an average of 4.5 years to projects. While Congress made a step forward last summer with the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), merely setting deadlines isn’t enough to alter the culture within agencies.
Voluntary pilot programs could test more efficient approaches without sacrificing environmental safeguards — plus, insurance underwriting can provide a market-driven mechanism to ensure quicker compliance. Builders who meet the criteria could fast-track their projects by securing insurance that validates their compliance. Insurers would assess environmental impacts beforehand, ensuring that the standards remain intact while only the regulatory process becomes more streamlined. If builders fall short, the financial burden would fall on insurers, not taxpayers.
Why would builders engage in such a system?
It allows them to hit the market years sooner. Insurers would also be keen to underwrite earlier since they are already familiar with the inherent risks. Homebuyers would benefit from a surge in housing supply, leading to reduced prices.
This could leverage innovative pilot initiatives like permit by rule and increased transparency technologies for monitoring. The Clinton administration previously conducted 50 voluntary environmental pilots without formal notice-and-comment rulemaking — a bipartisan example that could help expedite rebuilding efforts.
Critics, including some Democrats and environmental advocates, might argue that reforming the process could weaken protections. However, if the courts previously permitted the Clinton administration to explore alternative methods through voluntary pilots, why shouldn’t Trump be given the same latitude?
The true danger lies in the delays themselves; slow recovery can have serious consequences for victims’ health, both physically and mentally, as they remain in uncertain situations. Fully insured developers could navigate the streamlined permitting process more efficiently, leading to quicker completion of new homes, all while maintaining necessary safeguards with smarter enforcement.
Housing and Urban Development Secretary Scott Turner has echoed these concerns about red tape, pointing out in his Senate confirmation hearing that almost one-third of new housing costs stem from regulatory compliance, ultimately driving up prices for consumers. Given the pressure on federal housing budgets, regulatory reform—which incurs no cost—should play a larger role in the recovery process.
Trump Zones could represent a pragmatic, pro-growth approach, cutting through excess red tape while still upholding necessary standards. This strategy could empower communities to rebuild stronger, help children thrive in disaster-affected areas, and tackle cycles of poverty and instability.
For those who have endured disasters, the most costly regulation is the delays themselves. Survivors in North Carolina and California need action — it’s time to focus on facilitating quicker recovery.
