On April 20, 2026, the California Department of Insurance (CDI) announced that it has submitted its Intervenor and Administrative Hearing Bureau Fairness and Accountability rulemaking package to the Office of Administrative Law (OAL) for final review. CDI describes this package as the most significant modernization of California’s intervenor system since Proposition 103 was enacted in 1988.

California’s intervenor system authorizes qualified organizations to participate in insurance rate review proceedings and to seek recovery of their costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees, which insurers may ultimately pass on to policyholders. CDI states that the reforms aim to ensure that rate‑review dollars, including intervenor compensation, are tied to meaningful contributions to the public interest and are subject to greater transparency and accountability. For additional background on CDI’s initial proposal, see our October 15, 2025 post, “California Commissioner Announces Proposed Changes to Proposition 103 and Intervenor Process.“

CDI further states that the reforms are a central component of Commissioner Ricardo Lara’s broader Sustainable Insurance Strategy, which CDI describes as a multipronged regulatory initiative aimed at stabilizing California’s insurance market, expanding coverage options, and improving the resilience and transparency of the state’s insurance framework.

According to CDI’s description, the rulemaking package is designed to refine both the standards and procedures governing intervenor participation and administrative hearings under Proposition 103. CDI highlights four main themes: clarification of intervenor compensation standards; a more defined role for the Administrative Hearing Bureau (AHB), including its handling of settlements and fee requests; regular, mandated status reporting from Administrative Law Judges (ALJs); and expanded public access to information about rate proceedings.

To that end, CDI states that the package:

  • Clarifies what constitutes a “substantial contribution” and what is “reasonable” in terms of fees and costs, aligning compensation more closely with the value of an intervenor’s work;
  • Defines the AHB’s role in reviewing and addressing settlements and intervenor compensation requests, providing clearer expectations for parties appearing in rate cases;
  • Requires AHB ALJs to provide regular status updates — at least every 30 days — to all parties, to improve transparency and address concerns about delay; and
  • Expands public reporting by requiring the department to post on its website intervenor activity and statistics, as well as AHB calendars, dockets, and documents.

CDI intends these measures to ensure that the rate review process is more transparent and more disciplined, while preserving opportunities for public participation.

The department’s press release also responds to criticism from some opponents who have characterized the reforms as an effort to curb consumer voices. CDI asserts that the right to intervene “remains untouched,” and states that the reforms are not aimed at limiting who may participate, but at defining when and how compensation will be awarded. CDI states that the rules do not restrict intervenor access to the process; rather, they require that compensation be earned, documented, and demonstrably connected to issues that matter in the proceeding. CDI presents these changes as accountability measures designed to ensure that every dollar spent within the rate review and intervenor compensation system serves the public interest.

CDI’s submission to the OAL follows a public process that included a 45‑day public comment period, a public hearing, and a subsequent 15‑day comment period focused on targeted revisions. Under California’s rulemaking procedures, OAL generally has up to 30 working days to complete its review. CDI states that, if the package is approved, the regulations will be filed with the secretary of state and will take effect shortly thereafter.