Opposition mounts against state fire-protection fee

Opposition is mounting months before property owners throughout California and most of western Nevada County are to be assessed the first fire-protection "benefits fee."

Calling it an illegal tax, the California Farm Bureau Federation filed a lawsuit last month, naming as defendants the state, nearly every county in California and the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection.

Now, a bill introduced by state Sen. Rico Oller, R-San Andreas, is smoldering its way through the capital to repeal Senate Bill 1049, which created the fee for property owners. His proposal, Senate Bill 1460, is scheduled to be heard April 13 in the Senate Natural Resources Committee.

"Fire protection and public safety is, without a doubt, the No. 1 priority for our state government," Oller said. "But these services are far too important to be funded by a clumsy, unconstitutional and unfair tax that will be impossible to administer."

Gov. Gray Davis signed the bill days before he was recalled from office last year. The fee was meant to make up for a $50 million budget cut from CDF. The cut, in addition to another $50 million slice proposed by the current administration, leaves the fire protection department in a position where fire stations would literally have to shut down, CDF spokeswoman Karen Terrill said.

The law requires property owners to pay a one-time $70 fee and a $35 annual fee per parcel for fire protection in the 31 million acres the state is responsible for in case of wildfires.

However, the law is an unconstitutional tax increase labeled as a fee, said Tom Hudson, Oller's legislative director. Passing a tax requires a two-thirds legislative vote, unlike the fire fee proposal.

Hudson said life-saving fire services should have priority on state dollars, and almost anything else the state is doing is less important.

"No one is going to send their kids to a burning school," Hudson said.

The Regional Council of Rural Counties has also joined the effort, expressing concern about the fees, Director of Natural Resources John Hoffman said.

"It should come from the (state's) general fund because it's a general benefit to the entire state," he said. "We would be in favor of rescinding it."

Oller's bill will go through several committees before reaching the general Senate, where it will require two-thirds approval to pass. After a similar process in the state assembly, the bill would go to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger for his signature.

It is being proposed as an urgency statute to move faster for a repeal before the benefit fee is collected this summer.