A California bill that would impose an annual wildland firefighting fee on rural homeowners could end up backfiring on legislators, according to the state Board of Forestry and Fire Protection.
Earlier this month, the board—along with several other groups representing the interests of rural communities—expressed concerns over the effectiveness of ABx1 29.
Authored by Assemblyman Bob Blumenfield (D-San Fernando Valley), the bill would charge homeowners up to $150 a year for fire-prevention efforts headed by local fire districts, fire councils, or the California Conservation Corps.
The fee was created and passed by Democrats earlier this summer to raise $50 million in the current fiscal year and $200 million the year after that.
However, there are fears the bill could also leave the California Department of Forestry and Protection (CALFire) with a $50 million hole in its budget. As it’s written, the bill would create a special fund for fire prevention and allow the state to transfer equal amounts of money into the general fund.
“The money would be collected for fire prevention,” CALFire spokesman Daniel Berlant said, explaining that there are traditionally two tracks for firefighting. Fire prevention includes such services as community education outreach and brush clearing. Fire protection refers to physical firefighting. The fee would only apply to habitable structures.
Berlant said Gov. Jerry Brown “spelled out” in a July letter to the California Assembly “his intention is to raise additional money for the special [fire prevention] fund,” which could potentially cause budget problems for CALFire.
CALFire currently contracts with the Santa Barbara County Fire Department to provide firefighting services to rural and “other areas of interest” in the county, Berlant said. Additionally, CALFire will send firefighters from other county branches to help combat wildfires in the area.
“The Legislature has long looked for funding for fire safety, so this isn’t new,” he said. “The question here is, is it really going to go for fire prevention or back to
the department [at all]?”
CALFire has already suffered from $70 million worth of budget cuts in the last
year, he said.
The Board of Forestry and Fire Protection has directed staff to draft emergency regulations to begin collecting the fee starting Jan. 1, 2012. Those regulations will stand for 180 days until the board can adopt permanent rules.
When signing ABx1 29 into law as part of his budget package, Brown recognized it could cause some problems.
“As a result of population increases and urban development in state responsibility areas in recent decades, there has been a significant increase in state costs associated with fire protection in state wildland areas. This bill recognizes that a portion of costs borne by the state … should be funded by the landowners in these areas,” Brown said in a letter to the Assembly. “However, as currently drafted, the revenues may not materialize.”
Brown called on the Department of Finance and CALFire to work with the Legislature during the remaining legislative session to identify necessary “cleanup language” to ensure revenue generation.
Additionally, the bill includes provisional language requiring CALFire to convene a “working group” consisting of members of the Legislative Analyst’s Office, department staff, and at least two fire chiefs to discuss options for future funding and possible changes to the state’s management of wildland firefighting.
In July, California Sen. Ted Gaines (R-Roseville) announced he’s working on a referendum to repeal ABx1 29, on the grounds that it was passed illegally on a simple majority vote.
“It’s an illegal tax, pure and simple,” Gaines said on his website, tedgaines.com. “Many rural property owners already pay local fire agencies for protection, so this is double taxation.”
According to the site, Gaines claims that ABx1 29 is “merely a tax that attempts to sidestep Prop. 26, the initiative passed last June that prevents the Legislature from disguising taxes as ‘fees’ and circumventing constitutional requirements for passing higher taxes.”
Capt. David Sadecki, spokesman for the Santa Barbara County Fire Department, said it’s too soon to speculate how the bill will affect the county because it hasn’t been enacted.
A representative for the California Board of Forestry and Fire Protection didn’t return requests for comment as of press time.
Contact Managing Editor Amy Asman at aasman@santamariasun.com.
This article appears in Aug 18-25, 2011.