Officials continue fight against fire fee

State and county officials are continuing their fight against emergency regulations implementing the $150 State Responsibility Area fire prevention fees.

On Tuesday, the Tehama County Board of Supervisors received confirmation that a letter was sent to the State Office of Administration Law and California Board of Forestry and Fire Protection stating that Tehama County "remains deeply opposed to the 'Fire Fee' in principle, as it is grossly inequitable for rural residents and represents unwise and unworkable public policy."

Assemblyman Jim Nielsen, R-Gerber, has joined forces with Assemblyman Kevin Jeffries, who authored, and State Sen. Doug LaMalfa, R-Richvale, who co-authored, Assembly Bill 1506, which would repeal the rural fire fee.

"We believe this 'fee' to be, in fact, an unconstitutional tax with Prop. 26 implications," LaMalfa said in a prepared statement. "Not only should this tax have required a two-thirds vote rather than the majority-vote in received, but it results in triple taxation for residents who already fund local fire protection districts."

The county's letter was in response to a five-day public comment period on the third set of amended emergency fire fee regulations adopted by Board of Forestry on Jan. 11.

According to the Regional Council of Rural Counties, the newly adopted regulations remove non-residential buildings from the definition of habitable structure, delete the proposed $25 charge per additional dwelling unit, and also slightly clarify the definition of dwelling unit.

In the county letter, Tehama County Chief Administrator Bill Goodwin, questions the term "emergency" attached to the fire fees regulations, as the Board of Forestry has itself delayed and amended its original fire fee proposal over a period of several months, and in legislation that term is qualified only upon express written findings that clearly demonstrate a proposed regulations is "necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health and safety, or general welfare."

"Such findings are wholly absent from the proposes rulemaking package here," Goodwin wrote.

He also argues the proposed $150 fee fails to meet emergency regulations authorized by law, and the Board of Forestry fails to provide any justification for the $150 fee in violation of government codes.

"The foregoing represent only some of the county's serious objections to the proposed fee program," Goodwin states.

Nielsen agrees that the fee should be referred to as a tax, and calls in unconstitutional.

"Many homeowners already pay extra property taxes for fire protection and now they will be taxed twice for the same level of service," he said in a press release.

According to the makers of the fire prevention fee, there is an "emergency" need to help fund the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection as it provides fire protection services for 31 million acres of land, mostly in rural areas, in the state.

Gov. Jerry Brown signed a bill into law in July that requires approximately 850,000 rural residents pay a $150 fee per year to finance that "need."