SACRAMENTO
– George Runner today urged Governor Jerry Brown to restore full
funding to CAL-FIRE and eliminate the confusing and controversial Fire
Prevention Fee in the revised version of his
2014-15 budget proposal.
“The
Fire Prevention Fee was established during a time of crisis, when the
state faced multi-billion budget deficits,” said Runner. “Those budget
deficits are gone, but the fire fee remains,
much to the chagrin of hundreds of thousands of rural property owners
throughout California.”
The
Board of Equalization is required by law to mail “Fire Prevention Fee”
bills on behalf of CAL-FIRE to nearly 800,000 Californians each year. In
the 2012-13 fiscal year, the Board of Equalization
and CAL-FIRE spent a combined total of more than $17 million to collect
only $75 million from Fire Fee payers.
“The
fire fee continues to place more burdens and costs on CAL-FIRE and the
State Board of Equalization while providing no additional fire
protection for Californians – even with the state’s
increased firefighting expenses this year due to dry weather and
drought. The fiscally responsible thing to do is eliminate it.”
Restoring
CAL-FIRE’s full funding, using existing revenue, will save the state
the costs of continuing to administer, collect, litigate, and likely
refund the inefficient fire fee.
Elected
in November 2010, George Runner represents more than nine million
Californians as a member of the State Board of Equalization. Runner
keeps taxpayers informed of the latest fire tax
news and information at calfirefee.com.
FULL TEXT OF RUNNER LETTER
January 23, 2014
Dear Governor Brown,
I
am writing to urge you to restore full funding to CAL-FIRE and
eliminate the Fire Prevention Fee in the revised version of your 2014-15
budget proposal.
As
you know, the Fire Prevention Fee (ABx1 29, 2011) was established
during a time of crisis. The state faced multi-billion budget deficits
and adopted the law in an attempt to backfill $89
million in funding cuts to CAL-FIRE.
Those
budget deficits are gone, but the fire fee remains, much to the chagrin
of hundreds of thousands of rural property owners throughout
California—including many seniors on fixed incomes.
The law has proven extremely difficult and costly for the Board of Equalization to administer.
Each
year the Board is required to mail nearly 800,000 bills on behalf of
CAL-FIRE to Californians who own “habitable structures” in the State
Responsibility Area (SRA).
In
the 2012-13 fiscal year, the Board of Equalization spent more than $8
million and CAL-FIRE more than $9 million to administer the fire fee.
That’s more than $17 million in new expenses for
the state for just one year’s billings. That does not make good fiscal
sense.
A
comparison is helpful for perspective. The Board of Equalization
collects only $75 million from the 800,000 new fire fee payers. The
Board of Equalization collects approximately
$20 billion from nearly one million sales tax permit
holders (traditional retailers). The fire fee is an inherently bad tax,
not just because it is not cost-efficient to collect, but because of the
unnecessary burden it places on taxpayers. If
we were to redirect the staff currently working on the fire fee to, for
example, unpaid taxes from the illegal underground economy, the state
would benefit far greater.
Given
questions about the law’s constitutionality, the State of California is
also facing mounting legal costs and growing exposure as a class action
lawsuit brought by fee payers moves forward.
Should the courts strike down the fee California will need to provide
refunds to property owners.
From
the beginning, the process of collecting the Fire Prevention Fee has
been lengthy and expensive, proving it is an inefficient method for
funding CAL-FIRE. It continues to place more burdens
and costs on CAL-FIRE and the State Board of Equalization while
providing no additional fire protection for Californians.
Rather
than continue to force this burden on rural Californians, a responsible
budget will restore CAL-FIRE’s full funding using existing revenue.
This will save the state the costs of continuing
to administer, collect, litigate, and likely refund the inefficient
fire fee.
Thank you for your consideration. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
GEORGE RUNNER