SACRAMENTO — A Regional Council of Rural Counties (RCRC) board member testified Wednesday before a regulatory hearing to voice objections to the proposed “fire fee” on structure owners in the State Responsibility Area (SRA).
Richard Forster, chair of the RCRC regulatory committee and Amador County supervisor, testified on behalf of rural counties against SRA fees, also referred to as a “fire fee,” during the San Diego implementation hearing of the California Board of Forestry.
Recognizing the hearing was to gather public input for regulatory implementation of the existing law, which was passed in 2011 as Assembly Bill 29X, Forster took the opportunity to share rural county concerns with the law.
“RCRC has opposed SRA fees throughout this process, and we remain opposed,” Forster said. “While we understand the board is required by statute to adopt permanent regulations imposing the fee, RCRC still believes the repeal of AB 29X is the best approach.”
Forster raised a number of arguments against SRA fees, including the potential long-term liability to the state by assuming a greater role in fire prevention when homeowners that pay the SRA fee expect CAL FIRE has made their homes fire-resistant.
Subsequently, if residents” homes are destroyed in a wildfire and it is discovered that CAL FIRE has done little prevention work, those homeowners could have a legitimate claim against the state.
“CAL FIRE needs a healthy and strong local fire protection infrastructure to achieve its mission and protect California from the effects of wildfires,” Forster said. “SRA fees weaken the state”s mutual aid system by unraveling the ”respond-first-we”ll-figure-out-the-cost-later” understanding. I can assure you that the rural fire districts I represent will begin to contemplate the costs involved in responding to mutual aid efforts on behalf of the state.”
Forster said SRA fees also erode grant opportunities. According to calculations by the state Department of Finance, there will be no local (fire) grants available for a minimum of five years because money generated will be used to administer the new program. The calculations were presented to the Forestry Board at its March meeting.
Additionally, Forster said many landowners in the SRA have already agreed to assess themselves for fire protection and prevention services. Therefore, imposing an SRA fee effectively taxes people twice without any additional benefit.
