Fire fees under California state budget

[snwbnny]

Got a letter today from the county letting me know I might get a bill from the state for this fee. 

[Bob C]

My boss, who is a known for procrastinating on everything, failed to pay his fire tax bill on time. He reports the state was very quick to send him another bill, with a penalty/late fee applied. I guess it wasn't very much ($11?) but the state is very serious about collecting late fees.

[Nolena]

I got no bill. What do I do?

[Wrightwood]

Unfortunately many people thought this was a second bill and inquired about it through the Supervisor's office.

Got a letter today from the county letting me know I might get a bill from the state for this fee. 

[Wrightwood]

As much as I hate to say it, I'd call as you are still responsible to pay it.
Many homeowners have their tax bills sent directly to the mortgage company as they pay the taxes because of impound accounts. If the mortgage company is the only one listed to receive the tax bills it's possible they received the bill.

Regardless - call

I got no bill. What do I do?

[Nolena]

Got a number?

[Wrightwood]

I'd try: 1 800 400-7115
Which is the Board Of Equalization listed on their handy dandy color insert

[Nolena]

I will call my mortgage company first, as they get my tax bills.

[BikingBrian]

The bill I got was for 7/1/11 through 6/30/12. Has 7/1/12 through 6/30/13 been billed yet? Just asking because I had a refinance a little over a year ago, and if a new bill for 2012-2013 went out, it might go to the mortgage company.

[roynlorimoore]

New Fire-Prevention Fee Draws Heat
State officials announced the $150 fee earlier this year, but it still came as a surprise for some homeowners.
By Craig Fiegener and Bill French
|  Wednesday, Oct 24, 2012  |  Updated 11:21 PM PDT

Across California, some 825,000 residents are receiving notices about the state's new Fire Prevention Fee. Creation of the charge was no secret, but many people had not heard about it until this week.

"It's very shocking," said Anita Phillips, of Crestline, who received the letter a couple days ago.

Residents are being asked to pay $150 to cover the cost of fighting fires in heavily wooded areas where the state is responsible for fire prevention. But for Phillips, it comes just as she's struggling to modify her mortgage.

Some residents say it's the wrong time for unexpected bills, especially in the Inland Empire, where people are trying to recover from a badly-beaten economy.

Without question, Crestline is an area that has faced terrible fire threats. The Governor signed the Fire Prevention Fee law last July to help battle fires in areas similar to Crestline.

The language in the new law reads this way: "The law established a new annual Fire Prevention Fee to pay for fire prevention services within the State Responsibility Area. This fee is assessed on owners of habitable structures."

The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association considers it such an unfair levy that it plans to fight the fee in court. Others see it as a worthwhile expense.

"We need it," said Crestline resident Bridgitte Nowakowski. "Firefighters are here to help us keep our homes so they don't burn down. So what is $150? That's nothing."

If everybody pays it, the fee will raise more than $123 million. Phillips says she doesn't like what she sees as heavy-handed language in the letter.

"Well yeah, not be so demanding, and say they will foreclose on our homes if we don't pay and impose a 20 percent penalty if we don't pay," she said.

For now, the Fire Prevention Fee is state law and it's coming due. At least until a judge says otherwise.

http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Complaints-Grow-About-New-Fire-Prevention-Bills-175707431.html

It says right on the "pre-billing" that we will receive no additional services from this $150.00.  How can anyone say "we need it"  "it's worth it".  Its EXTORTION.  I have friends that live near Hwy 18 and Oasis Rd.  They received the bill too.  That is certainly not a wooded area, nor is there a whole lot of anything that would make fire fighting more labor intensive.  But, like they said, we get nothing more in regard to services than we do now

[kew]

New Fire-Prevention Fee Draws Heat
Creation of the charge was no secret, but many people had not heard about it until this week.

Other than the information here on this forum and the bill itself, I still have heard nothing.

[Wrightwood]

[Elk]

I also just received the same email notice. I did file and hope that HJTA is able to win this one in court to send a message that we will not just roll over and open our wallets!

[Chuck]

Since I have not received my bill I called the Board of Equalization.  Turns out they had the wrong PO Box, missing one digit.  They will correct and send a new bill with an extension, due to incorrect mailing information.

[luvroses]

Hi Chuck -- glad to know that we're not the only ones having problems getting our bill. 
We've been at the same address up here in WA, since moving from Wrightwood, over a year ago. Last year, we notified the County Tax Assessor's office of our new address, and have had no problems getting our property tax bills from them. Thanks to you guys on the forum, I knew to be watching for the "announcement" of the fire tax bill. We received that, as well as the other information from the County -- but NO bill. We waited and waited, and DH finally called the Board of EQ to find out what happened. Turns out that they had sent the actual bill to our Wrightwood PO Box, which we closed last year (when we moved). When the time came to match names and addresses to County parcel numbers, they are obviously working from an outdated address list! They have supposedly corrected our address and are sending a new bill. 
So, anyone who has moved or changed mailing addresses recently should definitely call them, if you haven't received your bill yet. The State has made it very clear that it's OUR responsibility to get billed, not theirs!

[BikingBrian]

Yes, I noticed their address list is at least a year old. Our place was held in a family trust, but it mistakenly was put in me and my wife's name when we refinanced recently. We still got the bill because the mailing address is the same either way, but we could tell they had older records because it was addressed to the trust.

[Wrightwood]

[Wrightwood]

BILL NUMBER: SB 17   INTRODUCED
BILL TEXT


INTRODUCED BY   Senator Gaines
DECEMBER 3, 2012

   An act to repeal Chapter 1.5 (commencing with Section 4210) of
Part 2 of Division 4 of the Public Resources Code, relating to fire
prevention.

   LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST

   SB 17, as introduced, Gaines. State responsibility areas: fire
prevention fees.
   Existing law requires the State Board of Forestry and Fire
Protection, on or before September 1, 2011, to adopt emergency
regulations to establish a fire prevention fee in an amount not to
exceed $150 to be charged on each habitable structure on a parcel
that is within a state responsibility area, as defined, and requires
that the fire prevention fee be adjusted annually using prescribed
methods. Existing law requires the State Board of Equalization to
collect the fire prevention fees, as prescribed, commencing with the
2011-12 fiscal year. Existing law establishes the State
Responsibility Area Fire Prevention Fund and prohibits the collection
of fire prevention fees if, commencing with the 2012-13 fiscal year,
there are sufficient amounts of moneys in the fund to finance
specified fire prevention activities for a fiscal year. Existing law
requires that the fire prevention fees collected, except as provided,
be deposited into the fund and be made available to the board and
the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection for certain specified
fire prevention activities that benefit the owners of structures in
state responsibility areas who are required to pay the fee. Existing
law further requires the board, on and after January 1, 2013, to
submit an annual written report to the Legislature on specified
topics.
   This bill would repeal the above provisions relating to the
implementation of the fire prevention fees.
   Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: no.


THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

  SECTION 1.  Chapter 1.5 (commencing with Section 4210) of Part 2 of
Division 4 of the Public Resources Code is repealed.

[RennMan]

[tcaarabians]

Oh, fudge.. I forgot to pay this bill.. but I did send it off today. And I, just speaking for myself, do think the state should be held accountable for what it does in the way of "prevention." Frankly, if it had gone to boosting up the number of firefighters and equipment to fight fires.. I might be more sanguine about it.

And,the State Board of Equalization (a misnomer if ever there was one).. is deducting how many millions to handle this billing process?? I guess $14 million betwixt the BOE and CalFire. It might be time for them to not equate 'prevention' with pretty 4-color mailers.  If nothing else.. the BOE should stop putting "special taxes" on the return envelope. That will be Exhibit One.  Just fudge. cheryl o7o