Author Topic: Fire fees under California state budget  (Read 378361 times)

0 Members and 33 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline ForestGal

  • Raccoon
  • *****
  • Posts: 3773
  • Fight On!!
Re: Fire fees under California state budget
« Reply #220 on: Sep 24, 13, 01:20:56 AM »
I got my bill in the mail today also.  I haven't bought colored paper in years.  I wonder how much more it cost them to mail these in PINK envelopes?   ??? >:(

ezzpete

  • Guest
Re: Fire fees under California state budget
« Reply #221 on: Sep 27, 13, 04:07:44 PM »
thanks Elk, that's what i needed. only problem is in in PDF format and i don't have a converter. if anyone has converted this PDF file into a WORD doc could you please email me a copy at ezzpete@yahoo.com

thanks

Offline dustyduck

  • Raccoon
  • *****
  • Posts: 1352
  • I did not know what I could not do, so I did it
Re: Fire fees under California state budget
« Reply #222 on: Sep 27, 13, 04:23:28 PM »
ezzpete
You can go to the adobe site and download a free pdf reader

http://get.adobe.com/reader/


Offline ad astra

  • Mouse
  • *
  • Posts: 38
Re: Fire fees under California state budget
« Reply #223 on: Sep 28, 13, 04:21:21 PM »
Okay, I have been reading this thread for some time, and resisting asking the obvious question because I don't want to get 'flamed'. However, I am serious about my question, and the recent fire above town has just increased my need to ask:

Knowing that we live in a high fire danger area, why are not ready to just write out that check - why are we protesting this fee? I know the legal argument, that it is an "illegal tax" because it wasn't passed by a 2/3 vote of the legislature. That's a legal technicality, not the point of my question. If we are looking at the state's financial ability to protect our homes in the event of a forest fire, I would think we would consider it like paying for fire insurance - a necessary evil to maintain our way of life in this rare, beautiful part of Southern California.

If you respond, please give me logical arguments, not emotion, because I seriously want to know what others are thinking about this issue.

Offline eversluys

  • Mouse
  • *
  • Posts: 21
Re: Fire fees under California state budget
« Reply #224 on: Sep 28, 13, 04:31:28 PM »
Does anyone know if the neighborhoods in San Diego that were ravaged by the fire a few years ago are paying the fire fee? That would be my argument, that the fee is being applied unequally when every California citizen should expect fire protection at the level available to everyone else. San Diego doesn't seem like a likely place to be a fire risk, but look at what happened there.

Offline Bob C

  • Moderator
  • Raccoon
  • *****
  • Posts: 967
Re: Fire fees under California state budget
« Reply #225 on: Sep 28, 13, 05:07:22 PM »
Knowing that we live in a high fire danger area, why are not ready to just write out that check - why are we protesting this fee?

For me, yes, it's an illegal tax. That's #1. Secondly, this tax does not go toward fire fighting in any way. It's for "education" and "fire prevention". Again, it is NOT used in any way to fund actual fire fighting.  It was enacted to make up the difference in the budget cuts to CalFire.  it was also "retroactive" , which is why we are already paying the second installment of this tax. The boundaries of the SRA's are in question, too, especially in areas where there is a local fire department.

regarding "fire prevention/education"...I would also argue that we, who live here are already pretty darned educated about fire prevention. We have to be. It's often the idiots who come to the forest from the big city, who have no idea that their tossed cigarette, or illegal campfire can cause problems.

Now, I might agree that people who live in remote areas that are in no way serviced by any local fire department presence, should have to pay something if CalFire is the only agency that would protect their property. Heck, everyone else pays taxes to their local fire department.

I would have preferred if they just increased income tax for everyone in the state to pay for things like this. That way, it would be fair, and everyone who benefits from using public (state/fed) lands, would help defray the cost. It's simply not fair to tax people who live in certain areas only, under the assumption that only they will benefit from the increased tax. Remember the nasty earthquake in the SF Bay area several years ago? The state increased everyone's sales tax by 1/2 point (as I recall) to "pay" for all the damage. Using the "we live in a high fire area" argument... I could argue that only the people living in SF or Oakland should have had to pay for all the damage done.

I'm also not too happy about hearing reports of gazillions of dollars being "discovered" in CalFire's contrrol.  I guarantee you that this is just the beginning of creative "taxes" or "fees" being created by the idiots in Sacramento.

I wonder how much money it cost us tax payers to have the state mail out numous "it's coming soon" mailings to people, followed by the pretty colorful invoice packages that were sent out. Add to that, the cost of people going thru the tap dance to protest it, followed by more mailings from the state departments denying those requests. Now, add the costs associated with the current lawsuit. I have no idea what other overhead is involved with this, but I'm sure there is plenty in Sacramento, associated with "administering" this tax.

The sad part, is that even if the lawsuit is successfull, even more money will be spent, refunding those who paid, if that's part of the settlement. Of course, I suspect some CPA in Sacramento has already figured out that the state will still make a tidy profit, just from interest earned while they held our money ransom.


Offline Jirka

  • Squirrel
  • **
  • Posts: 66
Re: Fire fees under California state budget
« Reply #226 on: Sep 29, 13, 06:01:12 PM »

Offline Jirka

  • Squirrel
  • **
  • Posts: 66
Re: Fire fees under California state budget
« Reply #227 on: Sep 29, 13, 08:36:42 PM »
I guess I answered my own question.  ;D

Paid on-line using ePay at www.boe.ca.gov. Saved the confirmation as a PDF and printed three copies to send with the petitions.

Offline Wrightwood

  • Administrator
  • Raccoon
  • *****
  • Posts: Plenty of Posts!
  • Wildlife Gateway
Re: Fire fees under California state budget
« Reply #228 on: Oct 08, 13, 12:07:58 AM »

Offline Bob C

  • Moderator
  • Raccoon
  • *****
  • Posts: 967
Re: Fire fees under California state budget
« Reply #229 on: Oct 08, 13, 02:37:33 AM »
And just to add insult to injury, if you read the instructions for the "petition" form (http://firetaxprotest.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Petition_for_Redetermination_Fillablenew1.pdf), at the very bottom is a partial list of "reasons you can't ask for a re-determination".

I quote..."Claims that do not qualilfy for redetermination include, but are not limited to...Disputes regarding the legality of the fee"

Offline ForestGal

  • Raccoon
  • *****
  • Posts: 3773
  • Fight On!!
Re: Fire fees under California state budget
« Reply #230 on: Oct 08, 13, 03:16:49 AM »
And just to add insult to injury, if you read the instructions for the "petition" form (http://firetaxprotest.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Petition_for_Redetermination_Fillablenew1.pdf), at the very bottom is a partial list of "reasons you can't ask for a re-determination".

I quote..."Claims that do not qualilfy for redetermination include, but are not limited to...Disputes regarding the legality of the fee"


Well good grief, that would be the reason that I would choose for disputing this "fee".  I did not file a dispute last year, I just paid the dang thing.  I have not looked at the forms yet so I don't yet know, but does anyone have any valid suggestions we could write on it for disputing it?

Offline Bob C

  • Moderator
  • Raccoon
  • *****
  • Posts: 967
Re: Fire fees under California state budget
« Reply #231 on: Oct 08, 13, 03:27:32 AM »
Karin,

Just protest as they recommend (writing the appropriate words on your check, and yes, filing that petition for redetermination). It will be a cold day in heck before I allow California to tell me I don't have a right to petition something.

Offline ForestGal

  • Raccoon
  • *****
  • Posts: 3773
  • Fight On!!
Re: Fire fees under California state budget
« Reply #232 on: Oct 08, 13, 03:39:50 AM »
Thanks, Bob.  My middle name should have been Procrastination, but I will look at it soon and follow your and John's suggestions on this wonderful site.  At least I put the stupid envelope in a safe place so it wouldn't get lost in the rest of the paper clutter on my table.  I need to do some serious straightening up. ;D

Offline tcaarabians

  • Raccoon
  • *****
  • Posts: 1900
Re: Fire fees under California state budget
« Reply #233 on: Oct 08, 13, 03:00:25 PM »
I did not file a formal protest last year. I did write 'Paid Under Protest" on my check. I don't know if that puts me out of the running for a refund. Cheryl o7o

Offline Wrightwood

  • Administrator
  • Raccoon
  • *****
  • Posts: Plenty of Posts!
  • Wildlife Gateway
Re: Fire fees under California state budget
« Reply #234 on: Oct 17, 13, 05:34:52 PM »
Remember the redetermination claim must be made within 30 days from the date of the invoice.

Ours were dated 9/20/2013 so time is running out.

Offline Wrightwood

  • Administrator
  • Raccoon
  • *****
  • Posts: Plenty of Posts!
  • Wildlife Gateway
Re: Fire fees under California state budget
« Reply #235 on: Nov 07, 13, 11:30:17 PM »

Offline Wrightwood

  • Administrator
  • Raccoon
  • *****
  • Posts: Plenty of Posts!
  • Wildlife Gateway
Re: Fire fees under California state budget
« Reply #236 on: Dec 17, 13, 11:54:52 PM »
Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association
New ruling will bar some from receiving refunds
The Court has issued a ruling that has important implications for those affected by the fire tax.
 
While we do not agree with the decision, the Judge has decided taxpayers who failed to file a Petition for Redetermination will not be eligible to receive a refund if the fire tax is declared unconstitutional.
 
If you filed a Petition for Redetermination, you are still eligible to receive a refund if our lawsuit is ultimately successful.  If you have not filed a Petition for Redetermination, you can still claim a refund of future payments by filing a Petition when you receive your next bill.
 
Petitions must be filed within 30 days of the date on the bill.  The necessary form and attachment, as well as instructions for completing and filing the form, can be found at our special website, FireTaxProtest.org.
 
Lawsuits can be long and drawn out processes.  We expect at least one more billing before receiving a ruling on the merits of the case.
 
If we win, all taxpayers could be free from future fire tax bills.  However, as a result of this decision, those who have not yet filed Petitions for Redetermination will not be able to recover money they already paid.

Click here to read the decision: http://tinyurl.com/msazhqr

Offline Wrightwood

  • Administrator
  • Raccoon
  • *****
  • Posts: Plenty of Posts!
  • Wildlife Gateway
Re: Fire fees under California state budget
« Reply #237 on: Feb 05, 14, 09:08:48 PM »

Offline Bob C

  • Moderator
  • Raccoon
  • *****
  • Posts: 967
Re: Fire fees under California state budget
« Reply #238 on: Feb 13, 14, 10:39:18 PM »
By George Runner

In the middle of California's driest winter on record and following an active fire season, our state must provide the firefighting services Californians need and expect.

That's why I recently sent a letter to Governor Brown urging him to eliminate the controversial (and probably illegal) Fire Prevention Fee. I also asked him to restore full funding to CAL-FIRE in the revised version of his 2014-15 budget proposal. In this time of drought, CAL-FIRE must have the reliable funding it needs to fulfill a mission that benefits all Californians.

Remember, the fire fee doesn't pay one cent toward fighting fires, but rather backfills budget cuts made to CAL-FIRE years ago. The third set of bills is currently scheduled to go out in early March.

The fire fee is a bad tax, not just because of the unnecessary burden it places on taxpayers, but because it is horribly inefficient to collect. From the beginning, the process of collecting the Fire Prevention Fee has been lengthy and expensive, proving it is a poor method for funding CAL-FIRE's fire prevention efforts.

Each year the Board of Equalization 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. It is a gross understatement to say this does not make good fiscal sense.

In a recent supplement budget report, staff notes that the fee "has created a substantial workload that could not be absorbed by the BOE."

Staff blames the program's administrative complexity and $1.7 million in cost overruns on numerous factors, including the delay of initial billings, a high protest rate, collection actions, errors in CAL FIRE's data file, high rates of returned mail and an extremely high volume of phone calls and correspondence not typical of other tax programs.

To demonstrate just how fiscally unsound the program is, let's compare some numbers.

The Board of Equalization collects only $75 million from nearly 800,000 fire fee payers. In contrast, the Board of Equalization collects approximately $20 billion from nearly one million sales tax permit holders (i.e. traditional retailers).

If we were to redirect the staff currently working on the fire fee to, for example, collecting unpaid taxes from the illegal underground economy, the state would experience a far greater benefit.

Given questions about the law's legality, the state also faces mounting costs and growing exposure as a class action lawsuit brought by fee payers moves forward. Should the courts strike down the fee, which seems likely, the state will need to provide refunds to property owners.

Rather than continue to pick the pockets of 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 this illegal and inefficient tax.

The fire fee continues to place more burdens and costs on both CAL-FIRE and the State Board of Equalization, without providing additional firefighters, air protection or even a single hose - despite our state's increased firefighting expenses this year due to drought conditions.

The fiscally responsible thing to do is eliminate this foolish tax.

George Runner represents more than nine million Californians as a taxpayer advocate and elected member of the State Board of Equalization. For more information, visit boe.ca.gov/Runner or calfirefee.com.


part timer

  • Guest
Re: Fire fees under California state budget
« Reply #239 on: Mar 28, 14, 07:40:52 PM »
Got bill last week, arrived in pale green envelope from the State Board of Equalization. $115.00 due, for 7/01/11-6/30/12, determination issued 3/18/14.  Due 4/17/14, with a penalty of 11.50 if not paid on that date. Interest will accrue 0.050% per month.
States that Board of Eq. issueing on behalf of CAL FIRE, called the Fire Prevention Fee.
Bold print in left upper corner: BILLING & REFUND NOTICE.

Any on else get one of these? I assumed this would appear on my property tax bill, am a little concerned how LATE the billing is, for 2011-2012. Will there be '12-'13 next and then '13-'14.
Any thoughts?