California bill would bring back fire prevention fee to high-risk areas

A new proposal moving through the California Legislature could mean added costs for some homeowners living in high-risk fire areas. The bill would bring back a fire prevention fee, charging certain residents up to $150 per year.

Supporters say the fee would fund critical wildfire prevention efforts, while opponents are raising concerns about cost and fairness.

"I think any kind of education, any kind of forest education, anything we can do to make ourselves safer, is terrific," said Tahoe resident Rhonda Keen.

The funding would go toward projects like forest thinning, property inspections, and wildfire hazard mapping. While Keen supports those efforts, she says she still has questions about how the money would be used.

"I'm a little bit skeptical because I kinda' wonder, ya know, who's managing this money? Where is this going? Is it going to help bring insurance companies back in? Or is this just fire fluff," Keen said.

The charge would apply to properties in what are known as State Responsibility Areas, or SRAs. These are typically rural or less developed regions where the state, through Cal Fire, is responsible for fire protection.

However, the fee is based on location within an SRA, not whether a homeowner already pays a local fire agency. That means some residents could end up paying for both local and state fire services.

Supporters argue that wildfire risks are increasing and that homeowners in high-risk areas should help cover the cost of protecting their communities. The fee could generate up to $90 million per year dedicated to fire prevention work.

"We have a lot of socio-economically disadvantaged areas in rural California," said Stacy Heaton, senior policy advocate for the Rural County Representatives of California.

Heaton noted that a similar fee was in place from 2011 to 2017 but was ultimately repealed after rural homeowners argued they were being unfairly targeted.

"The first time this fee was implemented, homeowners weren't seeing a lot of return for their money that was supposed to be a fee, not a tax," Heaton said.

She says this new version raises similar concerns, especially as many homeowners are already dealing with rising insurance costs and home-hardening requirements.

"It's not just $150, it's $150 compounded on top of everything else," Keen said.

The bill has already passed its first committee and is now headed for further review.