HomeMy WebLinkAboutResponse letter from Senator Neilsen - CA State Fire Prevention Fee CA R t01..OFF IC,.F, CC 4,N,I I I E 1:5
S F'A-r E C A P11 0 L BUDGE-T &FF5,CAL REVIEW
SACARAMEN PD, CA 9581 11
(,i)6 5 1-400 4 fo r U, a HEAL,7H
DISTRICT OFTICE
2653 FORES I AVE,
""'ra VETERANS AFFAHRS
9F.5928
�53C),871� /424
RZSCE!W M J Y OF r I CIP
108()MASCDN MALL— S-FIE 4 V
CRES�ENT 01 Y,CA 9553�
(707)464 1 25E,, SM OF SLHRVWM
ROSEWLf OFFICE
220()A DOUGLAS DL,VD S�E MD SENKTOR
ROSE VcLA F CA 95 765 JIM NIELSEN MAY 18 2015
4916) 772 O57T
FOURTH SENATE Dl�-3TRICT
4<)1)CF 1'V I d:.R STSTE C OROVI"MFOMIA
YU13A C'�Ty,C)-\�)5093
,5'30)'751 8657
May 15, 2015
The Honorable, Doug Teeter, Cbiir
Butte County Board of Supervisors
Administration Center
25 County Center Drive, Suite 200
Oroville, CA 95965
Dear Chairman Teeter,
Thank you.far your recent correspondence renewing your concerns about the California State
Fire Prevention Fee being unfair and requesting legislation to repeal this tax that unfairly impacts
our rural residents. I appreciate hearing from you and welcome the opportunity to respond.
We share the same frustrations regarding this illegal fee, or as I call it, tax. The money raised
isn't going completely toward fire prevention services as outlined in the original bill. Rather,
funds from the so-called Fire Prevention Fee are being used for wildfire investigations and civil
cost recovery. I also appreciate that you continue to keep a focus on this fe,e on behalf of the
citizens your represent.
I continue to support the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association (HJTA), which filed a lawsuit
against this illegal fire tax. The HJTA rightfully holds that this tax is a direct violation of
Proposition 13, which calls for a two-thirds majority vote of the Legislature to enact a new tax.
The lawsuit continues to move forward despite encountering procedural road blocks that have
hampered efforts to have this matter finally heard. CalFire has challenged the legality of the class
action status of the lawsuit, which represents some 820,000 residents. If IIJTA was unable to
certify the class action, the case would still move forward, but only for the 12 original plaintiffs
giving only them recourse for a refund, not the class.
The court hearing to certify the class action status is expected in June with actual arguments on
the tax/fee portion to follow.
Six bills have been introduced in the California State Legislature this session in various forms
and all of them rernaiwat the committee level, with three of the bills already placed on the
X"
Suspense file. The bills are AB 203 (Obemolte), of which I am a co-author; AB 301 (Bigelow);
AB 1202 (Mayes); SB 198 (Morrell); SB 250 (Gaines); and SB 520 (Berryhill).
I also authored AB 1506 in 2012 and SB 17 in 2013. Unfortunately,both bills failed passage in
various committees, when the majority party voted them down.
If you are interested in tracking other legislation, you can access bill text, status, analyses and
vote records from my Senate homepage at www.sen.ca.gov/Nielsen.
Please be assured that as your representative, I will remain vocal in my opposition to this
measure and continue to work to repeal this illegal tax. I thank you again for taking the time to
reach out regarding your concerns. Please do not hesitate to contact my district office if I or my
staff can be of assistance.
Sincerely,
JIM NIELSEN
Senator, Fourth District
Cc: Butte County Board of Supervisors; Butte County CAO
JNlln