Statewide taxpayer group questions legality of Salida fire assessments proposal

Soon after ballots were mailed this month in the Salida Fire Protection District, some questioned the legality of the district’s proposed special assessments for fire service under California’s Proposition 218.

The Modesto Bee learned Wednesday that the Sacramento-based Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association is reviewing the special assessments proposed by the Salida district, though it’s premature to say whether the group will challenge the district.

Tim Bittle, director of legal affairs for the association, said it’s debatable whether fire districts can use special assessments to pay for emergency services. The Salida district’s proposed assessments would require a simple majority for approval from property owners. It’s a steeper climb to win approval for a fire service tax, which requires a two-thirds “yes” vote.

Bittle said he learned about the Salida proposal when contacted by a local attorney.

The association has long been a champion of Proposition 13 and taxpayers’ rights to vote on tax increases.

Other fire districts in California have gone to special assessments to fund their services and have run into resistance. The 3rd District Court of Appeal ruled in 2011 that the West Point Fire Protection District in Calaveras County could not raise special assessments under Proposition 218, a 1996 statewide initiative that requires property owners’ consent for raising certain fees.

Special assessments usually pay for streetlights or other public improvements that benefit a defined number of property owners, who are responsible for paying the annual charges.

By contrast, fire protection services are more of a benefit to the general population.

“The court found the agency could not make the case that anybody is specially benefited by having firefighting crews on standby,” Bittle said. “Nowadays, a large part of a fire district’s budget is not for fighting fires but for paramedic services. Many times, people getting those services are not property owners. They may be out-of-towners passing through on the freeway.”

The state Supreme Court agreed to take up the case, Concerned Citizens v. West Point Fire District, but the case never set a legal precedent. When West Point received voter approval for a fire service tax, the Supreme Court decided the issue was moot and dropped the case. The appellate court decision was never published and cannot be cited by attorneys, Bittle explained.

Bittle said it is premature to say whether the Howard Jarvis group will challenge the Salida proposal.

Salida fire Chief Dale Skiles said he could not say if the district is prepared for a court dispute. The special district was advised by an attorney and financial consultant in preparing the Proposition 218 vote, he said.

The Salida Fire Protection District is on its own again after splitting with the defunct Modesto Regional Fire Authority. The regional authority, made up of the Modesto, Stanislaus County and Salida fire agencies, was dissolved last year.

Salida is asking property owners to approve increased assessments to pay for a second engine crew to improve response times and provide better coverage for residents and business owners. It would give the district engine crews to staff the Ladd Road station near Del Rio and one of the two Salida stations.

An annual levy of $45 would climb to $156, or $13 a month, for average-size homes. Homes larger than 3,000 square feet would be charged $195, apartment buildings $117 per unit, commercial businesses 5 cents a square foot, industrial property 4 cents a square foot, and schools and churches $264 per parcel.

A person with 50 acres of agricultural land would pay about $80 a year. The mail ballots are due June 17.

Board member Mark Brubaker said the main fire station in downtown Salida is centrally located to protect the community of 13,700. But the force can be stretched thin while responding to emergencies in the 42-square-mile territory, ranging from Del Rio in the east to Mapes Ranch on the west, he said.

Salida resident Bruce Blizzard said he voted against the increase and copied The Bee with his letters explaining why. He said residents need to know how they would benefit from paying higher assessments, the salaries of paid staff and the district’s financial condition.

“We don’t know how they are managing their finances,” Blizzard said. He added that ballots are weighted so owners with the higher property values have more sway over the results.

Skiles responded to another question, whether the increased assessments are to pay for firefighters whose salaries and benefits were enhanced when they worked for MRFA. Skiles said only one firefighter returned to the district from MRFA. To rebuild the paid staff, five people were hired under the district’s salary and benefit package.

Salida has six paid firefighters and 15 volunteer reserves. Regardless of the legal questions, Skiles said the decision for voters is whether they want one station with 24-hour staffing or two.

The fire district expects to respond to 1,400 calls this year in an area with 20,000 residents and 5,500 homes. The district’s $1.1 million budget is supported 60 percent by property taxes and 40 percent from the existing assessment collected since 1990.

Don Murphy of Salida said he’s glad the community has its fire department back and feels the assessments are a reasonable way to pay for service. He said people who are active in town seem to support the increases. “I don’t know that I was opposed to the merger (with MRFA), but I didn’t see anything good come out of it,” Murphy said. “The fire department has served us very well.”

Murphy observed that the Howard Jarvis group will consider whether it has a winnable case before spending money to challenge the assessments.

This story was originally published May 20, 2015 at 4:50 PM with the headline "Statewide taxpayer group questions legality of Salida fire assessments proposal."