Lake Valley makes pitch to hike fire tax
Lack of property tax revenue from the Angora burn area is impacting Lake Valley Fire. Photos/Kathryn Reed
By Kathryn Reed
MEYERS – Lake Valley Fire Protection District does not have enough money to do all of the things it wants to do. That is why a parcel tax is on the Nov. 4 ballot.
Members of the district, which for the most part includes the incorporated area of El Dorado County in the basin, have been paying $20 a year since 1986. The problem is Measure M never increased based on inflation. It brings in $150,000 a year.
Measure H, which will be before voters, would replace Measure M with a $120 fee that would be tied to the consumer price index. This means it could go up each year, though not by more than 3 percent any given year. It is projected to bring in $1 million.
“Things will change,” Fire Chief Gareth Harris told Lake Tahoe News when asked what happens if the measure fails. “We’d have to eliminate the fuels program.”
About 25 people turned out for a meeting Oct. 8 regarding the measure, though most were firefighters or on Lake Valley’s board.
Firefighter Martin Goldberg went over where the money would go. He explained how state and federal funds have dried up so another resource needs to be found. Measure H is the district’s answer.
Firefighter Martin Goldberg, left, with some of the members of the Angora Peak Fire Crew.
The money would not go to raises, even though firefighters have not received a raise in eight years. The salaries it would fund are those of the members of the Angora Peak Fire Crew. Many of them just spent two weeks on the King Fire. They were paraded before the audience and introduced.
This group is responsible for the free chipping service the district provides, thinning on district parcels and pile burning.
Parcel tax money would also go toward aging facilities and equipment.
It would go on indefinitely. Goldberg said if other funding sources come forward, then property owners would be given a reprieve with Measure H. Possible sources are if Lake Tahoe Restoration Act is reauthorized and if State Responsibility Area funds are released.
“I feel like we are asking what we need to maintain the program,” Goldberg told the group.
Lake Valley is not receiving any of the $152.33 the state is collecting from residents for being in a State Responsibility Area. It does, however, intend to apply for a chunk of the $10 million that will soon be made available statewide.
Another hit to Lake Valley’s income is the diminished property tax collected from the Angora burn area. This is because about 100 of the 254 houses that were reduced to ash in June 2007 have never been rebuilt.
“They are off the tax roll except for the land value,” Harris said. “That is a significant issue.”
To pass, Measure H requires two-thirds of the voters on Nov. 4 to approve it.
—–
Notes:
• More info is available online.
no.
“The problem is Measure M never increased based on inflation.”
But they keep telling us there IS no inflation. . .
No.
Lake Valley Fire is without a doubt a Top Notch Crew. I have overwhelming respect for these dedicated professionals and all they do. If H was a flat $50.00 I would have no problem voting yes. With LTCC, STPUD and the currant state Fire “fee” I’m done….no…. period. My income like others has not gone up since 2007. Government agencies are tasked to do more with less these days. Hard choices are being made at all levels. I know it’s a *rap sandwich but it’s real. Regardless of the outcome I would trust Lake Valley Fire, unlike other agencies to spend the money wisely.
Who is ‘they’?
Without dog ever answering the question of “who is they”? We already know she blames Obama and liberal forward thinkers. The finger pointer always has the same answer.
No
One wonders if economies of scale could be achieved with greater cost efficiency, and duplicate functions and overhead eliminated or reduced, by merging the separate fire departments into one.
Of course, the fire department people are going to say “no”, not possible.
If Lake Valley Firefighters are willing to host and be educators for a fire academy education at their fire house instead of us paying for a new $18 million dollar facility for Measure F …… then maybe ……
They could do this on their off season when snow is on the ground …….. and have Cal Fire help as well.
Yes.
How quickly everyone forgets the Angora Fire. I haven’t as I live in the burn zone and I’m reminded of it every single day. All you “NO” people will be the first to scream your bloody a**es off if a fire consumes your house and neighborhood so stop your whining for once in your life and pay your fair share for an important public safety service.
And if you can’t afford it then maybe you’re trying to live beyond your means and can’t afford to own a house in the forest.
Spouse – 4-mer-usmc
For the record I disagree with my Spouse and think that the Lake Valley Fire and other Fire Department’s should go after the State of California for the Fire Prevention Fee Assessment they charge.
First, how would this money have helped stop or prevent the angora fire? All that land is usfs. Second, i have heard of an open ended tax like this before. The income tax was to never exceed 3%. Third, how do we know this money will be used efficiently, calfire wants raises now, how convenient. Last, the funds didnt dry up. Someone neglected to do their job and pursue those funds and apply, just sayin
I think the chipping program probably has encouraged many to actually do their defensible space which is good. But maybe we might consider charging a minimal fee for this to pay for the program rather than slam homeowners with another bond tax.
If down the road it looks like we need a bond later then we can vote for one that’s not open ended.
Full time Lake Valley Firefighters and Cal Fire employees are well paid and do have a lot of free time on off season to do this work and earn their keep during that time.
The Citizens for a Fire Adapted Community – Yes on H appreciate your comments and respectfully offer a few of our own.
The Fire District has applied for every state and federal grant available for the past 9 years. They started before the Angora Fire. District personnel are working on two grants due in November including the CALFIRE Fee. Measure H is variable for this reason. It will be lowered equally every year in proportion to state and federal money received. The District had a tax with a maximum of $75.00 in 1993 that was let go in 1994 because your Fire District fought for dual county status to secure a stronger tax base.
There are no guarantees with fires like the Angora. However, fuel reduction works to reduce the threat of wildfire. http://www.fireadapted.org
The Fire District has maintained the Fire Crew, Chipping and educational services for 9 years but have insufficient funding for next year and had to borrow from their savings fund this year. Measure H is a way for the District to make certain they can continue to offer the high level of wildfire suppression and prevention services the community has requested.
How much money is Lake Valley currently saving while the Angora crew is on assignment ? Is that money being saved and put back towards the Angora crew year after year? Calfires minimal presence (at best ) in the basin does in no way warrent $130 per year , and have yet to see them lift a finger or anything else when it comes to “prevention” or the projects that lake valley speaks of.
Perhaps the money should come from them.
Until then No
The City does not pay the Calfire tax yet I see them (Calfire) respond into the city on emergency calls. Whats with that ? We pay the Calfire tax and the city get the benefit for free. It seems to me if the Angora crew can’t support themselves working on fires and Grant funding they should just go away. Oh and by the way, that Grant funding is” our tax dollars also”. Seems like the people at Lake Valley think that money magically appears when they need it. Also Chief Harris states that the Angora burn has taken tax dollars from the district. I’m sure it did at first but Chief Harris neglected to look at what was rebuilt in Lake Valleys area. The homes that have been rebuilt for the most part are 2 to 3 times larger than the ones that burned. While I’m sure the original square footage that burned is still taxed at what ever rate it was before the homes burned, all of the new construction is taxed at the fare market value. I would bet they are not missing out on as much as they claim. Vote NO !
There are at least two problems with this, one is the amount of going from 20 to 120 a year is too much, the other is it being tied to inflation and being variable. They need to try a reasonable increase to get some support.
I’ll ask the same question as “business owner” and then a few more. How is this tax going to help prevent fires where the real danger is Forest Service Land? Hasn’t the Forest Service been running a large scale “fuel reduction” program over the last few years by selling large stands of timber to logging companies? Where is the money from that? It would seem logical that the profits made by the Forest Service should go right back to the community so that healthy stands of trees remain in a fire safe forest. Are the taxpayers paying the logging companies $1,000 to $2,000 an acre to reduce the fuel so that they may go and sell the “fuel” they have reduced for a profit? Should I be taxed for a redundant program that for the most part is taking place on Federal Lands? Many of the home and land owners have already recognized the threat of wild fire and have done everything possible to make their homes fire safe. Does it really cost that much for Lake Valley Fire to educate the private land owners who have not complied? Do we as taxpayers after investing in our homes to make them fire safe need to subsidize those who haven’t especially with a no end / no cap tax?
I for one would like to see a return on my Calfire Tax for fuel reduction before supporting another tax that appears to be redundant. I also say no to paying a tax to support a cause that the Forest Service and Logging industry have been doing a mighty fine job at for a profit.
worldcycle:
In projects such as South Shore, Forest Service marks which trees to cut based on prescriptions for fuels reduction and forest health. These are not the bigger trees that would have the most value as sawlogs if the timber market were favorable — which it’s not, by the way.
At best, the companies awarded our forest health and fuels reduction contracts are able to sell enough of the materials they remove (often as clean chip, biomass or firewood) that it partially defrays the cost of treatment.
In actuality, the federal government pays for this work to be done on National Forest System lands to protect commumities that border the forest and to move us toward healthier forests. Work done by local fire districts and state agencies complements our projects.
USFS thanks for the input. In another post, I had addressed some of these questions with research I had done on timber value per acre and posted my findings. I did state that to clear an acre of forest costs more than the $2000 quoted. That post was under my real name and I have not seen it posted. The research was done to show that we as local taxpayers are already receiving forest treatment for a fire-adapted community on what is Federal land. A non-ending / no cap tax would add little to this program. “Yes on H” and myself have posted other posts in which we address some of the concerns of others who have posted here and those posts are now missing. What gives LTN?
Some comments were in spam. We took out the publishable ones. If yours is still not posted, please email me at info@laketahoenews.net.
We are sorry for the inconvenience.
Kathryn Reed, LTN publisher
1.) First of all there is a cap on the tax. The rate increase would be based on the CPI index with a maximum increase of 3%.
2.) Lake Valley just had their insurance ISO rating drop from a rating of 5 to a 2 in areas with a hydrant. Most homeowners will be able to contact their insurance company for a rate reduction, which means it may have a significance savings on their homeowners policy.
3.) The homes that have been rebuilt in the burn area were able to keep their pre-burn tax rate. Of the 245 homes that were lost only a little over 100 have rebuilt.
4.) YES on Measure H will save 20 firefighters jobs and allow them to continue to reduce the fuel load on NON Forest Service property.
So thats the pitch now…give you more money and save jobs. Can i pass a tax that mandates money to my company to save my job and help my family?
VOTE NO!
No. No. and No. Everyone is doing more with less. The automatic cpi means it will go up a little every year. Merge Lake Valley with other departments we don’t need the small Lake Valley and the City fire and Douglas County. One fire department would save a lot of money. We don’t need two, three or more chiefs. Let’s get more efficient not just take it from the taxpayers.
I already pay an ILLEGAL Fire TAX as ordered by Governor Moonbutt. Sorry guys, love you but maybe you should contact the senile goat in Sacramento. I and my friends are voting NO.
where can i sign up for this tax money to save my job? vote no.
Save Jobs is not well informed and is probably one of Lake Valley’s crew members.
Let’s just see about the cap on this new tax…
#1 This new tax is a 500 % increase from the old Measure M. The CPI from San Francisco is a joke. The median home price in San Francisco is around 1 million dollars where here in South Lake Tahoe it’s around $350,000.
#2 Yes, you are correct that the home owners in the burn area pay the same taxes on the size of their home that burned down. Any new square footage that is added over and above the size of the old structure is all taxed at a newer rate. I don’t know of too many rebuilt homes that were not up sized when they were rebuilt.
Also, many of these Angora burn parcels have been sold to new owners, and any new construction is reassessed at todays tax rate. This year there are at least 10 new homes being built and more to come…
#3 Seasonal firefighters are not generally career positions. Most hand crews turn over 70 to 80% of their personnel every season so don’t preach that we are saving anything.
#4 I talked to my insurance company and my rates are not going down one cent.
#5 Save Jobs is probably a crew member that isn’t even registered to vote, or if he is he obviously doesn’t own a home and is being spoon fed incorrect information.
Lastly, if you have any plumbing skills, can drive a dump truck or run a ski lift talk to your board members.
Vote NO!
I have no problem supporting a fire fee, but, I do have a problem with this one.
1) Indexing the fee to CPI is a non-starter for me. CPI measures the cost increases for a large bundle of goods and includes things like big screen TV’s, smart phones, room nights at luxury, bacon, corn meal, and whole lot of things that do not relate to the costs of the programs covered by the tax.
Also, going before voters is an a mechanism of transparency and accountability. If effectiveness of the programs paid for by the fee are reduced due to inflation in the future, come back to the voters and ask for an increase. This will give us a chance to evaluate the need and performance of the programs. The CPI index is put in place specifically so the department will not have to to the voters in the future, and we should all be asking why they’re afraid of accountability.
2) I’ve yet to see any king of reasonable analysis from lake Valley showing how they arrived at $120 as the correct number. Is this they’re wish list, what some political consultant said the voters would pass, or what they really need to support the programs? We need more detail showing what each program will cost and what the fees will be used for. The reluctance to disclose these details makes me wonder what’s really going on.
3) The shell game – one of the major selling points of the fee is that the money is restricted to a limited number of programs. However, when the Angora Peak Fire Crew (one of the supported programs) is sent to fight fires outside of the district, Lake Valley reimbursed for the costs of the costs of the crew. There is no restriction on how the reimbursements can be used. That money goes into Lake Valley’s general fund and can be used for any purpose. In government speak it’s called changing the color of the money. Without a provision restricting how these reimbursements can be used, the tax potentially adds hundreds of thousands of dollars in unrestricted dollars to Lake Valley’s general fund.
Give us a reasonable tax that can justified with real cost estimates and no CPI index and I’ll consider supporting a fee. But this boondoggle is a non-starter form my perspective.
Gov. Moonbutt has already imposed an ILLEGAL fire TAX. He thinks by calling it a FEE we will not realize he was actually making a decision that he knew the voters would reject. He’s a senile old goat who needs to be put to pasture. Sorry Lake Valley, but I am already taxed and it is QUITE ILLEGAL! For me or anyone to vote for yet another TAX, and from $20.00 to $120.00 with a 3% increase available every year is a no brainer. NO, NO, NO NO and NOOOOOOO.
NO on H!!!
I have already personally taken care of fire prevention on my property…at my own cost. Nobody else paid for it but me, and it wasn’t any agency that removed the trees.
I am not a firefighter. I am on a fixed income like a lot of you. I know there is going to be another Angora Fire and I want to make sure that our community has all the resources it needs save this beautiful environment. So for $10 a month I think its a great value.
Big fat skis should do his homework. The CPI doesn’t have anything to do with the median home prices in San Francisco. It has to do with a wide variety of cost of goods among other things. Also, fat ski guy, homes in Meyers that re-assessed during the downturn in economy are at a much lower tax rate than before the fire. As a result, along with homes not rebuilt, Lake Valley’s budget is considerably lower than before the fire. Their funding is public information, you can go look at it. The tax rate can only rise 3% a year per Prop 13 therefore their economic future will increase at a very slow rate. You can go to a Board meeting and ask any questions you want to the plumber, the truck driver, the ski lift operator & don’t forget the retired firefighter. Get informed instead of trolling this article. LTN editor should be removing your posts as spam.
Why do they keep calling it “free chipping”, when we are already paying additional taxes for it anyway. Will they still call it free chipping if this new tax passes? Probably! We already pay enough taxes, cut wasteful spending, then we will have plenty of money to pay for “free chipping” and a lot of other things. No new taxes, enough already.
4-mer-usmc, I used to be able to afford to live here,until we started getting taxed and fee-d to death.
ABSOLUTELY NO ON H! AND F for that matter.
Hey H for Myers, you’re justifying all those things in SF as opposed to here. We all know that the cost of all goods in SF are much higher. I know for a fact that LVFD’s budget has not gone down, and as tax prices in the burn, well, I live in the burn along with many of my neighbors who rebuilt and built bigger, and I pay more taxes! In fact there are a few firefighters who live out here too and are embarrassed of this high tax increase. Also, like I said before, people are not done building out here!!! LVFD will be getting more money. And it’s 2% per Prop13. I’m more informed than you think and I have spoken with your board members and employees. Don’t tell me you live in the city!
As for Save Jobs, I guess your not going to lose your job and if you would like to donate your $10 a month to LVFD I’m sure they would be happy to take it.
LVFD… Is it good management to pay for something that was suppose to pay for itself? If it’s original intent was to be grant funded, and the funds have ran out, the crew should go away. If you’re fiscally conservative…come up with something reasonable, take off the CPI and remember you work for the tax payers.
I would like to see LTN write their endorsement or a denouncement on measure H as they did with measure F. It was very thought provoking.
No on a Measure H. See you on the next ballot!
I am wondering how many of the yes voters actually work for the government or public agencies, “living high on the hog” and being personally supported by the taxpayers.
Ok Old Fat Skier, I don’t care to debate this with you & I’m sure neither of our comments are going to change anyone’s mind. But I must say, you are not informed. CPI is the change in cost of goods sold over time. It doesn’t matter how much a loaf of bread costs in San Francisco compared to Tahoe. Look it up. And you are right, Lake Valley’s budget hasn’t gone down, I’m sure it’s gone up considering they’re providing a hand crew and all. I said budget but meant their funding has gone down which I referred to just after that. And it has gone down. So go vote “no” & take comfort that the measure will probably not pass & you can go tell all the embarrassed firemen and all your other neighbors you shot down the measure. No I don’t live in the city, I live in the burn area and I am voting yes on H.
hey H prop 13 only allows for a 2% annual increase in assested value not 3%. This acctually helps your position tnough.
500% increase.
3% CPI
This tax is a pipe dream that will be the homeowners nightmare.
Lake Valley has squandered resources and money and lived outside their means.
This measure is not thought out.
This tax has no research to support it.
The fact this got to the ballot shows how poorly managed this fire district is.
20$ over 28 years at 3% annually is 46$.
We should be insulted by this and start looking at the rest of the backwards math going on with our money.
500% increase.
3% CPI
This tax is a pipe dream that will be the homeowners nightmare.
Lake Valley has squandered resources and money and lived outside their means.
This measure is not thought out.
This tax has no research to support it.
The fact this got to the ballot shows how poorly managed this fire district is.
20$ over 28 years at 3% annually is 46$.
We should be insulted by this and start looking at the rest of the backwards math going on with our money.