Higgins Area Fire Protection District Parcel Tax, Measure V (August 2015)

Voting on taxes

Ballot measures
By state
By year
Not on ballot
| Local

City taxes
County taxes
School taxes
Property taxes
Sales taxes
Income taxes
Other taxes
Measure info

Amount: $141/single family res.
Expires: Never Purpose: Fire Protection

## Contents

* 1 Election results
* 2 Text of measure
* 2.1 Ballot question
* 2.2 Impartial analysis
* 3 Support
* 3.1 Supporters
* 3.2 Arguments in favor
* 3.2.1 Official arguments
* 3.3 Editorials
* 4 Opposition
* 4.1 Opponents
* 4.2 Arguments against
* 4.2.1 Official arguments
* 5 Path to the ballot
* 6 Related measures
* 7 Recent news
* 8 See also
* 9 External links
* 10 Additional reading
* 11 Footnotes

A special fire protection parcel tax, known as Measure V, was on the ballot for Higgins Area Fire Protection District voters in Nevada County, California, on August 25, 2015. It was defeated.

If approved, this measure would have replaced the district's annual $25 parcel tax—a kind of property tax based on units of property rather than assessed value—with a parcel tax of $141 per residential dwelling unit, $100 per apartment dwelling unit, $125 per child care dwelling unit, $75 per hotel guest room, $60 mobile home space. The measure would have also authorized a tax of $40 per square feet for commercial, office and agriculture buildings, $45 per 1,000 square feet for industrial buildings and $10 per camping space. The Measure V tax was not designed to include an automatic expiration date. Moreover, Measure V would have authorized a gann override for the district, allowing it to exceed its state-set spending limitations to spend the revenue from the Measure V tax. The district was tasked with providing fire safety services in about 90 square miles in the southern part of Nevada County.[1][2]

This election was conducted as an all-mail election. Mail-in ballots were sent out beginning on July 28, 2015. The filled out ballots were due back by 7:00 p.m. on August 25, 2015.

The district tried to pass previous parcel tax measures in both 2013 and 2012. Both past measures received more than 60 percent approval, but failed to reach the 66.67 percent supermajority required. The 2013 measure, which was called Measure O, fell short of the two-thirds (66.67%) vote required by a margin of just 32 votes.

A two-thirds (66.67%) vote was required for the approval of Measure V.

## Election results[edit]

Higgins Area Fire District, Measure V

Result| Votes| Percentage
d No| 1,177| 40.84%
Yes|  1,705|  59.16%

Election results from Nevada County Elections Office

## Text of measure[edit]

### Ballot question[edit]

The following question was put on the ballot:[3]

“  |

To maintain prompt local fire protection and emergency medical response services within Higgins Fire Protection District, to maintain current fire station staffing, and to prevent the immediate layoff of personnel so that firefighters are available to respond to all emergencies; shall a special property tax be imposed as established by District, without any cost-of-living adjustment, with all revenue staying in our community?[4]

| ”

|
|

### Impartial analysis[edit]

The following impartial analysis of Measure V was provided by the office of the county counsel:

“  |

Measure V is a Higgins Fire Protection District ("District") special parcel tax measure. If approved by the voters, Measure V would authorize the District to levy an annual special parcel tax, and suspend an existing parcel tax, on each parcel of taxable real property within the District, beginning with the 2015/16 tax year. The amount of the annual special parcel tax would be:

Residential
Dwelling Unit (DU) - $141 for each DU per Parcel
Multi-Family Residences (MFR) - $141 for each DU per Parcel
Apartments - $141 for each DU per Parcel
Hotels/Lodging Houses - $75 for each Guest Room
Mobile Home Park - $60 for each Mobile Home Space

Commercial, Office & Agriculture Buildings

$40 per 1,000 square feet or portion thereof

Industrial Buildings

$45 per 1,000 square feet or portion thereof

Institutional
Privately Owned Medical Care Facility

$40 per 1,000 square feet or portion thereof

Residential Care or Child/Day Care Facility

$125 for each DU per Parcel

Campground

$10 per each Camping Space per parcel

Measure V provides that the special tax adopted in District Ordinance 80-1 will be suspended as of July 1, 2015; provided, however that any existing and/or delinquent payment of the special taxes levied prior to the 2015/16 fiscal year shall continue to be valid legal obligations subject to all collection and enforcement provisions as may be provided by law. Property owners may appeal a tax determination by filing an appeal with the District by December 1st of the calendar year for which the tax is levied.

Revenue from the special tax will be used solely for the purposes of supporting and providing fire suppression, prevention, rescue and emergency medical services within the District, for responding outside of the District under automatic/mutual aid agreements, and for incidental expenses related to collection of the tax.

Measure V requires that special tax revenues be collected by the Nevada County Tax Collector at the same time and in the same manner as ad valorem property taxes, that tax proceeds be deposited into a separate fund held by the Nevada County Treasurer, and that tax proceeds be expended in accordance with an annual budget adopted by the District's Board. The District's chief fiscal officer shall file an annual report with the Board, including the amount of revenues collected and expended, no later than 1/1/2016, and at least once a year thereafter. Measure V also amends the District's appropriation limit in an amount equal to the proceeds of the special tax, effective in the 2015/26 fiscal year.

If two-thirds of the qualified electors voting on this measure vote for approval, the annual special parcel tax will be imposed annual until repealed.

If two-thirds of the qualified electors voting on this measure do not vote for approval, the measure will fail, the District will not be authorized to levy the annual special parcel tax and the tax adopted in District Ordinance 80-1 will not be suspended as of July 1, 2015. (quote)

| ”

|
|

—Alison Barratt-Green[2]

## Support[edit]

### Supporters[edit]

The following individuals signed the official argument in favor of Measure V:[2]

* Karyn Leigh Gross M.D
* Bruce Jones
* Wendy Reddish
* Jim Layton
* Donn R Coenen

### Arguments in favor[edit]

Bruce Jones, chairman of the fire district board, said, “If this special tax is not passed, we’re going to have to close one fire station and lay off six firefighters.”[1]

Supporters argued that, without this tax, not only would the district have to close a fire station, but the cost of insurance would increase due to the lack of fire protection services. Supporters also claimed that the unpopular State Responsibility Area (SRA) fee motivating a lot of opposition for Measure V had little to do with local fire safety, and they were quick to point out that all of the revenue from Measure V was designed to stay within the Higgins fire district.[1][5]

Donn Coenen, chair of the Nevada County Libertarian Party, said, “My three kids have been paid volunteers with Higgins, and I think Higgins does a fine job. The problem is, we’re paying this Cal Fire fire prevention tax, and not getting anything back. I understand how people don’t want to be taxed twice. It’s hard for me to do, but I support the district and the tax will be good for our community.”[1]

In response to arguments presented by opponents of Measure V concerning the emergency medical qualifications of fire fighters in the district, Pete Marchinek, a spokesman for the Higgins Fire District, said, “The comments that were made and the postcard that was authored to the community members of our fire district stating that we do not use medical aid, that is not true. All of our full-time firefighters are EMTs, and three-quarters of our paid-call firefighters and volunteers are EMTs as well.”[6]

#### Official arguments[edit]

The following official argument was submitted in favor Measure V:

“  |

Higgins Fire Protection District provides very high level of emergency medical response and fire protection for our community, but without your support, we may soon have to wait much longer for help to arrive.

Last March, Higgins Fire Protection District received a federal grant allowing them to rehire six firefighters, and reopen all three fire stations full-time, insuring staffing throughout the District 24/7. That grant runs out in March 2016. Without additional funding, they will be forced to lay off six firefighters and shutter one station, severely reducing their ability to respond to local emergencies. With only two stations covering over 90 square miles, response times could go from 5 minutes to 20 minutes.

Many local residents don't know that Higgins Fire Protection District is not CAL Fire, and since 1977, they've worked to prevent fires, fighting them when they occur, and responding to many other emergencies, especially emergency medical calls.

Higgins Fire District has reduced costs, maintained high quality service, and been an active part of our local community. Going forward, they will maintain the same responsible, transparent approach to managing fire and emergency response services. With Measure V, our Fire District will responsibly and adequately provide for the long-term safety and security of our community.

A Yes Vote Will:

* Ensure the existing level of fire protection and emergency medical response services
* Maintain rapid emergency response times
* Maintain local control of our emergency medical response services
* Keep our current fire risk rating to prevent increases in home insurance costs

A Yes vote on Measure V will help the Higgins Fire Protection District to continue to keep all of us safe. Please join us in supporting our local community by voting yes on Measure V.[4]

| ”

|
|

—Karyn Leigh Gross M.D, Bruce Jones, Wendy Reddish, Jim Layton and Donn R Coenen[2]

### Editorials[edit]

The editorial board of The Union wrote an article urging voters to approve Measure V. Below is an excerpt of the editorial:

“  |

We believe voters should not be short-sighted in weighing the short-term expense of an increase for that service and not fully consider the long-term costs and impact on our community without it.

[...]

In addition to the real-life consequences in the real time of a fire, residents could also end up paying higher insurance premiums as a result of the decreased level of service — if they are able to find an insurance carrier to write a policy in our high fire danger area, something that continues to be a growing concern as California’s drought persists and wildfire danger remains on the rise.[4]

| ”

|
|

—The Union editorial board[5]

## Opposition[edit]

### Opponents[edit]

A group called Citizens for Fair Fire Taxes was formed to oppose Measure V.

Wade Freedle wrote the official argument in opposition to Measure V.[2]

### Arguments against[edit]

District resident Pat Schoellerman said, “People in South County have already rejected this tax two times. I don’t see that it’s necessary to do it again.”[1]

Some criticism of Measure V stemmed from the State Responsibility Area fee of $117 per year for each resident. Critics said district residents shouldn't have to pay two fire taxes. Referring to the SRA fee, County Supervisor Hank Weston said, “Our residents have paid $12 million in SRA fees over four years. And we’ve [sic] not getting our fair value for what we’re paying.”[1][5]

#### Official arguments[edit]

The following official argument was submitted against Measure V:

“  |

If there is anything that is obvious to everyone who pays taxes, it is that the financial burden of public employee pensions will collapse municipal governments in California in the immediate future. Some have already filed for bankruptcy. The public pension liability is a huge inverted pyramid with the base shrinking and the apex continuing to grow. There is no possible outcome profile that enables payment of this liability as it is presently structured. The proposal to increase the Higgins Area Fire Protection District tax would add another stone to that pyramid and assure that it will fall sooner and with more destructive effect when the cumulative effect of added benefits finally causes it to collapse.

The stated purpose of this tax increase is to staff facilities of the Higgins Fire Protection District. And since staffing means labor, let's take a look at how that might impact the District cost structure. With a policy that enables retirement after age 52 with full benefits, which can be up to 80% of final pay, the employee might be able to draw benefits for a period as long as his tenure with the District. Also, since both his pension and medical benefits are indexed to inflation on a compounded basis, his retirement pay package could soon exceed his final pay. So the District could end up paying more for John Doe fireman during his retirement than when he was a productive member of the staff. This reveals the impossible structure of the pyramid.

This election should not be about increasing this property tax assessment, but for its entire elimination.[4]

| ”

|
|

—Wade Freedle[2]

## Path to the ballot[edit]

The five-member Nevada County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to put this measure before voters.[1]

## Related measures[edit]

d Higgins Area Fire Protection District parcel tax, Measure O (May 2013)
d Higgins Fire Protection District parcel tax, Measure B (June 2012)

## Recent news[edit]

The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms Higgins fire district parcel tax Measure V. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles.

Higgins Area Fire Protection District Parcel Tax, Measure V (August 2015) - Google News

## See also[edit]

* California parcel tax on the ballot
* Parcel tax
* Parcel tax elections in California
* Gann overrides on the ballot
* Nevada County, California ballot measures
* August 25, 2015 ballot measures in California

## External links[edit]

| Suggest a link

|

* Nevada County Elections Office website

## Additional reading[edit]

* The Union, "Nevada County to demand equity in Cal Fire fee," May 27, 2015

## Footnotes[edit]

1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 The Union, "Nevada County OKs special election for proposed Higgins Fire Protection District tax," June 10, 2015
2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 Ballotpedia Satff Writer Josh Altic, "Email correspondence with Nevada County Elections Office," August 12, 2015
3. ↑ Nevada County Elections Office, "Higgins Area Fire Protection District - Special Election August 25, 2015," June 10, 2015
4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
5. ↑ 5.0 5.1 5.2 The Union, "Our View: Fire protection tax — Third time's the charm?" June 13, 2015
6. ↑ The Union, "Higgins Fire Board: Measure V opposition not factual," August 6, 2015

v • e

Local ballot measures in California

Counties|

Alameda • Alpine • Amador • Butte • Calaveras • Colusa • Contra Costa • Del Norte • El Dorado • Fresno • Glenn • Humboldt • Imperial • Inyo • Kern • Kings • Lake • Lassen • Los Angeles • Madera • Marin • Mariposa • Mendocino • Merced • Modoc • Mono • Monterey • Napa • Nevada • Orange • Placer • Plumas • Riverside • Sacramento • San Benito • San Bernardino • San Diego • San Francisco • San Joaquin • San Luis Obispo • San Mateo • Santa Barbara • Santa Clara • Santa Cruz • Shasta • Sierra • Siskiyou • Solano • Sonoma • Stanislaus • Sutter • Tehama • Trinity • Tulare • Tuolumne • Ventura • Yolo • Yuba

* * *

Analysis|

Laws governing local ballot measures in California • Ballot measure information on California county websites • Costs of administering local elections • Required approval rates for local California ballot measures

* * *

Political topics|

Advisory votes • Binding arbitration • Business taxes • City charters • Election and voting laws • Gambling • Gann overrides • Hotel taxes • Incorporations • Immigration • Jurisdictional boundaries • Labor • Marijuana • Marijuana taxes • Mottos • Municipal bonds • Parcel taxes • Pensions • Project-Labor Agreements • Recall • Red light cameras • Rent control • Salaries of local officials • Sales taxes • School bonds • Term limits • Utility user taxes • Vehicle registration taxes • Zoning and land use

* * *

Tax measures|

Business taxes • Hotel taxes • Marijuana taxes • Oil and gas • Parcel taxes • Real estate transfer taxes • Sales taxes • Utility user taxes • Vehicle registration taxes

v • e

State of California
Sacramento (capital)

|

Elections |

What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2026 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures

Government |

Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy