OROVILLE, CA (MPG) - The Butte County Board of Supervisors on March 14 authorized a letter opposing Senate Bill 1404, a proposal that would reinstate a state fire‑prevention fee on rural property owners.

The letter, signed by Board of Supervisors Chair Bill Connelly, and sent to Sen. Josh Becker, chair of the Senate Natural Resources and Water Committee, urges lawmakers to reject the measure.

SB 1404, authored by State Sen. Henry Stern, D‑Los Angeles, would revive the State Responsibility Area fire‑prevention fee, which was suspended in 2017 when lawmakers shifted wildfire‑prevention funding to California’s cap‑and‑trade program, now known as Cap‑and‑Invest. That agreement eliminated the fee through 2031.

The bill does not specify the amount property owners would pay. The previous SRA fee, implemented in 2012, was set at $150 per habitable structure, with most rural homeowners paying $115 after a fire‑district credit. That program drew widespread criticism for billing errors and administrative problems, including charges to property owners outside designated areas, and was repealed five years later as part of the broader funding shift tied to the state’s climate program, officials said. 

In his letter, Connelly wrote that reinstating the fee would break the state’s earlier commitment and place new costs on residents who are already facing financial strain. He noted that many households in the wildland urban interface continue to recover from the Camp Fire and the North Complex and remain vulnerable to rising insurance premiums, nonrenewal, and the high cost of home‑hardening improvements.

“Many of these residents are already struggling with affordability, including those on fixed and low incomes, and cannot absorb additional fees,” Connelly wrote.

During the March 14 meeting, Butte County Chief Administrative Officer Andy Pickett referenced the board’s earlier opposition to the fee. “You all worked very hard a decade ago to put an end to this unjust fee and now it looks like it’s trying to make a comeback,” Pickett said.

A coalition including the Rural County Representatives of California and the California State Association of Counties has also opposed the measure, arguing the proposal would shift costs back to rural property owners despite the state’s existing funding structure.

Pickett said the county will continue monitoring the bill as it moves through the Legislature.