Key Points:

• Rural fire districts are asking state lawmakers for more funding to fix staffing issues 

• Voters had an opportunity in 2022 to fund fire districts but voted against it 

• Emergency medical services in rural areas are impacted by funding issues

The president of a statewide firefighters association is asking lawmakers for more funding for rural fire districts across the state while warning a legislative panel that Arizona is not prepared for the California-style wildfires that devastated the Los Angeles area earlier this year. 

“The threat of wildfires is here. We know what the conditions are. We understand what’s in front of us and frankly, who we represent — we are not prepared for it,” Professional Fire Fighters of Arizona President Dan Freidberg said during a May 2 House ad hoc Study Committee on Fire Preparedness. 

The committee’s chairman, Rep. David Marshall, R-Snowflake, said the House created the study committee to prevent wildfires like those experienced by California residents. 

“This work is about more than protecting land. It’s about protecting people, protecting livelihoods, and the long-term health of our state,” Marshall said. 

Freidberg said that funding for rural fire districts has been a problem for years and dated the issue back to when voters passed Proposition 117 in 2012. That ballot measure set a 5% annual cap on property value assessment increases to limit increases in property taxes. Friedberg said the measure has significantly limited the funding fire districts receive from property taxes and that rural Arizona is now operating with fire prevention budgets better suited for 2015 than 2025.

The National Fire Protection Association recommends that fire stations have at least four-person crews in fire suppression and search and rescue operations. Freidberg said 92% of fire districts in the state have vacant positions and most operate with only two firefighters.

“We’re being asked to fight Mike Tyson in his prime with one hand tied behind our back,” Freidberg said. 

Committee members discussed what lifting Prop. 117 could mean for the state. Gary Morris, the Pine-Strawberry fire chief and a committee member, said he didn’t support abandoning the measure, but would like to see a formula adjustment that brings in more money to fire districts.

“The public in general, at least in the more rural fire districts away from the metro areas, is ready to pay for what they need in fire protection,” Morris said. 

Rural residents did have the opportunity to fund their fire districts in 2022 with Proposition 310, which was narrowly defeated by 51% of voters in that year’s general election. 

Prop. 310 would have created a 0.1% sales tax for 20 years to provide funding for the state’s 144 fire districts, allowing residents in metropolitan areas to subsidize rural fire districts. 

Will Humble, the director of the Arizona Public Health Association, said that mainly rural residents had defeated Prop. 310 in 2022. He referenced a map in a post on X showing that voters in the state’s metropolitan areas mostly supported the measure. 

“Rural people had a golden chance at a handout from urban and suburban people to help them with their fire districts, and the rural people said we don’t want it,” Humble said. 

Other committee members said that funding issues couldn’t be solved by property taxes alone. Russell Smolden, the CEO of B3 Strategies, said he wasn’t sure eliminating Prop. 117 would be helpful for fire districts that don’t have many residents in the area.

“There’s a lot of state land, there’s a lot of federal land, so you don’t have the tax base necessarily. So one of the things we ought to be looking at is another way to fund them other than just the property taxes,” Smolden said. 

Lawmakers could also provide more funding to fire districts in the state budget, but Marshall said budget constraints will likely result in some appropriations bills for fire districts that exceed more than $100 million not making it into the budget. 

“We’re not here to have hearings and walk away and not do anything. I’m not going to waste my time doing that,” Marshall said. “We’re not going to stop working and we’re not going to stop fighting for (firefighters).”

Another issue for fire districts is their ability to provide emergency medical services in fire districts. Friedberg said first responders’ capacity to respond to these situations is significantly impacted when understaffed rural fire districts are already dealing with wildfires. 

Humble said, “That’s the real public health impact of this – the lack of EMS availability in rural parts of the state.”