State and Local Legal Blog

Fees for fire service? | April 3, 2014

Last fall, the Supreme Court considered the question whether residents in an unincorporated area of a county, served by a fire protection district, were illegally taxed because of the monthly fee imposed by the fire protection district.  The residents claimed that the district did not provide a “service” unless there was a fire, and that they had paid months and months of fees but the fire district had never rendered them any services.  These residents alleged a number of grounds, including extortion.

The Supreme Court determined that the fee was permissible because “services” of a fire protection district was far broader than simply fire-fighting.  Among other things, a reduction in fees would cause the district to reduce staff and, likely, the Rating of Six, currently held, would be reduced to a Ten, which would cause an additional $4,000 to be added to the basic home general liability insurance policies of each homeowner.

The import of the case (Alfonso v. Diamondhead Fire Protection District, Mississippi Supreme Court, issued 8/1/2013) is the valuable discussion on how public entities and taxpayers should consider the meaning of “services” for which fees could be justified.



Posted in Uncategorized

Leave a Comment »

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: