Heeding the Lesson of the Oakland Fire : Prevention: Fire officials face the tough chore of convincing the public to accept costs and regulations needed to prevent an inferno in San Diego County.

The Oakland fire: could it happen here? The answer is a resounding yes. One of the few surprises locally was that it happened in Northern rather than Southern California. It was a predictable disaster, since the buildup of dry brush over many years needs only a spark, some wind and a few minutes to be a disaster.

Fire officials in San Diego County know that, and they know how such a disaster can be prevented. The tough question is, how can we persuade an indifferent public to provide those preventive measures, which require three ingredients not popular among our citizenry: effort, money and government regulation.

First, the effort: The development of homes in areas subject to wild-land fires requires homeowners to clear brush on their property. Although regulations require this in Oakland (and in San Diego), many homeowners ignore them, even in areas such as the Normal Heights neighborhood of San Diego, where fire destroyed or damaged 123 homes in 1985.

A Los Angeles Times editorial (“The Fire Next Time,” Oct. 26) called for government to clear the land of homeowners who refuse to do it themselves and add the cost to the homeowner’s tax bill.

This is easier said than done. The fire district where I serve on the board of directors cleared one lot in this manner. Collecting the money is a different story. The owner refused to pay. Three years later we have a lien on his property, but we haven’t collected a penny.

This raises the second issue, money. Once a brush fire starts, the last hope in preventing a major wild-land fire is a rapid response with enough firefighters to make a difference. But, like most fire jurisdictions, especially those most vulnerable to wild-land fires on the edge of urban development, we are short of money. Routinely, we have only two firefighters on duty for a district that covers about 1,600 households.

There is no money left over to spend on clearing uncooperative landowners’ lots and waiting many years before recovering the money. The county, almost broke, cannot help. The state, with mega-deficits in the billions, has slashed funding in all areas, including firefighting.

Yet the Oakland fire, which could have been prevented with thousands of dollars and some effort, is estimated to have caused $1.5 billion in losses. Even in recession, we are one of the most affluent places in the world. How is it that we can afford $1.5 billion in losses, but cannot afford essential government services, that could prevent the losses?

Clearly, what California can no longer afford is the Proposition 13 mentality. We have to pay for the services we need, and pay in taxes.

Think of the fire prevention and firefighting services that could have been bought with $1.5 billion. The cost of the Normal Heights fire alone--$8.9 million--could have funded a brush-clearing program throughout San Diego County more or less forever. The propagandistic view that all taxes go to support useless bureaucrats and lazy people on welfare has cost us dearly in poorly funded schools, criminal justice system, health services and, of course, firefighting.

Third, we need to combat the distaste of government regulation. An example: our fire district required a developer to pay for the installation of a hydrant, because he was building in a new area without hydrants. The developer gave a check for the hydrant to the water district, and we thought no more about it. Until, that is, we noticed that no hydrant had been installed and discovered the developer had stopped payment on the check.

The developer was unrepentant when challenged. We can pursue both criminal and civil penalties under the law. But the district attorney is overwhelmed with other cases, and the civil route may cost us more than we collect.

In the meantime, the developer will sell the house and move on. If it burns down someday, expect the fire district to be blamed, not the developer.

The attitude that government regulation is both bad and intended for someone else also cost substantial money in the Oakland fire.

The wood shake roofs prevalent in the Oakland fire clearly caused great loss. They should, literally, be outlawed.

There are other roof materials that are fireproof, pretty and cost-effective. Yet there is a California belief that a homeowner should be able to put whatever roof he pleases on his house. At what cost in money and lives will it take to convince us otherwise?

The Oakland fire will soon be a dim memory in a society bombarded with news. Next year, the big fire story may be from San Diego.

So the next time you are asked for effort and money in solving this problem, remember it may be an excellent investment.