I genuinely don't know, so that's a sincere question, but, geez, I sure hope not. In fact, that's the way I'd bet, because, as I noted below, this isn't the first time something similar to this has happened. A fee based service set by the state might be a little more tenable, but I think the problem you'll run into is that the cities know (and care) a lot more about what it costs them to run their local fire department than the state government does. That's before we even get into the political football that would result from the state saying it's raising property taxes on non-municipal residents statewide. You may recall that some state leaders are committed (at least in public) to lowering state property taxes NO MATTER WHAT.

The simplest, easiest and most logical thing to do is for them to fund their own fire department on their own, but they seem very unwilling to do that, and I think if we're being honest we both know why. It's tyranny and theft until I need the service and then I'm on national TV bitching about the heartless SOB who wouldn't spend thousands of dollars saving my house. I happen to believe in a fair amount of socialism because there's a lot of stuff like this. Others don't, and reasonable men can differ. But if you insist on raping yourself with a broomstick don't get pissy when you're sore the next day.