Proposed and rejected several times in recent years, a surcharge on property insurance policies to help pay for state firefighting and emergency services once again is on the table.

Fire protection's share of the state budget has grown the past several years, driven in part by major wildfires in San Bernardino, San Diego and other Southern California counties in 2003 and 2007.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger first proposed an insurance surcharge two years ago as state revenue began to slump. It has re-emerged in various forms several times since then but has never made it out of the Legislature.

On Monday, Senate Democrats are expected to try again, putting forward legislation that would levy a 4.8 percent surcharge on residential and commercial property insurance policies. It would raise an estimated $200 million for fire protection and help close an estimated $20 billion general fund budget hole through June 2011.

While the governor's office insists that the surcharge is a fee that could be passed on a majority vote, members of both parties call the surcharge a tax that requires a two-thirds vote.

Republican lawmakers, whose votes are needed to reach a two-thirds threshold, blocked similar legislation in 2009 and have ruled out any new taxes this year.

Some GOP legislators have offered different approaches to raising money for emergency services.

Assemblyman Kevin Jeffries, R-Lake Elsinore, introduced legislation this week to pay for firetrucks, brush-clearing and other activities with $45.6 million in expected oil and gas revenue for the state from the proposed T-Ridge project off the Santa Barbara coast.

The Senate approved a T-Ridge bill last year but the proposal failed in the Assembly. The legislation's prospects are uncertain this year.

Firefighters groups and other organizations back the insurance surcharge. It would add about $48 to the average annual premium of $1,100 for a $300,000 home in Moreno Valley aged 7 to 15 years, according to data from the state Department of Insurance.

The Legislature's nonpartisan fiscal adviser has raised concerns that the surcharge would apply even to urban residents who face little wildfire risk. The office instead has proposed a fee for people living in state responsibility areas, where the state has the primary firefighting mission.

Taxes apply broadly and are for general purposes. Fees pay for specific services that benefit those who pay.

Presenting his budget plan last month, Schwarzenegger ruled out higher taxes to solve the state's budget problems. He later rejected a suggestion that the insurance surcharge would be just that.

"I let some people debate over that, what's a fee and what's a tax. But I mean, I call it a fee and ... we have more and more fires now and therefore we need the extra money," Schwarzenegger said.

The semantics debate continued at recent Senate budget hearings. Inland state Sen. Bob Dutton asked a question referring to the surcharge as a tax. In his response, a representative of Schwarzenegger's Department of Finance instead called the surcharge a fee, prompting laughter in the room.

"We think there's a clear nexus between the people who'll be paying the fee and the people receiving the benefit," Department of Finance spokesman H.D. Palmer said. Cal-Fire and other state emergency vehicles frequently respond to nonfire disasters, he said, such as the recent earthquake in Humboldt County.

Besides Monday's bill, two Democratic lawmakers have introduced legislation to create a 4.8 percent insurance surcharge.