Proposition 21 restores a vehicle tax that was cut some years ago, and sets the funds aside for parks and wildlife programs.
First, I've got an immense problem with these "special fees" that pay for things that our basic taxes are supposed to pay for. Beyond that, the financial structure that we've erected in California with special fees, setasides, and voter-enacted budget restrictions.
I'd support an initiative to clear all those away and simply let the Legislature and Governor budget and if we don't like their work - fire them. We make a difficult job impossible with these kinds of restrictions (think Robocop2 and the list of rules they put on him - "Don't walk through puddles", etc.), and we give our leadership excuses for failure.
Second, this is a clear example of the cynicism of our political class and the fungibility of cash - from the "No" statement a quote from State Sen. Alan Lowenthal (D) - "Why would anyone vote for the park pass (Prop 21) if we've already fully funded the state parks?"
A hearty "NO" on Proposition 21.
-
We don't have enough money in the budget to cover what's needed for the parks. The main reason for this is the structural changes rendered by Prop 13 (2/3 requirement for any tax increase), in addition to the 2/3 majority to pass the budget.
The parks are being held hostage by a determined 1/3 of legislators.
$18 for parks is o.k. by me. I'm voting "yes" on prop 21.
The moment we return to democratic rule where a majority can determine our state budget I will be happy to defer to the legislature on this.
I actually would prefer it if more government services were funded by user fees that were paid by those who used the services. If the park system were made to be self-supporting based on admission fees and licensing revenue, rather than relying on general funds we could have a situation where the parks would still be open for public use even if the rest of the government were shut down.
For this particular resolution, I’d vote “no” though because this motor vehicle tax has nothing to do with using the park system (if anything it should be dedicated to roads and bridges just like the gasoline excise tax should be).
I never understood the California Proposition thing. It doesn't appear to have worked very well since in my, granted, uninformed view, I do not know how you can expect anyone to vote for a proposition that taxes them. It follows that the state is seemingly always in a fiscal crisis.
I can't offer a solution, but, it seems there must be a better way of doing things.
In spite of being a long term supporter and volunteer for state parks, I'm also voting no on 21, for pretty much the same reasons given by Marc.
Yes, there's some 'hostage taking' going in the parks budgeting process, but it's by cynical politicians who target them, and public safety, when they'd rather raise taxes than deal with politically painful cuts in less essential services. The solution isn't to give them more money, but to stop feeding the beast and fire the pols.