http://www.legisweb.net/v2/public/calm/Retrieve.asp?ref=urn%3Acalm%3A2007%3Asb0742%3Adoc

http://www.legisweb.net/v2/public/calm/Retrieve.asp?ref=urn%3Acalm%3A2007%3Asb0742%3Adoc

Please read and
write your legislator to bring there attention to it.

What's wrong with the bill?

I'm PISSED!!!!!!

5090.15. (a) There is in the department the Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation Commission, consisting of nine members, five of whom shall be appointed by the Governor and subject to Senate confirmation, two of whom shall be appointed by the Senate Committee on Rules, and two of whom shall be appointed by the Speaker of the Assembly.

(b) In order to be appointed to the commission, a nominee shall represent one or more of the following groups:

(1) Off-highway vehicle recreation interests.

(2) Biological or soil scientists.

(3) Groups or associations of predominantly rural landowners.

(4) Law enforcement.

(5) Environmental protection organizations.

(6) Nonmotorized recreationist interests.

It is the intent of the Legislature that appointees to the commission represent all of the groups delineated in paragraphs (1) to (6), inclusive, to the extent possible.

(c) Whenever a reference is made to the State Park and Recreation Commission pertaining to a duty, power, purpose, responsibility, or jurisdiction of the State Park and Recreation Commission with respect to the state vehicular recreation areas, as established by this chapter, it is a reference to, and means, the Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation Commission.


How is this a balanced commission?????????????


(1) Off-highway vehicle recreation interests. US

(2) Biological or soil scientists. They hate us

(3) Groups or associations of predominantly rural landowners. Most of them hate us

(4) Law enforcement. They hate us

(5) Environmental protection organizations. They REALLY hate us

(6) Nonmotorized recreationist interests. They hate us

So to whomever represents US on this OHV Commission....I feel for you, you are totally out numbered.

First of all, I have had it with the "ologists" and their made up numbers. Yes, they use computerized formulas to predict soil eroision, creek and stream sedimentation blah blah blah. It's all BS.

Those programs are only as good as the information that is input into them, and anyone with a knowledge of numbers can tell you they can be manipulated to tell you what ever story you want to hear/see.

What place does non motorized recreation have at a table for OHV parks??? I'm curious about that one.

Land owners complain about noise and "fugitive dust" :shaking:

What Environmental Protection Organizations????The EPA? no, Probably the Sierra Club.

What happened to voting? Who gave these people the power to squash our rights in the name of junk science?

How is it that we can do more damage, within responsible use guidelines, than a storm can when it dumps a large amount of rain in the Sierras? Or a pineapple express comes through and accellerates a snow melt, causing flooding and other damage.

My point is...stuff happens, and we deal with it. How do people become so freaking idealistic? It's fantasy. What are they seeking??? Redemption? Salvation?

I just don't get it.:mad3:

I tried to post a comment (http://www.legisweb.net/v2/public/calm/Comments.asp?ref=urn%3Acalm%3A2007%3Asb0742%3Adoc% 3Ahtml#commentsHeading) but the site wouldn't take it. Anybody other than BLINGN XJ run into problems trying to post a comment?

I'm PISSED!!!!!!



How is this a balanced commission?????????????


(1) Off-highway vehicle recreation interests. US

(2) Biological or soil scientists. They hate us

(3) Groups or associations of predominantly rural landowners. Most of them hate us

(4) Law enforcement. They hate us

(5) Environmental protection organizations. They REALLY hate us

(6) Nonmotorized recreationist interests. They hate us

So to whomever represents US on this OHV Commission....I feel for you, you are totally out numbered.

First of all, I have had it with the "ologists" and their made up numbers. Yes, they use computerized formulas to predict soil eroision, creek and stream sedimentation blah blah blah. It's all BS.

Those programs are only as good as the information that is input into them, and anyone with a knowledge of numbers can tell you they can be manipulated to tell you what ever story you want to hear/see.

What place does non motorized recreation have at a table for OHV parks??? I'm curious about that one.

Land owners complain about noise and "fugitive dust" :shaking:

What Environmental Protection Organizations????The EPA? no, Probably the Sierra Club.

What happened to voting? Who gave these people the power to squash our rights in the name of junk science?

How is it that we can do more damage, within responsible use guidelines, than a storm can when it dumps a large amount of rain in the Sierras? Or a pineapple express comes through and accellerates a snow melt, causing flooding and other damage.

My point is...stuff happens, and we deal with it. How do people become so freaking idealistic? It's fantasy. What are they seeking??? Redemption? Salvation?

I just don't get it.:mad3:

YUP!! 1 to 5 ratio Nothing like padding the vote:mad3:

What's wrong with the bill?

What's wrong is that if it doesn't pass then the OHV commission is not funded and EVERY state run OHV park closes!

Prairie City? CLOSED Carnegie? CLOSED Hollister? CLOSED Hungry Valley? CLOSED Oceano Dunes? CLOSED Ocotillo Wells? CLOSED

Actually, we would be better served if the COMMISSION were not funded and went away.

SB 742 is about the OHV program and it directly funds the OHMVR DIVISION and the OHV (green sticker) grants program. The Commission is along for the free ride.

Yes, there is an imbalance on the COMMISSION which has ascended into a the controller of the grants funds to the detriment of OHV recreation.

SB 742 is about changing the overall makeup of the Commission and applying controls on how the grant funding is disbursed.

The state OHV leaders have been heavily involved and worked hard to get to a point where the legislation is favorable to a recreation program.

Given the political climate of the state, we know that no legislation will move forward that does not contain a "restoration" component. In the past, that has been a sore point with us as it has siphoned funding away from trail maintenance to restoration projects that close trails and areas. That is because imprecise definitions were inserted into legislation which had an adverse impact in the long term.

It has been a continuing fight to get that part of the legislation changed. SB 742 is our chance to make that change and to get a permanent program; a program that is not subject to the whims of politics.

Yes, everyone has a right to be concerned about the program and the status of the proposed legislation.

I would encourage you to communicate with your elected representatives and express your concerns about the status of the proposed legislation.

Key talking points are:

Permanent program
Support for education
Support for law enforcement
Support for trail maintenance

Thanks John,

I just came back to clarify my incorrect language and add to my post that it's not important to call our representatives just simply to pass the bill, but to make sure it is not revised or amended in a way that hurts our access. Thanks for being on it and setting the facts straight!

I know this is a tough request....

but we need to wait a little bit before we start bombarding our legislators.

I know it's tempting to yell and scream about how unfairly we've been treated, (and we would be right!), and I know that we're "mad as hell and don't want to take it anymore".

But we are still in negotiations on SB 742, and are being represented by great people. And we are being taken seriously, in large part because of CLORV - California League of Off Road Voters.

Check out their website at www.clorv.org. Their member organization are:
AMA Nat'l
AMA D36
AMA D37 & Dual Sport
Cal4
CORVA
ASA
Cal-Nev Snowmobile Assoc.
Friends of Oceano Dunes
San Diego Off Road Coalition
Off Road Business Assoc.

Collectively this represents over 100,000 of us - and that is why they are taking us seriously. Numbers talk!

So..be patient. If anyone has a question about this, feel free to contact me. And if anything changes, I'll let you'll know.

Amy