:mad3:

Wahington State wheelers!!! Listen up! The House Ways and Means Committe is trying to take your money!!!!

Qutoted from a local board

"If you don't do anything else this month for the future of off-road recreation -

PLEASE TAKE THE TIME TO DO THIS ONE THING...

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

The budget proposal released this week by Washington State House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Kelli Linville steals ALL of our Nonhighway and Offroad Vehicle Activities (NOVA) funds for the next two years and puts it in the general fund.

This is all of the money that you and your fellow riders pay in ORV tabs and gas tax. The total is over $9 million dollars out of your pocket.

If this passes as written most, if not all of the public riding areas in Washington will at risk of being closed.

See page 165 of the proposed bill at the link below:
http://leap.leg.wa.gov/leap/Budget/Detail/2009/ho0911bill_0331.pdf

And here is a link to other supporting reports:
http://leap.leg.wa.gov/leap/budget/detail/2009/ho0911p.asp


Please contact your two Washington State House of Representatives members and the members of the House Ways and Means Committee immediately:

Here is the names, party, email and phone numbers of the committee members:

Linville, Kelli (D) Chair = Linville.kelli@leg.wa.gov (360) 786-7854
Ericks, Mark (D) Vice Chair = Ericks.mark@leg.wa.gov (360) 786-7900
Alexander, Gary (R) = Alexander.gary@leg.wa.gov (360) 786-7990
Bailey, Barbara (R) = bailey.barbara@leg.wa.gov (360) 786-7914
Dammeier, Bruce (R) = dammeier.bruce@leg.wa.gov (360) 786-7948
Chandler, Bruce (R) = chandler.bruce@leg.wa.gov (360) 786-7960
Cody, Eileen (D) =& nbsp; cody.eileen@leg.wa.gov (360) 786-7978
Conway, Steve (D) = Conway.steve@leg.wa.gov (360) 786-7906
Darneille, Jeannie (D) = derneille.jeannie@leg.wa.gov (360) 786-7974
Haigh, Kathy (D) = haigh.kathy@leg.wa.gov (360) 786-7966
Hinkle, Bill (R) = hinkle.bill@leg.wa.gov (360) 786-7808
Hunt, Sam (D) = hunt.sam@leg.wa.gov (360) 786-7992
Hunter, Ross (D) hunter.ross@leg.wa.gov (360) 786-7936
Kagi, Ruth (D) = kagi.ruth@leg.wa.gov (360) 786-7910
Kenney, Phyllis Gutierrez (D) = kenney.phyllis@leg.wa.gov (360) 786-7818
Kessler, Lynn (D) = Kessler.lynn@leg.wa.gov (360) 786-7904
Pettigrew, Eric (D) Pettigrew.eric@leg.wa.gov (360) 786-7838
Priest, Skip (R) = priest.skip@leg.wa.gov (360) 786-7830
Ross, Charles (R)&n bsp; = ross.charles@leg.wa.gov (360) 786-7856
Schmick, Joe (R) = schmick.joe@leg.wa.gov (360) 786-7844
Seaquist, Larry (D) = seaquist.larry@leg.wa.gov (360) 786-7802
Sullivan, Pat (D) = Sullivan.pat@leg.wa.gov (360) 786-7858


If you don’t know who your State Representatives are or how to contact them, follow the link below:

http://www.leg.wa.gov/legislature

Here are some example comments:

- Please DO NOT redistribute funds intended for the Non Highway and Offroad Vehicle Activities account!

- This account was created when offroad vehicle users volunteered to waive their legal right to a fuel tax refund in exchange for a self-directed state account to provide funding for programs that benefited offroad vehicle activities.

- These same citizens volunteered to have their license tab fees increased so long as those monies were also placed in the Non Highway and Offroad Vehicle Activities (NOVA) account.

- To redirect the funding away from the NOVA account and into the general fund would be nothing short of stealing from the very same citizens that willing gave the state their hard earned money.

- Furthermore, these funds are protected by the Washington State Constitution, Pursuant to Article II, Section 40 these monies must be used for their intended purpose or refunded. The State Supreme court has repeatedly reaffirmed this requirement.


Your sport is at risk, please take the time to step up and be heard today!"

DO NOT LET THEM GET AWAY WITH THIS! :mad3::mad3::mad3:

I'm all for trying to balance the budget and save a penny every chance you can.

But this is not the way to go about it. If the general fund is allowed to raid specific funds now -- we will never see that money again.

I wonder if they are taking money out of all other specific funds - or just ones they don't think anyone will raise a fuss about?

They are taking money from anyone and everyone! It is insane! EVERYONE should be in an uproar! They are taking money from pro gun, pro recreation, pro education, pro clean water.... I could not believe the amount of money they are taking.

I went off... Here is what I sent them...

To: linville.kelli@leg.wa.gov; ericks.mark@leg.wa.gov; alexander.gary@leg.wa.gov; bailey.barbara@leg.wa.gov; dammeier.bruce@leg.wa.gov; chandler.bruce@leg.wa.gov; cody.eileen@leg.wa.gov; derneille.jeannie@leg.wa.gov; haigh.kathy@leg.wa.gov; hinkle.bill@leg.wa.gov; hunt.sam@leg.wa.gov; hunter.ross@leg.wa.gov; kagi.ruth@leg.wa.gov; kenney.phyllis@leg.wa.gov; kessler.lynn@leg.wa.gov; pettigrew.eric@leg.wa.gov; priest.skip@leg.wa.gov; ross.charles@leg.wa.gov; schmick.joe@leg.wa.gov; seaquist.larry@leg.wa.gov; sullivan.pat@leg.wa.gov; webteam@komo4news.com; fox12news@kptv.com

Hello Folks,

I was quite shocked and extremely upset to see that in the recent budget proposed by your committee the amount of money that you are all attempting to steal from other programs. I was shocked to see money being moved from various locations and re-allocated to the states general fund. Is the money from these programs not to be used for the programs it was originally generated for? Do we not have constitutional rights that guarantee that the these monies must be used for their intended purpose or refunded.

I am having a hard time understanding this, and as my elected I am asking you to explain this. In looking through the monstrous waste of paper that is your budget proposal I see the following items being stolen and no longer used for the purposes that they were raised for.


7M from the Waste Reduction, Recycling and Litter Control Account:
another 7M from the Aquatics Lands Enhancement Account:
193M from the Education Construction Account? Seriously? Your going to take 193M that should be used to build schools and put it in the states general fund instead? Seriously?!?!?!
While you take 237M from the tobacco settlement and put it in the general fund, you only set aside 5.2M for the life sciences discovery fund?
1M bucks taken from the waste tire removal fund and allocated to the general fund. Isn't that money suppose to be used for cleaning up our public and private lands? How will this get done now?
3M from the Parkland Acquisition Fund - Wait a minute.... thats money thats suppose to be used for Parks! How are you planning on spending it now?
2M from the wildlife account state fund
500K from the firearms range account.... Hmmm do your pro gun constituents know you are taking there money? They will when I am done!
9.8M in funds raised for Recreational Resources to be stolen and placed in the general fund. What? Those are tax dollars set aside for public recreation that you are snagging!
28M from the water quality act....28M from a program to make sure my kids have clean drinking water... just gone?
9.6M from the Nonhighway and Off-Road Vehicle Activities Program??!?!?!?!?!?!? Wait a minute! I volunteer, I pay use taxes and other fee's. I quite honestly, work my tail off helping clean forests, maintain trails, pay extra fees to use and enjoy those trails, knowing that the fee's I pay help keep open the areas I enjoy. Now after I have paid in, helped volunteer to keep them clean and open you are simply going to take MY MONEY and put in to the state General fund?

This is illegal! It's also just ethically wrong! Did you all work for AIG previously?

Explain to me why this needs to be done. Explain to me why it is fair that I have paid extra, worked extra, and waived my right to a refund, now I lose the money that was going towards programs I benefitted from? I am outraged at the actions of this committee and its proposed budget. Is this the type of responsible government I should expect? I am quite honestly shocked to see that this is being done in my great state, by my elected officials.

You need to act, and you need to act now.
- DO NOT redistribute funds intended for the Non Highway and Offroad Vehicle Activities account!

- This account was created when offroad vehicle users volunteered to waive their legal right to a fuel tax refund in exchange for a self-directed state account to provide funding for programs that benefited offroad vehicle activities.

- These same citizens volunteered to have their license tab fees increased so long as those monies were also placed in the Non Highway and Offroad Vehicle Activities (NOVA) account.

- To redirect the funding away from the NOVA account and into the general fund would be nothing short of stealing from the very same citizens that willing gave the state their hard earned money.

- Furthermore, these funds are protected by the Washington State Constitution, Pursuant to Article II, Section 40 these monies must be used for their intended purpose or refunded. The State Supreme court has repeatedly reaffirmed this requirement.

Fix this mess folks... I dont know how they do things in Olympia, but in my neighborhood this is just wrong!

BUMP!!!!

Folks I hope with all of the views at least some lof you have fired off a message to these folks.

They are taking money from you! Stand up and be heard follks!!!

they did this to us a month or so ago...90 million, bye bye

First the 'loan' in CA, and then the 'attempted theft' in CO, and now the woes in WA?

It sure is a frustrating time for OHV funding. :(

Randii

I sure hope you folks have a OHV leadership that mobilizes its membership against this proposal.

Here in California none of the more major groups that I know of sent out via snail mail nor e-mail alerts to its membership attempting to get them to raise hell with their legislator.

Now, $ 90 million is gone from our OHV fund.

The legislature said they would pay it back in four years.

I seem to remember when they said this a number of years ago when they raided our fund for about $ 25 million.

It took a lawsuit from an OHV'er to get it back.

I sure hope you folks have a OHV leadership that mobilizes its membership against this proposal.

Here in California none of the more major groups that I know of sent out via snail mail nor e-mail alerts to its membership attempting to get them to raise hell with their legislator.

Now, $ 90 million is gone from our OHV fund.

The legislature said they would pay it back in four years.

I seem to remember when they said this a number of years ago when they raided our fund for about $ 25 million.

It took a lawsuit from an OHV'er to get it back.


Formal complaint...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I've received several complaints from users on the Pirate Bulletin Board system regarding your behavior on our site.

While I appreciate your passion for Land Use, I am asking you to tone down any misguided ramblings and/or personal attacks, or you will be permanently banned from the site without warning.

Thanks,
Lance
__________________
Your low-level contacts don't know about my high-level contacts.

And they still don't get it, rather than just apologizing to us and getting to work, it's getting rather apparent their starting some kind of campaign to get me off these boards. Received this last week and it's to date my only correspondence from Lance, now I ask with the community standards on this board :flipoff2: and all I talked about over time why now:confused: I believe the answer is in my signature...TJ:shaking:

Hope it's just an automated response, as a result of our so called leaders sheepie hitting the wine button, never dreamed I'd be telling Lance to get off the Koolaid. Tom on another note what happened to OHMVR.COM, is there some legal issues you can't talk about? Couldn't help but notice it's gone.

It sure is a frustrating time for OHV funding. :(

Randii

Yes..... Yes it is. Whats even more frustrating, is that my elected officials didn't even think they needed to send me a form letter back. I know I didn't voice my opinion in the most eloquent way, but I was pretty shocked that I didn't even get a "thank you for caring" mail back. This leads me to believe that they are just going to shove this through and deal with the fall out from voters after the fact.

I sure hope you folks have a OHV leadership that mobilizes its membership against this proposal.

Here in California none of the more major groups that I know of sent out via snail mail nor e-mail alerts to its membership attempting to get them to raise hell with their legislator.

Now, $ 90 million is gone from our OHV fund.

The legislature said they would pay it back in four years.

I seem to remember when they said this a number of years ago when they raided our fund for about $ 25 million.

It took a lawsuit from an OHV'er to get it back.

I got this from my local club president and she got it from Washington Off Highway Vehicle Aliance, who got it from BRC, so some groups are behind it, butit still doesn't seem to be getting much attention.

I imagine someone will probably have to sue, just like they did down there evidently. :shaking:

Good luck to you folks and I hope the best.

Sure hope if you have any organized OHV support groups their more help than ours...TJ:D

....so what did I miss..was TomsJeeps just a colossal troll??

....so what did I miss..was TomsJeeps just a colossal troll??
As briefly and generously as I can say this, Tom is a gifted analyst with a SERIOUS axe to grind against California State Parks' Department of Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation. He disagrees strongly with leaders in the Division.

More to the point of this thread, we all agree that fees collected from OHV users should be spent on OHV-related projects, and not be hijacked/hijinxed away to feed other general funds with less successful funding models. Accountability is key, and we should demand this from our government!

Randii

....so what did I miss..was TomsJeeps just a colossal troll??

I'm wondering the same thing.

Tom has a fairly good grasp of what is going on with the OHV Divison here in California. Recently, he questioned why the OHV Commission was not in accordance with the enabling legislation (SB 742) with the OHV Division. In short, he asked why the Commission is not meeting four times per year in locations throughout California.

To date, no answer from the Division.

His issues with the Division is not far off base most of the time. He seems to say what others in our leadership won't.

I participate in a few forums and Tom is usually on the mark. Why the management would ban him from this site is beyond me.

Well, let's see. According to the OHMVR Commission web site, they are scheduled to meet 5 times this year. As for last year, there weren't enough of the commission seats filled to hold a valid meeting ( lack of a quorum). With the passage of SB742, there was a requirement to have 5 or more Commisioners at the meeting. Besides, what did we miss by not having the meetings?
Earlier this year, the Commission web site stated that they meetings would be held in Sac. due to budget restraints until further notice.
If Tom actually had a good grasp on how things worked, like regulations and statutes, he wouldn't be posting a lot of vague and unsubstantiated comments.
Plus, posting under two different log-ons is a no-no.

Ride on
Brewster

Why the management would ban him from this site is beyond me.
Jeebus. :rolleyes: Don't make this about something it is not... as I understand it, Tom was slapped on the wrist for failing to follow the forum rules. He posted here as TomJeeps AND as TWENDE, and when the forum admin told him to quit having conversations with himself, he smarted off, and earned his first banishment. Logging back in as TomJeeps00001aaaab is a further violation of the Registration Agreement that users sign when they join this forum...

I appreciate Tom's analysis of OHMVR, but the axe he's often grinding against OHMVR's senior staff is less impressive. I hope Tom continues to attend OHMVR meetings and engage in feedback, but I find him most effective when he stays on the issues and leaves the personal attacks out...

Randii

Jeebus. :rolleyes: Don't make this about something it is not... as I understand it, Tom was slapped on the wrist for failing to follow the forum rules. He posted here as TomJeeps AND as TWENDE, and when the forum admin told him to quit having conversations with himself, he smarted off, and earned his first banishment. Logging back in as TomJeeps00001aaaab is a further violation of the Registration Agreement that users sign when they join this forum...

I appreciate Tom's analysis of OHMVR, but the axe he's often grinding against OHMVR's senior staff is less impressive. I hope Tom continues to attend OHMVR meetings and engage in feedback, but I find him most effective when he stays on the issues and leaves the personal attacks out...

Randii



:laughing: :laughing:

Jeebus. :rolleyes: Don't make this about something it is not... as I understand it, Tom was slapped on the wrist for failing to follow the forum rules. He posted here as TomJeeps AND as TWENDE, and when the forum admin told him to quit having conversations with himself, he smarted off, and earned his first banishment. Logging back in as TomJeeps00001aaaab is a further violation of the Registration Agreement that users sign when they join this forum...

I appreciate Tom's analysis of OHMVR, but the axe he's often grinding against OHMVR's senior staff is less impressive. I hope Tom continues to attend OHMVR meetings and engage in feedback, but I find him most effective when he stays on the issues and leaves the personal attacks out...

Randii

Now that I read this, its understandable.

Well, let's see. According to the OHMVR Commission web site, they are scheduled to meet 5 times this year. As for last year, there weren't enough of the commission seats filled to hold a valid meeting ( lack of a quorum). With the passage of SB742, there was a requirement to have 5 or more Commisioners at the meeting. Besides, what did we miss by not having the meetings?
Earlier this year, the Commission web site stated that they meetings would be held in Sac. due to budget restraints until further notice.
If Tom actually had a good grasp on how things worked, like regulations and statutes, he wouldn't be posting a lot of vague and unsubstantiated comments.
Plus, posting under two different log-ons is a no-no.

Ride on
Brewster

Brew... I have to disagree with you on some points here.

Section 5090.24 of the Public Resources Code provides:

(b) Meet at least four times per year at various locations throughout the state to receive comments on the implementation of the program. Establish an annual calendar of proposed meetings at the beginning of each calendar year. The meetings shall include a public meeting, before the beginning of each grant program cycle, to collect public input concerning the program, recommendations for program improvements, and specific project needs for the system.

I've scanned the rest of the legislation (SB 742) and cannot find reference to needing five Commissioners at a Commission meeting. I understand the lack of quorum under Roberts Rules, but cannot find reference to what you are providing here.

Nonetheless, the Gov's administration took their sweet time most of last year making the appointments. They and Steinburg knew the need and in essence, gave the Divison full rein for the better part of last year without any oversight by the Commission.

Just one of the things we missed is the opportunity of the Commission to hear first hand that the OHV fund had an extra $ 90 million and there was some opportunity purchases to expand OHV opportunity. One that comes to mind is the Rudick ranch that was for sale at the time.

I could go on but I think I've made my point.

Finally, with the funding the Division has, its difficult to understand - even in tough times - that they could not drag-up a few thousand dollars to comply with the enabling legislation (SB 742) that they owe their existence to.

Brew... I have to disagree with you on some points here.

I've scanned the rest of the legislation (SB 742) and cannot find reference to needing five Commissioners at a Commission meeting. I understand the lack of quorum under Roberts Rules, but cannot find reference to what you are providing here.

The requirement of 5 commissioners comes partly from SB742 where it calls for having 9 commissioners. Technically, a quorum does not have to be "more than half", but that figure is what is usually used.
At the last OHMVR Commission meeting I asked about the quorum number and legal council, LaFranchi, said that the somewhere in state code, it says that a quorum is over half of the total positions available, not the number of filled positions. Therefore, the Commission had to get 5 members to a meeting in order to conduct business.

Ride on
Brewster

Folks, as a newb here, I am asking (respectfully) that we get this thread back on topic. This is not about Tom or his 3-4 different aliases, this is not about California OHV funds (execept for perhaps some lessons to be learned as this has happened to the folks in CA already). Thats all good stuff, but please start another thread.

This is about Washington State stealing our money... Keep in mind the money is money that offroad vehicle users volunteered to waive their legal right to a fuel tax refund in exchange for a self-directed state account to provide funding for programs that benefited offroad vehicle activities. We had a right to a tax refund, we waived that so that the money would be used for off road, and now they are just taking it. 9.6M they are just taking... :mad3:

To date, I have not gotten a response from anyone in Olympia. I know my email was rather strongly worded, but I was hoping that would get a response from someone. Instead I have gotten nothing.

I also haven't seen much action locally. It's hard for me to gauge, maybe everyone of the 420 views sent something to Olympia, maybe half, maybe none. Its a bit depressing to not see a greater bump on this from folks on the NW. From what I have heard, the lack of these funds could have a pretty serious impact on our sport in Washington. It certainly wont help any new areas get opened (Like we are trying to do in SW Washington), and has the potential to lead to more closures due to lack of funding.

Folks - Send a letter.

Thanks, and again, I am not trying to be a jerk here, just trying to get my thread back on topic. I learn a lot from you folks about land use actions, and am sure I still have a lot to learn. I appreciate everyone sharing lessons learned. It is helpful!

Ooops, sorry about the hijack. But maybe there are some political procedures that are mentioned that helps to show the difficulties in dealing with state governments.....in any state.

A knowledge of the states regulations is a requirement to understand who to talk to and what to say. Here in CAL. we found out that even with recently passed legislation that was supposed to protect OUR OHV fund, the legislature can still change the rules and "borrow" the funds for a longer than agreed to period.

Ride on
Brewster

Ooops, sorry about the hijack. But maybe there are some political procedures that are mentioned that helps to show the difficulties in dealing with state governments.....in any state.

A knowledge of the states regulations is a requirement to understand who to talk to and what to say. Here in CAL. we found out that even with recently passed legislation that was supposed to protect OUR OHV fund, the legislature can still change the rules and "borrow" the funds for a longer than agreed to period.

Ride on
Brewster

Ditto here.:D

Thanks, and thanks for not going all pirate on me :-) I'm a newb who is eager to help make a difference and appreciate the assistance in guiding my energy into something that will actually help. My passion has made my message one which does not need a response from my elected officials evidently.

Now for the bad news... The budget passed the ways and means committee on Tuesday.

Washington State Folks, please email your local reps. Pressure them for a response, demand they take a stand against this.

I honestly didn't know who my local rep was, you can find them here ---> http://apps.leg.wa.gov/DistrictFinder/Default.aspx

The good news is that I have seen some positive responses from some of the local State Representatives. Suprisingly, most agree that this is wrong. Not suprising, apathy seems to have set in though and they are unsure they can stop this.

Thanks again - Not only for this, but also for all the work this board does for land use. I haven;t been to the vast majority of the places we fight for daily, but I hope to some day, and thanks to the work done here (and elsewhere), I think I have a pretty good chance!

Heres the response i got from one of my local reps.

"Hi Jon:

Thanks for your email. Sorry, but I don’t recall your earlier emails. ALL accounts with any fund balance are being “swept” and the money used to help fill the 9 billion dollar hole in the budget. Is it the best thing? No. I wish we didn’t need to do it. It’s not illegal nor unconstitutional and I’m sorry you feel that it is. Don’t you think we would have checked this out?

Do you really think, for example that I’m going to cut 43 million state dollars from public health (on top of the 33 million already taken at the local level) while we let millions of dollars sit in accounts for parks or tobacco prevention? By the way, these are fund balances, the revenue sources are still intact and will “refill” the funds.

This is the worst economic downturn in a generation. I’m sorry you think we have “stolen” your money. We have prioritized the spending and parks fall further down the list than education and health and human services.

Thanks for writing.

Sincerely,

Rep. Jim Moeller"

I know this is a PG section of Pirate so I will keep my thoughts in my head, but needless to say, I am not happy with this guy.:mad3:

The good news is that some reps do get it...

"I think it is wrong to raid the fund and will oppose it." Ed Orcut

"It is totally inappropriate for us to take funds away from off-road recreation accounts to balance this budget when you are already getting only a portion of the money you should be getting since not all of the gas tax money from the fuel used for off-road vehicles goes into the account; and That is a sneaky way to try to use gas tax money for operating which would seem to violate the 18th amendment." Ed Orcut

"Please know that I too have some serious problems with the proposed budget. Rest assured that I will do all I can to see that this budget does not take money wrongfully." Don Benton


The fight has not been lost yet folks... Mail em! If you sent one allready please send another mail now!

Some good news for us web footed wheelers here in Washington (and even those on the dusty side of the state). We managed to save the NOVA account from being raided.

I wont bore everyone with all of the details, but the following is an excerpt that was posted on our local clubs site...

"I am happy to report that in the operating budget that passed out of the House last night, NOVA funds were left intact. I believe this positive outcome is largely due to citizen efforts like yours."

We (IMHO) dodged a bullet here folks... Thanks for everyone who took the time to send in a mail. Its very much appreciated!

That is good news for once.

Congrats our so called leadership here in CA can learn from you, good work...TJ:laughing:

Glad to read they "blinked" and the funds are still there! The Jim Moeller "do you really think" email had me wondering exactly that about him - a high schooler response. Speaking of high school antics - Tom, is your other name chuckiekillskittens?

I'm afraid you may have been misinformed. It looks like there is no new money for the NOVA program in the final budget and they can take any "excess funds" currently in the account and give it to State Parks.

From the Recreation and Conservation Office (administers NOVA grants):

"Due to the current economic crisis, and for the first time since the program started in 1971, the budget passed by the Legislature redirects the upcoming biennium's (2009-2011) Nonhighway and Off-Road Vehicle Activities (NOVA) grant funds to other purposes. If the Govenor approves the budget, sometime in May, we will have to cancel this year's NOVA grant cycle."

I'm afraid you may have been misinformed. It looks like there is no new money for the NOVA program in the final budget and they can take any "excess funds" currently in the account and give it to State Parks.

From the Recreation and Conservation Office (administers NOVA grants):

"Due to the current economic crisis, and for the first time since the program started in 1971, the budget passed by the Legislature redirects the upcoming biennium's (2009-2011) Nonhighway and Off-Road Vehicle Activities (NOVA) grant funds to other purposes. If the Govenor approves the budget, sometime in May, we will have to cancel this year's NOVA grant cycle."

Hmmm...... this does not look good.

Welcome to Washington. They ask us after they've done it. I wrote a bunch of letters and got similar responses from each person.

:confused: