State Proposition?

[atvobsession]

So...I'm taking a shower this morning....still pissed off at those two morons that voted for something, after listening to PARADE of people that know more about this Grant Fund than they do...but yet still did what they wanted anyway.

So...my thought is....What about the approach of a State Proposition? I have no idea what the process is, but it would seem to me if we had one called: RESTORE OHV TRUST FUND. The law would simply say, they had to follow the original OHV Fund law. Zero cost to tax payers (they like that). We use a grassroots campaign on every OHV website.....You tell two friends, and so on and so on. There are 1.1 million (approx) green stickers, plus millions of wheelers in non-green sticker rigs that benefit from the Grant program in particular. Each of them, has friends that would listen to their plea.

My thought is do not ask for the loans to be repaid, don't ask for any money already taken. Why? This would be volatile portion of it...a lightning rod as you will of the opposition. No, all this bill would do, would say as of signing, all monies slated to be taken (ie: this 3 year BS) and all future stealing would cease.

I'm going to ask Kurt to delete ANY off topic BS threads about my OHV DICK is bigger than your OHV Dick. Got it?

[fermentor]

$200 and

Initiative Statute: Petitions proposing initiative statutes must be signed by registered voters. The number of signatures must be equal to at least 5% of the total votes cast for Governor at the last gubernatorial election. (Cal. Const., art. II, § 8(b); Elections Code § 9035.) The total number of signatures required for initiative statutes is 504,760.

Initiative Constitutional Amendment: Petitions proposing initiative constitutional amendments must be signed by registered voters. The number of signatures must be equal to at least 8% of the total votes cast for Governor at the last gubernatorial election. (Cal. Const., art. II, § 8(b); Elections Code § 9035.) The total number of signatures required for such petitions is 807,615.

From:
http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/ball...tive-guide.pdf

[Brewster2]

Always good to bring up new ideas. Yes, it would be a good possibility to get it on a ballot for the vote of the people.
BUT:

Voters of California, where would you prefer that fuel tax money be directed?

A. To keep state parks open.
B. To fund the recreational needs of wild off-road vehicle piloting thrill seekers.
.....................................

Ride on
Brewster

[fermentor]

Originally Posted by Brewster2

Always good to bring up new ideas. Yes, it would be a good possibility to get it on a ballot for the vote of the people.
BUT:

Voters of California, where would you prefer that fuel tax money be directed?

A. To keep state parks open.
B. To fund the recreational needs of wild off-road vehicle piloting thrill seekers.
.....................................

Ride on
Brewster

Bogeyman balloting..................

[atvobsession]

I think we have enough power in numbers of users and friends, if we can get the message out there.

[aphantomduck]

Great idea.

I'm thinking though that we need to align our issue with other somewhat like minded groups and work together.

I have to think that the necessary signatures to even get this to the ballot wil be nearly 1 million.

Thus, we would need some significant help to get us to that number.

[techman]

I think we can get the signatures. The most expensive part will be fighting media adds.

[LYIN' KING]

Given our budget shortfall and the Governors “realignment” plans, the following may be informative.

Counties were not happy with early realignments, particularly of gas taxes as they relate to transportation funding.
http://www.counties.org/images/users...spondTrans.pdf

There are plenty of other unhappy campers relying on funding from fuel revenues.

Fuel Tax Swap (March 2010): Eliminates sales tax on gasoline and imposes an additional 17.3 cents excise tax on gasoline. Increases sales tax on diesel fuel by 1.75 percent and decreases excise tax on diesel fuel to 13.6 cents. The rate is to be adjusted annually to maintain revenue neutrality with the increase to sales tax on diesel. This measure also increases the share of Public Transportation Account (PTA) funding to the State Transit Assistance Program (STA) to 75 percent of revenues.


Proposition 22 (November 2010): Restricts the use of fuel excise tax revenue for transportation purposes only; prohibits borrowing from fuel excise tax revenues; requires gasoline sales tax revenues (if reinstated in the future) to be used for transportation purposes only; reduces STA share of funding to 50 percent of revenues.

Source: http://www.dot.ca.gov/docs/2011-12Tr...kgComplete.pdf

The 2012-2013 budget . . . http://www.ebudget.ca.gov/pdf/Budget...getSummary.pdf

The appendix is notable in that it contains a Comparative Statement of Expenditures between the budget years of 2011-2012 and 2012-2013. Appendix 13, 16, 44, 52 & 54 refer to Off-Highway Vehicle revenues.

[angiebaby]

I like this idea. Just make sure the following words are kept out of the proposed law "except in cases of extreme fiscal emergency".

[The Wolf]

It would be a huge undertaking, a very tough task - but, the proposition way would give us much more protection if we could get that passed. I would suggest coordination and partnership with other "Special Fund" type programs/organizations (e.g., Boats and Waterways, Fish and Game) to give us much more strength. Language could be "the people of California pay into special funds to coordinate various activities....the State cannot divert funds ear marked for such special funds...." lol, obviously, I am not a legislation writer...but, you get my drift...

[LYIN' KING]

I believe “Parks” recently absorbed Boats and Waterways if that matters.

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by LYIN' KING

I believe “Parks” recently absorbed Boats and Waterways if that matters.

That is still a proposal of the Governor. It hasn't happen yet. Pete Wilson also proposed that in the early 90's and he got alot of push back and it didn't happen. I believe Boats and Waterways has a special fund that their community pays into - from what I understand, they are pretty influencial and carry alot of clout.

[LYIN' KING]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

That is still a proposal of the Governor. It hasn't happen yet. Pete Wilson also proposed that in the early 90's and he got alot of push back and it didn't happen. I believe Boats and Waterways has a special fund that their community pays into - from what I understand, they are pretty influencial and carry alot of clout.

Ah, that must be where I read it.

[atvobsession]

Obviously, I know my limitations of time between family, real work, RTF and knowledge....but I really think this could go somewhere, if some organization drove the bus. There are countless events, motocross, racing, Ultra4, WeRock, etc...to get the signatures.

I concur, there are many other groups affected...like fishermen, hunters, etc that are affected by the OHV grants....as this has nothing to do with the SVRA's...and 100% to do with the roads we all use for various purposes in the backcountry.

I think it's our only real chance to prevent this in the future...I think the precedence has been set.....so this will happen OVER and OVER...until this fund is completely bastardized, beaten and non-functioning...oh wait, it already is...

[LYIN' KING]

Unfortunately, even propositions aren’t immune from temporary or permanent suspension as history illustrates.

[OrangeCrash]

Think we need to figure out how to have an effect on elections first, just go with existing Law for now go check out the OHVDC web sight I do believe they are ON TOPIC

http://www.ohvdc.org/

[R290]

Maybe we need to get the $18 vehicle tax back on the ballot for state parks.

The prop fail 57 to 42

[OrangeCrash]

Originally Posted by R290

Maybe we need to get the $18 vehicle tax back on the ballot for state parks.

The prop fail 57 to 42

Think it's all ready been tried.

[Mad Machinist]

Not a half bad idea.

While I am not 100% familiar with the CA OHV program, I do know ours is similar. In ours there is money alloted for other institutions such as Fish and Game.

So when you go out to get signatures, make sure you spell out that it is not only us who suffers. We did this here and we now have a chapter of an Elk hunter's organization standing with us and we are talking to an equestrian org. right now on how something like this will effect them.

It is not so much getting a new prop passed, it is when you can actually threaten a politicians career is when you will get results. And when people realize the decisions made effect them, they tend to get a little upset.

[duneburner]

I still believe our next step should be a law suit aginst the state. At least a study on its fesability like the ohvdc is proposing.

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by duneburner

I still believe our next step should be a law suit aginst the state. At least a study on its fesability like the ohvdc is proposing.

I agree - the best path for us to proceed is through a lawsuit, while still pursuing the proposition idea.

[LYIN' KING]

The study is fully funded; let’s get on with it, hear the results and get cost projections of seeing a lawsuit through to the end.