Jul 23, 2017

CA property owners, especially in rural areas, should pay attention to Republican effort to defeat fire tax

Excerpt:

“This is a huge victory,” Assemblyman Devon Mathis (R-Visalia) said. “Six years ago the fire tax illegally forced people in fire-prone areas to pay $80 million a year, and not one cent has gone to putting more boots on the ground.”



Excerpt 2:

“For six years, ruling Democrats have extorted money in the form of a fire tax from hundreds of thousands of rural Californians, including many seniors on fixed incomes,” said former Republican state Sen. George Runner, a member of the state tax board.

Link to full article:
http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-fire-fee-suspended-20170723-story.html

7 comments:

  1. It has to be paid for somehow. Republicans seem to forget that. If you want a service, you pay for it. If it doesn't come out that pot, it will come out of another. Propaganda.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It can be paid if Democrats knew how to budget money and stop wasting $ on funding legal fees for people who come here illegally, stop paying to fund ridiculous any non profit like the local free needle programs for druggies, creating yet another bureaucratic, government commission that does nothing to grow the economy...etc etc. Propaganda is you blaming the Republicans for a state that has gone downhill since Democrats have beein in charge.

      Delete
    2. the only victory here is for the Democrat cap and trade tax program. this was a gimmie. victory will be when we get refunds of the illegal tax.

      Delete
    3. Anon, you preach that Republicans forget things, yet your group has some memory problems of it's own if they can't account for the money. Where did it go? It sure as hell didn't make it to the intended recipients. If you can't spend tax revenue properly, then you ought not to be trusted with it at all. ~TMOB

      Delete
  2. I was very much in favor of this when I heard about it. I owned an acre in Trinity county, an old cabin that hadn't been occupied since we divorced. I was assessed $150.00. Since the PG&E had been turned off and that was long ago so I could not get records from them, I had no way of documenting that the property wasn't occupied.
    I could drive from LA to Burnt Ranch, take a couple photos to send in or try to hire someone to go take photos (etc) and hope that the photos met the standard of proof.
    IF---and it's a big IF I would have received protection for that payment it wouldn't have been such a big irritant. But I wouldn't. There was a local (Hawkins Bar) VFD THEY were the respondents. And respond they did. Not to my particular area but they covered the area.
    HB VFD had hoped that they would have received the benefit of a small part of what was collected for their area since they worked on donations only (and many places in Humboldt do). No.
    I was going to ask one of the VFD to take photos, certify where they were taken, send them to me and I'd send them to the State office that required them, then I'd send the $150 to the VFD. They'd do a lot more with the money and I'd feel a lot better.
    But a neighbor wanted to buy the property and I sold.

    I know CalFire does a lot of good work and I'm not speaking against them. I agree with John and many of my friends that people in California pay way too much in taxes for what they receive.

    One of the problems with Sacramento (meaning those that pass and oversee the new laws) is that while they claim they are doing things 'for the people'. But then they write and push bills through before ordinary tax payers (and we all pay taxes, even if it's just sales taxes) find out.
    A proposition was voted into law so that there had to be 72 hours of internet access to a proposed bill before the final vote could be taken(and other important oversight provisions).
    It passed, voted in by the people. (65% to 35%)
    But the legislators are interpreting it differently.

    This is the proposition:
    http://voterguide.sos.ca.gov/en/propositions/54/

    Are they following it? No:
    http://www.dailynews.com/opinion/20170410/california-lawmakers-are-ignoring-new-transparency-rules
    If the non-compliance has to go to court that's more money down the drain.

    So whoever got the parcel tax cancelled, more power to them. Civics isn't taught in school anymore so most people don't know how a healthy government is supposed to work. My ideas of waste in government might be different from the next person's, but there is a large burden of waste and we will pay for it, and so will the next generation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. You make an excellent point Gabriele. If you are going to tax people, then use that money appropriately for services. Also,it is a shame the Government could not make it easier for someone like you to prove ownership of that cabin. You could have sold it, rented it to someone and knowing the kind person you are, made a difference in someone's life.

      Delete