Prop. 21 - New Tax, Slush Fund, or Good Idea?

The Recreation HQ wants to remind riders that we are heading into the heat of the 2010 political election season. There will be many issues and candidates for OHVers to review and consider.
*

PHOTO: HQ's trusty 2001 Montero (with 136K miles)

*
One such issue is the California State Parks Initiative (Prop 21). On several occasions The General has shared his views on that plan to create a $500,000 dollar/yr. slush fund that will be used, among other things, as a way to shunt monies to environmental groups and green agencies (that have nothing to do with state parks) such as the Ocean Protection Council.

HQ’s March 10 Overview of Prop. 21
http://thegeneralsrecreationden.blogspot.com/2010/03/california-state-parks-initiative-18.html

As HQ told the Sac Bee reporter when he called for info (info that was left out of the “crime in state parks” article) regarding TG’s view on state parks, OHV, and Prop. 21… “OHVers have several ways to look at this issue. For those who use SVRAs, it might be a fiscal wash since they won’t have to pay entry fees. For those who only ride on federal lands, they might feel it is a double or triple tax since their green sticker funds already go to support those units. But the real question for the proponents of Prop. 21 is if the 60-80 percent of Californians who don’t use state parks will want to pay another tax for something they don’t use?”

It looks like The General is not the only one questioning the fiscal wisdom of Prop. 21. In the link below, Michelle Steele gives an excellent overview from her perspective.

Michelle Steele’s take on Prop 21 as a new car tax
http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/ci_15850952

HQ loves state parks and its concerns should not to be taken as a lack of support for either motorized or non-motorized units. Rather, The General questions the wisdom of asking taxpayers to cough up scarce monies in this current economic downturn to fund a program that in large part simply creates yet another slush fund in Sacramento.