CA: Statewide asset sale proposed

Sac Bee ^ | 3/22/04 | Eric Stern

[NormsRevenge]

In 1931, in the throes of the Great Depression, the state Legislature spent $250,000 to build a livestock pavilion in San Francisco.

A newspaper questioned the logic, asking, "Why, when people are starving, should money be spent on a palace for cows?"

[RKV]

Great idea. CA has plenty of assets which should be sold.

[NormsRevenge]

Jeff Denham was on KSFO in the 7 am segment from 710 to 730 this morning if anyone wold like to hear him talk about stuff the state owns, the big question,,Why?

[watsonfellow]

I think spending should be reduced radically. I also think this asset sale is a great idea. BUT, the UC people have a point, if the property was given to UC by a donor for specific reasons (ie, use for various scientific or other uses) the donor's bequest cannot be ignored and cannot be sold to B.Streisand etc.....

[watsonfellow]

The house in Hawaii is a bad example. The house does NOT belong to the State, it was donated to the UC for specific reasons. If the State no longer has the funds to maintain it for those specific reasons it should be returned to the Donor's family.

[TheBigB]

How much would North Korea or Red China pay for Berkeley?

[CurlyDave]

Selling the Cow Palace is a great idea.

There have been gun shows there for years, but now the grabbers are objecting to guns shows on state-owned property.

In private hands we would be welcome again.

[Redbob]

"'It has tangible and intangible value.' Plus, the Cow Palace breaks even and doesn't require state subsidies, he (Stefanelli) said."

Doesn't Mr. Stefanelli have even the basic knowledge that not having to pay property taxes constitutes a huge "subsidy?"

And what "intangible" value can the Cow Palace have that would be lost if it were sold?

Why doesn't this article point out that one of the biggest costs of these state-owned porperties is that they are not on the tax rolls?

[RS]

" If the State no longer has the funds to maintain it for those specific reasons it should be returned to the Donor's family."

When the donor's family realizes the taxes that they will have to pay on the "non-donation" of the property, they may just re-think those specific reasons. In any case it should go back on Hawaii's tax rolls.

[watsonfellow]

It won't have to pay any taxes for the time that it was used by UC.

[watsonfellow]

It won't have to pay any taxes for the time that it was used by UC.

[Bonaparte]

"They hope to raise $1 billion."

Denham is wasting his time. The dems and their rino collaborators will never permit that bill to pass unless it allows them to spend every penny that comes in on more useless projects and set-asides. When democrats stop spending, they die.

[rudypoot]

How much would North Korea or Red China pay for Berkeley?

I think you got that backwards. How much are we willing to pay THEM to take Berkeley?

[pogo101]

In the words of The Joker in "Batman" (1989),

"This town needs an enema!!"

[RS]

"It won't have to pay any taxes for the time that it was used by UC."

Probably right, I was thinking inheritance taxes