Posted on 08/11/2012 8:24:13 AM PDT by OneVike
California Democrats joined Jerry Brown in passing an illegal fire fee for every habitable structure found on a land owners property. Most Californians were under the belief that fire protection was a basic government service? Well, not if you are a Democrat.
The unusual fire charge for rural areas, was pushed through by Gov. Jerry Brown, and styled as a fee and not a tax to avoid a ballot measure requiring a two-thirds vote of approval. Called "The State Responsibility Area Fire Prevention Benefit Fee", it was signed into law last year. The law requires homeowners in designated fire-prone areas to pay an annual fee of $150 for each habitable structure on a parcel. A $35 discount applies to properties that are already protected by an organized fire agency.
If you believe in the rule of law, then you must agree with Jon Coupal of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, who calls this an illegal tax. Republican Senator George Runner who's with the "Board of Equalization" says this is being done to pay the ongoing infrastructure for "Cal Fire". He claims that the fee paid by a homeowner may not even benefit the homeowners paying the fee, and therefore it is a tax. Well Coupal and Runner are being polite, because as far as I'm concerned, this is just scheme by Jerry Brown and the Democrats to get around Proposition 13, to collect money for the purpose of shoveling it to their Union buddies. One could also argue that it's being done on the backs of Californians who overwhelmingly vote Republican.
The Democrats and Jerry brown may claim this is just a "fire prevention fee" to help fires, but the truth is that the millions collected will just end up being used to fund Cal-FIRE's existing bureaucracy rather than expand the state's fire prevention efforts. What we have here is just another example of Democrats using the government to tax the people who never voted for them. Rural Californians vote Republicans, and it is Republican voters who are getting hit with this illegal tax. A tax by the way that will not benefit them because the money will never be used to help local agencies nor be used to prevent wildland fires at the local level.
If the Democrats are serious about preventing fires, then let the citizens of rural California start chopping trees down in areas that are fire prone. Then the areas will get cleared and when the trees do burn they will be burned in controlled containers called fire places and wood stoves to warm the homes in the winter. I get tired of watching all that good firewood burning during on a hot summer day, when it could be put to good use.
I am heartened by the Republicans plan to fight this illegal law. There are two arguments the Republicans can use. One is to fight it on the grounds that the fee is actually a tax, which would means it requires a 2/3rds majority for passage, not a simple majority. The second way is to use the fact that it unfairly taxes residents twice, because many already pay their counties for the fire services.
Remember, while Jerry brown is in the process of closing state parks to save money, he and the Democrats have found a way to tax the voters who do not vote for them by leveling this fee on rural Californians. All this at a time when it has been revealed that the State parks dept has $54 million in hidden funds no one knew about until just recently. To make it even worse we also just learned that the state owes almost 7 billion to retired teachers for benefits normal Californians will never enjoy. I think it is time that all Californians wake up to the stench that is the Democrat party that rules the roost of California politics.
This article has been presented in full, so there is no need
to visit my site. However, a complimentary hit and maybe
a comment if you so desire would not be looked down upon.
Who else can they tax? Illegals? Welfare recipients? They can only tax people with some actual assets.How about the millions of voters who live in the cities that make money and pay taxes. This tax hits only 825,000 voters who no one will care about. Hell, even is we all vote against the Democrats as is already the case for rural Californians, it will not make a difference I removing Democrats.
Obama and the dems want to destroy everything around the cities by draining money from the suburbs and rural areas and funneling the cash to their buddies in the urban areas.
I have been told by people within the County that there is a list of people they want to destroy, to take their homes and bulldoze them. I'm on it. There is nothing wrong with the house. It's only 20 years old. This is about politics. They want to burn us out and have us pay for the privilege.
Who else can they tax? Illegals? Welfare recipients? They can only tax people with some actual assets.How about the millions of voters who live in the cities that make money and pay taxes. This tax hits only 825,000 voters who no one will care about. Hell, even is we all vote against the Democrats as is already the case for rural Californians, it will not make a difference I removing Democrats.
Obama and the dems want to destroy everything around the cities by draining money from the suburbs and rural areas and funneling the cash to their buddies in the urban areas.
Me too. If the feds would actually manage all the land they keep grabbing, we wouldn't have such high fire danger.
And they can...
When I feel like cooking, I COOK and take it to the fire station.
“Then the areas will get cleared and when the trees do burn they will be burned in controlled containers called fire places and wood stoves to warm the homes in the winter. I get tired of watching all that good firewood burning during on a hot summer day, when it could be put to good use.”
I have a sister and brother-in-law who have lived the last 30 years in “fire prone” areas in northern California and now Oregon.
They are all in favor of citizens - under local fire protection advice and recommendation - cutting selected growths of trees as well as older dying and decaying trees, as well as underbrush, not to “clear” the land, but to thin it and prune it so that it is still “forested” but the easiest and most congested “fuel” for fires has been reduced, by local citizens willing to come get the wood themselves. Yes, thinning, not clearing. They still want to live among forested land, they just it managed better and they can help do that, if they are allowed.
Hey, it's Californica.... [stet]
Yes, thinning, not clearing. They still want to live among forested land, they just it managed better and they can help do that, if they are allowed.Yes I agree, however I wrote this for a blog that is carried by a leftists newspaper. I write in a way that will spur them to comment and debate. I leave it open for them to come and get me. People here at FR know me and my writing style, they know what I mean, and now so do you.
I know, I wanted a moderator to fix it, but once it’s posted I guess they cannot change the spelling.
It’s correct on my site, but I just screwed up when I wrote the title while posting it. Oh well, it is what it is.
I can’t read either intentions or emotions, in one dimensional communications, unless they are verbalized, because, “between the lines”, is placed on the senders end alone. Next time, at least on the same topic, I might know what you mean. Thanks for the heads up.
Nonsense
This Republic was mortally wounded when Honest Ape waged war on the sons of the Founders, and killed off in the 20th century with the imposition of an income tax and Universal suffrage to women, the poor, and those under 21 via Constitutional Amendment.
All this stuff going on now is just death rattle.
Serendipitous error — I like it!
I thought you did that on purpose. [smiles]
BUMP!
Thanks for the ping!
When the balance used to be better in the legislature, the Dems would keep a hit list on rural citizens (state funding of Watermaster, Williamson Act, etc.) to trade for budget votes. Now they don’t have to trade to get the votes they need so they just have intentionally targeted the rural populations they hate and despise without any remorse. It has become very obvious and a backlash is building to which they better pay close attention. Agriculture and its indirect jobs is still a huge portion of CA’s economy. Even urban folks have to eat. A general ag strike could cause real havoc.
In the case of this tax, it should go down quickly. It is totally unlawful. For instance, there are folks on the Klamath River who are supposedly in the State Responsibility Area (SRA.) However, due to trades at the state level, they are served by the Forest Service as an extension of the Federal Responsibility Area (FRA.) Although folks in the SRA get structural protection, folks served by the FRA do not, because the feds don’t do that. They will sit in your driveway and watch your house burn as they have done in places like Seiad Valley.
Nevertheless, the folks on the Klamath will have to pay the new tax, even if they get no CalFire service.
It is interesting to note that this tax is one that is not secured by property - ergo no lein can be placed on your property if you do not pay it. I suppose they could take your state tax refund - if you had one. Don’t know if they could garnish your wages - it would cost more than its worth to do so. Don’t know how they would react if folks just decided not to pay the damned thing. Sounds like a possibility to me.
For years the suburbs of Boston paid higher sewer and water rates to support the city. This crap has happened for years.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
