Know your ballot: vote yes on proposition 21

By Antoine Abou-Diwan
August 31st, 2010
Section: Know Your Ballot - Opinions

Proposition 21 aims to establish a vehicle license surcharge to help fund state parks and wildlife programs.  Surcharged vehicles will have free admission to all state parks.

I can hear the moaning already:  Times are tight!  No more taxes!

This is true.  With the California Employment Development Department estimating unemployment around 12 percent, it seems downright stupid to increase vehicle license fees for all.  And with times as dire as they are, why should we care about our state parks?

In an effort to make ends meet, our politicians have threatened to shut down some or all of our state parks time and time again.

Proposition 21 will create a trust fund within the state treasury and money available will be used strictly for operation and maintenance of park facilities, wildlife and natural resource conservation, outreach and public education.  Proposition 21 forbids our politicians from using money in the trust fund for any other projects.

To ensure that the money collected is used as intended, The State Parks and Wildlife Conservation Trust Fund will be subject to an annual audit by an oversight committee, and its report shall be made available to the public.

California—with all its problems—is a beautiful state.  It’s easy for us to take our state for granted.  I have family and friends overseas, and they all, without fail, marvel at the beautiful vistas and amount of open space that we are blessed with in California.  Our state parks cover over 1.5 million acres.  We have over 13,000 individual campsites.

As a mountain biker and occasional surfer and body boarder, I have greatly enjoyed California’s state parks.  Some of my fondest memories are of camping trips up and down California and of road trips with friends in search of new single-track trails to ride.  I am not alone.  According to the state park systems 2008-2009 statistical report, our state parks received over 72 million visitors between day users and campers in the fiscal year 2008-2009.

This issue goes beyond our recreational needs.  Our state parks also support local economies and generate tax revenues.  In fact, many local chambers of commerce are in favor of proposition 21.

Although most of our state parks are still open to some degree, their hours of operation have been curtailed, maintenance has been reduced and their overall quality has deteriorated.  Bathrooms and showers are not as clean as they could be.  Trails are not well maintained.

Many of the arguments against proposition 21 center around Sacramento’s inefficient and dishonest use of state funds, as well as the usual uproar whenever any kind of tax is proposed.

Like many people, I don’t enjoy paying taxes.  However, proposition 21 will keep our state parks open and in better shape.  It will help preserve our state parks for future generations and it will support local economies. All for a whopping $18 annual fee.

Proposistion 21

  • Yes (64%, 36 Votes)
  • No (36%, 20 Votes)

Total Voters: 56

Loading ... Loading ...
top

Disclaimer: The Daily Sundial is not responsible for comments posted on dailysundial.com. In accordance with the Communications Decency Act of 1996 the Sundial is not liable for the content of comments. By commenting, all persons posting on dailysundial.com have agreed to our comment policy. If a comment does not abide by the comment policy the Sundial reserves the right to delete comments without warning. The Daily Sundial advises persons commenting not to abuse their First Amendment rights, and to avoid comments of hate speech or encouraging violence.

  • lynnaya

    also I’m a 8th grade student doing a report on this. so all your ideas will help me thanks.

  • lynnaya

    Yes on prop 21!! we have to save our parks!! 18 dollars is not that much. we are all hurting bad but it all for the parks and nothing else. why not!!! i think its a awesome idea.

  • lisapbsd

    That’s exactly why we need Prop. 21-to take funding decisions away from our legislators. The longer we wait, the worse the parks’ decline becomes. Prop 21 establishes a trust fund where by law, the money cannot be used for any other reason, ever. Parks are essential to California’s economy, and we can’t leave them in the hands of our elected officials to rot away like our schools. That’s why as a Republican, I’m voting YES on PROP 21.

  • perspixx

    No way! The vehicle license fee is high enough as it is. If the state parks are important, then find a way to fund them… the politicians always ask for tax increases by threatening to cut parks, police or fire services… they are not honest enough to say “if we don’t get this passed, we will have fewer food stamps for illegal immigrants!”

  • Paula

    California state parks have been starving from chronic underfunding, and we cannot let it continue. We cannot leave this up to the legislature, who will continue on the same path of funding, or worse. State parks and beaches are valuable assets and need their own source of funding. That is why Prop. 21 creates a trust fund of new income that can go only to state parks. Money that the legislature cannot touch and simply take away from the park system.

    $18 is very little to ask, especially when it comes with free parking at all state parks and beaches. That is less than it costs to park at a beach for one day at some places.

    Vote yes on Prop. 21!

  • Jen

    I am going to vote no on prop 21. It is up to the legislature to determine how much of the budget should go to the state parks. This fee only allows more irresponsible spending. Why not tack on an additional “whopping” $18 per year per vehicle to fund SCHOOLS or senior services or the jails or road maintenance…Where does it end? Let the legislature do the legislature’s job. Don’t let them pull your environmental heartstrings. It is just another tax.