Adventure Pass ruled illegal

[KathyW]

The recent ruling just confirms what the courts in Arizona stipulated previously. Recreation fees have never been authorized for just parking and going for a hike. Even if you park at an area with improvements in a National Forest, you do not need an adventure pass if you do not use the facilities. I have tested this the hard way. Maybe this ruling will result in less intimidation by the Forest Service to get people to pay the fee when it is not required, but maybe not.

Here's one of the big flaws with the recreation fee programs: If it costs $500 per year to keep a restroom clean Joe Taxpayer will be charged $1,000 because he has to pay all of the administration, collection, and enforcement fees related to the fee program. If the National Park was just funded the $500 for cleaning the restroom, Joe Taxpayer would pay less in the end.

In my opinion it isn't okay to just accept an inefficient program when you can end up with the same results at a lower cost to the taxpayer. People need to speak up because these inefficient programs are not the answer.

[Ed]

I agree with Kathy that collection costs have to be netted out, and when they are user fees are not always the most efficient way to fund things. But I don't object to them in principle.

[climbant]

I know many children in Palm Springs who have NEVER been up to Mt. San Jacinto because there's no way their parents can afford the tram fee--for a family of four, it's close to ninety bucks. That's outrageous. It shouldn't be that high.

As much as I love the tram it is expensive. Do we know if the state gives the tram any incentives/tax breaks? Is the upper tram on state/federal/private land.

[zippetydude]

In a different thread the financial status of the tram was discussed. I don't recall where it was, but mention was made that it is required to publish its financials publicly due to its nature as a quasi-public entitiy functioning on public lands. If you find the thread and look into it you can find out what their costs and profit margins are.

As far as the adventure pass and Kathy's point of introducing further cost and reducing efficiency, I would say she is right. The purpose in these smaller fees, the Adventure Pass being only one of many, is that the taxation rates are already now at their highest levels in American history, and people are not excited about voting in even higher levels of Federal Income Tax, State Income Tax, State Sales Tax, County Sales Tax, Municipal Sales Tax....so a given agency will try to slip in their own "fee" instead. The whole system has become inflated, but it will be very difficult to fight the taxes back down when public employee unions hold so much power. For example, a recent study showed California state employees receive about 20% more than their private sector counterparts for doing the same job, then they retire earlier and receive up to double the going rate for private sector employees who are retiring. As long as that is going on, and I have nothing bad to say about state employees, they're just hard working people like the rest of us, but as long as such entitlement is part of the system, taxes will continue to rise and services will continue to decline. Too much is being siphoned off. No rant here, I'm not against anyone. It's just plain simple math.

z

[NickersonHikes]

The Tram is governed by a public body: The Mount San Jacinto Winter Park Authority.

http://www.pstramway.com/downloads/2014 ... hority.pdf

Supposedly the board members serve without compensation for a four-year term. This is the governing body that controls rates and are proposing to begin charging for parking later in the year. I guess they wanted to roll out a $5/car fee back in February but hit tons of flak from the public so they've delayed it for now.

They meet on the third Tuesday of select months at 9am up in some board room at Mountain Station. The meetings are public so feel free to give them a piece of your mind. I would attend if I didn't have one of these lame 9-5 jobs. I think Cynthia hit the nail on the head concerning low income people.

[OtherHand]

The Tram is governed by a public body: The Mount San Jacinto Winter Park Authority.

They meet on the third Tuesday of select months at 9am up in some board room at Mountain Station. The meetings are public so feel free to give them a piece of your mind. I would attend if I didn't have one of these lame 9-5 jobs. I think Cynthia hit the nail on the head concerning low income people.

The MSJWPA is one of those annoying public agencies hiding in plain sight. Their requirements for openness and public transparency are no different than of various city or county governments, as well as special districts (of which they are) like transit districts. Yet they cloak themselves in obscurity with no web presence whatsoever. While city and county governments usually post meeting agendas and minutes online, the SJMWPA does not. California's Brown Act, which sets forth the requirements for notices of public meetings, was unfortunately enacted before the Internet.

What's that you say, the MSJWPA is only a very tiny agency? Ummmm, maybe not. Per their required 2012 filing with the California State Controller's office, they have 67 employees to which they pay over $3.1 million dollars annually. That's more employees than a quarter of the cities in the state. Have a look at the link for an idea of the staff salaries involved (personally, I don't find them exorbitant).

Interestingly, I was unable to find anything online specifying their meeting location. If they are indeed meeting at the Mountain Station, then that means a free tram ride for anyone who wants to attend the meeting, as they can't charge someone to attend a public meeting. They must also provide copies of agendas, minutes, staff reports and budgets to anyone wanting them.

It might be an entertaining exercise to "nudge" the MSJWPA towards more openness by paying them a visit, getting copies of their minutes and financials, and posting them here. Could also cast an interesting light on their new parking fee.

[NickersonHikes]

http://www.desertsun.com/story/money/bu ... g/5600265/

This was the only thing I could find online that even hinted at their meetings.

I especially like the quote at the end:
“The public is invited to every meeting,” said Jon Sheinberg, a member of the Mount San Jacinto Winter Park Authority and past chairman. “We’re one of the most open meetings that I’ve ever been a part of. We’re a free ride up to the tramway. Come and participate in a public meeting.”

"One of the most open meetings"?? haha no one's even heard of you...

[Ed]

Regarding the PSAT financial statements, I requested and received them a year or so ago. They are not very informative, as any non-profit has an ability to absorb profits internally as costs. I looked at the make-up of the board at the same time, it seemed be almost entirely local business people.

Regarding the statement that taxes are the highest in our history, I know this is commonly believed, but it is wildly inaccurate, virtually a myth, regardless of whether you look at government revenues as a percentage of GDP or tax rates. They are very low compared to what they have been since the beginning of WWII until the 'temporary' Bush tax cuts about 13 years ago, which were on top of the Kennedy-Johnson tax cuts of the 1960's and the Reagan tax cuts of the 1980's. I'm not a tax expert, but I was born a month before Pearl Harbor, am a retired finance professor, and have been examining deductions on paychecks and filing tax returns since the late 1950's. So I have some perspective on what taxes are today compared to what they have been historically.

And I suppose someone is going to point out that we have state and local taxes as well, so I might as well get that one over with. It is commonly said that California is one the highest taxed states in the nation. Perhaps true in terms of rankings, the last time I checked a few years ago California ranked 6th in the nation. But at the same time the average state and local tax burden in California was about 10.8% of income, compared to about 10.2% in conservative Republican Idaho, which had a much, much lower ranking. Not much of a difference, about $600 per year for a $100,000 per year income. The data came from a website which is definitely not tax-friendly, I believe it was the Tax Foundation.

I know this is straying from what the message board is about, but some things I can't let pass, and there is some relevance.

[cynthia23]

I have to say I agree with Ed's points. No one enjoys paying taxes, but no one enjoys going to the dentist either. Still, both are necessities. I think the overall point is there's no free lunch. Running an enormously complex techno-industrial society requires enormous amounts of infrastructure and regulation. I mean taxes are very low in Nigeria, folks. Would ya want to live there?

But at the same time it's true that when no one is watching people are more than happy to take additional monies from the public trough. Imho that's what is happening with the tram, and private actors being allowed to make an inordinate profit from public lands.

[whitebark]

At least here in the Great Northwest, the Forest Service's efforts to make trailheads that require passes compliant with the legal ruling has resulting in some oddities:

http://www.nwhikers.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=8011068

How about a nice picnic next to an outhouse! Expect to see some picnic tables in odd places in S. Calif soon!