For the first time in its eight year history, the Dew Tour will be hosted in San Francisco, California. The Dew Tour is a free 4-day action sports and lifestyle festival and will be here in San Francisco October 18 to 21. It features Skateboarding, BMX and FMX competitions with live music and the Dew Tour Experience. Fans can get autographs, play games, and ride the Skate and BMX courses. The Championships will take place in Civic Center Plaza and is sure to have a city feel. Many of the skate and BMX platforms were inspired by our own athletes.
The San Francisco Chronicle represents all that is left wing (and wrong) on the West Coast. It should not come as a surprise that instead of celebrating the Dew Tour which draws the best athletes from all over the world to our little corner of the universe, the Chronicle paints the event as a “surplus of exhaust fumes, dust and nuisance”. One disgruntled resident felt that his civil liberties had been taken away from him because the event was being held in front of City Hall. See: http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Dew-Tour-fun-or-an-extreme-mess-3960935.php
Forget the bonus for local merchants; the focus is on the fact that the city should not be taking money from a soda company.
Why do they hate us? Is it because we have too much fun? Is it because they hate our machines? Do they think that we are all a bunch of hoodlums, dopers and high school drop outs? Are they modern day Puritans waging a battle against sin? Or are they just insecure about the size of their genitals and hate anyone who appears self-confident? Beats me but it is an ongoing slur campaign waged by the media against individual sports, freestyle anything and especially off road motorcycles.
This article should come as no surprise to the OHV community because we get bombarded right and left from the know nothings in the media who are fed information by our enemies.
Our enemies believe that we are destroying the environment because we ride our motorcycles on a few unpaved trails. It never occurs to them that asphalt is way more harmful to the environment than our maintained trails or that cows grazing on the steep hillsides cause more erosion than our bikes. They ignore the effect of impervious surfaces where they drive their cars or where they work out at their favorite gyms. I guess they never think of the creatures that used to live there before their habitat was destroyed.
Golf courses are their ideal. They are green and elegantly sculptured to be pleasing to the eye. Our enemies never think about the native habitat which was wiped out to create their fairways and greens or the effect that fertilizers and insecticides have on the environment. They are so indoctrinated into the ideal of paved over surfaces that never erode and finely sculptured lawns devoid of life that they see our unpaved trails as the epitome of environmental destruction forgetting or ignoring the fact that their own beloved hiking trails erode and need to be repaired after the rainy season.
Carnegie, a State Off-Highway Vehicle Park, is being attacked by our enemies. See: http://baynature.org/articles/can-off-roading-and-nature-coexist/ The people who publish these lies have obviously never been to Carnegie. They just cite the facts propagated by Friends of Tesla who want to take over our park (Tesla) for non-OHV activities.
“Carnegie looks like Armageddon,” said Garamendi, who lives nearby. “There are wide swaths of vegetation that has been denuded from the landscape, gullies scarring the hillsides, there’s dust. You don’t see wildlife when you’re there. It looks like a wasteland. Tesla is special. We can’t allow any damage to occur.”
We totally co-exist with nature although I don’t think we should co-exist with Garamendi and her friends. While riding in Carnegie I have seen coyotes, foxes, wild boar, deer, elk, jack rabbits, ground squirrels, hawks, turkeys and the ubiquitous different varieties of snakes and lizards. Wildlife exists all over Carnegie and we don’t harm it one bit.
Check out these photographs that I took of Carnegie and contrasted them with our neighbor, site 300 across the street, and with the description of our riding area in Connolly’s lawsuit (Garamendi’s husband). https://carnegiejournal.com/2012/07/30/excerpts-from-petitioners-first-amended-writ-versus-photographs-of-carnegie-and-site-300-5/
This article called “Can off-roading and nature coexist?” could have been written by Friends of Tesla except that the author says that East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD) officials admit that they can’t totally ban off highway vehicles from the OHV park (Tesla).
That was not what they were saying before. What happened? Has there been any communication with the Division?
Now EBRPD officials say that the Tesla should be dual use. They want to take over and manage areas set aside for passive non-OHV use. They call those areas preserves.
The terrain is hot semi-arid desert with brown grass covered slopes and very little rain even in the winter time. The hills are steep and almost devoid of shade; not the sort of terrain that is ideal for hikers.
Garamendi’s reaction to that idea is: “When you’re hiking, when you’re wanting to enjoy nature, you do not want to have the impact of motorcycles and ATVs and four-by-fours impinging on the environment,” she said. “The concept of mixed use is false.”
This property was purchased with OHV trust fund money and appropriated by the legislature for off road vehicle use. Public Resources Code 5090.43 describes how State Vehicular recreation areas shall be established on lands where there are quality recreational opportunities for off highway vehicles while protecting soil standards and wild life habitat.
The same Public Resources Code section does not permit the establishment of new cultural or natural preserves within an OHV park.
My question is why should off road vehicle enthusiasts pay for a park to be used by hikers ($7 million) when there are 270 state run non-OHV parks in California. Their parks are financed with general fund moneys (which we all pay as California taxpayers) and money from other special funds. There are only eight state OHV parks in all of California and they are all totally user funded contrary to the assertions of our enemies.
In the article about East Bay Regional Park District taking over our park for non-OHV passive use there is a link to another article which repeats their lies about the OHV trust fund being financed by fuel taxes paid by all Californians. See: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/09/01/4777548/california-officials-now-unsure.html
This article is about how California officials are now unsure of size of hidden OHV fund and are looking at the $54 million that was squirreled away including 34.5 million belonging to the OHV trust fund. They want to spend it before it disappears again.
Bob Blumenfeld, D-Woodland Hills sponsored legislation to spend $20 million for regular non-OHV parks while providing nothing for the OHV parks, despite the fact that the majority of hidden fund monies consisted of off road vehicle registration fees ($34.5 million).
“What I don’t understand is that we’re OK going ahead with the $20 million, but we have to have ongoing investigations for some months on the OHV fund,” said Sen. Doug Lamalfa, R-Richvale. “Why is the OHV fund being discriminated against? It’s deplorable.”
“Lamalfa’s frustration follows years of political tension over the funding for off-highway vehicle parks. The Democrat-controlled Legislature has repeatedly tapped the lucrative OHV fund to subsidize other state functions. Off-roading groups and their mostly Republican allies consider this tampering to be improper and unfair.”
The article repeats our enemies’ lies about where our fund gets its money and at the same time falsely insinuates that the other parks are self-sustaining when in fact they get the majority of their non-general fund money from other unrelated funds like the Cigarette and Tobacco fund and the Highway Users Tax Account. The misconceptions are purposeful and have been used against us by Karen Shambach of PEER for in the past.
“The OHV fund collects money from three sources: licensing fees paid by owners of off-road vehicles; entrance fees paid at the state’s eight off-highway vehicle recreation areas; and a portion of all the gas taxes paid at the pump in California. The fuel taxes bring in about $65 million annually, representing the vast majority of money collected by the trust fund.”
The implication is that the OHV trust fund is supported by fuel taxes that everybody pays and so it is not self-supporting. We don’t get a portion of fuel tax as the article says. The OHV trust fund gets fuel taxes from fuel used off road by off road vehicles.
Fuel taxes are collected at the refinery or terminal level and distributed to benefit the end users of the fuel being taxed. Fuel taxes do not go into the general fund like income taxes and sales taxes which support other state parks.
Instead, they go into the Aeronautics Account, Harbors and Watercraft Revolving Fund, Department of Food and Agriculture Fund, Off-Highway Vehicle Trust Fund and Highway Users Tax Account. The majority is transferred into the Highway Users Tax Account where a substantial amount is transferred each year to other (non-OHV) State Parks.
The amount of fuel used by off highway vehicles and dual sport vehicles used off road is carefully re-calibrated every five years to take account of changes in off road vehicle use.The mathematical formula used to determine changes in use looks at the number of off road and dual sport vehicles registered in California, attendance at state vehicular recreation areas, and OHV recreation on federal lands.
The amount of fuel tax transferred to the OHV trust fund takes into account these changes. It is carefully calibrated to take into account fuel used by off road vehicles that is consumed off road.
After truthfully describing how money was stolen from the OHV trust fund by past legislation the article inserts another whopper:
“2009 legislative counsel opinion concluded that fuel taxes collected by the OHV fund can legally be spent on non-OHV park projects. The opinion was based in the argument that at many of the state’s conventional parks, visitors must travel on dirt roads to reach trailheads, campgrounds and scenic vistas. In the current budget year, the Legislature appropriated $11 million from the OHV fund to buoy other parks threatened with closure and service cutbacks.”
California State Parks and Recreation cannot legally dip into the OHV trust fund and take our money for any purpose.
They can apply for grants and cooperative agreements for the acquisition, maintenance, operation, planning, development, or conservation of trails and facilities associated with motorized access to nonmotorized recreation. They can also apply for grants and cooperative agreements to restore areas damaged by off highway vehicle use. (1)
The idea that they can just take our money without applying for grants and cooperative agreements for any non-specific purpose is an outrageous interpretation of the law.
Although strictly speaking California State Parks and Recreation are entitled to some of our OHV trust fund money, they must apply for grants and cooperative agreements for repair and maintenance of off road access trails and for restoration of areas damaged by off highway vehicle use.
They cannot legally just dip into our funds and take our money for whatever including to “buoy other parks threatened with closure and service cutbacks.”
Maybe you could say that the lefties hate us because they want our money and our parks. The battle over Tesla and the fact that this year they have taken OHV trust fund money and re-appropriated it to other parks betrays their motives.
So maybe they hate us so they can tell lies about us and steal our money and our parks. It is really just a manifestation of the overwhelming selfishness that is taking over our society and the ease with which these forces control the media to get what they want.
WHAT CAN WE DO? We can go to the polls in November and get rid of the politicians who stole our funds. That means voting for the Republicans in the federal and California state elections.
(1) Revenue and Taxation Code Section 8352.6 (c) “It is the intent of the Legislature that transfers from the Motor Vehicle Fuel Account to the Off-Highway Vehicle Trust Fund should reflect the full range of motorized vehicle use off highway for both motorized recreation and motorized off-road access to other recreation opportunities.”
Public Resources Code Section 5090.50 (a) “Fifty percent of the funds appropriated by the Legislature pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 5090.61 shall be expended solely for grants and cooperative agreements for the acquisition, maintenance, operation, planning, development, or conservation of trails and facilities associated with the use of off-highway motor vehicles for recreation or motorized access to nonmotorized recreation.”
Public Resources Code 5090.50 also provides that State entities including California State Parks and Recreation are also entitled to funds available for grants and cooperative agreements for projects that provide ecological restoration or repair to habitat damaged by both legal and illegal off-highway motor vehicle use.