I’m sure most Californians favor alternate fuel research, just like they support cancer research, Alzheimer research and of course human stem cell research. The only question is how much of their own money Californians are willing to shell out for these projects ” projects that clearly favor certain businesses and industries
Relax. In the case of alternate fuel research, our friends in Sacramento have made that decision for us. Starting this Jan 1, when you register your six-year-old or newer vehicle you get to pay an additional $11 fee toward California’s Alternate Fuels and Vehicle Technologies funding program. In the case of AB118, much of the funding will be used for the cleanup of diesel trucks, farm equipment and lawn mowers. I have no idea why these businesses can’t pay for their own cleanup? Perhaps you have noticed that there appears to be no shortage of private research money where it will be put to legitimate use. Weren’t the stores filled with wonderful new plasma big screen TV sets this Christmas? Were you forced to pay a tax for plasma screen TV research? I didn’t think so.
I understand some of the money in AB118, estimated at only $150 million per year will also help fund California’s old car buy back program. I’m sure you’re glad to help.
This $11 fee joins all those other fees you find on your phone bill, energy bill and just about everything else you pay nowadays. I notice a new charge for the “calif. solar initiative” will appear on our electric bill next month. What do you suppose that is? There was a time I hoped that the voters would eventually run the scoundrels who pass such legislation out of office, but given the general dumbing down of our population I suppose they will all be re-elected and perhaps given Nobel Prizes.
As I read the guest column from Tahoe Regional Planning Agency Executive Director John Singlaub (“Dear 2007: We learned from you, but we won’t miss you” Dec. 26 Sierra Sun) I find it so ironic that what he says and what they do are two different things.
As a victim of the Angora fire and a homeowner for 30 years up there, I have tried to work within the system only to be told tough luck. After losing our home, we went to many meetings for rebuilding and thought we would go green after listening to the many lectures and knowing it would help all. We were also told by the supervisor in our district that TRPA would work with anyone going green. So we had plans drawn up, submitted to go green, and when you go green and use the ICF blocks (insulated concrete forms) which are 18 inches in diameter, you lose living space throughout the whole perimeter of your house. TRPA has provided no incentive or help in this area, even though it is a direct reflection of what they preach and would like the basin to ultimately be. We have hired Yonkers Construction to do the plans and build green. They have also tried repeatedly to work out something, but again no response.
What is said and what they do are two different things. TRPA’s big excuse is it would take too long to get an amendment approved. Well, in checking it out, with the governor declaring the area a disaster state of emergency it would be very easy to put an emergency amendment through with a beginning and ending expiration period.
So really there is no excuse or understanding from TRPA, same as it has always been. It is a shame that the agencies wouldn’t have the people’s best interest at heart and help the people from the Angora fire, and TRPA turn over a new leaf for 2008.
Support Local Journalism
Support Local Journalism
Your donation will help us continue to cover COVID-19 and our other vital local news.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.
User Legend: Moderator Trusted User