S.B. 767, Giving away Carnegie, (kinda) Again - THE BILL WILL RISE!!!!

[Butch]

I just sent this:

This content has been reintroduced

I have been talking to your office for some years in regards to off highway vehicle (OHV) access issues.

I would like my representatives to oppose the continuing waste of the state’s resources in Celeste Garamendi’s campaign against OHV users. It seems a personal issue as well as a perceived economic one, as her husband owns a 7500 acre ranch adjacent to the State Park. This ranch is used for cattle and hunting, among other things.

Through her family wealth and political influence, Garamendi has been able to have legislation introduced and lawsuits filed to cause the state to expend tremendous amounts of money to continue to operate this State Park that has been serving the community since 1974.

The few of Garamendi’s assaults upon the OHV community and State Parks that I am aware of are
The Fisherman’s Lawsuit of 2008.
Four lawsuits filed by her and her compatriots challenging the latest Carnegie General Plan approved in 2016; “Friends of Tesla Park”, SPRAWLDEF”, Alameda County Parks and the Connolly Ranch.
SB 249, meant to eviscerate the OHVMR Division of State Parks.
AB 1316, meant to encourage State Parks to sell two thirds of the park territory to SPRAWLDEF, or some other entity which she has influence; this would have set a bad legislative precedent by restricting who could purchase the property, how the property would be used if a sale occurred, and allow the property to be sold at below market price.
Closure of the SRI creek crossing under the guise of the Connolly Ranch will lose access to their property because of physical destruction of their easement.

SB 767 is a reintroduction of the content of last year’s AB1316.

Because almost anyone can put anything on the internet, Garamendi has continued to misrepresent the nature of the OHV activity at this, and other SVRA’s. In reality, these parks are nature preserves that are well managed that provide critical facilities for this community of public land users.

It is ironic that the Garamendi and Connolly families have been operating incredibly destructive cattle ranching operations for more than a century.

I ask you to represent my communities’s interests, as opposed to that of a few wealthy individuals. They may have more money, and Connolly is a lawyer, but we are more voters. We do not have a lot of money, and the Garamendi tactic seem to be to continue to put up roadblocks until our community and the State run out of money, or frankly, run out of energy to continue to challenge her legislative and legal campaign.

Please do not facilitate Garamendi’s abuse of our government.



I understand this will be heard by the Water, Parks and Wildlife Committee that Kalra is on.
I would like a written response fro the Assemblymember to share with my community.

I will call.

 

[Butch]

I just talked to Christina at Kalra's office. She will note that I oppose the bill. That is easy for everyone to do.

You can do it here:
http://www.legislature.ca.gov/legislators_and_districts/legislators/your_legislator.html

But I actually talked to her for four minutes because I am so appalled that the premis is to take public land, our state park, out of the hands of the park system and sell it to some private entity endorsed by Celeste and her Tesla Trolls.

Grrrr... Let State parks do their job. They can be trusted. Celeste cannot.

 

[Butch]

My Assemblymember Ash Kalra...

I just talked to Erika Salazar, who used to be in the SJ office and is now in Sacramento. She was on our tour of Metcalf last year when we saw elk and other spectacular stuff.
She said the committee hearing is June 18.

I, er, demanded, a personal response from Kalra about how he could support this legislation which is clearly brought forth by wealthy private interest. Sell off a public park? Grrrr…

I talked to Amy (CORVA awesomeness) earlier and am at a loss at what else to do if we cannot get the kids to make some noise.
Kids? What I mean is our OHV community, but the kids are the ones who really have to care if they want to have places to ride.

EDIT: The Sac number that I used was 919-319-2027 all you have to say is "pleas record my oposition to SB 766" or you could just email it to... Erika.Salazar@asm.ca.gov

 

[Butch]

dudes, look at the previous post and please act.

 

[budman]

Old kid sending in some noise Now.

 

[Butch]

This is apparantly being heard in committe next Tuesday.
If we want to preserve our riding areas, we cannot be silent... Please let your representative know you oppose this legislation that is written for the benefit of Celeste Garamendi and her pals.

All you have to do is let your representavie know that you and your fellow voters oppose SB767. It only takes a minute or two.

Please.

http://www.legislature.ca.gov/legislators_and_districts/districts/assemblydistricts.html

 

[budman]

Time to act!!

Peeps that react after legislation is done deserve why they get. Don’t be that guy.

 

[Butch]

I drafted this:

Re: SB 767, The Effort to Have the Carnegie Expansion Are Sold off to a Private “Conservation” Entity...
This is being heard in committee for Special Interest, Water, Parks, Wildlife https://awpw.assembly.ca.gov/content/members-staff

next Tuesday.
If we want to preserve our riding areas, we cannot be silent... Please let your representative http://www.legislature.ca.gov/legislators_and_districts/districts/assemblydistricts.html
know you oppose this legislation that is written for the benefit of Celeste Garamendi and her pals.

All you have to do is let your representative know that you and your fellow voters oppose SB767. It only takes a minute or two. If your assemblymember is on the committee, that is even better.

Please.

http://www.legislature.ca.gov/legisl...districts.html <http://www.legislature.ca.gov/legislators_and_districts/districts/assemblydistricts.html>

 

[Butch]

From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on A. & A.R. (Ayes 9. Noes 4.) (June 18). Re-referred to Com. on A. & A.R

 

[Butch]

AMA Alert Just cam out; action linky:
https://cqrcengage.com/amacycle/app...9v8CHEpRq8opJg6gRxpsWiePejnqeRIzT5XdEChg&lp=0

Intro text:
Senate Bill 767, which encourages the sale of the Carnegie expansion property, known as the Alameda-Tesla Expansion Area, has passed the Senate and is scheduled to be heard July 3 in the California State Assembly Committee on Accountability and Adminstrative Review.

It is critical that riders and their supporters remind their representatives that the land in question was purchased using funds from the Off Highway Vehicle Trust Fund, with agreement as to the future purpose of the land signed by adjacent landowners. Subsequent to the purchase of the land, extensive work was undertaken to correct previous neglect and to bring the property up to the high environmental standards mandated by state law. Instead of recognizing this fact, the bill instead seeks to deny the OHV community a long overdue opportunity for increased motorized recreational opportunities.

Two years ago, the legislature widely supported and passed S.B. 249 (Allen, Chapter 459, Statutes of 2017), which created a series of environmental responsibilities including monitoring and review for all land overseen by State Parks and managed by the Off Highway Motorized Recreation Division. The environmental responsibilities in S.B. 249 go far beyond what any local county, city or nonprofit is mandated to do or can afford to provide.


Furthermore, this legislation would set a dangerous precedent by emboldening local landowners who object to the location of any state park, preserve or beach to push legislation to privatize that specific location. Passage of this legislation would support privatization of public land and hurt many Californians looking forward to enjoying experiences the Alameda-Tesla Expansion Area will have to offer upon completion.

State parks should remain for the benefit of all Californians, not just a select few.

AMA members, and indeed, all OHV recreationists must immediately contact their elected officials and remind them of the agreement that was made when the expansion properties were acquired. It is also important to remind them that the program uses no General Fund monies and is, in fact, based on a user-pay, user-benefit style model. Monies used to pay for the program include those taxes collected on fuel, SVRA entrance fees and vehicle registrations (green and red stickers).

The OHV community has long paid its own way and will continue to do so, as long as these monies are used for their intended purpose.

Now more than ever, it is crucial that you and your riding friends become members of the AMA to help protect our riding freedoms. More members mean more clout against the opponents of motorcycling. That support will help fight for your rights - on the road, trail and racetrack and in the halls of government.

Join the AMA at americanmotorcyclist.com.

Please follow the AMA on Twitter @AMA_Rights and like us on Facebook.

Senate Bill 767, which encourages the sale of the Carnegie expansion property, known as the Alameda-Tesla Expansion Area, has passed out of the final Senate committee and is now eligible for a vote on the floor. The land in question was purchased using funds from the Off Highway Vehicle Trust Fund, with agreement as to the future purpose of the land signed by adjacent landowners.

Subsequent to the purchase of the land, extensive work was undertaken to correct previous neglect and to bring the property up to the high environmental standards mandated by state law. Instead of recognizing this fact, the bill instead seeks to deny the OHV community a long overdue opportunity for increased motorized recreational opportunities.

Two years ago, the legislature widely supported and passed S.B. 249 (Allen, Chapter 459, Statutes of 2017), which created a series of environmental responsibilities including monitoring and review for all land overseen by State Parks and managed by the Off Highway Motorized Recreation Division. The environmental responsibilities in S.B. 249 go far beyond what any local county, city or nonprofit is mandated to do or can afford to provide.

Furthermore, this legislation would set a dangerous precedent by emboldening local landowners who object to the location of any state park, preserve or beach to push legislation to privatize that specific location. Passage of this legislation would support privatization of public land and hurt many Californians looking forward to enjoying experiences the Alameda-Tesla Expansion Area will have to offer upon completion.

State parks should remain for the benefit of all Californians, not just a select few.

AMA members, and indeed, all OHV recreationists must immediately contact their elected officials and remind them of the agreement that was made when the expansion properties were acquired. It is also important to remind them that the program uses no General Fund monies and is, in fact, based on a user-pay, user-benefit style model. Monies used to pay for the program include those taxes collected on fuel, SVRA entrance fees and vehicle registrations (green and red stickers).

The OHV community has long paid its own way and will continue to do so, as long as these monies are used for their intended purpose.

Now is the time to send a message. Begin by clicking Take Action and following the instructions.

Now more than ever, it is crucial that you and your riding friends become members of the AMA to help protect our riding freedoms. More members mean more clout against the opponents of motorcycling. That support will help fight for your rights - on the road, trail and racetrack and in the halls of government.

Join the AMA at americanmotorcyclist.com.

Please follow the AMA on Twitter @AMA_Rights and like us on Facebook.

 

[budman]

Done.. who is next??

 

[Butch]

in response to...

... by Brokenlink...
Regarding Carnegie, it happens to occur in a bit of a biological hotspot. This is a problem because traditionally we have built on or used areas we considered wasteland for activities like motorcycling and dumps. Turns out, these "wastelands" are typically full of endangered species. Therefore problems occur. It isn't some huge land grab conspiracy. Oh don't get me wrong, there are groups that want to shut down motocross. But they don't randomly pick some animal based on a project. In carnegie's example is is known to be home to no less than five endangered or threatened wildlife species. Look at therir resource management plan. Even their own webpage says it is home to a "surprisingly wide range of plant and animal life".

This is what happens when people and nature collide. Here is Carnegie's management plan: http://carnegiegeneralplan.com/syste...pdf?1338498868
...end of Brokenlink opinion.

My Opinion:
The management plan is very aggressive in preserving habitat, much more so than any other State park. As a matter of fact, half the expansion area will remain undeveloped for buffer zone. The new trails will still leave most the area as undisturbed habitat.

Garamendi and her pals want the state to SELL OUR PARKLANDS to a private enterprise with unknown plans for the future, though the immediate plan is a preserve. We lose control of our parklands and open space to a private enterprise.

I wonder if the 7500 acre Connolly/ Garamendi ranch adajacent to the park is "biological hotspot". I think it might be. One tact could be is to flood the internet with the fact that the ranch is home to countless endangered species and Connolly/ Garamendi have not allowed an ecological assement.

Just sayin'.

 

[Brokenlink]

in response to...

... by Brokenlink...
Regarding Carnegie, it happens to occur in a bit of a biological hotspot. This is a problem because traditionally we have built on or used areas we considered wasteland for activities like motorcycling and dumps. Turns out, these "wastelands" are typically full of endangered species. Therefore problems occur. It isn't some huge land grab conspiracy. Oh don't get me wrong, there are groups that want to shut down motocross. But they don't randomly pick some animal based on a project. In carnegie's example is is known to be home to no less than five endangered or threatened wildlife species. Look at therir resource management plan. Even their own webpage says it is home to a "surprisingly wide range of plant and animal life".

This is what happens when people and nature collide. Here is Carnegie's management plan: http://carnegiegeneralplan.com/syste...pdf?1338498868
...end of Brokenlink opinion.

My Opinion:
The management plan is very aggressive in preserving habitat, much more so than any other State park. As a matter of fact, half the expansion area will remain undeveloped for buffer zone. The new trails will still leave most the area as undisturbed habitat.

Garamendi and her pals want the state to SELL OUR PARKLANDS to a private enterprise with unknown plans for the future, though the immediate plan is a preserve. We lose control of our parklands and open space to a private enterprise.

I wonder if the 7500 acre Connolly/ Garamendi ranch adajacent to the park is "biological hotspot". I think it might be. One tact could be is to flood the internet with the fact that the ranch is home to countless endangered species and Connolly/ Garamendi have not allowed an ecological assement.

Just sayin'.

well, I am not that up to speed on the Carnegie issue. But speaking from pure ignorance of the actual issue at hand, but some knowledge of the process. You are probably right that it is a land grab. You are probably right that it is crooked and slimy. No argument.

That said, it is likely that their ranch is also home to numerous sensitive species. I wouldn;t say that mentioning this would help your cause. They are likely trying to buy the land in order to turn it into a conservation easement, preserving the land in perpetuity , ibn order for them to impact those resources elsewhere on their property (i.e., build a home and destroy an acre of wetlands and 10 acres of red-legged frog habitat and you buy 20 acres of red legged frog habitat and preserve some wetlands as mitigation).

That's how it works. They would also have to do an assessment for any work being done. Not to buy the property. But if they (or Carnegie) wants to do something there (like have motorcycles run across the land or build a barn), then a biological assessment would have to be prepared and submitted to USFWS.

Again, don't make me out to be the bad guy here. What i said was not an opinion. I am trying to give you guys information and you seem to be taking it as an argument for the other side. Please realize that is not at all what i am doing. I am merely trying to inform you of the process. I am happy to back off and let you rant and rave. I was hoping to give you an understanding of the process so you can try and use it to your benefit. But if you are going to treat me like I am the enemy, I'll just delete my comments and let you guys have your fun.

 

[Whammy]

Again, don't make me out to be the bad guy here. What i said was not an opinion. I am trying to give you guys information and you seem to be taking it as an argument for the other side. Please realize that is not at all what i am doing. I am merely trying to inform you of the process. I am happy to back off and let you rant and rave. I was hoping to give you an understanding of the process so you can try and use it to your benefit. But if you are going to treat me like I am the enemy, I'll just delete my comments and let you guys have your fun.

Maybe explaining your self a little earlier in the conversation might of helped?
Perception is a mofo.
I see your point :thumbup
Whammy approved!

 

[Butch]

In my infinite ignorance I think/ wish/ hope that the process can be amended as required to serve all Californians. We are lotsa voters. Nothing is sure, except... change.

 

[Butch]

Next hearing July 3; please please please contact your prepesentative if they are on this committee...

CORVA anouncement:
On July 3rd the California State Assembly Accountability and Administrative Review Committee will hold a hearing for SB 767, the bill that would encourage State Parks to sell the Alameda/Tesla Expansion property of Carnegie SVRA. This committee is concerned with the business side of the discussion which includes state property sales, the amount of money proposed to be reimbursed to the state. They are also concerned with precedents that this bill would set in regards to State Parks administrative issues. The committee meeting will take place on July 3rd, 9:00am at the State Capitol in room 437

SB 767 as written would fail in a number of these areas. First, the bill does not call for the state to be reimbursed for the value of the land, only the price paid by the OHV Trust Fund in 1990. Land in the Bay Area has increased exponentially since 1990, representing a loss to the state. This bill also sets a negative precedent by catering to wealthy, politically connected individuals who decided they don't like OHV recreation and have funded a campaign against Carnegie. Should this bill pass, it's sets a precedent so any well-funded individuals could wage a war against a local state park or state beach to privatize the land for their own use. The individuals and groups supporting this bill have the ability to keep filing lawsuits trying to force the state to spend money or bow to their wishes. This committee should recognize the political blackmail behind SB 767 and support everyday Californians and respect the management State Parks. To submit a letter please use any of these points and add your own pertinent comments. Use this link: https://aaar.assembly.ca.gov/ and click on "Submit Position Letter".

These are the Assemblymembers in the Committee. If any of these are your representatives, please contact them and express your opposition to SB 767 and refer to any of the points in the above paragraph.

Burke, Autumn D-62 5150
Lackey, Tom R-36 2174
Medina, Jose D-61 2141
Patterson, Jim (Vice-Chair) R-23 3132
Petrie-Norris, Cottie (Chair) D-74 4144
Quirk-Silva, Sharon D-65 6012
Smith, Christy D-38 2158

 

[budman]

Great post. :thumbup

 

[KWeezyXB12]

what is happening to our OHV this year?! we may very shortly be losing pismo too. july 11th there is a meeting to decide its fate. its not looking good.

 

[cheez]

what is happening to our OHV this year?! we may very shortly be losing pismo too. july 11th there is a meeting to decide its fate. its not looking good.

NIMBY has extended its fingers to even the less-desirable areas.

 

[Butch]

It passed.
Amy of CORVA summed it up well here:

I’m an average off-roader. Sometimes it’s difficult to speak truth to power, but the ill conceived travesty that is SB 767 has gone on for too long to be polite.
There are many who haven’t had their voices heard during this process, especially hard-working people from the Central Valley who love and visit Carnegie SVRA, therefore I must speak for them and try to represent their grave concerns about this bill.

While many have been heard from who live in the Bay Area, Carnegie is a State Park that people from all around the state love to visit. All Californians deserve to be heard when elitists propose taking a State Park away from the public. Yet it seems that no one is listening, and even fewer care about the everyday people of our state. Everything about this bill cheats the average Californian, as wealthy and politically connected individuals use politicians and the political system to get their way. Now the bill has been amended to cheat off-roaders out of the land they paid for, and cheat the OHV Trust Fund out of any meaningful reimbursement. As off-roaders we get used to the name-calling and ideology based on hate for what we do.

This bill also cheats State Parks out of all the time and money they’ve put into improvements in the Alameda Tesla Expansion area for over 20 years. For what goal? To privatize a state park so it can become their exclusive playground, closed to anyone they deem unworthy
It sets a dangerous precedent that would allow any semblance of accusation to be used as an excuse to force the sale of a state park and keep out ‘undesirable members of the public’.

This bill would deprive thousands of Californians of access, shortchanges the state out of money spent per state law, with good intent, and will cause harm to the area itself by taking it away from the entity with the most stringent mandated environmental protections, higher than any mandated for county, city and certainly private property. The supporters are the only ones to gain.

These same people who told me they don’t want people like me in their community.
We cannot allow elitism to win.