"user" wrote in message
In that perspective, it does seem excessive.
I suspect someone sees this as a cash cow for the town (which it may not
be) plus summer/weekend jobs for someone's kids.
I'm still not certain what I'll write or say, but I believe this needs
to be significantly revised before they vote on it.


Fee systems usually come about as a result of some community operating
commitee or board.. It is seldom that these things happen without an
opportunity for community input or objections..

Once they are in place the revenue is budgeted and it is much more difficult
and complicated to eliminate or modify a fee or use tax.

If you want to have a user fee removed, be prepared to offer suggestions on
where else this revenue could come from..

My recommendation is to follow all local proceedings with an eye towards
objecting to any new fees or increases to existing fees..

On any election day, my moto is not "I Voted", rather "I Voted No".. I vote
NO on everything..

The public service, fees and taxes were just fine at the time I retired 8
years ago and I don't need an increase in anything..

Steve
s/v Good Intentions

On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 09:24:43 -0800, "Steve" wrote:


"user" wrote in message
In that perspective, it does seem excessive.
I suspect someone sees this as a cash cow for the town (which it may not
be) plus summer/weekend jobs for someone's kids.
I'm still not certain what I'll write or say, but I believe this needs
to be significantly revised before they vote on it.


Fee systems usually come about as a result of some community operating
commitee or board.. It is seldom that these things happen without an
opportunity for community input or objections..

Once they are in place the revenue is budgeted and it is much more difficult
and complicated to eliminate or modify a fee or use tax.

If you want to have a user fee removed, be prepared to offer suggestions on
where else this revenue could come from..

My recommendation is to follow all local proceedings with an eye towards
objecting to any new fees or increases to existing fees..

On any election day, my moto is not "I Voted", rather "I Voted No".. I vote
NO on everything..

The public service, fees and taxes were just fine at the time I retired 8
years ago and I don't need an increase in anything..

Steve
s/v Good Intentions

I agree. What happens is towns figure "boat people have a lot of
money, so lets go get some from them." It sucks.
John C.

I agree. What happens is towns figure "boat people have a lot of
money, so lets go get some from them." It sucks.
John C.



If the money goes into a dedicated fund to
maintain/improve the boat ramp and associated parking lot, it's hard to see
what the beef would be----but that's a huge "if".

In WA, every gallon of gasoline sold is subject to a large tax to maintain
state highways. I believe the tax is now almost 30-cents a gallon, so every
time a driver burns 20 gallons of gas in his car he's
contributing $6 toward highway maintenance. Doesn't seem all that far out of
line- the roads aren't paved and maintained by magic.

When the law was put in, years ago, the legislature acknowledged that not all
gaoline is used by vehicles driving on a highway. Boaters are allowed to keep
track of their gasoline purchases, and individually file for a refund of the
gas tax each year. Of course, the paperwork is a hassle, a lot of boaters only
pay $15-20 in tax, and so most people don't file for the refund.

The unrefunded portion is *supposed* to go to improving boat ramps and other
boating-oriented uses. Ha! The state capped the refund at 19-cents when they
raised the tax beyond that point. That's almost understandable, since the
majority of boats that burn gasoline are traveling down the road on a trailer
for a lot more miles than they are travelling across the water.However, in most
years the money allocated for boating infrastructure gets raided for other
uses. What would seem to be a reasonable idea gets screwed up by greedy
politicians.

Conservatives should be applauding user fees for boat ramps, trailer parking,
etc.
This places the financial burden squarely on the shoulders of the people
benefitting from the service, rather than the taxpayers at large. :-)

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
I agree. What happens is towns figure "boat people have a lot of
money, so lets go get some from them." It sucks.
John C.



If the money goes into a dedicated fund to
maintain/improve the boat ramp and associated parking lot, it's hard to
see
what the beef would be----but that's a huge "if".

In WA, every gallon of gasoline sold is subject to a large tax to maintain
state highways. I believe the tax is now almost 30-cents a gallon, so
every
time a driver burns 20 gallons of gas in his car he's
contributing $6 toward highway maintenance. Doesn't seem all that far out
of
line- the roads aren't paved and maintained by magic.

When the law was put in, years ago, the legislature acknowledged that not
all
gaoline is used by vehicles driving on a highway. Boaters are allowed to
keep
track of their gasoline purchases, and individually file for a refund of
the
gas tax each year. Of course, the paperwork is a hassle, a lot of boaters
only
pay $15-20 in tax, and so most people don't file for the refund.

The unrefunded portion is *supposed* to go to improving boat ramps and
other
boating-oriented uses. Ha! The state capped the refund at 19-cents when
they
raised the tax beyond that point. That's almost understandable, since the
majority of boats that burn gasoline are traveling down the road on a
trailer
for a lot more miles than they are travelling across the water.However, in
most
years the money allocated for boating infrastructure gets raided for other
uses. What would seem to be a reasonable idea gets screwed up by greedy
politicians.

Conservatives should be applauding user fees for boat ramps, trailer
parking,
etc.
This places the financial burden squarely on the shoulders of the people
benefitting from the service, rather than the taxpayers at large. :-)

The problem us fiscal conservatives have with the fees, is the usage.
California has (had) $35 billion + in the highway fund. Now we can not get
any highway improvements as there is no money in the state budget available.
Seems as if the Former Governor Gumby and his Legislature borrowed all the
money for the general fund. Reduced the deficit we saw. But still $35
Billion in money that has been stolen.

Tax, tax, tax. Didn't you pay some already?

"user" wrote in message
...
My town's last board meeting discussed parking fees for the currently
free, public boat launch. There is parking for about 60 trucks and
trailers. It is always full and often people don't park properly making
it hard to park or leave.
The proposal was a $5 fee for the vehicle per day. Single axle trailers
less than 20' long another $5. Double axle trailers or single axle
trailers over 20' long, $7.50. The estimate of revenue is $2,000 per
week May-October and $1,000 per weekend mid-March-April and November.
The parking would be free those week days. December-early March would be
free, but doubtful anyone would be there.
The argument I agree with is there needs to be more order in the current
parking situation. I suppose the fees charged will easily cover the cost
of a parking attendant. While it wasn't mentioned, I'd like to see the
leftover money going to improvements in the lakefront area, rather than
lost in the overall budget.
I do think the fees are excessive however. Certainly some people will
not come to our town to eat, shop or buy gas because they will find
another free parking lot within 10 miles on the same lake.
Do any of you pay to park or launch at your public boat launch. If you
didn't now, would you consider these fees excessive? Is there a
difference for residents vs. non-residents?
I plan on writing the town board voicing my opinions, but would like to
know about other peoples opinions first.
Thanks.

FWIW, at the Breakwater launch ramp in Monterey, it's $8/day for a single
vehicle, $12/day for tow vehicle and trailer, 9:00 a.m. till sometime at night.
You can also pay by the hour. ($1.50/hour single, I think, I always get the all-day).
TVs & trailers only in most of the lot till noon. No charge to launch. There's
a machine that takes credit cards or cash.

What are their enforcement costs going to be? Monterey has several
meter "maids" (one looks like an NFL lineman) in Cushman three-wheelers.

And that "over 20" rule is going to be a pain to enforce.



--
Chuck Tribolet

http://www.almaden.ibm.com/cs/people/triblet

Silicon Valley: STILL the best day job in the world.


"user" wrote in message ...
My town's last board meeting discussed parking fees for the currently
free, public boat launch. There is parking for about 60 trucks and
trailers. It is always full and often people don't park properly making
it hard to park or leave.
The proposal was a $5 fee for the vehicle per day. Single axle trailers
less than 20' long another $5. Double axle trailers or single axle
trailers over 20' long, $7.50. The estimate of revenue is $2,000 per
week May-October and $1,000 per weekend mid-March-April and November.
The parking would be free those week days. December-early March would be
free, but doubtful anyone would be there.
The argument I agree with is there needs to be more order in the current
parking situation. I suppose the fees charged will easily cover the cost
of a parking attendant. While it wasn't mentioned, I'd like to see the
leftover money going to improvements in the lakefront area, rather than
lost in the overall budget.
I do think the fees are excessive however. Certainly some people will
not come to our town to eat, shop or buy gas because they will find
another free parking lot within 10 miles on the same lake.
Do any of you pay to park or launch at your public boat launch. If you
didn't now, would you consider these fees excessive? Is there a
difference for residents vs. non-residents?
I plan on writing the town board voicing my opinions, but would like to
know about other peoples opinions first.
Thanks.

On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 17:20:24 +0000, user wrote:

My town's last board meeting discussed parking fees for the currently free,
public boat launch. There is parking for about 60 trucks and trailers. It is
always full and often people don't park properly making it hard to park or
leave.
The proposal was a $5 fee for the vehicle per day. Single axle trailers less
than 20' long another $5. Double axle trailers or single axle trailers over 20'
long, $7.50. The estimate of revenue is $2,000 per week May-October and $1,000
per weekend mid-March-April and November. The parking would be free those week
days. December-early March would be free, but doubtful anyone would be there.
The argument I agree with is there needs to be more order in the current parking
situation. SNIP

Here in Canada, most ramps charge for parking rather than "launching". Most have
machines where you get your parking ticket, and I assume a "metermaid" kinda
person to check the tickets. A few have "attendants" that also help "traffic
control" at the ramp, sell bait, tackle, ice cream, etc. and usually have Good
Advice about fishing. You can tell them where you're going if you're going over
a day and they will inform the CG if your vehicle is still there after you're
supposed to be back.

Provincial Parks (where a lot of ramps are) have recently started charging for
parking, and there's quite an underground "economy" where people leaving will
give their parking tickets to those arriving. After all, we've already paid for
the park: why should we pay for parking?

Has it helped the "chaos" of the parking area? Not that I've noticed.

I think a SINGLE parking fee is the best, using a machine. Easy to set up, easy
to monitor. The "Attendant" can be nice but not necessary, and the complex
system you're proposing sounds way too hard to set up and monitor!

BTW: Parking-machine ramps are usually $3-7, and ones with attendants are around
$10-15 (CDN)

Lloyd

Marina Del Rey is $2 for a single vehicle and $5 for boat and trailer.
Machine and gate takes cash or credit card.

"Lloyd Sumpter" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 17:20:24 +0000, user wrote:

My town's last board meeting discussed parking fees for the currently
free,
public boat launch. There is parking for about 60 trucks and trailers.
It is
always full and often people don't park properly making it hard to park
or
leave.
The proposal was a $5 fee for the vehicle per day. Single axle trailers
less
than 20' long another $5. Double axle trailers or single axle trailers
over 20'
long, $7.50. The estimate of revenue is $2,000 per week May-October and
$1,000
per weekend mid-March-April and November. The parking would be free
those week
days. December-early March would be free, but doubtful anyone would be
there.
The argument I agree with is there needs to be more order in the current
parking
situation. SNIP

Here in Canada, most ramps charge for parking rather than "launching".
Most have
machines where you get your parking ticket, and I assume a "metermaid"
kinda
person to check the tickets. A few have "attendants" that also help
"traffic
control" at the ramp, sell bait, tackle, ice cream, etc. and usually have
Good
Advice about fishing. You can tell them where you're going if you're going
over
a day and they will inform the CG if your vehicle is still there after
you're
supposed to be back.

Provincial Parks (where a lot of ramps are) have recently started charging
for
parking, and there's quite an underground "economy" where people leaving
will
give their parking tickets to those arriving. After all, we've already
paid for
the park: why should we pay for parking?

Has it helped the "chaos" of the parking area? Not that I've noticed.

I think a SINGLE parking fee is the best, using a machine. Easy to set up,
easy
to monitor. The "Attendant" can be nice but not necessary, and the complex
system you're proposing sounds way too hard to set up and monitor!

BTW: Parking-machine ramps are usually $3-7, and ones with attendants are
around
$10-15 (CDN)

Lloyd