[justalilrowdy]

ATTENTION ALL 215 PATIENTS IN LAKE COUNTY!! PLEASE ATTEND THE JUNE 26th BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING TO REGULATE CULTIVATION OF OUR MEDICINE!! STAND UP AND BE HEARD!! Your right to grow is being challenged. 3 plants on less than half an acre. We must stop this ordinance!

[paladin420]

bump from out of state...get ur asses there

[calicoli06]

See you all there!
peace

[northstate]

Bump the info...Im up near the top of CA but Lake Co. folks need to grab some pitchforks and head to that meeting!

[BM-504]

Rowdy do you have a link to the proposed Ord?

This was into todays paper on the latest BS they are trying to pull up here!


The Arcata City Council advanced a residential high energy use tax, placing it on the next council meeting consent calendar for final approval.
The council voted unanimously, with Councilman Mark Wheetley absent, to continue the item and allow time for staff to develop language for the tax. The council must approve the tax at its July 11 meeting in order for it to appear on the November ballot.
The council based details of the tax on recommendations from a Pacific Gas and Electric Company representative who met with city staff and some council members last week.
With a deadline for the tax looming, Vice Mayor Shane Brinton said the suggestions caused concern.
”I'm a little bit frustrated that they came in with a new proposal at the 11th hour,” Brinton said at Wednesday's meeting.
PG&E government relations representative Alison Talbott also spoke at Wednesday's meeting.
”PG&E is aware that Arcata faces a challenge,” Talbott said. “As the idea filtered through the company, it became clear that there were risks about the tax as presented.”
The currently proposed tax would charge residential customers who exceed 600 percent of a PG&E-defined baseline an additional 45 percent on their entire bill. The tax would include a medical baseline exemption and would have a 12-year sunset period.
PG&E representatives verbally estimated the cost of implementing the tax at $650,000, but Councilwoman Alex Stillman
Advertisement

asked Talbott to look into lowering that cost. Talbott said she would share Stillman's request for a lower implementation fee with PG&E staff.
Based on 2011 numbers, the revenue to the city would be approximately $1.2 million.
Discussion of the tax led the council to agree that exemptions for small businesses and large families would be difficult for the city to administer.
”We currently don't have the ability to enforce these things,” City Manager Randy Mendosa said. “There's some murky water there for your staff to try and do that.”
PG&E also said that the 600 percent over baseline number is currently being discussed between the company and the California Public Utilities Commission as a state guideline for what constitutes excessive residential electricity usage.
City Attorney Nancy Diamond suggested that if that is accepted as a state guideline, it could protect the city from litigation.
”Arcata's commitment to energy policy bodes well for support of the tax,” Diamond said.
Diamond also said that a flat utility users tax -- as opposed to a 15-cents-per-kilowatt-hour charge previously proposed -- had legislative precedent in the state.
”It's OK for cities to be charging flat utility users tax rate,” Diamond said.
Vice Mayor Shane Brinton said he had concerns about switching from a per-kilowatt-hour tax to a 45 percent tax on the entire bill for excessive users because of voter psychology.
Though the 45 percent tax is approximate to the per-kilowatt tax in cost to users, Brinton said voters may bristle at the tax even though only 633 of approximately 9,500 residential meters in the city exceeded 600 percent of baseline in 2011.
The tax will return on the council's July 11 consent calendar for final approval.

[justalilrowdy]

We are going backwards at this point.

[weeddaddy50]

there is about 5% of the meters above the 600 rate and they want to tax the whole population?....In my experience once a tax has been approved it is never taken off...and they will just try to find ways to make it effect all the meters....PG&E has the some of the highest rates in the US.....whoever is behind this in Arcata should be voted out of office.....its just a tax against people who need to grow their own medicine.

Rowdy.....here is Butte County we got it defeated....It can be done.....hopefully Lake county MMJ people can organize and get it done.....good luck.

Originally Posted by BM-504

Rowdy do you have a link to the proposed Ord?

This was into todays paper on the latest BS they are trying to pull up here!


The Arcata City Council advanced a residential high energy use tax, placing it on the next council meeting consent calendar for final approval.
The council voted unanimously, with Councilman Mark Wheetley absent, to continue the item and allow time for staff to develop language for the tax. The council must approve the tax at its July 11 meeting in order for it to appear on the November ballot.
The council based details of the tax on recommendations from a Pacific Gas and Electric Company representative who met with city staff and some council members last week.
With a deadline for the tax looming, Vice Mayor Shane Brinton said the suggestions caused concern.
”I'm a little bit frustrated that they came in with a new proposal at the 11th hour,” Brinton said at Wednesday's meeting.
PG&E government relations representative Alison Talbott also spoke at Wednesday's meeting.
”PG&E is aware that Arcata faces a challenge,” Talbott said. “As the idea filtered through the company, it became clear that there were risks about the tax as presented.”
The currently proposed tax would charge residential customers who exceed 600 percent of a PG&E-defined baseline an additional 45 percent on their entire bill. The tax would include a medical baseline exemption and would have a 12-year sunset period.
PG&E representatives verbally estimated the cost of implementing the tax at $650,000, but Councilwoman Alex Stillman
Advertisement

asked Talbott to look into lowering that cost. Talbott said she would share Stillman's request for a lower implementation fee with PG&E staff.
Based on 2011 numbers, the revenue to the city would be approximately $1.2 million.
Discussion of the tax led the council to agree that exemptions for small businesses and large families would be difficult for the city to administer.
”We currently don't have the ability to enforce these things,” City Manager Randy Mendosa said. “There's some murky water there for your staff to try and do that.”
PG&E also said that the 600 percent over baseline number is currently being discussed between the company and the California Public Utilities Commission as a state guideline for what constitutes excessive residential electricity usage.
City Attorney Nancy Diamond suggested that if that is accepted as a state guideline, it could protect the city from litigation.
”Arcata's commitment to energy policy bodes well for support of the tax,” Diamond said.
Diamond also said that a flat utility users tax -- as opposed to a 15-cents-per-kilowatt-hour charge previously proposed -- had legislative precedent in the state.
”It's OK for cities to be charging flat utility users tax rate,” Diamond said.
Vice Mayor Shane Brinton said he had concerns about switching from a per-kilowatt-hour tax to a 45 percent tax on the entire bill for excessive users because of voter psychology.
Though the 45 percent tax is approximate to the per-kilowatt tax in cost to users, Brinton said voters may bristle at the tax even though only 633 of approximately 9,500 residential meters in the city exceeded 600 percent of baseline in 2011.
The tax will return on the council's July 11 consent calendar for final approval.

[Skip]

The BOS needs to tell the people of Lake County how much this new law will cost to implement, including the arrest and incarceration of how many growers each year who defy the new law! That needs to be made public. If they can't come up with the numbers, then they can't vote on the measure. The EIR is not what is important here.

BTW, has anyone in Lake County ever heard the term "civil disobedience?"

[BM-504]

Weeddaddy
Not the whole population just the houses that use over 600% of baseline.
Arcata wanted to use the figure of 300% so they could get more money.

It will probably pass this Nov. And you can bet that other city's will follow suite as soon as Arcata get's it's first check, then the County will jump on bandwagon too.

Good luck at the BOS meeting Rowdy.

Stay safe
BM

[Meek]

GOODLUCK at the BOS meeting all!

I've got friends on the leftcoast & Im wishing the best for all of you. I'm not in the area but have you all in my thoughts.

Onward the course!