WDFW Vehicle Access Pass Legislation 3/11 Update

[Knocker of rocks]

Then we will have to agree to disagree. Because I am not wrong I have to buy 2 passes to cover two vehicles, you only have to buy one to cover 2 vehicles. I don't agree with that rule..... if it covers 2 vehicles than it should cover those two vehicles regardless if they are at the same place at the same time. I don't believe I am entitled to anything more than what I pay for.

It does seem unfair that you have to chose between the G-wagen and the Lexus,  you should be entitled to take both at the same time.

[Klyne3]

Whoa there Kitten, retract the claws. I'm not sure what your problem is with me but I am trying not to be a jerk to you.

We have a difference of opinion.  And I have no problem debating the issue with you or anyone else and keeping it civil. 

[ghosthunter]

Sounds like the perfect solution to me. I don't believe we should be given free access to state parks. But we should be able to hunt on DNR land without having to purchase a separate pass.

 

[stuckalot]

Way to go Doug!  Erickson is someone that I really hope takes a run at the governors mansion one day soon!

[bigtex]

This bill has it's first committee hearing tomorrow, 1/24

[buckfvr]

This IS going to be an uphill battle 1) there is currently only one sponsor to this bill, usually the more sponsors the better the chance the bill has of passing 2) there is going to be a significant amount of loss revenue, where are they going to make that up at?

A few years ago, I didn't have to pay for a pass to go to these areas.  Now, I do.  That results in a significant (for me) loss of funds . .  where am I going to make up for that?

THe only thing people in the system understand about budgets is either its not enough, or it'll do.  THink big picture, and spending cuts in Olympia....trim the fat from every department and division under state control.  The fat years made the state spend impulsively, and they seem intent to continue that at our expense.  When the state falls farther behind, what will they decide we need to be taxed on next.  The only way out of this is to reign in spending by law makers in Olympia......spending our money.....Less government, less state employees. 

[bigtex]

This IS going to be an uphill battle 1) there is currently only one sponsor to this bill, usually the more sponsors the better the chance the bill has of passing 2) there is going to be a significant amount of loss revenue, where are they going to make that up at?

A few years ago, I didn't have to pay for a pass to go to these areas.  Now, I do.  That results in a significant (for me) loss of funds . .  where am I going to make up for that?

THe only thing people in the system understand about budgets is either its not enough, or it'll do.  THink big picture, and spending cuts in Olympia....trim the fat from every department and division under state control.  The fat years made the state spend impulsively, and they seem intent to continue that at our expense.  When the state falls farther behind, what will they decide we need to be taxed on next.  The only way out of this is to reign in spending by law makers in Olympia......spending our money.....Less government, less state employees.

I get your point. But less government doesn't always mean less employees. The Liquor Control Board is the one state agency in the past year that has gone through the biggest change due to the liquor and marijuana initiatives. One of the points of the liquor initiatives was to eliminate state employees selling booze, well it happened. And now there is so many issues with liquor related crimes  (theft, underage drinking, etc) that the governor is proposing adding at least 10 more officers to the agency in one year alone. Then we have marijuana, the law was just written and the LCB has already hired/in the process of hiring 5 marijuana program managers. They then will have to people to handle the licensing, education and so on of the program. And then to top that off, even more enforcement officers. So 1183 did one thing, they did a drastic cut to the number of employees of the LCB, but ever since then the numbers of LCB employees has been rising because of 1183 and 520, both of which were voted in by citizens, not politicians.

[Bob33]

Bigtex: regarding marijuana legalization, I heard a rumor that perhaps you can verify or debunk. Is it really true the state will be issuing a new pass to pay for these unanticipated expenses?

[bigtex]

Bob,

That is correct 

[bigtex]

This bill had a hearing today. Two words come to mind when watching the hearing..NOT GOOD

Out of 3 people that commented, two were opposed, the other was neither pro or con. One of the opposition was the Washington Federation of State Employees.

The big issue...Loss of revenue.

To watch, the briefing on this bill starts at 1:18:00

http://www.tvw.org/index.php?option=com_tvwplayer&eventID=2013011128

In fact two committee members (senators) talked about ONLY having one pass for all three lands..meaning no more WDFW Pass. And maybe going that way

FYI, the bill Hargrove talked about his legislation, that is the legislation that would have a discounted Discover Pass price

[6x6in6]

.....because we nickle and dime you on so many other things, a few more pennies is no big deal right?

I like the Legislation and if there is going to be revenue shortfalls because of this?  Double or tripple the cost of the discover pass.  Many of us spend over $100/year on just tags and licenses already, if they want to PLAY....they can PAY what we do.

Under Gregoire's proposed budget, the shortfall Parks is already getting from missed revenue from Discover Pass sales is being replaced by general fund money. When the Discover Pass was created it was to eliminate general fund funding of Parks, that funding is now slowly coming back.

Well then privatize the State Parks system.
I highly doubt the private sector would employ 1,118 employees with their top 25 making in excess of $2 million.   

[Special T]

In fact two committee members (senators) talked about ONLY having one pass for all three lands..meaning no more WDFW Pass. And maybe going that way

This is the direction i fear this would go, and it only HIGHLIGHTS the real issue with the DP.  I beliver the legal term is conversion where you take from someone else and make it your own... I hate the DP BECAUSE it takes from sportmen BY DESIGNE to give to the parks... I have NO problem with our state parks AND i have payed to camp there many times. I WON'T go there for the day and will boycot giving them any of my "hunting funds" to pay for parks. 

[bigtex]

To read the comments made at the hearing read the last page here:

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/billdocs/2013-14/Pdf/Bill%20Reports/Senate/5080%20SBA%20NRP%2013.pdf

[JackOfAllTrades]

Does anyone know how much land DFW and DNR purchased in the last five years?  It is time to stop spending and TAXING!
 
-Steve

[Curly]

DNR probably purchases their land with timber sale dollars and not much if any tax dollars.  I do think DNR should have some sort of pass for people that use the DNR campgrounds and those that park at the trailhead parking areas, but the current DP is a joke.  State Parks should just go away if they can't stay on budget.