Thursday, September 18, 2014     Volume: 29, Issue: 8
Featured Slideshow


Panga Boat Bust 9/6

Weekly Poll
Should police be allowed to use surplus military equipment?

Cheap or free gear for local police? Sounds good to me.
No. Police are meant to serve the people, not to threaten them.
If they use it properly I don’t see any reason why not, but I don’t feel comfortable seeing cops with assault rifles.
Nothing says democracy like a bayonet to the butt.

Vote! | Poll Results

RSS Feeds

Latest News RSS
Current Issue RSS

Special Features
Search or post SLO County food and wine establishments

New Times / Letter To The Editor

The following article was posted on January 3rd, 2013, in the New Times - Volume 27, Issue 23 [ Submit a Story ]
The following articles were printed from New Times [] - Volume 27, Issue 23

Wood you believe this?

San Luis Obispo

Ken Hermann

In mid-December I received a copy of a “Special Notice” from the California State Board of Equalization, about a new use tax assessment, the “Lumber and Engineered Wood Products 1 Percent Assessment. (Yes, that is a $1 tax on every $100 spent.)

Starting January 2013, we will be taxed an additional 1 percent on many lumber products that are sold or transported into the state.

With further investigation, I found that Assembly Bill 1492 sets regulations for the recovery of fire suppression costs, extends the lifespan of timber harvest plans, and establishes a Public Resources Code, section, the “Timer Regulation and Forest Restoration Fund.”

This new fund is set up to provide for actions, regulations, and practices of the departments of Forestry and Fish and Game that currently exist, and are themselves funded through existing taxes and forest management fees. These fees, paid by forest landowners and management companies, are then passed to lumber consumers in the form of retail pricing.

Additionally, “The initial emergency regulation and the one readoption of an emergency regulation authorized by this section shall be exempt from review by the Office of Administrative Law.”

This double taxation bill has been quickly jabbed into us with virtually no comment or evaluation period, without considering alternatives, and to charge for things previously paid. It’s a side-deal slush fund to the general fund.

This splinter needs to be plucked out and thrown back at the boards from which it came.