Don's Tuesday column

      THE WAY I SEE IT   by Don Polson  Red Bluff Daily News   10/30/2012

Candidates, taxes and teachers unions

Tonight, at the Tea Party Patriots’ meeting, all of the candidates for State Senate – Jann Reed, Dan Levine, Ben Emery and Jim Nielsen – will appear, make statements and take questions. The format for questions will be announced. This is a somewhat different type of candidates’ night from others and will be worth your time. I apologize to anyone that went to last week’s meeting expecting a discussion of the ballot propositions; information was available at the door.

The meeting contained some passionate feedback by members who attended the Regional Water Board meeting, which they felt was inclined toward goals and agendas threatening to Northern Californians’ water rights. Some had various ideas for how to respond; others aren’t completely sold on the imminence of water meters, industrial-size wells sucking our aquifer dry to send south, or other top-down impositions against our water rights. We’ll see how it goes; I’m not lighting my hair on fire over it, yet.

I have to weigh in against Measure A, which imposes a “Transit Occupancy Tax (TOT)” on, effectively, one Red Bluff business, the Durango RV Resort on Lake Avenue adjacent to the freeway and south of the Sacramento River. I don’t have a vote, being a county resident; however, it is a ballot issue that affects the greater Red Bluff economy in ways that those who put it up for a vote may not have considered.

There are RV parks within the city as well as others in unincorporated areas; I’m informed that the TOT is paid by a couple of Red Bluff RV parks but not by any other parks outside of town limits. Those various parks range in quality (generally very good but not always), prices (I haven’t done a survey but Durango may trend higher due to facility improvements), location (proximity to the freeway, restaurants and shopping) and appeal (monthly residents can be a turnoff for higher end travelers and their hundred thousand-plus dollars worth of RVs).

I also have no way to ascertain whether the lack of a TOT in the pricing for Durango spaces has had any affect on competitors’ reservations or nightly drop-ins. We are too cheap to pay for a space when we can sleep overnight in a WalMart or other parking lot on our way to forest, lakeside or mountain campgrounds. However, as Good Sam members we receive their monthly magazine, “Highways,” and can assure you that the RVing community is adamantly opposed to TOTs or any other taxes targeting RV parks. Letters are published informing their readers about where they can go to avoid such fees and taxes; their reporters and researchers are keen to keep readers apprised of the worst offenders of travelers’ wallets.

Since all motels and hotels reside in the city, there is a leveling effect of TOTs in their case. However, if you haven’t noticed Durango’s well-filled park, it’s worth considering the arguments involved relating to the tax and it’s implications. In the first place, Durango Resort is not in a head-to-head competition with O’nite or Rivers Edge, for instance, due to their size and clientele, nor, as nice as it is, with the Red Bluff RV Park off of Antelope Blvd, due to Durango’s facilities.

Durango is, however, in competition with RV parks like the one in Redding next to I-5 at Lake Blvd (campers pay a TOT). I think we should consider that having a high-end RV Park with a pricing advantage versus other parks, sought out by well-heeled travelers, to be a major economic feather in our “Branding” cap, if you will. The word gets out and Red Bluff benefits when those travelers buy groceries, supplies, restaurant meals, attend an event or movie, or explore parks and trails. Why not let them keep a few (around five, actually) dollars per night, encourage them to discover some of the things that make us unique in all of Northern California, maybe chose among our modestly priced real estate listings to make into a “home base.” They might return that money many times over to merchants due to the good will they perceive by not being gouged just for occupying a space in an RV park.

Vote “No” on Measure A.

I was chagrined to find agreement with the other Tuesday writer on the issue of Prop 37, the food labeling initiative (Vote No). That should settle it in voters’ minds, anyway.

I have another example of an invaluable service to readers: “Polecat News and Views” (go to the blog tab at the online Daily News, or donpolson.blogspot.com) makes available material, analysis and opinion that won’t fit into this column. On the subject of teachers’ unions, the disconnect between money and education results, and the way said money is corrupted by virtue of forced union dues spent to raise taxes on Californians; scroll down to the “Education” label on my home page.

Must reads: “When Public Sector Unions Win in California,” “Small Class-Size Balloon Punctured Again,” “The Imaginary Teacher Shortage,” “The Largest Political Machine,” and “Textbook case of inefficiency: Can’t buy a quality education,” showing how 8 percent more students in classes has seen funding more than double with no discernable improvement in quantified learning and test results. Vote “No” on Props 30 and 38.