U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Alaska
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-17-2016, 10:38 PM
 
Location: Fairbanks
331 posts, read 499,543 times
Reputation: 309

Advertisements

HB319 I hope you do NOT support it!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-17-2016, 11:08 PM
 
20,428 posts, read 26,555,365 times
Reputation: 13128
If you can't afford it, it's probably time to hit the AlCan. It's only a $10 increase of what you're (presumably) already paying.

Sponsor Statement: HB 319

Quote:
The measure has support from snow machine users as a way to help the state during cash-strapped times and back funding to develop and maintain snowmobile trails and provide safety and educational programs.
Are you aware of what your fees pay for? I doubt it.

Quote:
Current snowmobile registration fees generate up to $250,000 a year for the Snowmobile Trail Development Program which is managed by the Department of Natural Resources’ Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation and the nine-member Snowmobile Trails Advisory Council (SnowTRAC).
Another typical fiercely independent Alaskan, crying a freakin' river when you might actually have to pay for something. Someone call the waaambulance. This is more pathetic than Pitts crying over spilled beer and pizza costs.



I'll tell you what -- if the increase is too hard for you to manage, I'll set up a GoFundMe page to help you out

I really am sorry to sound harsh, but seriously -- Alaska residents have had a free ride for so long. If you actually love the state, step up and help pay for things. I don't see a thing wrong with this bill, especially since the money doesn't seem to go into the general fund but is instead used for snow machine related expense. I wouldn't have even responded to this thread if it hadn't been for some commentary on your part about how fisheries should be heavily taxed to pay for your amenities (we already are, which you seemed to be ignorant of).

I think some of you got too used to sugar daddy oil buying you shiny toys. Time to put up, shut up, or hit the highway. The free ride is over.

Last edited by Metlakatla; 03-18-2016 at 12:09 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2016, 11:20 PM
 
Location: Back and Beyond
2,605 posts, read 2,398,821 times
Reputation: 5937
I don't have a snowmachine (yet ) and know nothing about this bill.

However, on a semi related note about ridiculous bills, if this is true http://www.newsminer.com/opinion/let...a22e925af.html, then I'm definitely opposed to SB161 and HB 81.

According to the author of the letter, if you own a home that you've built yourself you would be required to get permission from the state of Alaska before you could sell it. I've heard nothing about these bills except for reading the letter to the editor in the paper discussing it last week. If the author of this is correct, it's disturbing and an infringement on private property rights. Anyone know anymore about this? I wonder what they are thinking up next down in Juneau?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2016, 11:27 PM
 
20,428 posts, read 26,555,365 times
Reputation: 13128
You should buy my Subaru with your family's PFD instead of a snow machine anyway

I'm not opposed to the bill in question -- it's a slight increase and the money goes to maintain trails they use.

They'll be raising fishery taxes quite a bit more soon, but we'll take it like adults instead of crying over $10 -- well, a lot more than that in our case.


67, I haven't read the letter yet, but that sounds unconstitutional to me.


Pfft. Just read it. I have no problem with it. Sounds like the intent is to stop carpetbaggers from slapping up $hit structures for the purpose of selling them quickly. There was someone who was doing that in the Su Valley several years ago, and the houses were just crap even though they looked good. I rented one for awhile and the wiring was scary bad. I'm lucky I didn't burn up.

Last edited by Metlakatla; 03-17-2016 at 11:37 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2016, 11:42 PM
 
Location: Back and Beyond
2,605 posts, read 2,398,821 times
Reputation: 5937
I may be in the market for a Subaru soon. Looking for a lower mileage early 2000's outback or forester.

I haven't read the bill and If the purpose of it is to stop people from trying to profit by posing as contractors, building multiple homes with no intention of living in them, then selling them I don't have a problem with it. However, if I build my own house, live in it and years down the road decide to sell, I don't want to have to "ask for permission" to sell. I guess I should read the bill.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2016, 11:49 PM
 
20,428 posts, read 26,555,365 times
Reputation: 13128
Low miles Forester 2005, light blue. It's got seats that heat up and everything. Not entirely sold on selling it, though. That's something I need to think about over the course of the summer.

67, from what I saw of the bill, it wouldn't applicable to the situation you describe.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2016, 08:26 AM
 
Location: Interior Alaska
1,941 posts, read 1,689,690 times
Reputation: 1426
Quote:
Originally Posted by 6.7traveler View Post
I don't have a snowmachine (yet ) and know nothing about this bill.

However, on a semi related note about ridiculous bills, if this is true http://www.newsminer.com/opinion/let...a22e925af.html, then I'm definitely opposed to SB161 and HB 81.

According to the author of the letter, if you own a home that you've built yourself you would be required to get permission from the state of Alaska before you could sell it. I've heard nothing about these bills except for reading the letter to the editor in the paper discussing it last week. If the author of this is correct, it's disturbing and an infringement on private property rights. Anyone know anymore about this? I wonder what they are thinking up next down in Juneau?

That's not really what it says, bro. I think they're only referring to contractors.

http://www.legis.state.ak.us/PDF/29/Bills/SB0161A.PDF

Alaska State Legislature
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2016, 08:27 AM
 
Location: Interior Alaska
1,941 posts, read 1,689,690 times
Reputation: 1426
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metlakatla View Post
You should buy my Subaru with your family's PFD instead of a snow machine anyway

I'm not opposed to the bill in question -- it's a slight increase and the money goes to maintain trails they use.

They'll be raising fishery taxes quite a bit more soon, but we'll take it like adults instead of crying over $10 -- well, a lot more than that in our case.


67, I haven't read the letter yet, but that sounds unconstitutional to me.


Pfft. Just read it. I have no problem with it. Sounds like the intent is to stop carpetbaggers from slapping up $hit structures for the purpose of selling them quickly. There was someone who was doing that in the Su Valley several years ago, and the houses were just crap even though they looked good. I rented one for awhile and the wiring was scary bad. I'm lucky I didn't burn up.
That's exactly how I read it, too. They're trying to stop scammers from scamming. I can live with that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2016, 10:38 AM
 
Location: Back and Beyond
2,605 posts, read 2,398,821 times
Reputation: 5937
Ahh, now I feel stupid, I just read the bill about the housing and don't have a problem with it. This is what I get for reading letters to the editor and why I should do more research and actually read the bill before participating in political discussions on city data. Shame on me . In my defense, the guy that wrote the letter to the editor made it sound like any owner builder would not be able to sell without permission, which is NOT the case. Only if you're advertising it for sale while building or immediately after in which case you're a wannabe contractor, not an owner builder. My apologies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2016, 01:31 PM
 
Location: Naptowne, Alaska
15,596 posts, read 34,561,048 times
Reputation: 14657
Where the heck are the trails? We don't have any maintained or groomed trails in the Sterling area! I do register our machines and keep current tags on them, mostly because when we do ride, it's across Skilak Lake to the cabin and that's partial state and mostly federal lands...which means a ticket if no current registration. But I know many owners that don't even bother to register their machines.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Alaska
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top