Good News

In the most recent bulletin from the California Cattlemen’s Association, the trade group that keeps all of us in the business of raising cattle informed as to all information, legislation, and news impacting us, an exciting new effort by Pacific Gas and Electric is taking place. The notice told of a new renewable energy project that will use methane gas generated from a Fresno County dairy to power homes and businesses nearby.

It is thrilling to me to see a large energy company taking the initiative to use a natural product on a whole new level to provide an alternative to traditional energy resources. I know that we as a society can be far more productive if we just begin to look for our opportunities instead of condemning them. I am gratified that PG&E is leading the way.

 

Looking Forward

I firmly believe that people who are used to looking forward to plan, as best one can, what their next step might be will be the most successful in life. Of course, one cannot plan for everything, which is part of the mystery of life, but one can look for trends and make judgments based on what one sees. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that there are now very clear indications that a proposal has been made to develop a property on Highway 246 at Edison Street into a gas station and a mini mart.

The fact that there are already three gas stations in Santa Ynez makes one wonder why we would need another, unless, umm … could it be an ugly attempt to undercut the existing stations and force them out of business? Within a single block of this location are two mini marts, and another is located two blocks away. So is this also a nasty attempt to undercut local businesses and force them out? Surely, good business sense would dictate that three existing gas stations and three mini marts within a tiny town would be all that would be sustainable — unless one had some sort of financial advantage. So what could possibly be the reason for this development? Financial gain is surely one and that is a noble goal. I took some time to look into what profits might be available to a gas station owner, assuming no mortgage on the property. It was very difficult to cull the actual information out of the volumes of data on how much gas is produced, who gets what and so on.

I did discover some interesting figures on taxes that explain at least part of the picture. According to what I read, 18 cents per gallon goes for State excise tax; 14 cents per gallon goes for other unidentified state taxes; 18.4 cents per gallon goes for Federal taxes; and one-half cent for Measure D goes to Santa Barbara County, although that will expire in February 2010 unless a 14-cent surcharge proposed by 3rd District Supervisor Brooks Firestone is adopted. I found it interesting as well that the oil companies make 7-10 cents per gallon profit. Compared to the money going to the government agencies, it doesn’t seem like very much, does it? So if the property owner, or station owner, did not have to pay any part of these taxes that everyone else does, that would enable two things: first, the price charged customers could be considerably less than other stations charge, which would be a huge advantage, and second, people are always trying to get the best deal for their money, which in this situation would almost guarantee the loss of customers for the other local stations.

So, too, this potential advantage would almost surely cause the existing mini marts to lose business as well. Can we afford to lose competition, fair competition, in our valley, whether in Santa Ynez or any of the other towns? Are you listening?

 

Deliberate Confusion

I have been hearing lots of reports lately about the economic impact of the local casino. I have also heard that South County is benefiting from the casino. There are a number of impacts and reports that have been, deliberately I believe, left out of the media’s glowing stories.

Foremost in this discussion is the obvious lack of exposure of the impacts on valley residents who are, of course, the ones most impacted.

Curious that they would be left out of the conversation, or is it? There has been no report of where the employees come from (surprise, they are not all local), where the cars and busses come from, or what affect the casino has had on local crime statistics. In fact, there was nothing negative mentioned at all.

In case you were curious how the valley residents voted on the expansion of casinos, there was not a single community in the valley that voted in favor of expansion. Overwhelmingly, from the lowest (also the farthest distance from the casino) of 52 percent to 70 percent with Santa Ynez voting 67 percent NO, one would wonder how such a report about the casino could be so glowing.

I refer to the economic report purportedly commissioned by the Santa Barbara County Taxpayers Association to extol the economic virtues of the casino. Of course, the casino is making lots of money; that is a good thing for the tribal members as far as I am concerned. I do find it unfortunate that some members find it acceptable to trash the community around them, all in retribution for perceived wrongs long ago by the federal government. As someone whose family has also suffered at the hands of bad government, I have no sympathy for that kind of attitude. Get over it and move on! It is time to grow up and be responsible along with the rest of the community. The divisiveness that is being promoted by some individuals is counterproductive to the ultimate success of the valley and the people who live here. We will not all move away and leave the area many of us have lived in for generations. We have contributed much to this land and I, for one, will not abandon my family’s efforts. I am not alone in this feeling, and I am proud to be a part of this very beautiful, very bountiful and dynamic location. No one has anything to gain by continuing to create divisions between groups of people. This type of behavior leads to nothing but destruction of good people for the benefit of a bitter few.

 

Letters

I apologize to you the reader, as I had intended last week to include a letter to which I referred, written by Brenda L. Tomares of the California Indian Legal Services. Although I faxed a copy, somehow it got lost in the ether, as sometimes things do. I do hope it makes it in this publication as it lays to rest some of the questions the community has been asking.

In 2005, prior to current ownership of the Journal, a couple of things occurred which have relevance to today’s discussions of the gas station.

Back in 2005 there was an application submitted for a trust acquisition for 5.68 acres (fee-to-trust) by the Santa Ynez Band of Mission Indians, namely the property being considered for the gas station and mini mart.

The intended use of the property was not revealed at the time of the application. Peter Siggins, the legal affairs secretary who made statements increasingly important today, wrote a letter on Aug. 26, 2005, from California’s governor’s office. The current status of this application is unknown, as it has been characterized as “shelved,” which normally means that it could come off the shelf at any time.

As background, I would mention that the fee-to-trust mechanism is generally used to increase tribal lands in order to provide homeless Indians a home and a place to advance economic ventures.

This certainly has been achieved in our local situation which, as the letter stated, would make any application for further land transference unwarranted.

In an almost uncanny view into the future, the letter states, “This [acquisition] is attractive to the tribe because such land, if placed in trust, would allow the tribe to argue that state and local land use regulation did not apply.

“Moreover, it would invest that land with the commercial advantage of being free of property tax, and potentially state income and state and local sales tax liability for certain types of economic activities.”

The letter goes on to say, “Similarly, there are significant implications for non-tribal businesses located in the adjacent business district.

Freed from the requirement to pay state and local property, sales and income taxes, tribal businesses could plainly undercut non-tribal businesses to an unfair commercial advantage.”

The two years that have passed since this letter was written have not changed the situation. In fact, we now see the potential our business community faces. The application is pending.

A further comment in the letter from the governor’s office reveals that one of the stated reasons for the tribe’s need for the fee-to-trust acquisition is “to meet its need to preserve cultural resources and protect the land from environmental damage.“

Can you explain to me how a gas station is going to protect the environment?