The first of three County Park Commission meetings on the possibility of beach parking fees revealed what most already knew: The public is very much against the idea. About 40 people showed up Thursday morning, with roughly half telling the Park Commission they are against the idea. Residents of Alan Road, near Arroyo Burro Beach, already see a lot of traffic from beach-goers. They expect it will only get worse if beach visitors have to pay to park. Currently, the idea is general, and whether it’s an hourly fee or a fixed flat rate — or whether fees are recommended at all — remains to be seen.
Summerland residents spoke of how parking spaces have already been recently lost, and beach parking fees would only increase the spotlight on how little parking there is in the tiny town. “Please don’t do this to our community,” said Jeff Melnick, who said he was speaking on behalf of downtown Summerland business owners. “We have already lost enough.”
“The county should be expanding opportunities for beach access, not limiting them,” said resident Alan Howard. Adam White, who along with his father operates the Boathouse, said parking fees could have a huge impact on their business. “We’ve put our heart and soul, as well as our livelihoods, into these restaurants,” he told the board. The next two meetings are August 16 in the County Planning Commission hearing room at 5:30 p.m. and August 23 at 9:30 a.m. in Santa Maria. The Park Commission is planning to make recommendations to the Board of Supervisors at its August 23 meeting.


Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
Comments
Share Article
Myspace





Previous Month



Comments
We already pay taxes, a lot of them! I vote NO!
deniseL (anonymous profile)
August 2, 2012 at 6:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Well the incurious 99% just isn't coming to the table with solutions to solve the budget problems.
We could build at Arroyo Burro/Hendrys a fee based 3 story parking garage to solve Alan Rd residents growing public street parking problem. Alan Rd residents could incorporate and create their own private district for maintenance of their private streets and area. They could even put up entrance gates to keep the public out.
A 25 cent surcharge for each beer and cocktail served at the Boathouse or what ever name it will have in the future to pay for parking lot maintenance?
And more timely, why oh why should anyone in the tiny little town of Summerland ever expect to drive anywhere. Don't Summerlanders realize that in their quest for pie-in-the-sky free socialized and expanding freeways and parking that they are creating an impact; incurious as to their impact when they drive to the Fiestas Mercado del where-ever and to avoid lowly public transportation and fee based downtown parking garages then blithely park in downtown neighborhoods; their own families trampling over lawns and property rights of others with all that taco and margarita merriment.
DonMcDermott (anonymous profile)
August 2, 2012 at 8:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Don, you act as if you never take advantage of these socialized public assets. Even your beloved public bus must use streets paid for by tax dollars.
Driftwood (anonymous profile)
August 2, 2012 at 8:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)
So a few years ago, when this concept came up, wasn't it to pay for Goleta Beach 2.0? And wasn't it only for GB and Arroyo Burro? The money raised was supposed to stay in the parks. Now, they want to use it to cover the general fund deficit that keeps getting worse due to the weakness of this current board majority to make the tough calls. Will these fees cover the budget deficit? The answer is NOT EVEN CLOSE.
Don, practice what you preach. Dont go to parks, beaches, or use county services if you feel that way. A little civics lesson. Summerland in unincorporated. Salud makes the calls for them in his own self serving ways.
BeachFan (anonymous profile)
August 2, 2012 at 9:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)
What I am saying is that somehow we have to start with some constructive ideas about how to pay our communities amenities, the upkeep and maintenance in a responsible and environmentally sensitive manner, and without having to resort to pilfering contractors and slave wage immigrant off-the-books laborers who don't have benefits. I personally think we should go back to the tax rates of the Eisenhower era which would included hefty tax rates for the top 2%.
DonMcDermott (anonymous profile)
August 2, 2012 at 1:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)
My thanks to Chris Meagher ( Indy reporter) for keeping this story on the front page. All the other local media can't seem to devote much room for this important issue.
Hopefully everyone will show at the next Park Commission meeting ( time & place in Meaghers article above) and speak their piece in opposition to this terrible proposal. At least get off your butts and email all the supervisors ( not just your own district) and let them know we dont want this punitive beach access fee passed.
geeber (anonymous profile)
August 2, 2012 at 5:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Let them know they'll be consequences on their careers if they implement this bonehead, elitist plan.
Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
August 2, 2012 at 6:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I actually don't mind paying my taxes. I can't say I love it but I I want our community, local, state and national to be able to maintain itself. good roads, adequate fire and police protection, airports, parks, schools etc. However I don't like the idea that every service needs to be paid for individually. Toll roads, entry fees to parks, pay to go to public schools.
what next, pay for every time you ned a cop or a firefighter? Some things I suppose need to be fee for service but I would urge our county supervisors to let the parks be free for now.
Noletaman (anonymous profile)
August 2, 2012 at 6:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Like I said before.
loonpt (anonymous profile)
August 3, 2012 at 12:21 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"Let them know they'll be consequences on their careers if they implement this bonehead, elitist plan."
-- Ken_Volok
"Elitist"?? What is an elitist plan? How do you know when a plan is elitist or plebeian?
That word is used so often in political talk to describe everything someone dislikes that it has become entirely meaningless. Also, it is used in a deprecating manner in spite of the fact that an elite person is one to be admired.
SezMe (anonymous profile)
August 3, 2012 at 1:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Well Sez , I for one fully realized that this plan would mainly benefit mainly the elites when my RangeRover driving friend told me he looks forward to the implementation of this lousy plan. He looks forward to prime parking as the rest of us give up our spots in moral protest. Beach access should not be a county asset that they can then resell us. It just aint right.
geeber (anonymous profile)
August 3, 2012 at 1:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)
SezMe: The Santa Barbara system of governance is not designed to help the hoi polloi. It is about tourists and Yuppies. Working-class people are an afterthought and the last thing someone who can barely afford to pay the hyperinflated rent prices here needs is to have to fork over yet more $$$ that they really don't have for the privilege of enjoying the natural wonder of the beach.
These people who make these plans *are* elitists and even if they are pro-abortion, pro-gay, Unitarian feminist Marxist Democrats, they are ultimately for the wealthy and are not true Progressives just as many Republicans are not true conservatives.
billclausen (anonymous profile)
August 3, 2012 at 2:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Sounds like someone needs to take an evening beach walk to relax and lose their crankiness.
Since part of the county deficit was caused by county policies and giveaways, so part of our plan needs to stop that behavior. Through elections and county charter changes.
Sadly, at the county level, we can't solve the real reason the revenue has shrunk recently. The economy. The highest corporate taxes in the world have driven our factories which employed a lot of "the working class" overseas. And unemployment increases the need for social services. A death spiral as pilots call it.
While I'm not a big fan of Bill Clinton, he got it right when he said "It's the economy, stupid".
so vote. More than once if you can. ;-)
passagerider (anonymous profile)
August 3, 2012 at 2:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)
@Bill C. You're completely correct that "The Santa Barbara system of governance is not designed to help the hoi polloi. It is about tourists and Yuppies. Working-class people are an afterthought" -- proof, I don't hear about placing Casa Esperanza or the new aspect of it on the Upper Eastside or in SanRoque... you oughta live in the Westside where the hoi polloi do live...they can't even get decent crosswalks by Cuca's there on Micheltorena St...
DrDan (anonymous profile)
August 3, 2012 at 8:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)
So...... are all you commenters coming to the neaxt hearing or what?
geeber (anonymous profile)
August 3, 2012 at 5:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Geeber: I'm out of country right now [does this mean I'm an elitist??] but have emailed my Supervisor vs. this stupid additional tax.
DrDan (anonymous profile)
August 3, 2012 at 7:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"The highest corporate taxes in the world have driven our factories which employed a lot of "the working class" overseas."
-- passagerider
I know this is a diversion from the thread topic but this statement is entirely false. The USA has the second lowest ACTUAL corporate tax rate of all the OECD countries.
SezMe (anonymous profile)
August 3, 2012 at 11:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)
@SezMe & passagerider -- SezMe is right, we have about the LOWEST corporate tax rate AND those guys don't pay even that: isn't that why Romney hasn't got the balls to release his obscene tax returns??
DrDan (anonymous profile)
August 4, 2012 at 1:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Back to topics more important than fast food. is there an organized effort yet? Have any supes publicly come out in support of parking fees at the beach?
Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
August 8, 2012 at 12:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Supervisors unanimously voted it down!
Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
October 9, 2012 at 8:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)