State of Jefferson Idea Gains Ground In Butte County

by Jack

24 Sep Oroville – Folks from around the county and beyond packed the Oroville Grange to hear comments from the organizers of the State of Jefferson movement. In attendance was Congressman Doug LaMalfa, as well as representatives from state/county officials, the GOP, Tea Party, and the Butte Taxpayers Alliance.

The State of Jefferson movement began in Siskiyou County around 1939 and it’s been simmering on the back burners of politics ever since, until recently when economic and taxation issues in Sacramento made the idea very appealling.  

The original reason for splitting was fair and equal representation.   That hasn’t changed, and today’s proponents argue that the vast geographic and economic differences between the North and South State  make it difficult to manage from Sacramento and still represent both sides fairly with reasonable taxpayer allocations.   As the population increases in the Southern end the majority of legislation favoring that constituency grows, often times at the expense of voters in the North State.  

The idea of a State of Jefferson was overwhelming popular with those attending the Oroville meeting.   It was virtually unanimous that Northern California has a number of critical economic issues coming our way in the near future.   Therefore, we need to assure fair representation against the weight of overwhelming votes in the Southern end of the State.  The South State currently dominates the legislative playing field in Sacramento.   It was also agreed that while the odds may be against them for forming a new State, they won’t get any better as time passes.   As one of the proponents said, “Sure, the odds are long, but they’re better than the odds of us getting fair representation in the coming years.”

There’s no question that California has had its share fiscal woes, from corruption to wasteful spending.   As a result, we’re the most taxed people among the 50 States and 2 territories! Voters in the North feel they can do better than last place.   They also liked the idea bringing government and spending bills closer to the people.   As Mike Wacker-Chico, one of the proponents pointed out, “During times of financial distress, when corporations become unwieldy they downsize.   That’s basically all we’re asking here.   California needs to downsize, so voters will receive better representation.  We’re brining government closer to the voters.”    He joked, “If the voters in the North State had their say, no way would we be spending billions on a bullet train for SoCal!” 

The diversion of North State water to quench the thirsty Southern portion was another major issue that came up.   This one of the North State’s most valuable resources and currently, the sheer number of votes in the South will determine how and when that resource will be taken.   This has many North State farmers nervous because they can’t begin to match the lobbying power of the interests in the South. 

At the conclusion of the meeting it was decided that the multitude of serious political issues for creating a new State of Jefferson are far more compelling and more diverse than the issues that once confronted our founders in 1776.  At the core of the movement is taxation without fair representation.   

Eventually, Butte County Supervisors will be asked to make a decision to support the idea of a new State or reject it.   As a matter of risk they have little or nothing to lose by supporting the idea.   It’s the next level is where it gets to be more interesting.  The counties will then be calling on our representatives to draft a bill to create a new State.    Will the Butte County Supervisors have the vision and the courage to take this bold move?  At this time we have had very little feedback from them.  This is the time when your voice really counts.   If you like the idea of a smaller state government that is closer to the people, that provides more freedom and less regulation, why not let your Supervisor know? 

UPDATE: Modoc County is the latest county to vote for Statehood, 4-0.

Some of the reasons for a new state:

  • More freedom
    Less Regulation
    Smaller, more efficient government
    Lower taxation – greater representation
    Preservation of natural resources, water, timber, coastal property, etc.
    Greater diversity
    Legislation designed for local demographics
    Less waste, fraud and corruption with home rule concept
    More transparency
    Better communications between elected and voters


District 1: Supervisor Bill Connelly, Chair5280 Lower Wyandotte Road
Oroville, CA 95966Phone: (530) 538-6834
Email: BConnelly@buttecounty.netFirst Term Began: January 11, 2005

Current Term Ends: January 2, 2017

Larry Wahl - District 2 Supervisor District 2: Supervisor Larry Wahl2233 Nord Avenue, Suite 2
Chico, CA 95926Phone: (530) 891-0686
Email: LWahl@buttecounty.netFirst Term Began: January 3, 2011

Current Term Ends: January 5, 2015

District 3 Supervisor Maureen Kirk District 3: Supervisor Maureen Kirk, Vice Chair196 Memorial Way
Chico, CA 95926Phone: (530) 891-2800
Email: MKirk@buttecounty.netFirst Term Began: January 8, 2007

Current Term Ends: January 5, 2015

Supervisor Steve Lambert District 4: Steve Lambert3159 Nelson Avenue
Oroville, CA 95965Phone: (530) 538-2516
Email: district4@buttecounty.netFirst Term Began: January 5, 2009

Current Term Ends: January 2, 2017


District 5: Supervisor Doug Teeter747 Elliott Road
Paradise, CA 95969Phone: (530) 872-6304
Email: Dteeter@buttecounty.netFirst Term Began: January 7, 2013

Current Term Ends: January 2, 2017


This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to State of Jefferson Idea Gains Ground In Butte County

  1. Libby says:

    You need somebody to run some real numbers. I don’t think you’re taking into account the fact that a lot of north state government services are subsidized by south state taxpayers.

    I think Jefferson might wind up quite impoverished, and without the means to defend itself against voracious capitalists and corporate polluters and that sort of thing.

  2. Mike says:

    Gosh Libby, let’s look at the numbers. If Jefferson included say the 12 northern counties, it would be larger than New Mexico and many other states. We would be entitled to all the taxes that now go to California. That’s state income taxes, sales taxes, etc. Plus, you can believe that our expenses would be a heck of a lot lower with local control.

    I’m sure our own state would be able to “defend itself against voracious capitalists and corporate polluters”. After all, we live here and we love it here. We know a lot better how to take care of our home than politicians from LA, San Francisco and Sacramento.

  3. Tina says:

    Sure Libby, because you lack the vision of the free entrepreneur and believe things get done only when government has a hand in them. You like to pretend that the money required for your big government solutions don’t come from the efforts of those who are capitalists, form corporations, and create wealth and opportunity.

    American business has been a cooperating partner in cleaning up the environment and done yeomans work in changing their operations which are among the most nonpolluting in the world!

    And the reward for their enthusiastic cooperation and their investment in time, money, and R&D from small minded people (like you) is to trash them on a regular basis.

    Ugly, ugly attitude, lady.

  4. Libby says:

    “Gosh Libby, let’s look at the numbers. If Jefferson included say the 12 northern counties, it would be larger than New Mexico.”

    Territory is not taxpayers. To effectively run a state, you need bodies and businesses generating revenue. If you’re aim is to avoid your responsibilities in this regard, you ain’t gonna be running much of a state … which is fine, as long as you stay healthy, and none of them rapacious capitalist polluters moves in next door.

  5. Tina says:

    Libby: “To effectively run a state, you need bodies and businesses generating revenue.”

    Horse feathers!

    The people in this area do not and will not see a necessity to “fund” things that don’t fit the lifestyle and population!

    The state of Wyoming has a population of 568,158 cowboys. It is the 10th largest in terms of surface area but has the lowest recorded population of any state in the Union. Their employment is stable with a 4.6% unemployment rate, much better than California. The people of Wyoming work at all kinds of companies from makers of honey to steel parts manufacturing. Wyoming also has a balanced budget and, last I heard, the state has a $200 million cushion…not bad for a state with such small numbers of folks.

    Revenues generated from growers and ranching is not small potatoes lady. The northern part of the state has a lot more going for it than you think. We also have a few very nice resort areas. There is a bit of clean manufacturing going on here too.

    I think the good folks of Jefferson will do just fine thank you.

  6. Tina says:

    Dr Ben Carson wrote a piece today in the Washington Times about the stand Ted Cruz has taken using history, and the Alamo, as a guide. Once paragraph seemed particularly appropriate to this effort:

    We have an opportunity to re-establish a government in which freedom of speech is cherished. As Thomas Jefferson once famously said, “When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.” We must remember that our representatives work for us; we don’t work for them. Whenever they forget that, we must act to re-establish proper order.

  7. Libby says:

    “The people in this area do not and will not see a necessity to “fund” things that don’t fit the lifestyle and population!”

    No, you have to be responsible: figure out what you do fund, what it costs, and whether you’ll have the means.

    That is my chief gripe with you “conservatives”, your ignorance. What does it cost to run a DMV office, a county hospital, a school? You have no idea and/or unreasonable expectations about what $24K and no bennies will buy you.

    It is … just … extremely irritating.

  8. Tina says:

    Libby: “No, you have to be responsible: figure out what you do fund, what it costs, and whether you’ll have the means.”

    Libby…you actually regard the people up here as clueless bumbling hicks? Do you really think people that have seriously considered this have not taken a look at what it would take financially and economically?

    “That is my chief gripe with you “conservatives”, your ignorance.”

    Wow! Such arrogance. A great many of us own businesses and responsibly manage budgets, pay employees, and pay taxes of all kinds that others don’t have to pay or be responsible to collect. We deal with the actual outcomes that result from the vapid regulation that you “smart guys” think is necessary. That means we have intimate knowledge of what does and does not work and what is actually necessary and what is just a bunch of bloated, expensive bureaucratic nonsense!

    Yes Libby dear, the proposed budget for the State of Jefferson would look a great deal like a business plan…it would include the expense of running a DMV, etc.

    “It is … just … extremely irritating.”

    Irritating is putting up with progressives as they rail against the mythical creatures they have constructed in their prejudiced, mean-spirited minds to represent those of us on the right.

    My point was that we wouldn’t be likely to spend millions on a bullet train to nowhere and a lot of green taxation and regulation that is unreasonable. We wouldn’t have to pay for the maintenance of all the freeways and bridges in the Bay area and LA/San Diego. We would be able to address the things that concern us. The budget would be smaller but we would have the opportunity to establish a different pension plan, for instance, for state workers. We could establish very different rules about how we administer welfare. We could re-establish the logging industry we could do it responsibly without the stupid unimaginative extremism that killed that industry for California.

  9. dewey says:

    Good Luck with that! I am in district and laugh.

  10. Tina says:

    Good luck with that dewey!

  11. Dewey says:

    I was born in the State of California and I will die in the state of California not Jefferson.

    The real story is they want to split California into 3 states. 6 Senators to take over the senate. All a scam. When any political party wants to completely take over a gov for their own corporate agenda I take issue.

Comments are closed.