N.Y. Times Article - How does this happen?

National
In Remote Canyon, Calif., a Pay Phone Is Celebrated
By CAROL POGASH
Published: September 4, 2007
With cellphone reception rare, residents of Canyon, Calif., consider their pay phone to be as essential as the one-room post office and the three-room schoolhouse.


I think this is a great story. Don't get me wrong, I think AT&T was right in taking out the phone in the first place; let's face it, they're in the business to make money, and if removing a pay phone is cost-effective for their business that's okay with me. I also think that the residents of Canyon were right in fighting to keep it there. It served a purpose, and although it may not have been making money for AT&T, they had a right to keep it; the Telecom Act of 1996 even guaranteed the resident's this service.

So where is the problem with this story? Who is at fault? It's not AT&T, and it's not Canyon, California's residents, it's the state government of California. All I can say is leave it to the California State Government to figure out a way to collect over $1 million dollars in taxes from big-business, and at the same time not have any way to disperse the money to the people for whom it was supposedly collected. How did this tax law get passed? Isn't this something that our law-makers have done before? Why would this not be part of the ENTIRE process?

Maybe it's just me, but I think someone figured out a way for the State of California to collect one million dollars in taxes, make some money off the investment, eventually use the money for other things, and never have to use it for what it was ear-marked for.