99 groups sign up to protect Arizona’s Heritage Fund! Who will be 100?

One group shy of 100 has signed on to help protect the Arizona Heritage Fund.  Who will be number 100?

If you or your organization would like to sign our letter (and be that #100), send us an e-mail and include your name, mailing address, e-mail, and state legislative district.  To locate your district, click here.  Thank you for your interest and support in preserving and protecting Arizona’s cultural, natural, and historic resources.

San Xavier could be hurt by decision that saves Arizona state parks

Budget sweeps caused group restoring San Xavier Mission to lose a grant for east tower restoration. (Photo: Jonathan J. Cooper)

[Source: Jonathan J. Cooper, Cronkite News Service] — Late last year, crews removed scaffolding that covered the west tower of San Xavier Mission.  Preservation experts had spent years removing a concrete coating, replacing disintegrating brick and restoring the original lime mortar cover.  

Restoration work was supposed to move this year to the mission’s east tower, where the structure is disintegrating from the inside. But the scaffolding could stay on the ground and the tower could continue to slowly crumble now after lawmakers closing the state’s budget deficit swept millions from a fund that had committed $150,000 in lottery proceeds to the work here.  “The whole thing is frustrating because you want to believe the state lives up to its word,” said Vernon Lamplot, executive director of Patronato San Xavier, a nonprofit organization created to restore the 212-year-old mission south of Tucson.

An Arizona icon dubbed “The White Dove of the Desert,” San Xavier stands a vision of contrasts.  One tower is gleaming white, while the other has yellowing paint and mold.  The exterior is cracked, with stucco falling from the brick walls.  The restoration at San Xavier is one of about 120 projects, some already under way, that stand to lose grants from the Heritage Fund, which designates up to $20 million of state lottery revenue annually for parks, trails, historic preservation, and wildlife conservation.  Voters created the fund in 1990.

There is some hope for the grants.  A bill by Rep. Warde Nichols, R-Chandler, was amended to reallocate money to help prevent some state parks from closing and, among other things, replace the $4.9 million swept from the Heritage Fund.  A House committee endorsed the bill, but it would require a three-quarters vote from both chambers to pass.  The plan may prove unpopular because it would take the money from the Growing Smarter Fund voters created in 1998 to conserve land.

The dozens of Heritage Fund grants around Arizona are especially important now to stimulate the economy and encourage tourism, said Doris Pulsifer, grants director for Arizona State Parks, which administers much of the money.  “To develop these projects provides jobs because someone has to go out there and build them,” she said.  “And money is spent on the equipment and the materials.”

Dennis Hoffman, an economics professor at Arizona State University’s W.P. Carey School of Business, said the Heritage Fund grants probably do create some jobs and have a small economic benefit.  But he said it’s hard to argue that one state program is more beneficial than another as they all fight for a dwindling number of dollars.  “You’ve got a million ducks fighting over two croutons,” Hoffman said.  “We need more croutons.  There’s just not enough money going around to fund everything that most Arizonans would agree needs to be funded.”

Beth Woodin, president of the Arizona Heritage Alliance, an organization that lobbies the Legislature to continue supporting the Heritage Fund, said the sweep shows a lack of commitment to historic preservation, parks, and wildlife.  “It would seem that sane and reasonable and educated people would care about the Heritage Fund,” she said.  [Note: To read the full article, click here.]

Community rallies to keep Oracle State Park open

State Sen. Al Melvin (seated at left) listens as docent Mary Bast gives a tour of Oracle State Park's Kannally Ranch House (Photo: Ty Bowers, The Explorer)

[Source: Ty Bowers, The Explorer] — Given the nearly $22 million in immediate budget cuts the Arizona Legislature has proposed for the state park system, keeping Oracle State Park open could prove difficult, Sen. Al Melvin (R-26) told a handful of park supporters Saturday.  “Time is of the essence here,” Melvin said after a tour of the Kannally Ranch House at the park.  On Friday, Feb. 20, the Arizona State Parks Board will vote on whether to close up to eight state parks, the 4,000-acre park in Oracle among them.

A letter-writing campaign could work, especially one featuring a detailed proposal for how the park’s support group, the Friends of Oracle State Park, could help defray operating costs, Melvin strategized.  He would write the parks board, too, the senator said.  “I promise you I will do everything I can … to keep it up and running,” Melvin told a small cadre of some of the park’s most loyal volunteers, many of whom live near Melvin in SaddleBrooke.

Two days earlier, on Feb. 5, more than 100 people had packed the Oracle Community Center to discuss the park’s potential closure.  At that meeting, the Friends of Oracle State Park proposed spending some of $40,000 they had in the bank to keep the park open for the rest of the fiscal year, which ends June 30.  It would cost about $1,500 a month to run the park with a shoestring staff — hardly a long-term solution, many volunteers said.

In fiscal 2008, it cost $278,398 to operate the park in Oracle, according to state officials.  The 9,898 recorded visitors to the park brought in $14,492.  When contemplating which parks it might close, the state looked at how much it cost per visitor to operate each park.  It costs $26/visitor to operate Oracle State Park — second highest only to McFarland State Park in Florence.  Numerous people attending the meeting in Oracle last Thursday questioned using cost per visitor as the only metric for deciding which parks to close. “Is that the best way to value a park?” asked Jim Walsh, the Pinal County attorney.  [Note: To read the full article, click here.]

Arizonans worried about possible state park closures

Oracle State Park

[Source: Associated Press] — To many people living in southeastern Pinal County, the Oracle State Park is a hidden environmental gem that draws the local rural communities together.  So concern over its possible closure as part of the state’s attempt to cut a $1.6 billion budget deficit has rippled like a shockwave through Oracle, an unincorporated community 45 miles northeast of Tucson, and the surrounding area.  “Oracle is not incorporated; we’re not a town, we’re not a city,” said area resident Julie Szekely.  “We have no legal entity to provide things like a place for people to get together and do things as a community…  We use Oracle State Park as our neighborhood gathering place.”

The 4,000-acre park was among eight of Arizona’s 27 state parks that officials initially recommended for closure, for a five-month savings of $844,840, because of midyear spending cuts imposed by legislation that Gov. Jan Brewer signed last weekend.  Action on the recommended closures has been tabled temporarily as Arizona Parks Board members examine other alternatives, but 47 state parks seasonal employees were put on leave without pay Friday.

The eight parks recommended for closure had relatively low visitation rates. Officially, the Oracle park only reported 9,989 visitors during 2007-08.  But the front entrance gate is unmanned, with only an honor system for visitors to pay $6 per vehicle without annual passes.  The count likely doesn’t reflect the true number of visitors, more repeat visits by pass-holders and the park’s 125 to 150 volunteers, said Tina Acosta, the park’s assistant manager.  Padlocking its gate would trim $116,000 from the park’s budget through June 30.

Acosta said she fears that “the preservation, conservation, educational, and cultural heritage are not being taken into consideration” by bean-counters. “I think a lot of the more rural parks are very connected to the communities,” she said.  “The people are more connected to the parks.”  [Note: To read the full article, click here.]