Audit: Arizona state parks need more funds, visitors

[Source: Yvonne Wingett-Sanchez, The Arizona Republic] – The future of Arizona’s state parks is at risk, a new audit says, and their long-term financial sustainability depends on expanded partnerships and marketing efforts.

An Auditor General’s Office report released Wednesday portrayed the parks system as in dire need of funding. The Legislature and Gov. Jan Brewer cut funding to about $25.7 million last fiscal year from about $54.7 million in fiscal 2008, the report said. The audit also found that low and declining visitation was among the factors that pose long-term risks for the parks. Auditors recommended the Arizona State Parks Board, which manages the state’s 30 parks, continue to expand partnerships with local governments and organizations and create a new marketing campaign to showcase the parks. Auditors also said the board should study how the parks system can become more financially sustainable.

The 30 state parks cover a total of 62,000 acres, with 28 percent of the land owned by the state and 72 percent leased or under easement from federal and state entities. There are four types of parks, ranging from environmental-education parks such as Boyce Thompson Arboretum to recreation areas such as Kartchner Caverns. About 2 million people visited the state parks in fiscal 2011, the report said.

Cristie Statler, executive director of the Arizona State Parks Foundation, said the audit results were no surprise given years of deep budget cuts to parks funding by the governor and lawmakers. “They swept entrance fees, gift-shop money, donations, as well as eliminated the $10 million annual Heritage Fund allocation to state parks,” she said. Statler pointed out that, time and again, surveys say Arizonans overwhelmingly support state parks and open spaces and believe such areas add to a region’s economic health. “The only reason we have state parks open right now is because partners around the state, municipalities and non-profits, have supported … a huge number of state parks — about 19 across the state,” Statler said. “Were it not for these partnerships — I kid you not — these parks would be closed.”

In some partnerships, for example, cities will agree to share certain park expenses. Statler said she understands the need to continue to expand such partnerships but questioned auditors’ recommendation of a marketing campaign. “If you don’t have money, how can you promote the parks?” she asked. “To admonish the state parks board or direct them to continue to expand partnerships is to relinquish any state responsibility for the state’s park system.”

The audit also found:

• Arizona has one of the lowest number of park visits among Western states, and state parks compete with many national and local parks for visitors.

• The loss of state funding for park operations has created a need for the system to transition from being supplemented from state coffers to earning enough revenue to cover its own operating expenses. Historically, park revenue has not covered operating expenditures, until recently.

• The board has taken steps to increase revenue, including adding electrical hookups at campsites, an improved reservations system and a new fee schedule that charges lower fees to attract campers during the off-season and higher fees when sites are at a premium.

Initiative to fund Arizona state parks fails to make ballot

[Source: Howard Fischer, Capitol Media Services] –Arizonans are not going to get a chance to vote on whether they want to fund state parks with a surcharge on vehicle registration fees. Bill Meek, president of the Arizona Parks Foundation, said Tuesday the initiative campaign ran out of money about two weeks ago to hire paid circulators. “We had a really good army of volunteers,” he said. But Meek said that was insufficient to gather the 172,809 valid signatures needed by Thursday to put the question on the ballot.

Meek said, though, that is not the end of the issue. He said supporters of the plan will ask lawmakers next year to refer the issue to voters in 2014, bypassing the need to circulate petitions. The question of funding remains significant because lawmakers, looking for ways to balance the state budget in prior years, have refused to provide tax dollars to support the parks system. Complicating matters, legislators even took some of the money that had been raised from admission and other fees.

A 2009 task force report to Gov. Jan Brewer concluded that the parks system “is threatened with extinction and cannot survive under a roller-coaster system of financial support.”

The initiative had two key provisions.

One would have imposed a $14 surcharge added to the cost of each vehicle registration fee. That fee would be voluntary — but motorists would have to affirmatively opt out by checking a box on the renewal form to avoid paying it. Meek said states with similar systems manage to get anywhere from 40 to 80 percent of drivers agreeing to the additional fee. While Meek had no specific figures of what the fee might raise, that 2009 report estimated that even if half of motorists opt out, that could still raise $40 million a year.

The second half would make anything the parks system raised, whether from the vehicle license surcharge or admission fees, off limits to legislative raiding. Meek said he had hoped to line up sufficient major donors to get the signatures.

The idea of the registration fee is not new. In fact, it was part of the recommendations in that 2009 report to Brewer. Meek conceded there is probably no way lawmakers themselves would ever approve the plan — even with the opt-out provision — as many have taken a “no tax hike” pledge. Meek disputed, though, that it is a tax. But he said they might be willing to give voters a chance to weigh in by simply voting to put the issue on the ballot.

That logic worked in 2010 when lawmakers agreed to let voters decide whether to impose a temporary one-cent hike in the state sales tax. Several legislators who supported referring the issue to the ballot later said they voted against it in the special election that year. Meek, however, has an uphill fight, even to get that Referral.

A version of the vehicle license surcharge gained the support the following year by the House Committee on Natural Resources and Rural Affairs in 2010. But the full House refused to go along — or even send the question to the ballot.

State Parks petitions hit the street

[Source: Steve Ayers, Camp Verde Bugle] – The move to put an initiative on the November ballot that supporters hope will stabilize and sustain Arizona’s 27 state parks, is underway. It is known as the Arizona Natural Resources Protection Act. With five state parks located in the Verde Valley, along with the Verde River Greenway, the initiative is getting plenty of support locally.

“This has everything to do with the value of state parks to the Verde Valley and to Yavapai County,” says Chip Norton, president of the Friends of the Verde River Greenway. “It means a lot to our communities and the opportunities it provides for school kids as well as the residents. The tourism component is really big. The amount of money it brings into the valley is pretty phenomenal. They have been hanging on the edge for too long, forcing local communities to keep them going.” Norton and the friends group launched the petition drive at a meeting last Thursday, at a meeting in Cottonwood.

If the initiative makes the ballot and it passes, it would fund the operations of Arizona State Parks as well as the Heritage Fund, which was also raided by the Legislature, with a $14 donation attached to annual vehicle registration. The charge would be automatically added to the registration cost, but vehicle owners could opt out. Supporters hope it will raise $30 million a year. The initiative protects all money donated to the fund from legislative sweeps and re-establishes the Arizona State Parks grant program, which pays for municipal and nonprofit recreation projects across the state. It also provides for free admission to state parks for school-age children when on school sanctioned field trips and sets aside at least one day every year in which anyone could come to a state park for free.

The initiative was launched by the Arizona State Parks Foundation after House Bill 2362, which overwhelmingly passed both the house and Senate, was vetoed by Gov. Jan Brewer. “We have been watching for some time and realized there was growing support for long-term support and a long term funding mechanism of some sort. So we began forming a coalition,” says ASPF Director Christy Statler. “The straw that broke the camel’s back was the governor’s veto. And no legislator wanted to stick their neck out for a referral to the voters, so we mobilized and are moving forward with the Arizona Natural Resources Act.”

Volunteers will be circulating petitions around the valley over the next few weeks. To get on the ballot, 175,000 signatures will need to be collected statewide by the July 5 deadline.

Arizona Heritage Fund Update, Summer 2012

This past legislative session, HCR2047, sponsored by Representative Russ Jones (R-Yuma) and co-sponsored by a bipartisan group of 17 members of the House, would have placed a referendum on the November ballot seeking voter approval for reinstatement of the Arizona State Parks Heritage Fund. “Pristine areas that represent the varied vistas, flora, and fauna found throughout Arizona, along with many important fragile sites, represent the heart and soul of our state,” Jones said. “It’s particularly important now, as Arizona celebrates its Centennial, that we rededicate ourselves to the preservation of our historical roots and spectacular vistas.”

The bill passed its first hurdle, gaining the unanimous 9-0 vote of the House Agricultural and Water Committee. However, the measure was suffocated in the State House before it could even get a full debate. The House Appropriations Committee chairman, Representative John Kavanagh (R-Fountain Hills), said there were more important uses for the money and denied it a hearing.

“Voters fought for 22 years to protect this fund,” said Beth Woodin, President of the Heritage Alliance and former Arizona Game & Fish Commissioner. “We’re doing everything we can in our waking hours to bring it back to them. The Heritage Fund has a huge economic impact,” she said. “For legislators who are cranking the line about job creation and community pride, this is something really positive to have on your resume.”

In May, the Citizens to Save Arizona’s Natural Resources filed language for an Initiative to seek qualification for the November 2012 statewide ballot that provides voter-protected funding for the management and protection of our natural resources.  The new initiative called the Arizona Natural Resources Protection Act will ensure that current and future generations are able to enjoy the natural splendor, historic heritage and outdoor recreational opportunities offered at our Arizona parks and recreational areas.

This campaign was created in a very short time in response to the Governor’s veto of HB2362, state parks revenue fund, which was sponsored by Representative Karen Fann (R-Prescott). Fann’s bill would have established the State Parks Revenue Fund consisting of retail sales, appropriations, gifts, donations, user fees, concession fees and other revenue generating activities.

Previously, for many years, Parks was asked by the Governor and Legislature to operate like a business and make its own money. It did just that, and fairly well, but the Legislature took all of that too. HB2362 was intended to be a remedy for that sort of sweep. It passed the House and Senate with about 97% of the vote only to be vetoed by the Governor. Brewer did not like that there were no provisions to have those funds appropriated by the Legislature. As part of budget 2012 negotiations, those funds are now permitted to go to Parks as long as they are appropriated.

Currently, the group, Citizens to Save Arizona’s Natural Resources, is hoping it can gather the 230,000 or so signatures necessary to make it to the ballot for 2012. The Arizona Natural Resources Protection Act, if successful, will be funded donations from generous citizens when they renew their drivers’ registrations. The fee suggested is $14, but one may opt out of it for any or all automobile registrations. This is not a tax. It is voluntary. It is hoped that enough citizens will donate to fill the fund and more so that State Parks may once again keep all parks open and in good repair.

This Initiative language is written by Andy Gordon who penned the original Heritage Fund Initiative in 1990. Gordon is a partner with Coppersmith Schermer & Brockelman PLCand specializes in Election Law. This measure to help save State Parks is important for Arizona’s wildlife too. It would:

  • voter-protects the entire $10 million Game and Fish Heritage Fund.
  • establishes a new State Parks granting fund for $10 million to be used for habitat protection and purchase as well as environmental education and historic preservation.
  • protects all Arizona State Parks funds from Legislative sweeps.

If the Arizona Natural Resources Protection Act does not make it to the ballot or is not passed by the voters in 2012, another similar initiative will get crafted in November for the 2014 election cycle. The Arizona Heritage Alliance will continue leading the dialog with community leaders to reinstate the State Parks Heritage Fund.

A 2007 study estimated that 224 jobs were directly supported by Parks Heritage Fund grants. Heritage-funded improvements to parks and historic sites help attract more than 2 million visitors, about half from out of state, who add $266 million to our state’s economy each year and support an additional 3,000 jobs, mostly in rural areas that have been among the most heavily impacted by the economic downturn.

Reinstatement of the parks funding is not a partisan issue. It is not a liberal-conservative issue. It is common sense and sound business practice a win-win for wildlife and habitat, outdoor recreation, historical restoration and Arizona taxpayers.

For more information regarding the Arizona Natural Resources Protection Act go to: