John Kavanagh

Yuma Legislator right to seek funding vote opportunity

by

[Source: YumaSun.com Editorial] – It looks like Arizonans may not get to vote on whether they want to set aside money to support outdoor programs and parks in the state. A legislative measure sponsored by Yuma’s State Rep. Russ Jones to accomplish this goal appears to have been smothered in the State House before it could even get a full debate. The House Appropriations Committee chairman, Rep. John Kavanagh of Fountain Hills, said there were more important uses for the money and denied it a hearing.

It is a shame that Jones’ effort to give voters a voice in this decision was dismissed so casually. In our view, Kavanagh feared voters would make a different choice than they did and that is why an end was brought to the measure. Jones’ goal was to let voters decide whether to restore the state’s Heritage Fund that was created by Arizona voters more that 20 years ago. Each year $10 million in Arizona Lottery money was given to the Arizona Game and Fish Department and $10 million to the State Parks Department. The funds were used to support state parks, protect endangered wildlife and promote outdoor activities.

Unfortunately, lawmakers decided they needed the money for other purposes during the economic downturn and eliminated the fund in 2010. This is one reason that communities like Yuma have had to come to the rescue of state parks operations in recent years. Jones was right to try to let voters decide where the priority should rest. It would not be a matter of asking for more taxes for the fund. The money comes from Arizona Lottery revenues.

Supporters hope they can get around the roadblock, but that may not be possible. There is an alternative and that is for supporters to gather signatures to put the measure directly on the ballot rather than going through the Legislature. It is difficult and costly, but it may be the only option.

Attempt to revive voter-approved Heritage Fund stalled in House

by

[Source: Jessica Testa, Arizona Capitol Times] – A lawmaker’s attempt to have Arizonans decide whether to revive the voter–approved Heritage Fund is stalled in the House. HCR 2047, authored by Rep. Russ Jones, R–Yuma, earned unanimous approval from the House Agriculture and Water Committee in early February, but the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee has declined to hear it.

The measure could potentially reinstate the $10 million annually that the Heritage Fund provided to Arizona State Parks. The agency used the money to expand and improve its parks and provide grants to communities for trails, parks and historic preservation.

In 2010, lawmakers eliminated the Heritage Fund and reallocated the money to the general fund. Rep. John Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills, said the bill wouldn’t be approved because the Legislature needs that $10 million for other natural resources funding, such as state trust land purchases and treatments to prevent forest fires. In addition, he said, the November ballot already has limited space. “The voters don’t like to see 20 or 30 ballot questions,” Kavanagh said. “We get criticized for that all the time. There has to be some triage.” Jones didn’t return phone calls seeking comment.

The Heritage Fund, established by voters in 1990, provided $10 million annually from the Arizona Lottery to the Arizona Game and Fish Department, which used the funds to promote recreation and environmental education and help endangered species, and $10 million to Arizona State Parks. The Heritage Fund was approved too early to fall under the 1998 Voter Protection Act, a constitutional amendment that prohibits the Legislature from reallocating voter-created funds.

“Voters fought for 20 years to protect this fund,” said Beth Woodin, president of the Heritage Alliance. “We’re doing everything we can in our waking hours to bring it back to them.” Woodin said Heritage Fund supporters are attempting to bypass Kavanagh, forming a committee of local political players and airing their concerns directly to House Speaker Andy Tobin, R–Paulden, and Senate President Steve Pierce, R–Prescott.

“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.”

The Heritage Fund benefited groups such as Patronato Mission San Xavier del Bac in Tucson, which was granted $150,000 in 2007 to renovate its east tower. The grant was canceled before construction began. Now, with the building rapidly deteriorating, renovations could cost between $1.5 and 2 million, said executive director Vern Lamplot. “The longer it sits, the worse the condition of the east tower gets,” he said. “It’s a shame that voters passed this and legislators saw it fit to undo it.”

Woodin’s group has formed a political committee with members such as Grady Gammage Jr., lawyer and senior research fellow at Arizona State University’s Morrison Institute for Public Policy, and Richard Dozer, former president of the Arizona Diamondbacks. Heritage Fund supporter Lattie Coor, chairman and CEO of the Center for the Future of Arizona and former ASU president, said access to public space plays an essential role in the lives of Arizonans. “We have to stay attentive to that, protecting it and preserving it as the population continues to grow,” he said.

A House concurrent resolution would allow reinstatement of The Heritage Fund, which would help with renovations on buildings such as the Mission San Xavier del Bac in Tucson. Often called “White Dove of the Desert,” this building was founded in 1692. (Cronkite News Service Photo by Brittny Goodsell)

Legislature’s neglect of state park system harms Arizona’s economy

by

[Source: William C. Thornton,  Special To The Arizona Daily Star]

Preliminary recommendations by the Governor’s Commission on Privatization and Efficiency (“Arizona urged to privatize its parks,” Sept. 22) come as no surprise to those of us who have been on the front lines of the battle to save Arizona’s state parks.

For the rest of us, it should serve as a wake-up call of what’s at stake if a lack of vision and political will is allowed to destroy our state park system. Conveniently, the final proposal won’t be released until after the fall elections; but it’s difficult to envision any park privatization scenario under which Arizona citizens and taxpayers won’t be the big losers.

In comments posted to the Star’s website, one writer asked: “What’s wrong with somebody earning a profit?”

The answer: absolutely nothing, and that’s just the point.

Hundreds of businesses throughout our state earn profits by supplying park visitors with gas, groceries, supplies, lodging and meals. A 2009 study by Northern Arizona University estimated the total economic impact of our state parks at $266 million per year, about half from out-of-state visitors. When a local park closes, as has already happened at Winslow (Homolovi), Springerville (Lyman Lake), and Oracle, visitors and the dollars they spend go away.

You may ask: “Won’t they do just as well under private management?”

The answer: Not likely! Private operators will, no doubt, be eager to take over profitable parks such as Catalina, Kartchner Caverns and the Colorado River parks. They probably won’t show much interest in smaller parks that, in themselves, aren’t profitable but still support local jobs.

How did we get here? The Legislature began the systematic dismantling of our state parks long before it could be justified by a budget crisis.

General-fund park appropriations ceased in 2002. Legislators told parks to become “more entrepreneurial and self-supporting” through admission fees, souvenir sales, etc. When they did, the Legislature took the money.

As a holistic system, profitable parks could carry those that didn’t break even but still generated economic benefits for their communities. That was no longer possible when the Legislature swept away every cent parks earned for themselves. In a particularly outrageous fund grab, legislators even took money from park donation jars and $250,000 from the estate of a benefactor who specifically willed it to state parks.

Before leaving office Gov. Janet Napolitano assembled a task force on sustainable parks to consider all options, including sale and privatization.

Gov. Jan Brewer continued the task force when she took office in January 2009. In October 2009, the task force recommended a modest $12 surcharge on noncommercial-vehicle licenses. In return, anyone with a current Arizona license plate would gain unlimited admission to all state parks. The system has worked well in other states. It would have assured the future of our state parks and reopened all roadside rest areas.

The measure died when House Appropriations Committee Chairman John Kavanagh would not allow a vote by the panel. Kavanagh claimed to be taking a principled stand for taxpayers. It was nothing of the kind. If the measure had passed the Legislature, it still would have required voter approval. By denying voters a more direct voice in determining the future of our parks, Kavanagh exemplified the arrogant abuse of power that prompted the framers of our state constitution to provide for voter initiatives.

In testimony to the House Appropriations Committee, I relayed sharply contrasting experiences at two state historic parks: Judge Roy Bean in Texas and McFarland in Arizona. Although it’s far off the beaten path, at Roy Bean we found beautifully maintained facilities that celebrate a colorful chapter in the history of the Lone Star State. At McFarland, in the Tucson-Phoenix corridor, we found a closed facility with crumbling historic buildings, even though Senator, Governor and Judge McFarland arguably played a bigger role in Arizona history than Judge Roy Bean did in Texas.

Our tax code is riddled with dozens of loopholes that could be closed to distribute the overall tax burden more evenly and allow for investment in our state’s future. The legislative leadership flatly refused to consider it.

Where do we go from here? The future may look grim, but it’s far from hopeless. Much will be decided in the upcoming elections. If you agree that we need a vibrant system of parks to preserve our natural, cultural and historic treasures for all Arizonans, make your views known to the governor, your state legislators and candidates.

William C. Thornton is a member of the Arizona Heritage Alliance Board. E-mail him at cactusworld@msn.com

Enhanced by Zemanta

Legislature’s neglect of state park system harms Arizona’s economy

by

[Source: William C. Thornton, Special for the Arizona Daily Star] –Preliminary recommendations by the Governor’s Commission on Privatization and Efficiency (“Arizona urged to privatize its parks,” Sept. 22) come as no surprise to those of us who have been on the front lines of the battle to save Arizona’s state parks.

For the rest of us, it should serve as a wake-up call of what’s at stake if a lack of vision and political will is allowed to destroy our state park system. Conveniently, the final proposal won’t be released until after the fall elections; but it’s difficult to envision any park privatization scenario under which Arizona citizens and taxpayers won’t be the big losers.

In comments posted to the Star’s website, one writer asked: “What’s wrong with somebody earning a profit?” The answer: absolutely nothing, and that’s just the point. Hundreds of businesses throughout our state earn profits by supplying park visitors with gas, groceries, supplies, lodging and meals. A 2009 study by Northern Arizona University estimated the total economic impact of our state parks at $266 million per year, about half from out-of-state visitors. When a local park closes, as has already happened at Winslow (Homolovi), Springerville (Lyman Lake), and Oracle, visitors and the dollars they spend go away.

You may ask: “Won’t they do just as well under private management?” The answer: Not likely! Private operators will, no doubt, be eager to take over profitable parks such as Catalina, Kartchner Caverns and the Colorado River parks. They probably won’t show much interest in smaller parks that, in themselves, aren’t profitable but still support local jobs [to read the full article click here].