Arizona State Parks Board

Rural lawmaker seeks halt to state sweeping Arizona State Parks revenues

by

[Source: Jessica Testa, Cronkite News Service, 1/18/2012]– Arizona State Parks would be able to protect the revenue it raises from budget sweeps and use it for park operations under legislation proposed by a rural lawmaker. Rep. Karen Fann, R-Prescott, whose district is home to five state parks, said it was “penny wise and pound foolish” for the Legislature to cut the agency’s funding so drastically over the past few years. “Our state parks contribute to jobs and economic development. Especially in rural areas, they’re the ones bringing in business to local restaurants and hotels,” said Fann, the author of HB 2362.

The bill would create a fund allowing Arizona State Parks to keep all of the money generated from gate fees, concession fees, souvenir sales and all unconditional gifts and donations not specified for particular projects. The money would go toward operation and maintenance costs for the entire parks system. The state wouldn’t be able to pull money from the agency to help balance its budget, as it has done in the past, Fann said. “We’re asking the Legislature that we make sure, from here on out, that we don’t touch their fund,” she said. “Hands off this one. No sweeps of this one.”

The fund would not only protect park budgets but also ensure that Arizona State Parks is following rules set by the federal Bureau of Land Management, said Arizona State Parks Assistant Director Jay Ziemann. Many of the state’s larger parks sit on land that the federal government has transferred to the state at little to no cost as part of the Recreation and Public Purposes Act. These parks have entered into various financial partnerships with private entities, such as concession companies, Ziemann said.

The Bureau of Land Management requires that all money generated by these parks be reinvested into the parks, not transferred to the state. Without the protection of the parks’ funds, the public-private partnerships would also not be eligible for renewal.

Arizona State Parks hasn’t received money from the state’s general fund since 2009. Meanwhile, more than $15 million has been swept from the agency’s revenues, Ziemann said. “The Legislature directed the Arizona State Parks Board to act like a business, to go out and survive on their revenues,” Ziemann said. “Since then, they’ve essentially stolen money out of the till.”

Fann said her district’s parks brought in more than 500,000 tourists and $1.8 million last year, supporting 916 jobs. “It could have been much worse, if not for the municipalities who stepped up to the plate and contributed a little money from their funds to help minimize the impact of the sweeps,” Fann said.

Rep. Russ Jones, R-Yuma, one of the nine primary sponsors of HB 2362, said that though partnerships with companies have helped raise park revenues, the state’s parks should not become “private retail venues.”

“Every one of our parks is a jewel and we should take pride in how they look and how they function,” Jones said.

Misconception hurts state parks

by

[Source: Arizona Republic Editorial] – The struggling state park system isn’t suddenly and magically awash in cash. But there’s a pernicious misconception that it is because the Arizona State Parks Board approved more than $40 million in grants for two cities to buy state trust land. This is not park money.

The board happens to be, under the terms of a voter-approved referendum, the gatekeeper for funding to preserve trust land. The parks don’t get one penny.

It’s a lot like the state treasurer. The office manages billions of dollars a year. But that doesn’t turn Treasurer Doug Ducey and his staff into billionaires.

This kind of misunderstanding – whether willful or careless – may be one reason legislators have so blithely undermined Arizona State Parks. They cut off all state support in 2009. Since then, they’ve reached right into the till, diverting money that the parks themselves earn through entrance fees and concessions. This is not only wrong but also profoundly disingenuous from legislators who want agencies to act more like businesses.

As Arizona heads into yet another challenging year for the state budget, we can’t make smart decisions without looking at the numbers in context. All dollars aren’t the same. Some funding has legal constraints. Some spending has broader benefits beyond the immediate budget line.

Take that $40 million. It’s from the Growing Smarter fund, which voters approved in 1998. The ballot measure required the state to put aside $220 million, over the course of 11 years, to be used as matching money to preserve state trust land. (Trust land cannot be set aside for conservation outright but must be bought or leased.) Scottsdale just got approval for a $36.2 million grant to help expand its mountain preserve.Phoenixis getting $4.18 million to put toward buying land for the Sonoran Preserve.

Given the well-established value of open space – from tourist appeal to recreation to wildlife habitat – those are farsighted moves that will benefit all Arizonans in the long run.

It gets better. The dollars actually do double duty, helping Arizona schools, as well. Money from the sale of trust land is put into a permanent fund, with the interest going to education and a few other public purposes. Because of the matching requirements, the Growing Smarter grants will end up putting more than $80 million into the permanent fund. The story is far more complex than a single figure on a balance sheet.

Arizona State Parks: Big Money Problems

by

[Source: Tucson Weekly, Jim Nintzel] – Here’s the good news from the State Parks Board meeting this week in Tucson: Despite more sweeps of the parks’ funds by the Arizona Legislature, all of the state parks that are now open will remain open next fiscal year. The Joint Legislative Budget Committee agreed earlier this month to allow the State Parks Department to shift some funds around so the agency would have enough funds to handle payroll and other other expenses.

Here’s the bad news: The parks are continuing to run on a shoestring and the current path is a road to disaster. “We can’t go on every year like this and try to sustain a statewide park system,” said board member William Scalzo.

The GOP-led Legislature has whittled away at the parks’ funds for years now. The parks used to get $10 million a year in lottery dollars, but that has been redirected by the Legislature. And in the upcoming budget year, lawmakers swiped a portion of the gate fees from the parks, as well as some of the money from the parks State Lake Improvement Fund.

At this point, the department has no money for any capital improvements—new campgrounds, improved sewer systems, historic renovation. The parks had $150 million in unmet capital needs in 2007; State Parks Director Renée Bahl says that number is even higher today, but the department doesn’t have enough money to even survey the needs.

Several parks are open because local governments, business leaders and non-profits have stepped up to help. The partners have been “fantastic,” says Bahl, but the arrangement “was a bridge, and there’s only so long a bridge can go.” Several board members talked about the dangers of “partnership fatigue” and the likelihood that local governments, with their own financial pressures, would not be able to keep helping out over the long term.

That, in turn, is bad news for rural economies. There’s reason that local governments and businesses want the parks to remain open: They are a big boost to tourism—and outside tax dollars—for rural communities. But board members also acknowledged the reality that lawmakers weren’t likely to either dramatically increase funding for parks or put a proposition on the ballot to create a dedicated funding stream—such as a small fee on license plates, which was floated as an idea last year.

Board members and parks staff ended the meeting yesterday talking about the possibility of a ballot initiative that would dedicate dollars for the parks system. There are several conservation-oriented ballot drives being formulated around the state and park supporters are looking into whether they can join forces with one of the efforts. “We want a sustainable, non-sweep-able revenue source,” said board member Larry Landry.

State Parks: Lifeblood of Rural Communities

by

[Source: Mary King, Sedona.biz] – Over a hundred people attended the meeting at the Sedona Library on September 30th to learn about the fate of the state parks, which the legislature has voted to close. The attendees were treated to a 13 minute film entitled The Future of Our State Parks. It showcased the beauty of our state and local parks including Red Rock, Dead Horse Ranch, Slide Rock and Jerome (which has been closed) State Parks and Fort Verde Historic Park.

After that, a panel that included Chip Davis, Park Supervisor for Yavapai County; legislator Sandy Bahr; Former State Senator Tom O’Halleran; and Sedona Mayor Rob Adams discussed the many aspects of the issue. Missing was Republican Tobin, who declined the invitation to attend.

Economic Issues Outshone Environmental Concerns:
The park closings have been cast by the legislature as an issue that appeals to only liberal environmentalists. It has been framed as a necessary cost-cutting measure to be attractive to conservatives. However, some say revenues lost to the state and rural communities will be far greater than the dollars saved by the demise of these recreational/historical areas:

» 8 million dollars would be saved by closing the parks.
» 260 million in tourist dollars could be lost by closing the parks that includes the money spent by park visitors on hotels, restaurants, gas, gift shops, etc.
» 3,347 jobs in rural communities would be gone.

Privatization:
Chip Davis summed up the idea of privatization when he said, “In 1957, Arizona was the last state to establish a state park system. Let’s not be the first state to dismantle our state park system.”  One speaker stated that he was sure that the closing of the state parks was a calculated move on the Governor’s part towards privatization.

Privatization is a complex issue, which could entail having the Arizona State Park System run by an out-of-state entity. It could mean expanding the use of the park by private vendors that would offer services that the park service would want to contract out like concession stands, thereby using non-state funds to operate the park system.

Initiatives to Save the Parks:
It was clear that the members had given a lot of thought to ways to create a permanent funding source for the future. Mayor Rob Adams stated that Sedona could not afford to fund their parks next year. He had consulted with an event planner to see what type of revenues could be had if an outdoor event like a wedding was held at Red Rock State Park (without infringing on the environment). The event planner estimated that one event could yield a hundred thousand dollars.

Another speaker said, compared to neighboring states like New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming, we get very little revenues from our mineral resource-copper. The copper is owned by the citizens of Arizona. Likewise, these neighboring states put much more money into their state park system.

Verde Valley Has the Most State Parks:
This region has the most to lose with the closing of the parks. We have lost Jerome State Park. 80% of Arizonians are urban dwellers, and their cities pay for their local parks. Scottsdale pays over two hundred dollars per person per year to fund their local parks. Our state parks and the tourism it generates is our lifeblood, and as a region we need to let the legislature and the Governor to know our concerns, especially in an election year.