State Parks

State support is essential

by

[Source: Arizona Republic Editorial] – Budget cutting left the state’s park system seriously wounded. Now, Arizona has to decide if it will leave the parks bleeding. Will the next generation find the kind of robust park experience envisioned by Arizonans who supported state funding for parks with the 1990 Heritage Fund initiative and land acquisition through the 1998 Growing Smarter referendum?

That vision included public support to grow and enrich parks.Or will your grandchildren find a few remnants of an anemic system?

That could be the consequence of years of budget cuts to the state park system, which saw its funding slashed from about $54.7 million in fiscal 2008 to $25.7 million in the past fiscal year.

A report from the state Auditor General’s Office says the Parks Board “was established as a publicly funded agency to provide a system of state parks for the public to enjoy. The loss of state funding … created a need for the state parks system to transition from being publicly funded to paying for its own operating expenditures. However, park receipts have not been sufficient to cover park operating expenditures.”

There was no public outcry to “transition” the parks from state support. In fact, the public repeatedly has used the ballot box to express support for the parks and open spaces.

No wonder. The parks serve a variety of public interests.

Economic: A 2009 study by Northern Arizona University found that state parks visitors had a statewide impact of more than $266 million, plus an additional $22.8 million in state and local taxes. Parks help rural economies.

Recreational: State parks offer hiking, camping and other outdoor experiences.

Educational: Historic landmarks, such as Yuma Territorial Prison State Park, preserve Arizona’s colorful heritage.

Spiritual: Arizona is enriched by the grace, beauty and culture of state parks.

A robust park system says something positive about a state’s vision of itself and its future.

Some might argue that Arizona has plenty of federal land and national parks to satisfy its needs. But Kartchner Caverns, Catalina State Park, Picacho Peak or Tubac Presidio are special, uniquely Arizonan places that deserve state park status. Arizona’s 30 state parks are jewels worth keeping in the public trust for future generations — including your grandkids’.

Arizona’s budget was in deep trouble in 2008 and subsequent years. The Legislature and Gov. Jan Brewer had to make painful cuts. However, in 2010, alternatives were proposed to help keep the parks whole. A proposal for a vehicle-registration fee to provide long-term stable funding for the parks never made it out of committee.

Stonewalling that idea suggests some of our elected officials have philosophical reasons for wanting to limit public funding to the parks. But the voting public supports parks.

The auditor general’s report found that reduced funding, coupled with reduced visitation, create long-term risks for the sustainability of the parks. The report lays out some options for partnerships and other alternatives that are worth exploring.

But state support is essential.

Arizona must move beyond the crisis mentality of recession-era budgets and plan for a state park system worthy of Arizona’s amazing history and eye-popping natural heritage.

It’s time to heal the wounds inflicted on Arizona’s park system.

Audit: Arizona state parks need more funds, visitors

by

[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.

Arizona’s Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP) is now ready for Review by the Public

by

(Phoenix, Arizona – September 10, 2012) – The Arizona State Parks department is responsible for writing Arizona’s Statewide Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP) every five years. This plan sets the evaluation criteria to allocate the Federal Land and Water Conservation Fund grants, along with other applicable grant programs consistent with the state’s outdoor recreation priorities as identified by public participants in the research. This policy plan is now available online in a draft format for public review at AZStateParks.com/SCORP and will be available for comment through October 7, 2012. The final plan will be implemented starting January 1, 2013.

Citizens interested in outdoor recreation in Arizona have participated with State Parks staff in the collection of recreation data since last May to build this first draft of the 2012 Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP). For more than 47 years, this offshore oil and gas leasing revenue fund, passed by Congress in 1965, has been used to plan, develop and expand outdoor recreation throughout America.

Arizona has received $60 million dollars from this fund toward the enhancement of outdoor recreation for Arizona communities and those monies were distributed through 728 grants administered by State Parks.

Arizona State Parks is committed to preparing a highly integrated outdoor recreation system for the future. This plan balances the recreational use and protection of natural and cultural resources. It also strengthens the awareness of the public between outdoor recreation with health benefits while also producing opportunities to enhance the economies and quality of life for residents. Recreation managers of cities, counties, the state and Federal government organizations in Arizona use this information for more specific recreation planning and budgeting. The plan also offers leadership opportunities to make decisions about the State’s enhancement of outdoor recreation sites, programs and infrastructure.

2013 Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP)

The 2013 SCORP Planning Process

Arizona State Parks is responsible for completing a Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP) every five years. The 2008 SCORP was a comprehensive report that included partnering with Arizona State University to conduct a statewide telephone survey of households. The 2013 SCORP is a targeted update to the 2008 SCORP to address the unique changes and challenges of the past five years.

Oversight, direction and input for the SCORP 2013 comes from a SCORP Work Group consisting of outdoor recreation professionals from a variety of organizations across the state. As part of the 2013 SCORP two online surveys were available beginning May 1, 2013 through May 31, 2012, one for Outdoor Recreation Providers, another to members of the public who had signed up for outdoor recreation agency list serves, email lists, newsletters and other constituents. In addition, a press release was sent out about the public survey, and the information was also made available on websites for those who were looking for outdoor recreation opportunities in Arizona on multiple agencies’ websites.

Tell us what you think!

This updated draft report contains a review of research related to outdoor recreation trends and issues, survey results from both the Outdoor Recreation Providers and Involved Recreation User surveys, indicating their opinions, preferences and outdoor recreation needs. Survey results are used to identify changes in outdoor recreation experiences during the last five years, and to identify primary outdoor recreation issues that need to be addressed statewide. This will enable public land agencies to improve your outdoor recreation experience by allocating scarce resources to issues that are most important to you. We would love to hear what you think. Please look at the document and send us your comments! Comments are due by October 7, 2012.

Download 2013 SCORP Draft Plan Document  (PDF Document3 MB PDF)

Download 2013 SCORP Draft Plan Supplement: Tourism & Outdoor Recreation (PDF Document400 KB PDF)

Download 2013 SCORP Draft Plan: Appendices & High Resolution Maps (33 MB PDF)

Submit Comments By Email
If, after reviewing the document you would like to submit public comments, or suggestions to be incorporated into the final SCORP document you can email feedback to: SCORP2013@azstateparks.gov

Submit Comments By Mail
If you would rather submit your comments or suggestions via mail, please send feedback to:
Arizona State Parks
ATTN: SCORP
1300 W. Washington St.
Phoenix, AZ 85007

If you would like Arizona State Parks staff to send you a paper copy of the draft plan to review, you can call (602) 542-4174 to request a copy. The Final 2013 SCORP will be available in January 2013.

Initiative to fund Arizona state parks fails to make ballot

by

[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.