Jack London and Sugarloaf Ridge parks will be shut down for two years as a cost-cutting move, California State Parks announced today. Across the state, 70 of the system’s 278 parks will be closed, some as early as Labor Day.
Nearby closures include the Petaluma Adobe, Annadel in Santa Rosa, and Boethe-Napa State Parks.
The shut downs, expected to all be in effect by July 1, 2012, will save the state $11 million in the next fiscal year, and $22 million in the following fiscal year.
“We regret closing any park,” said Ruth Coleman, director of California State Parks, “but we can no longer afford to operate all parks within the system.”
The cuts were mandated by AB 95, which was passed by the Legislature and signed into law by Governor Brown Jr. in March, Coleman said.
Assemblymember Jared Huffman, chair of the Assembly Water, Parks and Wildlife Committee, called the cuts “devastating.”
“While we are dismayed at the prospect of state park closures, this announcement does not come as a complete surprise,” Huffman said. “With the magnitude of the current budget cuts, it was inevitable that state park closures would be announced.”
Despite the large number of parks identified for closure, the parks department said that at least 92% of today’s attendance will be retained, 94% of existing revenues will be preserved, and 208 parks will remain open.
Even so, said Elizabeth Goldstein, president of the California State Parks Foundation, “Closing these parks is going in the wrong direction. At a time when local communities are struggling to be part of the state’s recovery, this proposal shuts the door to a vital part of our economy.”
The state’s current budget crisis demanded that tough decisions be made, said Resources Secretary John Laird. “Hopefully, Republicans in the legislature will agree to allow California voters to decide whether we extend currently existing taxes or make deeper cuts to our parks.”
State Parks had three primary metrics in determining the hit list: protecting the most significant natural and cultural resources; maintaining maximum public access and revenue; and the ability to protect closed parks so that they remain attractive and usable for potential partners.
Another factor was the ability to physically restrict all access to the park area. Jack London and Sugarloaf, for example, are remote areas with one gated entrance.
With recent announcement of over 70 park closures (including our beloved Annadel State Park), it’s time to step up. Among many other orgs working on this issue, LandPaths will continue to coordinate “People Powered” solutions while advocating for FULL PARK BUDGETS! It’s NOT too late! These parks are too dear to all of us to let them close!
Sign the petition to save Annadel and other parks here: http://www.change.org/petitions/pledge-to-help-keep-annadel-state-park-open
More info on the statewide effort to save our parks: http://www.savestateparks.org/
With recent announcement of over 70 park closures (including our beloved Annadel State Park), it’s time to step up. Among many other orgs working on this issue, LandPaths will continue to coordinate “People Powered” solutions while advocating for FULL PARK BUDGETS! It’s NOT too late! These parks are too dear to all of us to let them close!
Sign the petition to save Annadel and other parks here: http://www.change.org/petitions/pledge-to-help-keep-annadel-state-park-open
More info on the statewide effort to save our parks: http://www.savestateparks.org/
The impending closure of these parks was a focus a couple of years ago. At the time I remember reading an article/study that demonstrated how cost inneffective it was to maintain the parks without any revenues from visitors. I wonder if anyone is working on a similar survey now. Personally I don’t believe that this is as much to do with economics as it is to do with ideology.
The impending closure of these parks was a focus a couple of years ago. At the time I remember reading an article/study that demonstrated how cost inneffective it was to maintain the parks without any revenues from visitors. I wonder if anyone is working on a similar survey now. Personally I don’t believe that this is as much to do with economics as it is to do with ideology.
This article reiterates the State press releases that the shutdown will save 11 million the 1st year and 22 million the 2nd. However, actual savings are problematic at best. No effective plan to reduce the number of employees and other costs has been approved, and it looks very difficult for such to be implemented…park staff numbers were already low and minimum numbers seem required to merely protect these resources. 1/3rd of 1% of the deficit is taken care of AT BEST by these closures.
This article reiterates the State press releases that the shutdown will save 11 million the 1st year and 22 million the 2nd. However, actual savings are problematic at best. No effective plan to reduce the number of employees and other costs has been approved, and it looks very difficult for such to be implemented…park staff numbers were already low and minimum numbers seem required to merely protect these resources. 1/3rd of 1% of the deficit is taken care of AT BEST by these closures.