Should California state parks consider private alternatives to closures?

California's continuing budget dilemma is again raising the specter of closing state parks. John Koeberer, CEO and co-owner of the California Parks Company and former chairman of the State Chamber of Commerce, wrote an op-ed piece in the Napa Valley Register that private alternatives should be considered before closure of any parks.

With the failure of Propsition 21 in last November's ballot to fund parks with an increase in vehicle license fees, voters have said no new taxes. Koebere suggested the following solutions:

"• Assess state parks. As a park professional, it is difficult for me to even mouth this, but some parks don’t belong in the state park system. Most of these are the smallest of our parks. They lack any semblance of statewide historical, natural, cultural, recreational or economic significance and were often added in response to political influence or when funding was more available. California needs an independent task force (similar to the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission) to assess which parks should be retained and which should be mothballed until times are better. The task force might also recommend parks for adoption by nonprofits, local park districts or other sympathetic entities. The potential savings from this assessment could be substantial.

"• Private management. Many parks could be packaged regionally for private-sector management, while others have sufficient real or potential revenues to be managed privately on their own. Private enterprise has demonstrated itself capable of operating parks, on average 30 percent less than it costs government to do so at comparable standards. Under this scenario, supervision and protection (public safety and natural resources) would remain under the direction of state park personnel. Functions like maintenance, janitorial, fee collection, interpretation and limited security services could be assumed by private contractors. These represent the lion’s share of the overall costs to keep parks open. There are many examples of this working at public parks across the country. The savings (both human and financial) at these privately operated parks could make it easier to fund parks still operated directly by the California State Parks.

"• Generate new revenue. Many privately managed approaches can raise funds for parks, such as: automated 24/7 fee collection at park entrances, parking lots and showers; privately owned and managed portable tent cabins, park models, yurts and other forms of alternative camping; special events (such as concerts, competitions and spectator events); and new types of tours, recreational and interpretive programs that appeal to new audiences of park users. To its credit, California State Parks is now studying some of these; however, a top-to-bottom review of outdated policies could result in considerable gains, such as at Hearst Castle where significant revenue is lost because of current approaches. More revenue to the state can be generated without additional investment by state government. In many cases, existing concessionaires would be willing to invest privately to expand their operations in ways that increase revenue to the state, sustain and improve upon the park experience and preserve park values.

"• Seek concessionaire solutions. It is in the DNA of entrepreneurs to invent new ways to stimulate revenue. Do that by challenging state park concessionaires to propose revenue-producing ideas and programs appropriate to the parks. Private capital will flow when opportunities for return on investment are given. These private investments could convert to state ownership upon contract expiration, providing even greater revenue to the state when those contracts are rebid.

"• Reinvent state parks. Considering that old approaches aren’t working, it’s time for a fresh start. Take this opportunity to review and reinvent how state parks are managed and operated. Major U.S. corporations and nonprofit organizations stay competitive, vital and relevant by employing private consultants. The same approach could benefit state parks."

Koeberer says that these private-sector approaches can be accomplished at little to no cost, and that if the public and politicians have the political will to consider new private approaches to the state parks, that "park closures and deteriorated parks need not be inevitable."

What do you think? Is this the way to save our parks?

Check out Bob Difley's Boondocking and Snowbird Guide eBooks at RVbookstore.com