PD Editorial: State parks need allies not rivalries

If, as the author Wallace Stegner said, "national parks are the best idea we ever had," then closing California state parks has to be one of the worst ideas anyone ever had.

The state has marked 70 parks for closure, asserting that it will save about $22 million a year.

To put that figure in perspective, it's about what the state spends annually on cellphone service. In the big picture, it's about two-tenths of one percent of the $9.2 billion budget deficit for the fiscal year that starts July 1.

In other words, it's chump change.

Moreover, those savings are likely to be illusory - offset by the rising cost of vandalism, garbage dumping, marijuana farming and other illegal activities once the rangers are other personnel are gone from the parks. Without maintenance, the parks themselves will begin to deteriorate, adding more hidden costs to the closures. Communities that rely on park visitors to support their economies will suffer, too, chipping away at local tax revenues.

Everyone loses.

Facing a public backlash from his ill-advised plan to close parks three years ago, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger retreated. Unfortunately, there's no indication that Gov. Jerry Brown will back down, and a July 1 deadline is looming.

For park supporters, the objective should be keeping as many state parks open as possible. But that's being threatened by another bad idea: squabbling over who is worthy enough to save a park from closure.

The conflict arose when word got out the state Department of Parks and Recreation was gauging interest from concessionaires, businesses that already operate campgrounds, food services and other services in some state parks. Private concessionaires also operate in national parks and even some state parks.

Rather than welcoming the concessionaires as potential allies, or even partners, some park advocates insisted that only nonprofit organizations should be allowed to assume responsibility for parks on the state hit list. State Sen. Noreen Evans, D-Santa Rosa, fancifully imagined a "Wal-Mart State Park and Recreation System."

There's nothing magic about nonprofit status - imagine the response to a large health insurer taking over a park. There's also nothing inherently evil about for-profit companies, which succeed by providing popular services at affordable prices.

Multiple approaches will be be needed to save parks on the hit list.

Several already have been spared, at least temporarily, through agreements with the National Park Service and private foundations. Sonoma County, meanwhile, is negotiating to assume responsibility for Annadel State Park, and state officials are encouraging numerous other efforts, including a local fundraising campaign that is about halfway to its goal of $70,000 to keep the Petaluma Adobe State Historic Park open.

The state Public Works Board wisely rejected pleas to stop parks officials from weighing interest from private companies. We think anyone willing and able to save a state park from closure deserves considering. The alternative is locked gates.