- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
Comments (7)
Print
Save/ShareCalifornia's budget crisis might force the government to shut down dozens of state parks, thereby cutting off public access to many of the its beaches and recreation areas. (Federally managed parks, such as Yosemite, wouldn't be affected. Get more details on this story by reading this article at the website of The National Trust for Historic Preservation. The LA Times Real Deals Blog has also been covering this here and here.)
The threat to California's parks is reminiscent of the 1995 budget standoff that shut down national parks across the country—but at least then the closures were temporary. A move like the one California is considering could reduce public access to state lands for years.
Taking away access to parks seems like an immoral act, like kicking a puppy, but the fiscal situation for a lot of states, and the nation, for that matter, is pretty dire.
How fundamental is it to have a state park system? Worth raising fees and/or hiking taxes?
User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.
Shutting down or curtailing important public servi9ces is the Government's tried and true method of coercing the public into accepting higher taxes. All the while, the Government's idiot fat and social programs continue unabated and untouched. How many cities and counties have seen police and fire service threatened with massive cuts, only to be rescued by an infusion of tax hikes?
But, the docile public accepts it.
Posted By Buster Evans on March 17, 2008, 1:56 PM
It seems that most governments are ready to cut the very few services used by middle and upper economic classes while preserving the giveaways to the lower classes who do nothing of merit for the collective. The closure of state parks is a perfect example of this ignorant populism.
Posted By John Zimmerman on March 17, 2008, 4:23 PM
I guess the feeding,clothing,schooling and medical given to illegals has finally come home to roost.Also I have found that certain people do not appreciate the parks and destroy facilities with garbager also strewn all over.Too bad for the rest of the Californians who appreciate the parks.
Posted By Barbro Nygren on March 17, 2008, 4:34 PM
California's budget crisis is caused entirely by a tax initiative in 1977 that created huge disparities in property assessments. (Proposition 13.) Since then California has been in the lower third of the nation in expenditures for its schools. The Governor now wants to reduce school funding even further. This cannot be tolerated. It is clearly time to repeal Proposition 13 and increase taxes on the privileged who have been parasites on the general public for the past three decades. I stand for higher taxes and the repeal of Proposition 13.
Posted By Jim Webber on March 18, 2008, 1:22 PM
It would be tragic to lose access to our wonderful State Parks in Californian and other states. Perhaps we travelers need to write the various Tourism Departments, Chamber of Commerce’s and the state politicians to tell them how important these parks are to residents and to visitors of their state.
But it is also unfair to blame the budget problems on programs for poor families and immigrants. Our own jobs and investments have no guarantees. At any point, we too could be living on the street asking for handouts. The amount of money going to these programs is pennies compared to the vast sums of cash lost from corporations and wealthy individuals through tax loopholes, corruption, subsidies, and giveaways. Why is it okay to provide welfare and entitlements to the wealthy, but not the poor? Most of the rich and powerful (less than 5% of population)protect their own and feed the rest of us lies to encourage us to eat our own. It is time to open our eyes and see what is really happening. We can hold our politicians accountable by asking them where the rest of the money goes. Why do they have money for their pet projects, but not for the needs of the majority of the population? Sorry, I’m just tired of all the lies.
Posted By Marie Schultz on March 18, 2008, 2:43 PM
Although this was written in 2008, its again 2009 and now 80 per cent of the state parks will close in less than 90 days. Save California Stae parks from Closure.
Posted By jim on June 13, 2009, 2:10 AM
According to what I've read, the Ca 2005 Park Dept budget was $344M, so let's call it $350M now.
The Governor expects to recoup $14M by closing the parks.
In the meantime, the Speaker suggests we can save the parks by accepting a $15 surcharge to vehicle registration.
DMV says it has 31,363,000+ paid registered vehicles, so the Speaker's math is to continue to spend $14M by raking in $464M from vehicle owners.
Yup, that balances out.
Posted By Observer57 on June 20, 2009, 9:35 PM