July 24, 2009
Compromise Close on CA Parks
It looks like the CA assembly is close to reaching a deal that will close most of their state budget deficit and save MOST of CA state parks from closure. The funding agreement will still result in an approximately $8 million budget shortfall for the park system and it is likely that close to 30 parks may be closed (better than the original 220 proposed for closure but still bad). It is possible that partnerships with local governments, nonprofits and private citizens can help keep some of these parks open.
Posted by dop_editor at 09:12 PM | Comments (0)
July 23, 2009
Friends of Lake Texoma call for referendum on TIF Funding for Pointe Vista Development
For immediate release: Thursday, July 23, 2009
Contacts: Stephen Willis, Friends of Lake Texoma State Park (FLTSP) ( 580) 564-5047
Boyd Steele, President, FLTSP (580) 564-2075
Shannon Meyer, Executive Director, Defense Of Place (970) 963-0629
Marshall County Commissioners Expected to Approve Pointe Vista Tax Relief
Friends of Lake Texoma State Park Sponsoring Public Referendum on Pointe Vista Tax Scheme
(Kingston, OK) -- Marshall County Commissioners may approve the Pointe Vista Tax Increment Financing (TIF) scheme following a public meeting in Kingston tonight, according to reports received by the Friends of Lake Texoma State Park.
The vote is expected to occur regardless of county taxpayers opposition to the proposed $329 million public tax subsidy of virtually all of Pointe Vista's project costs, past and future.
The Tax Increment Financing (TIF) proposal for Pointe Vista Development and Chesapeake Energy CEO Aubrey McClendon, was approved by the Marshall County TIF Review Committee prior to the first of two legally required public meetings.
County TIF Attorney Nate Ellis said the reason they were holding these public hearings after the TIF Committee voted to approve the draft TIF resolution is because the law allowed them to do so. But that did not provide for public comments on the resolution, which also did not include the Increment District Legal Description, or the Project Area Legal Description, Exhibits "B" and "D."
That first meeting was held in Kingston on July 14th. The Marshall County TIF committee decided to approve Pointe Vista's incomplete draft resolution prior to the hearings required by the Oklahoma Local Development Act.
"Attorneys for the Friends of Lake Texoma State Park are preparing a referendum petition on any Marshall County Resolution to approve a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District for Pointe Vista Development, LLC of Oklahoma City," according to Eldon White, board member of the park advocacy group based in Kingston.
"If the County Commissioners deny us the opportunity to weigh in on the TIF resolution, The Friends will proceed with our public referendum to guarantee that Marshall County voters have the opportunity to have the final word in the matter."
Boyd Steele, President of the Friends group stated, "What we have here is a classic example of Corporate Welfare for the politically well- connected Pointe Vista Development. They, like all corporate special interests, seek to Privatize the Profits, and Socialize the Costs."
"Furthermore, who is going to pay for the police and fire protection services for Pointe Vista during the 25 years until this thing supposedly returns benefits to Marshall County?"
Stephen Willis, Director of the Friends shared, "We represent the public interest. We will insure that the voters and taxpayers of Marshall County have the final word on tax relief for Pointe Vista Development. That's how it's supposed to work in a real democracy."
The Friends of Lake Texoma State Park encourage all concerned citizens, taxpayers and area property owners to attend the meeting in Kingston at 7 PM tonight at the Kingston Elementary School Auditorium. For more information on the Friend's Referendum, call 580-564-7205.
Posted by dop_editor at 09:53 PM | Comments (0)
July 07, 2009
Dont Let Parks Pay the Price for a Bad Economy
Everywhere you look these days local and state governments are facing serious budgetary woes. All too often these governments are looking eagerly at your public green spaces as a source of raising, or saving, green backs. Why should our parks pay the price for economic hard times? Parks provide a place for people to gather, to exercise, play and communicate. Many studies have shown that the existence of a vibrant park system in a community leads to healthier citizens. Parks and trail systems attract both tourists and residents to a community. Park visitors spend money in the surrounding communities and enhance local economies. Yet despite all these obvious benefits of parklands, too often they are first community amenity to feel the pinch during economic hard times.
California is making headlines these days for the Governor’s threats to close 80% of the state’s parks (220 parks) because of the massive budget deficit. Yet, the parks budget amounts to a mere 1/10th of 1 percent of the state’s general fund. Governor Schwarzenegger claims the closures would save $143 million, but against a total deficit of $24.3 this is a drop in the bucket. Shutting the gates of these parks may cause more problems than it would solve. With no rangers patrolling these often large and remote areas, state parks may soon become havens for criminal activity and squatters. When the parks are called back into use, the cost of repairing the environmental and physical damage that is bound to occur may outweigh the supposed savings of closing them. According to a recent report by the California State University of Sacramento, park users spend on average $57.63 per park visit in the surrounding community equaling more than $4.2 billion in positive economic impacts across California that generates $300 million in sales tax revenues. Because of this multiplier effect, every dollar invested in the State Park system actually puts $2.35 into the general fund from sales taxes and jobs. Park closures would devastate local economies that depend on tourism but the idea of closing parks to “save money” is a popular one that is being played out across the nation.
Georgia’s Department of Natural Resources, when faced with a 39% budget reduction, partially closed 17 state parks and historic areas and cut their workforce by 12% even while increasing park entrance fees. In Arizona, a $1.6 billion budget shortfall led to the closure of 8 popular state parks. Last July during the peak summer season New Jersey almost closed 45% of its total park acreage but was able to “save” them with beach protection funds. New Hampshire, the only state that relies entirely on entrance fees to support its park system, is now considering selling or leasing 27 of its underperforming parks. New York state parks will have a shorter season this year in order to save money. Ohio closed its parks for a week for a savings of $190,000. At the local level, the number of cities and towns closing parks, limiting facilities, or looking at privatization is too numerous to detail.
Yet in the face of serious budget deficits some states and municipalities are getting creative about maintaining their park systems. Washington State pays for its parks with a license fee added to car registrations and Michigan is considering a similar system. Santa Clara County CA is considering providing rangers for Henry Coe State Park in order to keep the park open and its benefits alive for the community. Kentucky, which has the third highest revenue generating park system after CA and NY recognizes the financial and societal values of its park system and has vowed to keep parks functioning even with a budget that has to shrink by 10%. A small town in Nebraska decided to take matters into its own hands and lease the nearby state recreational area to keep visitors coming and locals engaged in the outdoors.
Our public parklands are a vital part of our public trust. They are held by our states and municipalities in trust for us and for future generations. It is the current generation’s responsibility to see that this trust is not violated so that our children’s children will have these same resources to enjoy. If we let parklands go now they will be nearly impossible to get back. Close your eyes and imagine your community without its parks – do you like what you see? If not, be a voice for these lands. Join Defense of Place in standing up for parks big and small across the nation.
Posted by dop_editor at 09:11 PM | Comments (0)