BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 594
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 16, 2013
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON WATER, PARKS AND WILDLIFE
Anthony Rendon, Chair
AB 594 (Committee on Water, Parks & Wildlife) - As Amended:
April 10, 2013
SUBJECT : State Parks
SUMMARY : Clarifies the Department of Parks & Recreation's
(DPR's) authority to enter into operating agreements with
nonprofit organizations during the time period of the current
moratorium on state park closures, and modifies existing law
relating to the process required for any future proposed park
closures. Specifically, this bill :
1)Clarifies that the 2-year moratorium on state park closures
enacted in 2012 does not limit or affect DPR's authority to
enter into operating agreements with qualified nonprofit
organizations for the purpose of operating a state park.
2)Requires DPR, in the event any parks are proposed for closure
in the future, to document and publicly disclose the
methodology, rationale and scoring system used to evaluate and
select parks for proposed closure, and modifies the criteria
DPR must consider. Requires the State Park & Recreation
Commission to hold a public hearing on any proposed park
closures.
3)Clarifies legislative intent that DPR achieve any required
budget reductions by implementing efficiencies and increasing
revenue collections, and that full park closures be considered
only as a last option after other feasible alternatives,
including but not limited to, operating agreements with
qualified nonprofits and local governments are explored.
4)Clarifies that funds in a subaccount continuously appropriated
in last year's budget to provide incentives for revenue
generation in park districts may be used for capital outlay
projects.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Establishes the California State Park system and vests DPR
with control of the state park system and responsibility for
AB 594
Page 2
administering, protecting, developing and interpreting state
parks for the use and enjoyment of the public. Requires DPR
to protect the state park system from damage and to preserve
the peace therein.
2)Authorizes DPR to enter into agreements with private entities
to assist DPR in securing long-term private funding sources
for units of the state park system, and to ensure that the
parks are preserved and open to the public for their use and
enjoyment. DPR's authority includes but is not limited to
securing donations, memberships, corporate and individual
sponsorships, and marketing and licensing agreements.
3)Authorizes DPR to collect fees, rents and other returns for
the use of state parks with amounts to be determined by DPR.
4)Authorizes DPR to enter into operating agreements with
qualified nonprofit entities that will enable DPR to keep
parks open that would otherwise be subject to closure.
5)Requires DPR to achieve required budget reductions by closing,
partially closing, and reducing services at selected units of
the state park system based on specified factors, but places a
two-year moratorium on park closures for the 2012-13 and
2013-14 fiscal years.
6)Creates the State Parks Revenue Incentives Subaccount within
the State Park and Recreation Fund and provides that funds in
the subaccount are continuously appropriated to DPR until June
30, 2016 to create incentives for revenue generating projects
in state parks.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS : This bill clarifies and modifies certain provisions
of law enacted last year relating to state park management, and
updates other existing provisions consistent with those changes.
In 2011 DPR proposed to close 70 state parks as a result of
budget reductions. The Legislature then enacted AB 42
(Huffman), which authorized DPR to enter into operating
agreements with nonprofit organizations in order to keep some of
the parks open to the public. A number of nonprofit groups,
local governments and other donors contributed funds to DPR and
entered into operating agreements to keep the parks from
closing. Several additional operating agreements are still
AB 594
Page 3
under negotiation as of the time of this writing.
After it was revealed in July 2012 that DPR had hidden $20
million in the State Parks & Recreation Fund from the
Legislature and the Department of Finance, the Legislature
enacted AB 1478 (Blumenfield) which, among other things, placed
a two-year moratorium on all park closures. Since AB 42
authorized DPR to enter into agreements with nonprofits for the
full operation of a state park if it was threatened with
closure, the enactment of the moratorium under AB 1478 created a
potential legal ambiguity as to whether DPR still had the
authority to enter into operating agreements while the
moratorium was in effect. (Partial closures were not affected.)
This bill clarifies that the existence of the moratorium is not
intended by the Legislature to limit or affect DPR's authority
to enter into agreements for the full operation of a State park.
The Legislature's intent in authorizing DPR to enter into
nonprofit operating agreements was to give DPR additional tools
to avoid park closure. Facilitating such collaborative
partnerships is a key strategy in enabling DPR to keep the parks
open and accessible to the public. The operating agreements
allow DPR to avoid closing state parks, which is also the
purpose of the moratorium.
This bill also modifies and updates existing law relating to
proposed park closures, which was enacted prior to the
revelation of the hidden funds last year, and prior to other
budgetary and policy actions taken by the Legislature in 2012 to
provide DPR with additional funding flexibility, including
promoting revenue generating and entrepreneurial activities at
the district level. This bill requires that such strategies as
improved efficiencies, increased revenue generating activities,
and partnerships be explored first before park closures are
considered. It also requires DPR in the event any park closures
are proposed in the future to document and publicly disclose the
methodology used in selecting parks for closure, and requires
that a public hearing be held by the State Park & Recreation
Commission. These changes appear to be consistent with the
approach taken by the new management at DPR which has publicly
stated that "If a future budget situation should require a
reduction plan, we will develop a new plan in an open and
transparent fashion. The 70-park closure plan is not our plan
for moving forward."
AB 594
Page 4
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
Blue Wing Adobe Trust
California State Park Foundation (sponsor)
County of Sonoma
Opposition
None on file.
Analysis Prepared by : Diane Colborn / W., P. & W. / (916)
319-2096