BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER
Senator Fran Pavley, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular
Bill No: SB 1111 Hearing Date: March 29,
2016
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Author: |Pavley | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Version: |February 17, 2016 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Urgency: |No |Fiscal: |Yes |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Consultant:|William Craven |
| | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: State parks: operating agreements
BACKGROUND AND EXISTING LAW
1.The California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) is
vested with control of the state park system and responsibility
for administering, protecting, developing, and interpreting
state parks for the use and enjoyment of the public. DPR is also
responsible for protecting the state park system from damage and
preserving the peace.
2. Recent statutory changes that reacted to fiscal improprieties
at DPR established several reforms by which the department was
empowered to improve its own fiscal health. To that end:
a) The department's authority to collect fees, rents, and
other returns for the use of state parks was expanded;
b) It was authorized to sell additional annual and regional
passes and to enter a wider array of concession contracts;
and
c) A revenue generation program was established.
Also, ex-officio legislative members to the California State
Parks and Recreation Commission were added, and state law also
directed the establishment of a citizen review panel, the Parks
Forward Commission, whose final report was released earlier this
year.
3. The key recommendations of the Parks Forward Commission were
SB 1111 (Pavley) Page 2
of ?
to:
a) Create a "transformation team" within the department to
improve internal procedures including technologies to assist
with budgeting, planning, and project implementation. The work
of this team is ongoing;
b) Improve relationships with nonprofits and other partners;
c) Develop an outside support entity to help the department with
marketing, financial, and other aspects of the department's work
where an outside entity with greater business experience would
be useful;
d) Improve cultural and resource protection programs;
e) Expand access to parks including to those from park-poor and
other disadvantaged communities.
4. These recent changes were a part of what has developed into
a concerted, year-by-year approach to reforms at the department
by the Legislature. Last year, these recommendations were
partially accomplished in AB 549 (Levine) and SB 204 (Pavley).
PROPOSED LAW
This bill would eliminate the statutory limit of 20 parks that
could be subject to an operating agreement by which a local
government or nonprofit organization could operate the park
pursuant to a written agreement with the department.
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT
The author acknowledges that this bill is currently a work in
progress and will eventually contain other provisions
recommended by the Transformation Team, the Parks Forward
Commission, the department, or others. This bill will continue
the author's work from last year with SB 204 that contained
several provisions related to state parks, including the removal
of impediments to partnership agreements with nonprofits,
reforms to the park unit general planning process, and others.
SB 204 achieved final passage with no opposition on the floor of
either chamber.
The removal of the statutory limit of 20 parks is a good first
step, according to the author. SB 204 last year authorized the
SB 1111 (Pavley) Page 3
of ?
department to enter into partial operating agreements so that a
local government or nonprofit could operate specific aspects of
a park, but not the entire park. With that change, the number of
operating agreements could well exceed 20 in the foreseeable
future.
Currently, the department's website lists 13 parks with
operating agreements, which omits the operating agreements at
Presidio at Santa Barbara, Mendocino Woodlands, and the Marconi
State Historic Park (Marconi Conference Center). Additionally
there are several other types of agreements that allow partners
to operate specified aspects of state parks, including
concession agreements (such as at Bodie, Mono Lake, and Grover's
Hot Springs), and donor agreements (such as those involving the
parks subject to an agreement with Friends of Santa Cruz State
Parks and many others.) There are also 3 parks operated by a
concessionaire. In short, the statutory limit of 20 may well be
exceeded in the near future as more and more partnership
agreements are considered by the department.
The Trust for Public Land supports the bill as a continuation of
the author's leadership on state park reforms. TPL notes that
the department has been making great strides forward and points
to the new revenue generation mechanisms, the transition to a
new reservation system, and the new job classification for
superintendents that does not require law enforcement
certification.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION
None received.
COMMENTS
This may be a bill that returns to the Committee for a
subsequent hearing as amendments are added.
SUPPORT
California State Parks Foundation
OPPOSITION
None Received
SB 1111 (Pavley) Page 4
of ?