A House Republican initiative-- House Bill 2013 (Ellis-R-Butler)-- to open Pennsylvania’s State Parks to private development-- is scheduled to be amended on the House Floor Monday and passed Tuesday.

Gov Wolf has already made major concessions to Republicans on environmental issues in the last 2 weeks.

Gov. Wolf signed legislation Thursday to kill conventional oil and gas drilling regulations--  Senate Bill 279 (Hutchinson-R-Venango), now Act 52; and a bill to provide more legislative oversight for any DEP plan to implement the EPA Clean Power Climate Rule--  Senate Bill 1195 (White-R-Indiana), now Act 57.

Will House Bill 2013 be next?  And could it show up in an omnibus Fiscal Code bill that moves along with any final state budget settlement?

Good questions. 

PA Environmental Council & The Nature Conservancy-Pennsylvania Oppose Bill

The PA Environmental Council and The Nature Conservancy-Pennsylvania Tuesday expressed their opposition to House Bill 2013 (Ellis-R-Butler) that would create a new board to oversee public-private partnerships to bring golf courses, water parks and any other recreational experiences private developers could propose to Pennsylvania’s State Parks.

The bill was amended and reported out of the House Tourism and Recreational Development Committee Tuesday and is now in the House Rules Committee.

The groups noted House Bill 2013 would create a new board within DCNR that takes away the ability of DCNR to determine which private recreation development is appropriate within State Parks.

The bill does not provide for any public involvement in making decisions on what kinds of private development to approve and saddles DCNR with the long-term maintenance costs of any facilities approved by the new Board.

Take Action

Davitt Woodwell, President of PEC, provided this video overview of the issues and urged the public to contact their member of the House of Representatives to oppose the bill.  Click Here to find your legislator.

Action on House Bill 2013 follows the introduction this week of House Bill 2188 (Christiana-R-Beaver) which directs DCNR to build 4 golf courses on its land to establish the Arnold Palmer Trails Program (sponsor summary).

Text Of PEC/TNC Letter

The text of a letter sent to members of the House Tourism and Recreational Development Committee follows--

Dear Representatives:

We are writing to share the concerns of the Pennsylvania Environmental Council and the Pennsylvania Chapter of The Nature Conservancy regarding House Bill 2013, Printer's Number 3219, scheduled to be considered at the June 21 meeting of the Committee on Tourism and Recreational Development. 

House Bill 2013 would amend the Conservation and Natural Resources Act to establish a Public-Private State Park Partnership Board (Board) to review and approve contracts with private sector entities for development, financing, construction and operation of recreation, lodging and ancillary facilities in Pennsylvania State Parks.

Pennsylvania's system of 120 State Parks is an incredibly valuable asset from which the citizens of the Commonwealth derive multiple benefits. 

State Parks provide opportunities for affordable and healthful outdoor recreation, nature interpretation and environmental education,  while conserving important natural, scenic, aesthetic and historical values. 

They also make meaningful contributions to community quality of life and economic development, generating more than $1 billion in local expenditures across the State and returning $12.37 in economic value for every dollar invested. 

What's more, Pennsylvania's State Parks have been recognized as one of the best-managed systems in the nation, receiving a National Gold Medal Award for Excellence in Park and Recreation Management.  

This successful record of management includes oversight of more than 130 concession operations.  DCNR has existing authority to enter into concession or lease agreements, including long term contracts for large-scale recreation facilities. 

Through their extensive experience providing Pennsylvanians with quality outdoor recreation opportunities, State Park professionals have learned which types of public-private partnerships work best.  

Accordingly, we question both the need for and value of a separate entity like the proposed Board. 

We believe its functions at the very least would duplicate decision making responsibilities of State Parks professionals, and potentially could result in recommendations that are inconsistent with the mission of Pennsylvania's State Parks and the best professional judgment of State Park managers.  

Our specific concerns include the following:

​-- ​New Board: Under House Bill 2013, the newly-created Board would enjoy considerable leverage and influence, and as such, DCNR could find it difficult to reject the Board's recommendations for development projects, even if they conflict with State Park management goals and priorities.  

​The above concern is particularly noteworthy, when observing that House Bill 2013 provides no criteria for the Board to use in its review and approval of proposed projects.

The bill contains a reference to developing guidelines for sponsors to use when submitting proposals, but does not identify specific factors the Board will consider in evaluating such proposals (e.g., potential effect on existing park users/uses, potential impact on natural resources/habitat, compatibility with park character and local land uses, level of long term maintenance and reinvestment required, demand for service/amenity to be offered, etc.). 

-- No Additional Funding: House Bill 2013 would require DCNR to provide all necessary assistance to the Board, including retention of legal, financial and technical consultants.  The additional responsibilities and related costs associated with the Board's inventory, solicitation, and evaluation of proposed projects could be substantial.  The legislation provides no additional source of funding for these activities.

-- Long-Term Maintenance Costs: House Bill 2013 also imposes long term maintenance costs on the Commonwealth by transferring management responsibilities to DCNR after 25 years — typically when substantial upkeep and repair will be needed. The legislation provides no source funding for these obligations.

-- No Public Involvement: Although it would create a new process for approving potential development projects in Pennsylvania's State Parks, and such projects are likely to be of considerable interest to the public, House Bill 2013 does not provide opportunities for public review and comment as part of the Board's approval process.   

Because of the concerns noted above, we are unable to support House Bill 2013, PN 3219. 

We encourage the Committee and sponsors, rather than moving forward with this legislation, instead to explore working with DCNR and its Recreational Advisory Committee and Conservation and Natural Resources Advisory Council to update the study on State Park concession and lease operations conducted by Penn State ten years ago.

Such a review could provide helpful information on the views and preferences of visitors regarding recreation opportunities at State Parks and the experiences of DCNR and park agencies in other states with the private operation of park infrastructure and facilities of all sizes and categories. 

Sincerely,

Ronald L. Ramsey, Senior Policy Advisor, The Nature Conservancy - Pennsylvania,

John Walliser, Senior Vice President, Pennsylvania Environmental Council

A sponsor summary of the bill is available.

For more information on programs, initiatives and special events, visit the PA Environmental Council website, visit the PEC Blog, follow PEC on Twitter or Like PEC on Facebook.  Click Here to receive regular updates from PEC.

PA Parks & Forests Foundation Opposes Bill

The PA Parks and Forests Foundation this week, joined the PA Environmental Council and The Nature Conservancy-Pennsylvania, in expressing its opposition to House Bill 2013 (Ellis-R- Butler) that would encourage private development in Pennsylvania’s State Parks.

The text of a letter to the House Tourism and Recreational Development Committee follows—

On behalf of the Pennsylvania Parks and Forests Foundation, I am writing to express concern regarding House Bill 2013.

For in excess of 125 years, Pennsylvania has been fortunate to have had leaders with enough foresight to set aside more than 2 million acres of state forest and 121 state parks for the general public to enjoy and appreciate.

This bill would encourage development in areas originally intended as access to the natural world and healthy outdoor recreation; would place a financial, staff, and resource burden on a state agency for private gain; and would introduce non-traditional use of state parks that are not supported by recent public surveys.

In 2009, the National Recreation and Parks Association and the American Academy for Park and Recreation Administration honored Pennsylvania’s state parks with their prestigious Gold Medal Award for Excellence in park management.

This award to the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (DCNR) was in recognition for our agency professionals’ skill in planning for and managing a diverse state park system.

DCNR also holds the distinction of being the only two-time winner of the National Parks Service and Society of Outdoor Recreation Professionals’ award for our Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP), which for 2016 includes 20 recommendations and 83 action steps.

This top honor recognized the Department for their collaborative approach to recreation planning. Development of the plan included comprehensive data collection, with over 10,000 survey respondents; a steering committee representing 40 agencies, organizations, and commissions; three public input meetings; and online public feedback sessions.

The professional staff at the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources consistently demonstrates an understanding of the changing needs of recreation in Pennsylvania.

For example, in recent years a small nature inn was built at Bald Eagle State Park, and an existing facility at Cook Forest State Park was converted into a bed and breakfast.

Currently, more than 200 full-service hook-ups can be found in 14 state parks, along with hundreds of other campsites, modern cabins, camping cottages, yurts, and rustic cabins.

The Department also has significant experience with public-private partnerships with 138 concessionaires currently operating in the system, representing ski areas, whitewater rafting, food concessions, boat rentals, and more.

Additionally, there are more than 50 friends groups across the state working in cooperation with DCNR in public-private partnerships. These groups represent dedicated volunteers committed to the conservation and stewardship of our state owned lands.

House Bill 2013 sidesteps the long history of professional planning and management demonstrated by the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources by opening our state parks to private interest bankrolled by taxpayer dollars.

House Bill 2013 proposes to open our state parks for private development ranging from hotels to amusement parks to office buildings.

According to the bill, construction cost of these new, commercial facilities would be augmented through the DCNR budget, thereby diverting funds from needed capital improvements to existing structures already identified by park staff.

This is in stark contrast to public opinion on how public dollars should be invested. 

The SCORP survey found the highest funding priority identified by survey respondents as it relates to park development was to maintain existing park and recreation areas, followed closely by protecting wildlife and fish habitat, and acquiring additional open space.

Maintaining current facilities was more important to the citizens of the state than developing new facilities.

House Bill 2013 removes DCNR’s ability to make decisions about development in state parks, yet places a staffing burden (with no associated additional revenue to fund said staff) on parks to oversee the new board proposed by the bill, to research ideas presented by the board, and to oversee construction and operation of these new facilities.

The bill also requires DCNR to invest already limited funds to subsidize and/or build whatever projects the new board approves.

At present, only about $20 million a year is allocated to state parks for major repairs and new capital projects like bathrooms, upgraded campgrounds, additional cabins, and improvements to recreational facilities.

All of these already limited funds could be diverted for private gain at a cost to the general public if House Bill 2013 were to be enacted.

Resort-like developments have a long history of failure in state parks across the nation. Too often, concessionaires do not reinvest in the infrastructure they are renting, placing a burden on the taxpayer to do so.

And the creation of a contractual relationship through a public-private partnership is not a guarantee of success.

For example, at Denton Hill Ski Area the state is now faced with a huge project at the park after the concessionaire defaulted on his obligations.

Creating resorts in state parks would create an unfair disadvantage for the state’s private resorts such as at Mount Pocono, Nemacolin, Gateway Lodge, and numerous others as well as small inns adjacent to state parks.

A quick Google search reveals 103 resorts in the state, a strong indication that when feasible the private sector will invest in the acquisition and development of lodgings and recreational facilities.

This current private investment approach, which relies less on taxpayer investment and more on private entrepreneurship, generates more revenue for the Commonwealth than a DCNR-subsidized resort that pulls from an already-strained parks budget.

Private investment in communities outside of state parks can boost local economies, provides an increased tax base, and is more fitting to the intention of state parks.

If the legislature truly wants to accommodate the people of the commonwealth, the investment of additional dollars in the development of state park cabins (which was identified by the public as the top investment need when funds are being invested in the creation of new infrastructure) and an increase in the allocation of maintenance dollars would provide a greater return than the proposed diversion of public funds to private interest.

We would also encourage the state to invest in the creative reuse of buildings currently existing in state parks, such as was done with the Inn at Cook Forest.

In summary, the Pennsylvania Parks and Forests Foundation opposes House Bill 2013 and urges you to oppose this bill as well.

The Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan is but one year old and already much work has been done to move forward the aggressive agenda approved by the people.

The plan recognized that we have a changing population—we are aging, becoming more urban, and are more ethnically diverse.

With these factors in mind, the recreation community and the Department of Conservation of Natural Resources is working to engage the changing face of the people of the state.

Pennsylvanians love their state parks and forests, as do we at the Pennsylvania Parks and Forests Foundation.

As an organization, we are dedicated to the stewardship of our parks and forests.

We invest volunteer labor and private dollars into their conservation and stewardship and firmly believe they should be accessible to every Pennsylvanian.

We oppose any diversion of already limited allocations from agency professionals who have already proven – on a national stage – their expertise in parks management.

We further oppose the development of incompatible activities and facilities within our state parks. Resorts, amusement and water parks, offices, outdoor sports facilities, and golf courses exist outside of state parks in more appropriate settings.

Our state parks and forests were set aside to conserve our natural world and the very personal relationship generations have developed with them. In these days that seem to move ever faster, now is not the time to lose the valuable sanctuaries so many people have worked so hard to protect.

I would be happy to meet with you to discuss any aspect of the bill and/or the Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan.

Yours in the Outdoors,

Marci Mowery, President

For more information on programs, initiatives and special events, visit the PA Parks & Forests Foundation website.  Click Here to sign up for regular updates from the Foundation,  Like them on Facebook or Follow them on Twitter.

NewsClips:

House Bill Encourages Private Development In State Parks

Bill Would Open State Parks To Golf, Water Slides, Hotels

Bills Would Permit Commercial Development In PA State Parks

6/27/2016