Proud or Ashamed

[Smossy]

The issue is the $ is being taken from one group to pay for anothers...I would find it hard to argue my point if it was split 3 ways.

Do it, do it! Atleast try lol.

[Whitpirate]

Essentially why I did it.   I wasn't setting a very good example for my kids.

I'm with ya.

[Curly]

The issue is the $ is being taken from one group to pay for anothers...I would find it hard to argue my point if it was split 3 ways.

Also, the DP is a band aid fix and does not address the real problem which is mismanagement of State Parks.  There has to be other ways to run the State Park system to be in the black.

[Gringo31]

I now avoid going to "those places" that I used to go to because I hate the whole idea so much.  I think the only way I buy one is if I get drawn for a bull tag. 

IF I am drawn and "forced" to buy one.....

I'll feel ashamed 

[buckfvr]

Taxes on top of taxes, with no end in sight................I'm neither......I can't get beyond disgusted....
But because I recreate with some DNR guys, I buy it and complain.

[bobcat]

Also, the DP is a band aid fix and does not address the real problem which is mismanagement of State Parks.  There has to be other ways to run the State Park system to be in the black.

Published February 08, 2013

Lawmakers seek to match Discover Pass fees from general fund

JORDAN SCHRADER

Lawmakers tried to move the parks system off the state budget and onto user fees, but so far there have been simply too few users. Now a proposal with bipartisan backing calls for restoring some of the money.

A proposal introduced Thursday by Republican parks-committee chairman Kirk Pearson of Monroe with backing from the panel’s lead Democrat, Christine Rolfes of Bainbridge Island, would match the parking fees brought in by the Discover Pass with an equal sum from the state’s general fund.

A separate idea put forward by Pearson and the Senate’s GOP-dominated majority is a four-year diversion of money to parks from a tax on grocery items that is meant for litter cleanup and recycling programs.

Money from the main state budget will be hotly contested in the Legislature, which faces a court order to provide more dependable school funding and is seeing everyone from college officials to mental-health advocates crying out for relief from years of cuts.

Diverting all of roughly $20 million in litter taxes won’t be easy either, even though lawmakers have grabbed money from that fund in the past for general needs. “It’s not popular with a lot of people,” Pearson acknowledged at a public hearing where it soon became clear he was right.

“The tax dollars are going to programs that mean something for the environment,” Jan Gee, president of the Washington Food Industry Association, said after the hearing.

The GOP-backed plan builds on a suggestion last year by then-Sen. Dino Rossi. It stirred some interest in the Democratic minority on Thursday, although not pledges of support.

“There’s a beauty to the idea that if we’re going to sweep it, let’s sweep it for state parks,” Rolfes said of the litter fund.

Still, the idea drew fire from a variety of interests — not just from the businesses that pay the 0.015 percent tax but also from government agencies that use the money and even from public-lands advocates complaining about a part of the measure redirecting money away from parks’ expansion projects and land purchases. It would mandate that money instead be spent on park maintenance, which some Republicans say should be a bigger priority.

Planned projects that would lose funding include a parking addition at the proposed Nisqually State Park and the purchase of 214 more acres of privately owned land for the Eatonville-area park, as well as the purchase of a recreational-vehicle resort next to Millersylvania State Park south of Olympia.

Opponents said the projects could generate more visitors and revenue. They agreed with supporters that more money is needed to keep the existing parks open, staffed and maintained.

“That’s why you need to put money (from) the general fund to help us, to pay to maintain those facilities,” Joe Mentor, treasurer of the Washington Wildlife and Recreation Coalition, told lawmakers. “Those facilities are there for the citizens of the state to use, and many of them can’t pay. … Every year you will see fewer people using those state parks and every year you will see less revenue, not more.”

Unless lawmakers add some revenue, parks are set to receive no money at all from the next two-year general-fund budget.

Instead, they are supposed to rely on fees such as the Discover Pass. But the $30 annual pass and $10 daily fee, created in 2011 and intended to raise $64 million for state-lands agencies in its first two years with most going to parks, has instead raised just shy of $24 million after 18 months.

Park advocates along with Pearson and Rolfes call for a state match of parks’ Discover Pass proceeds, which are projected to total $27 million for the two-year period ending this June.

The same measure also calls for giving the parks extra state funds to make up for what they forego because of free admission and free or reduced campsite rentals for low-income seniors, the disabled and others — at a cost of $7 million every two years according to the parks agency. The bill also adds food-stamp recipients to the list of people entitled to free admittance.

Jordan Schrader: 360-786-1826
blog.thenewstribune.com/politics
jordan.schrader@thenewstribune.com

Read more here: http://www.theolympian.com/2013/02/08/v-print/2415309/lawmakers-seek-to-match-discover.html#storylink=cpy

[Special T]

The issue is the $ is being taken from one group to pay for anothers...I would find it hard to argue my point if it was split 3 ways.

Also, the DP is a band aid fix and does not address the real problem which is mismanagement of State Parks.  There has to be other ways to run the State Park system to be in the black.

The whole pay to play system IS fair, and if you use the state parks you should buy a DP and be happy to support a resource you use...

To me this issue is just like the Licence plate funds being raided, or the ORV funds, or..... You fill inthe blank... I hate how they rob petter to pay paul so i refuse to give them anymore than i have to. 

[Curly]

WTH does State Parks need so much money?    Most of the land should be paid off by now.  I don't get it.  Has their been an audit to see where the money is going?  Just doesn't make sense to me.........

[bobcat]

WTH does State Parks need so much money?    Most of the land should be paid off by now.  I don't get it.  Has their been an audit to see where the money is going?  Just doesn't make sense to me.........

Lots of maintenance is required. Doesn't it cost a fair amount for you  to maintain your home and property?

The state parks employees have to be paid.

Didn't you work at a state park once?   

[Special T]

Its really quite simple. some parks draw lots of campers that make the park $, many are day use only and have no revenue generating capability. The problem is the parks are NOT making tough choices. Generating Rev, and OVERHEAD are the2 key factors for state parks.... Kinda sound like business to me... Some parks like Deception state park have HUGE overhead but very little ability to generate rev to make up for all the costs. Some like the Potholes state park is a low overhead money maker because it has so many camping spots and is a destination for people seeking the sun and has a LOONG season. The DP came about because the state and the State parks refuses to make the hard choices... either close the least self sufficient parks and or add camping space to existing parks to help them be more self sufficient. I'm sure the parks are torn wanting to preserve parks and not altering them with more camping space, and want to keep them all open, but we live in a real world that requires priorities.

[logger]

Then require for state parks then, not the rest of the unimproved land. I am on dnr land pretty much everyday and have yet to questuined wether I have 1 or not, which I don't  and won't have one unless I am camping in a park. If they charge shouldn't the payer have reasonable access and not have a ton of gated roads and maybe less chuckholed roads? Lottsa state ground besides capitol forest that are gated off, which is fine by me, but if you charge for access I think they should provide access.  could be way off here, just my simple mined thinkin again

[Quarteredaway]

I agree everyone should pay something to use public land....... but i believe i already do my part buying my 100.00 hunting licenses and tags every year..

[Curly]

WTH does State Parks need so much money?    Most of the land should be paid off by now.  I don't get it.  Has their been an audit to see where the money is going?  Just doesn't make sense to me.........

Lots of maintenance is required. Doesn't it cost a fair amount for you  to maintain your home and property?Yes, but the difference is that I don't ask people that don't live here to pay for my maintenance.

The state parks employees have to be paid. I understand that.  But maybe there are too many employees.  Or maybe they need to contract out some of the work.  I bet a private landscaping business would do lawn mowing, brush cutting and the like way cheaper than it costs to employ state employees.

Didn't you work at a state park once?      Yes I did.  That is why I believe there is likely a lot of waste there.  I witnessed it.  That was 27 years ago, though, so I bet the waste is worse now.

I don't like the idea of 84% of the pass going to Parks.

What really should have happened is there should be a pass for Parks and one for DNR; we already have the one for WDFW.  They could have a vinyl decal that sticks to your windshield (like the State Park boat launch permit).

And like you already said, they should only require the DP for DNR campgrounds, and improved trailheads and parking areas............not for simply driving on DNR logging roads or parking on the side of a logging road and walking cross country.

[Smossy]

I agree everyone should pay something to use public land....... but i believe i already do my part buying my 100.00 hunting licenses and tags every year..

lol Only public to those who own and maintain the land, oh and charge for use of it 

[bobcat]

I agree everyone should pay something to use public land....... but i believe i already do my part buying my 100.00 hunting licenses and tags every year..

Your hunting license money does not go to DNR or State Parks. So if you use those lands at all, you're paying nothing to help support them. But yes, you are paying into the WDFW, and for WDFW land, you don't need the Discover pass. Only your vehicle use pass is required, and you get that with the purchase of your hunting license.