B and B

Bush trying again to sell off public lands

Amazingly, after getting thoroughly dumped on when they tried this last year, the Bush administration is once again proposing to sell off substantial amounts of our nation's public lands.

From the San Diego Union-Tribune yesterday:

For the second year in a row, the Bush administration has proposed selling off as much as 300,000 acres of national forests and other public land to help pay for rural schools and roads.

And for the second year, Western lawmakers and environmentalists blasted the plan, saying short-term gains would be offset by the permanent loss of the land.

Rep. Norm Dicks, D-Wash., the new chairman of an Appropriations subcommittee that oversees environmental spending, pronounced the plan dead on arrival. “They are just not going to do this. It's not going to happen,” Dicks said Monday.

“We're going to find a way to fund the (rural) schools program without selling even one acre of public land,” added Sen. Max Baucus, D-Montana.

Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., called the plan a “betrayal,” and said he would “work around the clock ... to convince Congress to act honorably and fulfill the federal obligation to our rural counties.”

Once again, former timber lobbyist, Undersecretary of Agriculture Mark Rey, is serving as Bush's point man on this plan. Once again, he is lying by claiming that no one has come up with a better idea to fund the rural schools in question.

For some background on last year's proposal, which faded away after receiving essentially no support amongst either the public or Congress, see these old posts of mine:

• New public lands sell-off proposed by GOP: Feb 11, 2006
• The trumped up rationale to privatize public land: Feb 12, 2006
• Point man on Bush's public lands sale beholden to real estate developer: Feb 13, 2006
• Some details on the Bush public land sale emerge: Feb 20, 2006
• GOP Senator vows to kill Bush's public land sell-off: Feb 21, 2006
• Montanans take their public land seriously: Feb 25, 2006
• Ultimate goal of privatizing public lands: Mar 2, 2006
• More opposition to Bush's "sneaker" public lands sale: Mar 22, 2006
• Bush's public land sale sputters along: Mar 30, 2006

Last year's sell-off, clearly on its last legs by the end of March, was officially put out of its misery over the summer. Now, Bush and Rey have brought it back from the dead with a few cosmetic changes.

The rhetoric is unchanged, however. Here is a quote from Mark Rey from the last post above, a post which outlined a specific alternative proposal from Senators Baucus and Wyden for funding rural schools "by withholding taxes from payments by the Federal government for goods and services delivered by public contractors at a rate of three percent of the payment amount" At that time, Rey said, "We're open to alternatives, but nary another alternative has emerged." I asked, rhetorically, "What will his tune be tomorrow?"

Over ten months later, his tune is precisely the same. The Durango Herald reports today: "Rey said he was open to hearing about other funding mechanisms for helping rural communities, but the plan's critics had offered none."

Fortunately, Democrats now control Congress, so we have real hope that an alternative along the lines of the one Baucus and Wyden proposed last year will actually emerge as legislation.

Speaker Craddick supports state parks -- Lt Gov Dewhurt not so much

The latest on the action (or inaction) on state parks in the Texas legislature:

• Last week, House Speaker Tom Craddick expressed his support for fully funding the parks system via the entire amount of the sales tax on sporting goods (via Capitol Annex and Eye on Williamson). This did not come as a surprise, since, as I wrote about earlier, six of the seven people Craddick assigned to the committee considering the bill that accomplishes this are co-authors—and the chair, Harvey Hilderbran of Kerrville, is the primary author.
• Meanwhile, Hilderbran's bill to fully fund state parks, HB6, is up to 104 co-authors, including 52 Republicans and 52 Democrats. After Democrat Ruth McClendon of San Antonio signed on today, the only central Texas representatives missing are Dems Robert Puente of San Antonio (southeastern Bexar County) and Mark Strama of Austin (northeastern Travis County).
• Despite the overwhelming support for parks in the Texas House, the leader of the Texas Senate, GOP Lieutanant Governor David Dewhurst, following in the footsteps of Governor Rick Perry, has expressed reservations about fully funding our parks, saying an extra $25 million is all they can handle. Parks director Walt Dabney, via the outdoors columnist of the Austin American-Statesman, strongly disagrees:

  "If that's all the money that's coming," Dabney said, referring to the $25 million figure, "we can fix some things but we can't run it. It makes no sense to fix something but not take care of it."

  Dabney laid out the department's legislative request for annual money above the current $56 million parks budget that would be needed to get the system back to a competitive level with other states:

  •$23 million for full- and part-time staff, operating expenses and equipment replacement.
  •$2 million to add staff to plan for road and building repair and replacement.
  •$25 million to restore historical sites and parks that have been allowed to decline because of a lack of funding. There is a $400 million backlog of identified repairs and restoration projects, Dabney said.
  •$7 million to add acreage and facilities to existing state parks. Many parks need group shelter sites and new bathrooms, as well as adjacent available acreage that would make them more usable and attract more visitors. "Those things would expand the season for those parks and increase the money those parks bring in," Dabney said.
  •$8 million to add four new parks, which have been called for in the department's strategic plan. Those parks are to be acquired and developed close to the state's largest metropolitan centers.

  The department is seeking another $20 million in local parks funding. That appropriation has been decimated in recent sessions and currently stands at $5.5 million. Raising it back above $20 million per year would be a real boost to local parks construction and development, Dabney said.

How long will Gov. Perry and Lt. Gov. Dewhurst continue to resist restoring Texas parks to their full potential?

UPDATE (10:49 P.M.):  Is Perry finally on board?  It appears his list of "emergency legislation" that the legislature can consider early in the session includes the parks funding bill (via AP and Matt Glazer at Burnt Orange Report).

State parks bill goes to committee

The bill to fully fund Texas parks, HB6 by Harvey Hilderbran of Kerrville, has apparently been referred to the committee on Culture, Recreation, and Tourism in the Texas House. It is now up to 95 co-authors, including the addition of Trey Martinez Fischer from Bexar County, who was not on the list as of my post last week.

Examining Speaker Tom Craddick's recent committee appointments, I see that this committee is chaired by none other than Hilderbran, and has six co-authors amongst its seven members. So prospects for the parks funding bill look excellent—even better than excellent—in the Texas House.

But that's just part of the story.

The companion bill in the Texas Senate, SB252—recently filed by GOP Craig Estes of Wichita Falls—has been referred to the Finance Committee. That committee is chaired by a fellow that I am not familiar with—Steve Ogden of Bryan. His bio states that "Ogden has been in the oil and gas exploration business for 20 years and is currently president of Ogden Resources Corporation, an independent oil and gas company based in College Station."

Not knowing much else about Ogden or the other members of the Senate Finance committee, I am not sure what this means for the chances that Texas parks will receive the full funding that they so desperately need. If anyone else has insight on this, please pass it on.

Watch 'Texas Parks at Risk', new short film from Environment Texas

A group called Environment Texas has put together a short film, with actor Ethan Hawke, on the effects of the budgetary crisis in the Texas state parks system (via Charles Kuffner). They have screenings tonight in Dallas, Austin, and Houston (alas, none in San Antonio for some reason). Fortunately, even if you can't make one of the screenings, you can still watch the 7-minute film at the end of this post (via YouTube) or on their website.

State Rep. Hilderbran's bill to fully fund our parks (HB 6) is now up to 90 co-authors, including 42 Democrats and 48 Republicans. That is 60% of the entire Texas House.

The word "bipartisan" is vastly overused and mis-used these days, but this seems a rare situation where the word applies in a very meaningful sense. The co-authors include 61% of Texas House Dems and 59% of Texas House GOPers. Our neglected parks have strong backing all of a sudden, and that support shows no hint of a partisan tilt.

As far as Bexar County representatives go, 5 of the 8 Dems have signed on (Joaquin Castro, Joe Farias, David Leibowitz, Menendez, Mike Villareal), while both GOPers have (Frank Corte and Joe Straus). Missing so far are Dems Trey Martinez Fischer, Ruth McClendon, and Robert Puente.

With such strong support in the Texas House, passage there seems virtually assured (or so I would naively believe, at least). So what about the Texas Senate?

A bill identical to Hilderbran's full-funding bill was introduced in the Senate a week ago by GOP state senator Craig Estes of Wichita Falls (SB 252). I don't see any co-authors listed yet. Perhaps this new short film will help spur our state senators into action. Writing them a letter or two probably wouldn't hurt either.

Anglers speaking up for our parks

Gov. Perry's re-discovered reluctance to fully fund Texas state parks is drawing a reaction, wrote the Fort Worth Star-Telegram yesterday:

Charles Harkless, president of the Texas BASS Federation Nation, said most anglers would rather have their money go to parks improvements than rebates. Of greater concern to anglers is the neglected parks system and a state government that has taken money originally meant for parks and used it for other purposes, he said.

"There is concern that boat ramps need repairs, the bathrooms need repairs. ... Fishermen don't mind paying money for the parks service," said Harkless, contacted during a fishing tournament in Louisiana.

Meanwhile, Perry's aides try to "clarify" what he said last week:

"What the governor was saying was ... that the money that a tax brings in should not drive budget decisions," [Perry spokesman Robert] Black said. "Budget decisions should be driven by how much a state agency needs. ... We're going to have a debate during the legislative process, and the parks department needs to justify" its needs.

Where has Mr. Black been for the last few months? The needs of the parks system have been laid out in detail by Perry's own appointees to the Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission, and their appointees to the State Parks Advisory Board, whose report came out last summer.

[Director of the Texas Coalition for Conservation, George] Bristol, who is also a member of the State Parks Advisory Board, said that panel heard testimony on numerous occasions from department officials who outlined where the extra money would go. "We felt comfortable that not only did they need the money, but that they could spend it wisely and in a fiscally prudent fashion," Bristol said.

Meanwhile, the number of co-authors of state Rep. Hilderbran's bill to fully fund Texas Parks (HB6) is up to 74. Counting Hilderbran himself, that is now exactly one-half of the Texas House. According to the Houston Chronicle's outdoors columnist, two years ago, a very similar bill from Hilderbran received the support of a mere 10 Texas House members.

Another local perspective on state parks

Down the road here in frozen San Antonio today, as we're in the midst of our first ice storm in several years, Dig Deeper Texas has put together a comprehensive summary of recent news items demonstrating the funding needs of our state parks system, and why Gov. Perry's recent backtracking on his campaign promises to fully fund parks is so laughable.  They summarize with this:

These reports come from all over the state: Waxahachie, Odessa, Houston, Fort Worth, San Antonio, and Austin. This isn’t a bunch “do gooder liberals” from Austin whinning about their bike trails. These are people from around the state that use the parks to hunt and fish. These are people from small towns where the local economy is dependent on the parks. So why is Perry balking now?

Exactly what 100% of Texans is he representing? Who would object to spending more money on parks? This is Perry’s chance to demonstrate that he’s an astute politician after all and realize that this one campaign promise he needs to make good on. Or he prove again that there really isn’t much else to him besides the “good hair” and hot air. After all, Texas is a “state of mind” which is a good thing because if you leave it up to Perry, there won’t be any thing physical left to share.

State parks: Gov. Perry tries to slow the full funding train

Fulfilling expectations that have been building over the last few months, the long-festering budget crisis in the Texas state parks system is receiving a lot of early attention in the new session of the Texas legislature.

From the Houston Chronicle late Wednesday (emphasis added):

Advocates of improving funding for Texas state and local parks had to smile earlier this week when a much-anticipated bill addressing park funding was filed for consideration by the Texas Legislature.

The bill, sponsored by Rep. Harvey Hilderbran, R-Kerrville, was designated as House Bill 6.

In the tradition-bound world of the Texas Legislature, only bills considered by leadership to be of considerable statewide importance are given single-digit numbers.

That Hilderbran's bill drew such a low number indicates it will have high priority in the 80th session.

...

The annual operating budget of TPWD's state parks division is about $56 million, making Texas 49th in the nation in per-capita park funding.

Under Hilderbran's bill, that funding would greatly increase, going from the current annual maximum of $32 million to approximately $105 million.

Hilderbran has filed the same bill in previous sessions recently, including in 2005. But the bill went nowhere then. This year looks to be different. It's already up to 70 "coauthors".

The San Antonio Express-News has some quotes:

• From Rep. Hilderbran: ""The primary goal is to restore our Texas parks system to excellence. We also want to strengthen the management practices of the department and create greater funding opportunities for local parks."
• From George Bristol, vice chairman of the Texas State Parks Advisory Committee and president of the Texas Coalition for Conservation: "We feel very confident and a great deal of pride that this bill will go a long way toward meeting the needs of a state park system that attracts a lot of visitors from out-of-state and even around the world."
• From conservative GOP Rep. Debbie Riddle: "Our parks are a natural resource that we need to protect. We need to make sure that our children and our children's children have those parks. It's important for families, especially from our urban areas, to have a place where you can go to enjoy nature." (Interestingly, she's not listed as a "coauthor" yet.)

One voice that doesn't appear ready to jump on the bandwagon of fully funding our state parks system is that of our Governor, Rick Perry -- the fellow who somehow won re-election in November with 39% of the vote.

The Fort Worth Star-Telegram interviewed Gov. Perry on this and other subjects yesterday (emphasis added):

During the 30-minute interview, Perry said there was no question that the 600,000-acre state parks system needs more money, but he questioned whether the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department could efficiently spend the roughly $80 million in extra money that would accrue from a parks funding bill filed this week in the Texas House.

Instead, he suggested that some of that money could flow back to anglers, hunters and wildlife enthusiasts in the form of rebates when they buy sporting goods. "We need a way to make a rebate back to Texans," he said.

Contrast Perry's words with last years' report of the Texas State Parks Advisory Committee:

"After working extensively with Texas Parks and Wildlife Staff, the Advisory Committee has identified approximately $100 million in additional annual needs."

The bulk of these additional needs are just to address the repair and maintenance backlog. 35 million dollars of this is for acquisition of new parks (15 million) and for local park grants (20 million). Without such programs, it will be impossible to maintain a parks system worthy of this state into the future.

From the Advisory Committee's report (emphasis added): "The population of the state of Texas is growing at a rapid pace, yet there has not been a major acquisition and development financing package for state parks undertaken since 1967." And, "The Texas Recreation and Park Account, commonly known as the local grant program, has suffered the bulk of reductions in appropriations from the sporting goods tax in recent years, falling from $15.5 million to about $5 million in the current biennium." That's 21 cents per Texas resident! The Advisory Committee's recommendation brings this up to a buck per resident every two years.

Hopefully Perry wail fail in his efforts to prevent full funding of our parks system.  The political moment has come, and we have to take advantage of it now to save our parks.

Will legislature save our state parks?

How will our state parks fare in the upcoming session of the Texas legislature? After years upon years of neglect and decreasing budgets, the dismal condition of our state parks system finally received major attention last summer, thanks, in part, to the four-way gubernatorial campaign. But will that recent attention translate into actual dollars next year? Or will state parks, once again, get pushed aside by other priorities and the GOP ideology of privatization?

Perhaps the Texas State Railroad's example provides an outlook into what will happen with the rest of the park system. Three weeks ago, the Dallas Morning-News reported:

To the relief of many East Texans, the death knell for the Texas State Railroad was temporarily silenced Tuesday [November 28] when state park officials announced that additional funding will continue operations for a few more months.

...

But the long-term future of the popular tourist railroad is still precarious, depending on whetehr legislators decide to fund future operations, convert the engines and cars into a static display or arrange for private operations.

...

Still, the emergency funding identified by Lt. Governor David Dewhurst and speaker of the House Tom Craddick in a letter to the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department is "wonderful news for the railroad and the state of Texas and our local community," said Steve Presley, a Palestine city councilman who chairs the Texas State Railroad Preservation Task Force of the emergency funding.

"Everyone will be extremely pleased that we've got it temporarily saved -- that was our first big hurdle to jump. The next big hurdle is for us to get that legislative support to save it long term."

Could this additional funding for the State Railroad be a presage of things to come for the rest of the state parks system during the upcoming legislative session? Rep. Sid Miller (R-Stephenville) has already filed a bill to allocate all of the revenue from the sporting goods tax, about $100 million per year, towards state and local parks. Currently, the legislature has the amount of this revenue used for parks capped at a mere $32 million per year, and the actual amount allocated for parks recently has been significantly less than even thatr reduced amount.

If this bill is passed, it would amount to a much needed cash infusion into our parks that would go a long way to re-building a system that Texans can be proud of.

From 1990 to 2003, according to the report of the State Park Advisory Committee earlier this year, spending on Texas state parks dropped from 0.40% of the state's operating budget to 0.15%, leaving Texas 49th in the nation in per capita spending on state parks. The direct results: "layoffs, partial closings," reduction of maintenance and curtailment of park programs." The indirect results: "significant economic hardships on local communities and regions," and "a lack of confidence in the quality and availability of the park system that is impacting our tourism industry."

Here in San Antonio, Government Canyon State Natural Area was finally partially opened to the public a year ago, after at least six years where its opening was supposed to be a year or two away. Even now, it is still closed Tuesday through Thursday, camping is not available, and Friday to Monday hours are only from 8 AM to 6 PM. And this is a large, stunning, showpiece park immediately outside a major population center.

This bleak situation may be about to change, fortunately. The Waco Tribune wrote on Friday:

Few agencies made the switch from fleeting afterthought to high priority for the legislative session in January as fast as the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, which expects a major funding boost for the first time in many years.

Indeed, Rep. Miller is optimistic about the restoration of the full allocation of the sporting goods tax to parks, according to a late November interview at the blog Capitol Annex: “We’re going to do it. I don’t know if it will be my bill or someone else’s, but we will do it."

Until they do 'do it,' however, the crisis continues. According to the State Park Advisory Committee's report, "Every day that passes without action leads to further deterioration of park infrastructure, loss of historic resources and dissatisfied customers. The time for action is now."

Update on San Antonio's preservation of land to protect the Edwards Aquifer

Back in 2005, San Antonio voters approved an extension of a 1/8-cent sales tax to be used to purchase land in the recharge zone for the Edwards Aquifer. The goal is to prevent over-development of that land and thus preserve the quality of the water in the underground reservoir that supplies the vast majority of this city's water.

The Houston Chronicle has an update on what is being done with these funds.

It's some of the most picturesque land around this sprawling city: 116 acres of craggy, oak-covered hills near the Government Canyon State Natural Area.

The city bought the acreage in September with nearly $1 million in taxpayer funds — not for parkland but to shield it from development and preserve its role in replenishing the Edwards Aquifer.

The tracts were the first of many being acquired with proceeds from a one-eighth-cent sales tax approved by local voters last year to raise $90 million for water-related land conservation. Most of the acquisitions are likely to be in recharge zone areas of rural Medina and Uvalde counties, where land is cheaper than in heavily urbanized Bexar County.

...

"This is one of the largest, most significant conservation projects in the entire state right now," said Deirdre Hisler, who leads the city advisory board implementing Proposition 1.

...

Rather than buy land, the city prefers to seek easements that impose restrictions on the owners' use of the property but keeps it on the tax rolls.

"We only deal with willing landowners that are willing to be a part of the program," and there is no shortage of interest, Hisler said.

...

Jeff Francell, director of land protection at the Texas Nature Conservancy, said San Antonio's initiative "is going to have a major impact in the future on water quality, on protection of the aquifer and sprawl, to some degree."

By seeking easements in Medina and Uvalde counties, "we're going to be able to protect tens of thousands of acres with the $90 million," Francell said.

"We're talking about land that is in the $1,000-$3,000 an acre range rather than in the $20,000-$50,000 an acre range in Bexar County," Francell said.

The effort should benefit anyone who visits, not just San Antonians, he said.

"A lot of Houston hunts in this area. Just keeping it open for wildlife is an added benefit," he said.

This effort is just one small part of what will be needed to ensure that our quality of life in south and central Texas is preserved in the decades to come.

Off the Kuff also comments on this article, taking issue with the Texas Nature Conservancy's Francell's comment, "The state parks don't have two cents to rub together now. Private buyers are the only hope."

Kuffner writes, "Restoring, or in this case not restoring, those cuts [to state parks budget], is also a choice. Maybe that's a choice you agree with, but it's still a choice. We could choose differently, and that's why Francell's statement about private trusts being the "only hope" is wrong."

I agree that Francell's statement is wrong, but only because he left out local initiatives such as San Antonio's Proposition 1.  At the state government level, I believe Francell is on target, even given the likelihood of increased state parks budgets in the short term (a subject I will be posting about very soon). 

It is inconceivable to me that a state run by Republicans whose ideology and campaign contributors incline them towards underfunding and even selling off state parks is going to embark upon a land acquisition binge any time soon.  And what limited land acquisition by the state we may be fortunate enough to see will likely follow the Government Canyon example of public-private partnerships -- where the Trust for Public Land, and other private organizations, were instrumental in assembling what is now a showpiece of the state parks system.

So, for the foreseeable future, private land trusts and local initiatives such as San Antonio's Proposition 1 appear to be the only substantial hope for preserving undeveloped land.  Of course, I would love to be proved wrong on this.

Texans care about their parks -- does Rick Perry?

DriveDemocracy points to yet more indications that Texas Governor Rick Perry, despite his recent words, appears quite eager to dispose of whatever state park land he can get away with.  The beneficiaries of the sell-off would, unsurprisingly, be residential real-estate developers.

This story comes from the Fort Worth Star-Telegram:

[I]n an e-mail obtained by the Star-Telegram, attorneys in the governor's office outlined a proposed auction that could have left only one-fourth of the property [400 acres of parkland in Tarrant county (Fort Worth)] as green space. Several sites would also have been set aside for natural gas exploration, according to the correspondence.

In a note dated May 30, parks Director Robert Cook reports on phone calls from the governor's attorneys in which they were requesting that a Parks and Wildlife Department attorney "come down to their office soon and assist in the development of a Request for Proposal for the sale of Eagle Mountain Lake."

Fortunately, Texans are starting to wake up:

Several area residents complained in separate e-mails that the parks department purchased the property more than 25 years ago, but it never developed it. They blamed the governor's office or the Texas Legislature for withholding funding from the department.

Others identified themselves as Republicans but warned they would not vote for the GOP governor unless the Eagle Mountain Lake property is preserved as park space. The governor's office released the correspondence after receiving a request under the Texas open records law.

"This is a very nice place to camp and fish and I strongly oppose the Governor's plan to sell the land [for] any development unless it is for a state park," wrote one Fort Worth resident.

"I am definitely against this ... sale, and you will hear my voice being expressed at the upcoming election," wrote another.

Many Texans obviously care about their parks. 

After so many months posting about this subject, feeling isolated, it has been heartening to see support for our state park system become a significant issue in the current gubernatorial campaign in recent weeks.