Editorial: Legislature should approve plan to help parks

It's time for California to end its neglectful relationship with its beloved state parks.

Millions of people enjoy these state beaches and parks each year, resulting in more than 75 million annual visits. On a daily basis, school kids and vacationers are awed by the ancient redwoods at Big Basin, the spring wildflowers at Anza-Borrego or the history preserved at Coloma's Marshall Gold Discovery park.

Yet even as our state parks touch so many lives, their grounds and facilities are in a downward spiral of decay. Altogether, they have a $1.2 billion maintenance backlog of crumbling buildings, leaky septic tanks and other problems.

This backlog gets worse with each meltdown of the state budget, allowing simple repair jobs to turn into costly fixes requiring capital investment.

Someone needs to end this twisted cycle of neglect. To his credit, Assemblyman John Laird has come up with a park-saving plan that deserves to become law.

Laird proposes to increase the vehicle license fee by $10, generating about $282 million in revenue each year for the state parks system.

In turn, people with valid California license plates would be provided free day-use entrance to all 278 parks and beaches.

For people who visit these parks frequently – or those who would like to do so more often – this $10 "parks pass" would be a bargain.

It also would be a lifesaver for dozens of parks. By approving this fee, lawmakers this year could avoid closing 48 state parks and reducing lifeguards at 16 state beaches – as Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger proposed in January. Over the long term, the revenue stream would allow the state to open new parks and improve law enforcement and facilities at existing ones.

Historically, this page has opposed proposals that dedicate chunks of the state budget to serve narrow purposes, no matter how worthy. But there's a big difference between what Laird is proposing and what voters have approved at the ballot box in recent years.

For one thing, the state parks plan is a legislative proposal, not a constitutional amendment or a ballot measure. It isn't like Proposition 71, the initiative voters approved in 2004 to borrow $3 billion for stem cell research, which prevents lawmakers from altering its provisions as circumstances change.

Laird's plan also creates its own revenue stream instead of borrowing money or sequestering funds out of annual state budgets. That's much different than Proposition 42, a 2002 ballot measure that carved out sales tax revenues for transportation.

Any hike in vehicle fees is sure to prompt protests, especially at a time when gas prices are high. Yet there's good reason to think that Californians will accept a $10 hike in their annual registration fee if it offers a tangible benefit. Laird's proposal would end the prospect of park closures and ever-higher park entrance fees, and give us well-maintained parks and beaches that are open and accessible.

That's a deal that both Republicans and Democrats should rally behind.

* * *

For more information on the parks proposal, go to http://democrats.assembly. ca.gov/members/a27/parks.htm.