Governor's Budget: Close Mt. San Jac?

[Hikin_Jim]

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me ... ome-center

Deep cuts, closures across the state at heart of budget plan
Beaches, parks, schools and prisons would be hit. Some think the governor's proposal is a ruse to get a tax hike.
By Evan Halper and Jordan Rau, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
January 10, 2008

SACRAMENTO -- Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is expected today to propose shutting 48 state parks -- including some popular Southern California beaches -- releasing far more prison inmates than previously projected and increasing car fees for the second straight year as part of his solution to the state's fiscal crisis.

And 14 months after persuading voters to borrow $37 billion for public works improvements, his administration will propose roughly $40 billion in new borrowing for infrastructure needs related to schools, courts, water systems, higher education and high-speed rail.

Related Stories
- Taking off the budget blinders, finally
- Fire levy plan sparks criticism

The budget blueprint, shaping up as the harshest since Schwarzenegger was first elected in 2003, will include scores of spending reductions that would affect people across the state. School spending would be rolled back by about $3 billion. Welfare payments for tens of thousands of children whose families are considered to be at high risk for homelessness would be eliminated.

A cost-of-living increase for the elderly, blind and disabled receiving state assistance would be canceled, as would state-funded dental visits for the poor.

The cuts, described by officials familiar with the governor's proposals, are so deep that some in the Capitol are already dismissing the plan as a ruse -- an attempt to stir up so much public demand for a tax hike that the governor will ultimately be able to break his pledge not to take that route.

No multibillion-dollar tax increases are in the Schwarzenegger plan for now, the officials said. The proposal offers the governor's vision of how to bring the budget into balance without new revenue.

It is certain to rattle voters.

Bolsa Chica, Will Rogers, San Clemente, Carlsbad and San Onofre state beaches would all be closed to visitors. Topanga and Mt. San Jacinto state parks would be shut down. Lifeguards and other seasonal staff would be laid off.

"They're trying to raise that as the bloody red shirt that will pave the way for a tax increase," said one high-ranking Republican, who spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of angering the governor.

Administration officials refused to comment on the proposal.

"We are going to wait to allow the governor to roll out the budget," said Schwarzenegger spokesman Aaron McLear.

Protest had begun even before the budget was released.

School groups were already mobilizing a campaign to fight the cuts, including the governor's plan to ask lawmakers to suspend voter-approved spending formulas that guarantee schools about 40% of state revenue. The organizations are planning to begin televising advertisements this month calling on the public to resist such a suspension.

Bob Wells, executive director of the Assn. of California School Administrators, called a school funding rollback "outrageous."

"Schools didn't cause this budget problem," he said. The governor and lawmakers "binged on other spending in good years and want to purge school spending in bad years. That is not fair."

State Senate leader Don Perata (D-Oakland) said he has already started fielding complaints, including one from Ronald M. George, chief justice of California. The jurist warned that the cuts the governor wants would decimate some services and possibly interfere with legal mandates.

George said he pulled the governor aside after the State of the State address and warned him that the proposed cuts to the courts would be devastating.

"I told him I have very great concerns that the operations of the court could be crippled if these are carried out," George said.

Perata said of the budget to be unveiled today: "I expect it's going to be bad." He and other Democrats have already begun calling for a tax increase to avoid some of the proposed cuts. Republicans, who are in the minority but hold enough votes to block new taxes, have vowed to resist.

The criminal justice proposal that is expected to generate the strongest opposition is the possible early release of as many as 50,000 nonviolent offenders -- 10,000 to 20,000 more than previous estimates of 30,000. Under the plan, the state would also stop monitoring tens of thousands of parolees.

Schwarzenegger said last year that he was strongly against releasing prisoners early. But his new proposal would have the dual benefit of cutting the budget and pleasing a three-judge federal panel that within months is scheduled to hold a trial on state prison overcrowding. Many state lawmakers, particularly Republicans, have said that the prisoner release plan would be dead on arrival in the Legislature.

Assemblyman Todd Spitzer (R-Orange) said such proposals, certain to be unpopular with the public, appear intended to bring "the full force of every interest group to bear on the state Legislature so we have to pick the winners and losers, or consider having to raise new revenue." Spitzer repeated the Republicans' pledge not to raise taxes.

While the prisons plan would save hundreds of millions of dollars, the park plan would save $13 million. Perata said lawmakers might consider user fee increases as an alternative to shutting the parks.

"I know a lot of people think parks should be free, but we seem to be well beyond that point in California, and most of us would agree that classroom education is more important than state park admission," Perata said.

Any such fees would come on top of an $11 fee increase for registering vehicles. The money would be used to fund the California Highway Patrol and the Department of Motor Vehicles. It follows a registration fee hike of as much as $11 that Schwarzenegger signed into law last fall to fund research into alternative fuels.

Advocates for the poor, meanwhile, expressed exasperation that the needy were once again targeted for major reductions.

Safety net grants intended for children whose parents do not meet work requirements in the state's welfare program would be eliminated. So would grants for the children of some legal and illegal immigrants. "It looks like the governor is not doing anything new," said Nancy Berlin, director of California Partnership, a coalition of community groups. "He is just bringing out the same cuts, targeting the same low-income families that have taken the brunt of the cuts for the last three years. There has to be a more responsible and fair way to balance the budget than to keep going after low-income children."

The $40 billion in borrowing that Schwarzenegger will propose comes after a similar effort that stalled last year. The money would be used for building projects, including courthouses, schools and university buildings. About $10 billion would be set aside for water projects.

Perata said he is open to the possibility of a new infrastructure bond issue -- at least for water projects -- but cautioned that interest costs would only add to the state's financial burdens. The state already faces difficulty keeping up with its debts.

Among them is $15 billion in bonds that voters authorized to help balance the budget in the midst of the last fiscal crisis just a few years ago. Today, the governor will propose delaying repayment of those bonds for a year, in the hope of generating $1.5 billion to help eliminate the current shortfall.

Times staff writers Patrick McGreevy, Michael Rothfeld and Nancy Vogel contributed to this report.

[AlanK]

Without taking us down the road of talking politics here, one can safely say that, whatever happens, "it ain't gonna be pretty."

[Perry]

What are they gonna do, pay law enforcement officers to keep people out of the parks?

I believe outdoor and wilderness experiences have positive effects on children, and it's something that Southern California desperately needs. Certainly, learning how to read is more important, but I think the benefits of the mountains are lost on some. Most people in Southern California can't even name the tallest mountain in SoCal, but almost everyone knows what is happening with Britney Spears and Paris Hilton. Vicarious living is not good for the soul and creates a diseased society, in my opinion. Achieving personal goals is more healthy to the individual and community.

[Foleymo]

The Desert Sun is trying to put together a comprehensive story on this for tomorrow's paper and they're looking for hikers to comment on the budget. If anyone would like to be quoted in tomorrow's paper, e-mail reporter Mariecar Mendoza at mariecar.mendoza@thedesertsun.com. Leave your name and contact information as well as your comments. She may want to call you back and ask follow up questions.

[Perry]

A general note, if you write it like this:

colin.atagi at thedesertsun dot com

most spam programs won't be able to read that.

[Perry]

Another rant here. Consider how much emphasis is put on superficial things in our society and how judgemental people are about silly things. The beauty of parks and wilderness areas is that they are open to anyone regardless of social status. This gives anyone the opportunity to build self-esteem or burn off negative energy in a positive way. I really hope this proposal is just a joke and not actually considered.

[phydeux]

Some of this seems like a ruse by the Governor; it looks like Arnie's administration might want to implement user fees for these areas, or might be trying to pawn these areas (and their expenses) off on other government agencies. For example, how would you close extremely popular state beaches here in OC? (Bolsa Chica & San Clemete State Beaches). He's probably just trying to get the respective cities , Huntington Beach and San Clemente, to take them over.

As for Mt San J State Park, he'd probably like the Feds to take it over and integrate it into the Federal wilderness. (Wild as it may seem, maybe even the City of Palm Springs might take it over?). IF the Feds do it, I'd imaging something like the quota system of Mt. Whitney, with permit fees for day and overnight hikes.

[Hikin_Jim]

Closing the park isn't too practical. People can hike in from SR 243, Skyline, Snow Creek, and of course from the main Federal part of the Wilderness. Also, I seriously doubt that they'd shut down the tram. What? People will be on the honor system to not walk past the Ranger Station? Yeah, right.

At best, it doesn't sound like Ahrnold's plan is well thought out. More likely, it is a ruse. He's picked some really prime areas for closure. Public outcry will "force" him to raise taxes even though he promised he wouldn't, which gives him a nice out.

[halhiker]

Don't know if this will actually happen. All agencies were told to come up with ways they could cut 10% of their budgets. San Jacinto is essentially a wilderness area and I'm sure it doesn't cost a whole lot to administrate it.

I listened to the program, "To The Point" about this on KCRW (you can listen to the podcast on kcrw.com) tonight and they said that the money saved by shutting parks would amount to about $13 million dollars, as mentioned in the Times article. Budget dust, they called it. It is a very insignificant amount of money but will get people's attention. Just like the way closing the National Parks did.

And if it happens, don't get caught hiking there. It would be a healthy fine and that'd be just another way to close the budget shortfall

[magikwalt]

The press has been so focused on the real estate woes on us that they failed to report the effect it would have on the state budget. When you have the largest national home builders in the nation closing offices and killing projects as fast as they can it has to effect the State's budget. Revenues are down across the board so Tax Revenues for the State and all States will be down.

Cuts will be made. Unlike the National Budget, State's Budgets must be balanced and not supported by a defict. As with all cost savings moves the large numbers get looked at hardest but those small numbers lacking vocal and political defense will get mauled.

Things to expect...increased taxation of "vices" such as tobacco, liquor and gambling... gasoline taxes, sales tax, vehicle tax...any increase in business taxes imaginable but we'll pay for it in the end.

It really doesn't matter who is in office. The reality is they have to balance the budget. Its either raise tax revenue or cut spending. Now we'll get to see what type of real political skill Arnold has.