OPINION: Don't be shortsighted about parks
Albert E. Caccese is the executive director of Audubon New York, the state program of the National Audubon Society.
New York's state parks face serious infrastructure problems. As a member of the executive staff of the state's parks agency from 1975 to 2003, I had a front-row seat as three administrations, both Democrat and Republican, responded to budgetary crises by instituting a number of difficult cuts at the expense of our state parks. Now, under Gov. David A. Paterson's budget, we face the reality of park closures.
In 1975, Gov. Hugh Carey declared an end to the "days of wine and roses." In 1983, Gov. Mario Cuomo urged agencies to "do more with less." And in 1995, Gov. George Pataki declared state government downsizing among his highest priorities.
Throughout these years, the agency was able to survive and provide safe and enjoyable recreational and interpretive opportunities for tens of millions of New Yorkers and their guests. Yes, maintenance was deferred and other difficult choices were made, but in the final analysis, a remarkably dedicated and talented state park and historic site staff did whatever it took so that the public could enjoy their outdoor experiences.
Enter the Paterson administration. Over the past two years, the budget of the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation has been cut by $46 million dollars - 25 percent of its entire operating budget. At a time when park attendance is escalating, the governor eliminated 1,100 permanent and seasonal employees and instituted service reductions at more that 100 state parks and historic sites. Incredibly, now the governor is suggesting to the legislature that it remove another $29 million dollars from the agency's operating budget - bringing the total cut to 40 percent over just three years.
If this proposal is accepted by the legislature, then, without question, parks and historic sites will be closed in every one of the 11 park regions around the state. Yet, we can't measure the impact without knowing which places are on the list. Nearly 100 state parks and historic sites around the state are on the block,
For the record, you don't save money by closing small, underutilized facilities. So this number would require the closure of such major state parks as Heckscher, Valley Stream and Hempstead Lake, as well as seven others on Long Island.
There seems to have been no thought given to the impact of these closures in terms of lost revenue at the sites and tourism dollars from communities around the state. The park and site system is estimated to generate nearly $2 billion annually in economic activity. These thoughtless cuts may in fact cost the state more money than they'll save.
We all know that the state is facing an unprecedented deficit and fiscal challenges unlike anything in the past six decades. But the state parks budget accounts for only one-quarter of 1 percent of the state budget. To close this gap, why not get creative? Why not look for long-term ways to allow the parks to continue to be an economic plus for the state?
We could dedicate some of the revenue from the proposed tax on sugared sodas to keep the parks open. After all, if the governor is truly interested in fighting obesity, why would he also limit access for children and their parents to get outdoors and be active?
Or, how about taxing the sale of nonagricultural, aesthetic lawn-care pesticides and fertilizers? This would not only provide revenue to keep the parks open, but will help stop the use of materials that are spoiling water resources.
Tell us which parks will be closed. Let the people of the state decide whether they're willing to live with the ramifications of this proposal. Let them, through their elected representatives, determine whether the economic juice obtained from these cuts is actually worth the squeeze.
Gov. Paterson shouldn't let his administration be known as the one that knew the cost of everything and the value of nothing.
