Michigan’s once-proud network of state park facilities is pretty much held together with bubble gum and baling wire. But lawmakers’ fear of passing any kind of tax increase (or tax change) could kill a promising idea to refurbish parks and boost Michigan tourism.
“One estimate is that half of the state parks and recreation facilities are in bad condition,” the Detroit News reported last month. “The Department of Natural Resources has more than 200 infrastructure projects that would cost a total of $341 million and only $2 million earmarked annually to make emergency repairs to deteriorating facilities… As the weather turns warmer and visitors begin to flock to the beaches along Lake Michigan in Holland State Park or spend nights under the stars at secluded campgrounds at Craig Lake State Park in the Upper Peninsula, they’ll find much to enjoy. But, increasingly, they’ll notice problems throughout the 98-park system…The state takes in $52.6 million in revenues for the parks. Officials say $90 million a year would be an optimal budget, but a minimum of $70 million a year would be required to do an adequate job. Park officials have requested federal stimulus money to make some repairs, but were told that no money would be available.”
There is a simple way for the DNR to get much of $90 million every year.
A proposal moving slowly through the Legislature would charge a $10 fee for state parks as part of the annual vehicle registration process. It’s how the beautiful state of Montana funds its parks system. The Michigan proposal could replace lagging fees from annual park permits and result in additional park funds of $40 million or more per year. Click here for a summary of the plan.
So what’s the problem? Well, it’s much like the state’s approach to hunting and fishing license fees (which fail to provide enough funding to support wildlife, fisheries and conservation management programs are a pittance compared to others across the country.) Many lawmakers are terrified of passing any kind of tax increase or user fee change.
They even balk at a voluntary tax, which is exactly what the license fee would be. Any vehicle registrant who didn’t want to support the parks, could simply get a $10 refund. In Montana, 88 percent of drivers support the parks tax and only 12 percent ask for refunds.
But, rather than giving Michigan drivers that choice, legislators could very well kill the proposal. Some of the young professionals who attended last night’s Center for Michigan dinner with legislators shook their heads.
“We’re fighting over a $10 fee for state parks?” asked an incredulous Alok Sharma, an information technology consultant and resident of Detroit. “C’mon. That’s stupid.”
4 Comments
Investing in State parks; Why the controversy?
This is part of the problem in this state. Why is the state in the parks business??? They admit they can not run this in the black and have let it self destruct. There are thousands of private parks in this state that are functioning and make a profit because people are willing to use them. Why is the State in competition with these business operators?
Michigan should sell their parks. Hundreds of millions would be generated. The state could sell with stipulations in the deeds for proper minimal operations and access etc. There would be a flurry of bidders from across the nation. The property would be put on the tax rolls, forever. This would generate continual sustained revenue. The free enterprise system could and would operate. The state would also be relieved from this operation and duty thereby cutting the annual budget. People come to certain parks for the access, facilities and locations. Whether it is a state park or “Joe’s Park” wouldn’t mean a thing. Let the market and actual costs dictate the price and the amenities like the rest of the “real” world! Why isn’t the state in the water park business? Why aren’t they in solar and wind equipment production? Let private enterprise do what it does. Get out of the way and do what government is supposed to be involved with. Way to much of what this state does or operates is not it’s function and fails at it unless taxes are raised ever higher. This is so simple it seems hard for them.
State parks and forests are public assets that provide services to every Michigan citizen, whether they use them in any given year or not -they filter/clean water, sequester carbon, provide habitat, etc. These general services justify general fund support, but the legislature eliminated GF support in 2004. User fees cannot support the current system without rising so high they become a barrier to public access. The “Passport” proposal is a serious attempt to improve public access and provide the financial resources to sustain Michigan’s natural resources.
I attended the MTA conference in Detroit this year and the one presentation that I really enjoyed was given on the importunates of parks and rec. It was give by Linda Walker of Clinton township by Detroit. She really hit the high points of the importance of our parks.In fact she did such a good job I have asked her to give her presentation to a group in our area.
Don’t underestimate the valve of our parks.
State Parks are not an essential function of government, but roads and bridges are.
Vehicle registration fees are one of two user fees that fund our transportation infrastructure. The Governor’s Transportation Funding Task Force made up of business, labor and community leaders determined that Michigan must double our transportation funding. State Parks have their own funding mechanism. It is irresponsible to add this to vehicle registrations at a time when the legislature is being asked to increase vehicle registrations for transportation.