Posted on 10/10/2004 7:55:12 PM PDT by RGSpincich
The Schwarzenegger administration has quietly shut down virtually all expansion of California's state parks -- even land paid for with private donations, the Mercury News has learned.
Saying the state cannot afford new rangers, fences, signs and maintenance, Schwarzenegger officials in the state Department of Finance are refusing to buy almost any new land or accept new scenic beaches, forests and historic sites into public ownership.
The policy was put into place by the state Public Works Board, an obscure panel appointed by the governor that approves funding for state buildings, college classrooms, prisons, parks and other facilities.
(Excerpt) Read more at contracostatimes.com ...
Ping
Good for him
If you ask me the State AND the Federal governments should be SELLING land and paying off debt.
It's called REALITY. Something Democrats know nothing about.
Achtung!!!! Ping
It's about time someone stopped taking land for federal use.
The more land under title to the federal government the less land for use by the private sector, which is what the liberal environmentalists want.
Alright.
Will there ever be a reporter that can write a balanced story?
Some are critical that the State is not buying more land for parks while others agree with the Governor's position.
Get quotes from both sides and present a fair and balanced story.
Whatever happened to objective journalism?
Conservation Easements and out-right purchasing for trail easements that extend vastly beyond rights of way for trails are what's going on and is based on simply using state government to wipe out the investment backed expectation of any possiblity of ANY type of development prospects for said landowners.
It's all about expansion of the State's "collective" of public land. There could be no other motive with the Sierra-Nevada Conservancy as over 70% of the Sierra-Nevada is publically owned and thus undevelopable, except for government developments. Thus the 30% left, which is not all developable land is what the Socialists/activists covet and even the developable land is NOT coveted for state government parks!!!
RG, you're trying so hard to deny the obvious intent of these socialists, aren't you. I can't help wonder to what lengths you'd go to, to defend AS as he plays right into their wet(lands) dreams. There was absolutely no need for any of this and it cannot be rationally justified by anyone but the most rabid of militant EnvironMentist/GovernMentalist activists!!!
AuntB, thanks for the ping and I'm glad for AS's restraint on the park business, at least. But you watch, he won't intercede in the coming actions of the Resources Agency's Fish & Game Department's Wildlife Conservation Board. Pete Wilson never did and neither will AS.
This is good news.
Did anyone read the Conservancy bill he signed carefully? Didn't he denied funding for it earlier, so it doesn't have any teeth? Although I would have been much happier, if he didn't sign it.
My personal major pet peave with Arnold is that he signed those impossible and useless cae emission standards bill.
But we have to look at the entirety of what Arnold has done, and he has done a lot of good and hopefully will do more. On points he is still way ahead of what Davis or Bustamante would have done.
If we managed to elect a Republican majority to the CA Legislature, they could overturn those damagin bills, so we need to work on that.
Rights, farms, environment ping.
Let me know if you wish to be added or removed from this list.
I don't get offended if you want to be removed.
It doesn't look too good for the revitalization of Hetch-Hetchy, either.
You have an excellent point that we don't often think of when we consider the debt of the nation.
LOL
Every acre that is acquired by the state...must be managed by the state. So this means revenue or taxes. I think alot of environmentalists simply don't understand the economics of the situation.
I think alot of environmentalists simply don't understand the economics of the situation.
You got to be joking! They could care less about the economics of the situation. There goal is to have land set aside and preserved. Economics means nothing to them. They would ask for your last food dollar to buy land, that's how much they care about the taxpayer.
BTTT!!!!!!!
Arnold is making it clear we don't have the money to take care of new state parks. If the Democrats and the enviro wackos don't like it, let 'em find the money to operate them.
But these liberal dippos simply want us to eat whole organic grains, walk to work/shop, and have 0.5 children, if we must have sex.....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.