Posted on 11/04/2004 8:56:47 PM PST by NormsRevenge
Two days before it is scheduled to complete a $95 million deal to preserve the scenic Hearst Ranch, the Schwarzenegger administration still has not made public its estimates about how much the landmark purchase will cost taxpayers for new park rangers, maintenance and other expenses.
--snip--
If Schwarzenegger officials stick with a rule they approved earlier this year aimed at curbing costs for new state parks, they would have to reject the Hearst deal because of its operating expenses. Or they could accept the deal, and keep costs down by closing Hearst's beaches to the public, which would be unpopular. Or they could violate their policy and accept the land despite the new costs.
--snip--
Roy Stearns, a spokesman for state parks, said the information is part of internal budget documents given to the Finance Department that can be kept secret under state open-records laws. A Finance Department spokesman, H.D. Palmer, did not provide the information despite repeated requests by the Mercury News.
Environmentalists say the administration appears to be stonewalling to avoid political embarrassment.
``Arnold Schwarzenegger promised the public he was going to throw the doors open wide to government,'' said Pat Veesart, a Sierra Club spokesman. ``This is business as usual. These are state bureaucracies dealing with huge sums of public money and essentially locking the public out of the process.''
--snip--
The issue has exposed a wider problem at California's nationally famous system of state parks -- one that threatens Schwarzenegger's carefully cultivated reputation as an environmentalist. Because voters have approved $10 billion in parks and water bonds since 2000, there is plenty of money to buy new land. But because bond money cannot be spent on operating costs and the state has a $5 billion deficit, there is no money for rangers.
(Excerpt) Read more at mercurynews.com ...
voters approved $10B in bond sales to finance the purchases of private land to be used as parks - damn
This sickens me.
Frankly, I don't give a flip how WR Hearst, a practitioner of yellow journalism and one of the chief instigators of the Spanish American War, lived. Talk about elites.
If Ahnold sold off the place to developers, I wouldn't shed a single tear.
I understood that Hearst Castle and grounds was deeded to the State decades ago as a tax write off with the stipulation that the family could use part of it I think in perpetuity.
And, that it was the biggest money maker for the State from tours of any other park in the State and maybe than all the others put together.
The ranch at one time included land between the Castle and all the land between that and a far hill on the far horizon.
I thought they wanted to sell state land???
With the rate of the debt load this state is accumulating, they will have to... or try and raise taxes and every fee they can.
It's a lot bigger than that. The 82,000 acre ranch (over 128 square miles) includes some of the most desirable real estate in the world, as well as the only narural deep water port from LA to San Francisco.
You know, I went to Hearst Castle on my birthday....and it was EMPTY. I have probably taken the tour 5 or 6 times in the past ten years, with different people, and it was the lightest crowds I have seen. Of course, they have doubled the price, and gas prices are a lot higher. But you know, it was fully staffed, with two tour people on each tour, and six ticket windows staffed even though 2 would have sufficed.
Maybe they should sell the whole deal to Bill Gates or something.
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.