Mass: Call Your Senator RE: State funding of Parks

[pk]

NEMBA needs your help--it will only take 5 minutes of your time!

Massachusetts DCR Parks Need Your Help

Four years ago the combined MDC/DEM budget was $106.9 million dollars. This
year, the House of Representatives proposed a $67.2 million dollar
budget--seriously impacting the ability of the parks to offer even basic
services, let alone work to create a world-class park system.

On May 10th, the Senate will be announcing its own proposed budget, and
NEMBA needs you to call your local Senator and Representative to let them
know that the minimum budget should be $80 million dollars (as recommended
by the Forest & Parks Partnership, of which NEMBA is a member).

Please call your representatives. To find their name and number, click
here:
http://www.state.ma.us/legis/citytown.htm
or
http://www.wheredoivotema.com/bal/myelectioninfo.php

The AMC provides the following tips:
1. Identify yourself and where you are from. You will be talking
to a staff person in their office who will be happy to talk to
you.
2. Tell them about any state forests or parks near you and/or
how you enjoy the outdoors.
3. Urge them to support House Amendment #1123, filed by
Representative Jones, which would maintain level funding for our
state forests and parks and the Department of Conservation and
Recreation.


Philip Keyes
Executive Director
NEMBA
PO Box 2221
Acton MA 01720
P: 800-57-NEMBA
P: 978-636-1718 (outside USA)
F: 928-395-7759
E: pk@nemba.org
http://www.nemba.org

[sizlinseagulsoup]

Mitt Romney is such a good reformer!

[Mr_Cheeze]

This is going to be an unpopular stance, I am certain; but I actually don't have a problem with the MDC/DEM budget getting slashed. There are always tough decisions for our government officials to make in times of budget crises. Everybody with their hands in the trough wants to continue to get their fair share. And, of course, those who get their share cut end up feeling cheated. At the same time, I understand that NEMBA has a stake in advocating a continuance of what they consider to be a just level of funding. While I do enjoy using state parks for hiking and biking, I just do not see it as a priority in a budget. You can blame Mitt Romney if you like. Fact is, it's not his fault that Massachusetts, along with virtually every state in the country, is going through budget crunches and have to find ways to cut spending. I do not think it is fair to ask all taxpayers to shell out money so that a minority of people can continue to enjoy their recreation. So the onus comes down to we who do use these assets. More donations of both time and money by those who have direct interest is the fairest and most democratic way to achieve this goal.

[digger]

Past experience has shown that a 30% cut in budget results in a 60% cut in stewardship and services. A budget cut will not correct the management problems or personnel/union constraints. The DEM/MDC/DCR reorganization has yet to produce any results. Until they essentially nuke the whole organization and start over from scratch (unlikely to happen) or some management miracle occurs, DCR needs at least as much money as they have now or IMO any funds they receive will produce less and less value to the parks and park users.

As a rec hiker and Mtb'r, untill i get a warmer feeling that a substantially higher percentage of $$ is giong to find it's way into the "woods" and less towards new state of the art "facilities" to attract tourists, larger gated parking lots to facilitate expanded swimming holes and visitor centers, ideas of paving walking trails, ad infinitum although i realize the need and desire for mnay of these. I question the efficacy of substantial budget increases at this time esp., when in the past with the considerably larger budget, there still never seemed to be enough money , personel or desire to get much accomplished in the" forest proper" to complement user groups wishes. That is a run on sentence and this i realize is a realitively narrow point of view but i'll pass on advocating the increase...for now

[T Grimble]

Mr. Cheeze makes a good point. In a down economy when budgets are getting slashed, we need to be realistic with our expectations. Naturally, there are issues which are greater priorities such as safety and education but there are also programs which are a lower priority then the environment. Yes, we may be considered a special interest but every program has it's backers and if we don't support the environment then something less meaningful might get the funding. I guess I am saying it doesn't have to be a choice between basic health and safety or the environment. We should be able to have both.

I called both my Senator and State Representative. It took less time to make those calls then it did to write this note. Don't be apathetic.

-Tom

Hmmm, I guess it's "apathy" or squeaky wheel politics, which is the lesser of these evils

I love apathy

[T Grimble]

Without a doubt, Apathy is the greatest evil. What could be worse then losing something you believe strongly in just because you didn't speak up. If you disagree…call and disagree. If you don’t feel strongly about it…don’t bother calling. I just don't understand why you would try to dissuade people from speaking up by mocking the process?

If your legislators don't know what you think, how can you expect them to act on your behalf? Society functions because its members contribute. If you don't want to contribute, that is fine with me. Society also has an amazing capacity to carry a lot of dead weight.

-Tom

Belive me, I've called and dissagreed. I've been to the public input meetings and voiced my opinion. But most of the time i find, i state my position and something stupid happens anyway. Any one else have this problem? I don't like squeaky wheel politics

[sizlinseagulsoup]

There are always tough decisions for our government officials to make in times of budget crises. Everybody with their hands in the trough wants to continue to get their fair share. And, of course, those who get their share cut end up feeling cheated.

Well, you are neglecting one option: raise taxes. 44.9% of Massachusetts residents feel that taxes should be raised as opposed to the 32.8% who agree with cutting programs, such as Romney's purposed 100% cut of recycling funding and this cut for the DEM. (the other's where unsure (14.5%) or thought that both should be done (6.3%))

So, I guess Romney is just going against his constituency and we loose out.

Taxes, I love taxes

[huff'npuff]

Hmmm, I guess it's "apathy" or squeaky wheel politics, which is the lesser of these evils

I love apathy



"First they came for the Communists, and I did not speak up — because I was not a Communist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak up — because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak up — because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Catholics, and I did not speak up — because I was a Protestant.

Then they came for me — and by that time, nobody was left to speak up."

— the Rev. Martin Neimoeller,
German Lutheran pastor who died at Auschwitz.


I don't mean for this to seem as radical as it looks. I'm just making my point against apathy. Apathy gets you NOTHING.

Apathy..Oh i thought you guys were talking about Empathy

[AA]

There are always tough decisions for our government officials to make in times of budget crises. Everybody with their hands in the trough wants to continue to get their fair share. And, of course, those who get their share cut end up feeling cheated.

Well, you are neglecting one option: raise taxes. 44.9% of Massachusetts residents feel that taxes should be raised as opposed to the 32.8% who agree with cutting programs, such as Romney's purposed 100% cut of recycling funding and this cut for the DEM. (the other's where unsure (14.5%) or thought that both should be done (6.3%))

So, I guess Romney is just going against his constituency and we loose out.


Kevin,

Please state your source of this poll and how many respondents there were. I find it difficult to believe that 44% of Mass residents want to pay more taxes.

I think that the state should operate in the same manner as a business. In business when you have a budget shortfall you cant magically generate more revenue by mandating it from your customers. The state shouldnt mandate more money from it customers (us the taxpayers). I suggest that in a few years when you are living in a crappy apartment, eating generic mac & cheese while working off your student loans you will have a slightly digffering opinion of raising taxes.

I dont want to see the DCR loose funding, however I dont want politicians solving every budget shortfall by raising taxes.

BTW for the record I voted for Romney.

[huff'npuff]

Apathy..Oh i thought you guys were talking about Empathy


LOL!!! Are you a politician!?

Our Pres. said it best;

''I know what I believe. I will continue to articulate what I believe and what I believe?I believe what I believe is right."?Rome, July 22, 2001

Don't tell anyone, I'll be officially announcing soon, maybe

[sizlinseagulsoup]

http://www.mccormack.umb.edu/umasspoll/

The poll from march 29th - April 5th.

Personally, I do not find it that inaccurate to say 44% would rather see higher taxes. If you read every line of Romney's purposed 2005 budget (which I sadly did one boring and rainy afternoon), you will notice that he cut the budget of almost every government program. Nominally, he left their budgets the same (neither cutting nor raising their funding). However, many government employees (ie teachers) are contracted raises every year. Therefore, by leaving the budget the same, you only cut the programs operating budget.

Lets not forget his other reform measures. Cutting 100% of prostate cancer research and recovery, Cutting the budget of the harardous waste site clean ups, closing overcrowded hospitals and moving its patients to already overcrowded hospitals. Argh, I could go on forever.

Just pointing out that his cuts do affect a lot of people, therefore it is no wonder that people would rather see taxes go up.

Moreover, I think it is pretty funny that Romney had the nerve to show up at the Earth Day festival at the Hatch Shell the other weekend, seeing as though he is allowing the DEM budget to be cut!

People love to have taxes go up when it is in their percieved interest, but hate it when the price of gas or stamps increase

[AA]

Interesting polls. The sample size for all those polls are approx 400 people (not a very large group). I also found it interesting that the polls are done my Umass Boston. I wonder if they are polling students or the general population.

[sizlinseagulsoup]

I suspect it was of the general population, I cannot imagine that students would be that against gay-marriage.

You don't think that good old Lou Dinatale would skew the poll demographic to suit a particular political agenda do you

[sizlinseagulsoup]

Has anyone looked at this amendment? I just did out the math and it doesn't raise the budget by anymore than 5 million dollars. This hardly offsets the 40 million that is being cut.

I feel we could do better. Maybe we can push our representatives to purpose new amendments to actually bring the budget to 80 million as recommend, or even better.

The amendment also advocates giving budget-line item 1231-1000 $631,652 for 2005, down from the 5 million it had in 2004. Romney's purposed budget gave it 0 bucks for 2005 because it is a "discontinued program." (1231-1000 is "Water and Sewer Rate Relief Payments - Local Services Program," does anyone even understand what this means? )

Personally, give em the 67mil and call it a day. Distribute the other 20-40mil (if you could get it) amongst key related non-profits in addition to their grant monies and continue in that direction (at least untill they screw it up too)

[sizlinseagulsoup]

Nevermind, the House already voted on the amendments and we did not make out too well.

Jones called for 2810-0100 (State Parks and Recreation) to be raised by 1.5 million, but it only went up by .35 million. "And moves to further amend the bill in said section 2 In item 2810-0100, by adding at the end thereof the following:— provided further, that $99,000 shall be expended for repairs to the portico at Pilgrim State Park ; provided further, that $50,000 shall be expended for the improvement and reconstruction of the Daly Field located in the Allston-Brighton section of the City of Boston; provided further, that $100,000 shall be expended for the Schooner Ernestina Commission; provided further, that $50,000 shall be expended for a public waterfront accessibility project on Plum Island in the City of Newburyport

And move to further amend the bill in said section 2 in said item 2810-0100 by striking the figure “$16,599,682” and inserting in place thereof the following:— $16,949,682"


2810-2000 (State Park Seasonals), Jones called for .9 million increase. We got .3 million.

2820-0200 (Urban Parks Seasonals) came just a mere $50,000 under Jones request. (The state is apparently really counting dollars and cents)

2820-0100 (Urban Parks and Recreation) - Jones asked for $1.11 million increase, the House raised it exactly 1 million dollars. (most of the money is staying in the downtown Boston area according to the amendment, to fix pools and what not. Apparently the Pioneer Valley doesn't need nice urban parks yo)

You got it. Parking lots, pools to piss in, visitor centers to refurbish, "facilities", kiosks, maps of places that are already mapped, and of course don't foget all the spectacular events which are meant to increase retailers profits through incresed tourism. The money goes where the money is

[sizlinseagulsoup]

On May 10th, depending on what the budget says for the senate, we could all bug Berkshite Senate Nuciforo to get an amendment going to keep the budget up. He claims to be a mountain biker (http://www.nuciforo.com/bio.php3), so he might be more inclined to listen to us and get an amendment on the table. After that, we'd just have to bug 39 other Senators and ensure their votes to pass it.

[pk]

FROM THE MA DCR:

May 17, 2004

Dear Friends and Partners:

I am writing, on behalf of Commissioner Kathy Abbott and the employees of the Department of Conservation and Recreation, to request your support for a number of amendments that have been filed on our agency’s line items in S. 2400, the recommendations by the Senate Ways and Means Committee (SWM) for the FY2005 state operating budget. The amendments would augment funding levels provided by SWM for the three DCR line item accounts noted below.

As the Senate floor debate on these amendments begins tomorrow, we urge you to express your support for the amendments listed below by contacting your local State Senator, as well as the Chair of the Senate Committee on Ways and Means, Therese Murray, and Senate President Robert Travaglini today. You can find your State Senator and his/her contact information (telephone number, State House mail address, email address) at www.wheredoivotema.com <http://www.wheredoivotema.com>. Note: look for listing for “Senator in General Court”, or at www.state.ma.us/legis/memmenur/htm.

2800-0100 – DCR Statewide Operating Account

This account supports both the Boston central office and certain statewide costs for essential functions of Human Resources, Finance, Information Technology, Legal, Public/Private Partnerships, Assets Management, and for the oversight and direction for the three major divisions of DCR and support services for the newly-created Stewardship Council.

Over the past two years, appropriations for this account have been reduced by an estimated $1.7m (25%) in staff losses, mergers of functions, and other savings. In fact, the FY2004 appropriation for DCR administrative operations represents only 3.3% of total agency spending, far below the 7-10% business standard.

The SWM budget recommends an additional reduction of $1.2m from the FY2004 level, lowering administrative operations to 2.6% of total spending, dangerously below the standard. This funding cut would impair the Department’s ability to respond to inquiries, manage its workforce, make timely payment to vendors, administer contracts, meet legislative mandates for resouce management plans for each park and National Register designation for the Metro Parks System, pursue agency forestry managementplans, attract and implement partnership initiatives, develop new revenue opportunities, and complete the pace-setting baseline assessment project and asset inventory.

The following amendments would add $1,249,511 in funding to this account, to bring it up to FY2004 levels:

· Amendments #651 and #420 (Senators Resor, Brewer, Creem, Creedon, Moore, Barrios, Morrissey, Wilkerson, O’Leary, Joyce, and Walsh, Sprague, Tarr, Tisei)

2810-0100 – State Parks and Recreation Main Operating Account

This account supports the direct service operations for all state parks, reservations, campgrounds, ocean and fresh-water beaches, pools, and dams, as well as programs for natural resources protection, including natural resources management planning, forestry management, fire control, and environmental education. The account is used in conjunction with the state parks retained revenue account, and over the past two years, appropriations for the combined accounts have been reduced by $6.53m (23%). These reductions have resulted in reductions in programs and services at parks and pools, unguarded inland beach swimming areas, fewer forest fire control positons, elimination of winter camping and 24-hour coverage at campgrounds, unfilled staff vacancies, and the deterioration of facilities, with more litter, vandalism, and illegal dumping throughout the system.

The SWM FY 2005 budget would keep funding at the FY 2004 service levels described above.

The following two amendments have been filed to increase the funding for line item 2810-0100 for the state parks main operating account by $456,136 over the level recommended by SWM:

Amendments #668 and #519 (Senators Resor, Barrios, Brewer, Creen, Creedon, Fargo, Hedlund, Joyce, Moore, Morrissey, Nuciforo, O’Leary, Tucker, Walsh, Wilkerson, Sprague)

2810-0100 – Urban Parks and Recreation Main Operating Account

This account supports staff and funding for the operation of the urban park system, including parks, playgrounds, reservations, beaches pools, rinks, bikepaths, historic sites, flood control facilities, engineering services, and for natural resources management planning, fire control, and environmental education programs.

The SWM recommendations for FY2005 will reduce funding for urban parks services, as compared with the Governor’s H. 1A recommendations, by $762,763 (exclusive of a special account funding park rangers.) They would result in reductions to full-time staffing at urban parks and reservations, reductions in programs and services at parks, pools, and playgrounds, and deterioration of facilities, with more trash, litter, vandalism, and illegal dumping throughout the urban parks system.

The following two amendments would add funding of $762,763 in funding to this account:

Amendments #173 and #477 (Senators Hart, Joyce, Morrisey, and Tolman, Sprague, Tisei)

Without this amendment, DCR estimates that it may need to close three urban swimming pools serving 86,000 people, mostly children, this summer; swimming lessons, adult swimming periods, day care programs, and summer camps at these pools would have to find other locations. In addition, the agency may need to shorten the skating rink season by two weeks, and halt the backfill of critical staff vacancies at key urban properties.

Your support for these amendments would assist DCR in moving positively toward its vision of:

Creating world class parks for everyone
Fostering citizen stewardship
Improving efficiencies
Reinvesting gains and savings and leveraging additional resources
Promotiong smart conservation and green infrastructure as critical components of Smart Growth
Contributing to the quality of life of our citizens, as well as the economic health of Massachusetts.

If you have any questions, please call me at the number below. Thank you, as always, for your ongoing interest and support as valued Friends and Partners of the Department of Conservation and Recreation.

Sincerely,

Anne Fiesinger
Acting Director of External Affairs
and Parks Partnerships
Department of Conservation and Recreation
251 Causeway Street, Suite 900
Boston, MA 02114-2104
www.state.ma.us/dcr