It might sound like the funding woes facing California’s state parks have been addressed. A $54 million surplus has been found in the Parks Department budget – hallelujah! That’s more than enough to cover the $22 million budget deficit that had state officials planning to eliminate funding to 70 state parks.

So parks supporters can pop the (organic) champagne and celebrate, right?

Not so fast.

Molly Samuel/KQED

“I think the jury’s out about how this is going to play out,” said Elizabeth Goldstein, president of the California State Parks Foundation, on KQED’s Forum this morning.

Goldstein has reason to be cautious. Of the $54 million surplus, $33.5 million is in the Off Highway Vehicle Trust Fund and can only be spent on off-highway vehicle services. That leaves $20.4 million in the Parks and Recreation Fund for the state legislature to re-allocate to keep the parks open, the San Francisco Chronicle reported Sunday.

There’s no word on when or if the legislature will consider re-allocating the funds.

“We all hope the legislature is going to rededicate this funding… to state parks,” Goldstein said. “This is one of the things that should be on everyone’s list.”

But even if the legislature approves the re-allocation, it still won’t solve all the parks’ financial issues. Goldstein noted that the department has a $1.3 billion maintenance backlog that needs to be addressed.

And not all of the parks’ problems are financial. The discovery of the $54 million surplus has shaken faith in state leaders who have been raising money from the public to keep the parks open. Ruth Coleman resigned as parks director on Friday, and an the Chronicle this weekend explored what impact the scandal will have on the governor’s tax measure this November.

hdpublicplaces-modBob Berman, vice president of the Benicia State Parks Association, said on Forum that the state must work to be transparent about how the parks spend money in the future.

“I think, in terms of the issue of public confidence, there needs to be that type of clear audit and transparency for those of us at the local level who want to make sure that the money that’s there for state parks is properly used for state parks,” Berman said.

Some of those who donated funds to support the parks have taken to social media to express their shock and anger over the surplus scandal. Here’s a look at what’s been said:

What’s Next for the $54 Million California State Parks Surplus? 13 September,2013

  • I believe the CA Parks Foundation and other park-related
    non-profits should be afraid of public outrage and blowback from the OHV
    community because of their Sustainable Parks Initiative that was based on a
    lie. That plan had as its “foundation
    block” the complete evisceration of the OHV Program and its grants program to federal
    and county partners.

    • Doug Behr

      Right on the money Don. The OHV trust fund comes from outside sources and is held in trust just for state OHV parks and grants to the National Forests for upkeep and maintainance of trails we must save money for major projects or for unexpected demands, thus running a surplus. The state in the past has confiscated some of this surplus ( in the millions ) refusing to pay it back.

  • Doc JJ

    I am sure that all those in shock are experts in cost accounting. Governments are complex, handling huge amounts of money, with all sorts of special funds set up. I make mistakes with my personal accounts and I am a small fry. If the outraged public over this scandal had voted for Prop 21 we could have saved our parks. Now they can argue this is why they should not vote for a Prop 21. Always looking for excuses not to help what needs help. The people, sir, is a Beast.

Sponsored by

Become a KQED sponsor