Let’s see, maybe State Parks working with and collaboration with other agencies and groups cost money, so maybe we spotted one organization a one-of-many? Just-willing to share State Parks operating- and capital-money spending tomorrow, and it’s not for an existing and ‘Taxpayer’ operating, open, and operated State Park tomorrow?
The average Washington State ‘Taxpayers’ and ‘Citizens’ might just think that State Parks suggesting to close thirteen or more existing State Parks is a necessity because the apparent tough economic times the State of Washington is experiences; since just-the-lack-of ‘Taxpayers’ taxes contributions to keep-operating the complexities of Washington State General Government and its delivery of ‘Citizens’ beneficial services delivered back to ‘Citizens’; for one such example, State Parks need for sufficient operating-money (‘Taxpayers’ tax cash) funding to continue to operate all present State Parks without suggesting some parks to become closed with gates-locked.
So, as existing 'Taxpayers' State Parks are offered-up for this sacrificial parks closure need; but–while, the State Parks agency continues joining-hands1 using its resources and engaging other institutional agencies within Washington State for added State Parks complexity of services delivery—for example, Washington State Parks strategic partnership under consideration now with The Washington State Historical Society.2 It follows, this 'strategic partnership' initiative will cost Washington State Parks more money tomorrow, use more State Parks people resources, and take-away more State Parks operational money from the ‘Taxpayers’ remaining, existing, and operating State Parks of tomorrows.
Obviously, the details of this specific joint plan that includes the State Parks is best described within the Washington State Historical Society document,
Strategic and Action Plan, FY 2007-2013, ( Washington State Historical Society, 1911 Pacific Avenue, Tacoma, WA 98402, 253-272-3500 http://www.washingtonhistory.org) (“A leadership document establishing institutional priorities and operational directions“)(Adobe PDF document) (last visited 30 Jan. 2009). But, absent is the operational- and capital-money cost projections and the economic impact statement and analysis towards all existing and operating 'Taxpayers' operating State Parks today?
Therefore, as more money is spent for State Parks complexities of services delivery outside of its basic priority “Fix what we have” for State Parks; as it relates to, existing and operational State Parks; it just follows, it will become necessary to suggest closing more 'Taxpayers' State Parks in future years; as a result, for for the State Parks supporting complexity costs that are outside of a simple words-joined: State Park.
Endnotes
- See generally, We 'Taxpayers' and 'Citizens' Know More About The State Parks Agency, 30 Jan. 2009, (State Parks employees present a audio and video assertions what they are doing for State Parks) (last visited 30 Jan. 2009). ↩
- “The Washington State Historical Society was founded as a non-profit organization in 1891 and officially chartered in 1903 by the Legislature as a trustee agency, thereby operating under the provisions of RCW 27.34. The Society, as an agency, also operates in accordance with all other state laws, its own by-laws, and other governing policies as established by the Board of Trustees of the Society. . . .”
Strategic and Action Plan, FY 2007--2013.↩
Tags: Citizens, Closing parks, money, resource, State Parks, Taxpayers
Too much money paying for the countless people working at State Parks Headquarters, and the cuts are being made in the field. They quietly closed several parks’ campgrounds that had previously been open year round. The (horrible) State Parks website says it is due to inclement weather, yet the closures came before the winter storms and were due to budget cuts.
It’s funny because they plan to have another hiring freeze, but park rangers are exempt… They stopped hiring rangers last fall, leaving 10-15 positions vacant, and they laid off 14 rangers last week. Ostensibly this is to leave room for rangers who are displaced when parks close, yet many of the parks won’t close until September!
Park rangers are so important for public safety that they are exempt from the hiring freeze, yet with all of the reductions in park rangers and park aides, most of the work at State Parks this summer will be done by volunteers such as camp hosts, who are generally retired couples.
If safety is important to anyone in Olympia, they should make the cuts at State Parks headquarters and leave the safety officers in the field.
The truth is there is talk of closing more parks and laying off even more park rangers. It could be a year or more until another park ranger is hired in this state.
Now the latest rumor published within the The News Tribune (Tacoma) Political Buzz blog (on-line) present an article about some agencies ‘law-enforcement officers’ positions might become joined and operated under one-named agency; for example, like the Washington State Patrol agency, and it just-happens one of the named agencies employees is listed Washington State Parks rangers that do law-enforcement, so you can read this blog article political news release: available at
Will Fish and Wildlife shrink dramatically in agency reforms?