Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SUNDAY, October 1, 1995 TAG: 9509290020
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: G-3 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: RICHARD S. GROOVER
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
The rhetoric driving this proposal would have us think of government as a collection of similar services, with equal potential for privatization. But is this the case? And what has been the experience of other Southern states that have experimented with park privatization? These are questions that need answers before we make the kind of radical changes that have been proposed.
During the 1995 General Assembly session, the Allen administration attempted to create a framework that would have permitted it to privatize the entire state parks system. This failed, but the Department of Conservation and Recreation will develop a proposal for private management, on a pilot basis, for a selected state park.
Virginians should have input on this proposal and keep a watchful eye on the yet-to-be-completed report from the Governor's Commission on the Conversion of State-owned Properties.
The Allen administration wants to take one park (or more) and turn it (or them) completely over to private management, a kind of "totality management," thus reducing the cost to state government to operate those areas. It sounds like a great money-saving idea: We are being told that the private business will offer superior services and pay for all capital or development costs. But there is more to this story.
The Allen administration apparently did not investigate the success of totality privatization, or it ignored the facts. Totality privatization has been tried in many other state park systems and has not worked.
Florida, for example, tried it at that state's Oscar Scherer State Park. A contract was established for a private company to build and operate all the facilities. The company's expectations were never realized; in the context of growing public unease with the operation of a public park by a private entrepreneur, the state bought out the contract and the park reverted to public management.
The hope of private development on state land is also not a simplistic story. In Georgia, at Brasstown Valley Crown Plaza Resort, the government had to float millions in development bonds to build "resort-type facilities" before a privatization deal could be struck.
Our state parks are attractive, with lots of features that bring paying customers. But they don't have enough attractions to draw minimal cost-of-operation revenues. Swimming pools, campgrounds and the like do not generate large "profits." If they did, the General Assembly years ago would have cut appropriations for operations and required state parks to be self-sufficient.
The current big money spent by recreating tourists goes to Disney World, King's Dominion or similar attractions. Citizens will spend more money for the facilities offered at those "parks." Thousands of acres of just trees and forest in a state park will not attract the big tourist dollars.
Privatizing an entire park operation does not make economic sense unless that private business can maximize the profit potential of all of the real estate available. In the private sector you become successful by meeting the customers' needs; that means building giant water slides, golf courses and roller coasters. If a company cuts the trees, and asphalts, manicures and builds on almost all of the ground, is that still what you identify as a state park - or is it just government's subsidizing a private business with a sweet deal?
Privatization is not an entirely bad idea, at least not when you offer only part of a park. For nearly 60 years, private businesses have run many of Virginia's state-park concession operations, at least the profitable ones. Small businesses that can efficiently manage profitable units have been very successful. This might be a camp store, like at Seashore State Park, or a pool and snack bar at Pocahontas State Park.
Such relationships can be very beneficial to the state park because the private business can sometimes do more with less operations money. We can have this kind of portioned privatization without giving the whole park away, and sacrificing what is good about Virginia's natural parks.
Our state parks have fulfilled their mission, which is protecting and conserving the natural resources given them when the system was created. Protecting this heritage is part of "the Virginia Way." So, too, is the adage that "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." Our parks are not broken.
Richard S. Groover, former chairman of the Hanover County Parks and Recreation Commission, served 17 years with the Virginia state parks.
Virginia Forum
by CNB