NOTE: As provided in LFC policy, this report is
intended only for use by the standing finance committees of the
legislature. The Legislative Finance Committee does not assume
responsibility for the accuracy of the information in this report when used for
other purposes.
The most recent FIR
version (in HTML & Adobe PDF formats) is available on the Legislative
Website. The Adobe PDF version includes
all attachments, whereas the HTML version does not. Previously issued FIRs and attachments may be
obtained from the LFC in
F I S C A
L I M P A C T R E P O R T
|
SPONSOR: |
Carraro |
DATE TYPED: |
|
HB |
|
||
|
SHORT TITLE: |
Prohibit
Admission Fees to State Parks |
SB |
610 |
||||
|
|
ANALYST: |
Valenzuela |
|||||
APPROPRIATION
|
Appropriation
Contained |
Estimated
Additional Impact |
Recurring or
Non-Rec |
Fund Affected |
||
|
FY03 |
FY04 |
FY03 |
FY04 |
|
|
|
|
NFI |
|
($3,500.0) |
Recurring |
State
Park Fees |
|
|
|
|
$3,500.0 |
Recurring |
General
Fund |
(Parenthesis
( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)
Conflicts with Senate Bill 168, which
require the Legislature to set fees for state parks use.
Conflicts
with Appropriation in the General Appropriation Act for FY04 to the State
Parks Division.
REVENUE
|
Estimated Revenue |
Subsequent Years Impact |
Recurring or
Non-Rec |
Fund Affected |
|
|
FY03 |
FY04 |
|
|
|
|
|
($3,500.0) |
($3,500.0) |
Recurring |
State
Park Fees |
|
|
($162.0) |
($162.0) |
Recurring
|
Governmental
Gross Receipts Tax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Revenue Decreases)
SOURCES
OF INFORMATION
Responses
Received From
Energy,
Minerals and Natural Resources Department (EMNRD)
SUMMARY
Synopsis
of Bill
Senate Bill 610 proposes to eliminate admission
fees to state parks. SB 610 also repeals
NMSA 1978, 16-2-7.1, which provides for a one day-use pass for entry into the
state parks to a one-hundred percent disabled veteran residing in the
state. The effective date of the bill
would be
Significant
Issues
The graphic below
details the visitation and revenue collected for state parks over the past
three fiscal years. Visitation has decreased by 15.4 percent while revenue has
dropped by 8.2 percent. The revenue impact has not been as significant because
of the fee increase implemented in 1999.
EMNRD reports that
these revenues represent just over 15 percent of its self-generated revenues
and just under 20 percent of its annual operating
budget. These revenues represent the amount of funding that will be lost in
accordance with Senate Bill 610.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
Senate Bill 610 does
not contain an appropriation.
The fiscal impact of
the bill will be a loss of $3.5 million, on average, in annual revenue. To
maintain the current operating level, a $3,500.0 increase in general fund would
be required. As an alternative, the
State Parks Division will be required to reduce expenditures by an equivalent
amount. EMNRD reports that its field staff spend 20 percent of their time
collecting admissions fees. An equivalent reduction in salaries and benefits
equates to roughly $2 million.
According to SPD, eliminating park fees would
also impact the Governmental Gross Receipts Tax Fund, where in FY02 an
estimated $162.0 was paid from the fees collected.
CONFLICT, RELATIONSHIP
House
Bill 2, the General Appropriations Act, uses this fee revenue to support
operations in FY04.
SB 610 conflicts with Senate Bill 168. Senate
Bill 168 would remove the authority/responsibility of establishing state parks
fees from the Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department and the place
the authority of establishing state parks fees with the Legislature.
TECHNICAL ISSUES
Section
POSSIBLE QUESTIONS
What proposal might
the State Parks Division recommend to make each park as nearly self-supporting
as possible?
Is the sponsor
recommending a reduction in the operating budget as a result of the revenue
loss, or recommending increased general fund support to make up the admissions
fee revenue loss?
MFV/ls:njw