NOTE: As provided in LFC policy, this report is intended 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 in any other situation.
The LFC is only preparing FIRs on bills referred to the Senate Finance Committee, the Senate Ways and Means Committee, the House Appropriations and Finance Committee and the House Taxation and Revenue Committee. The chief clerks are responsible for preparing and issuing all other bill analyses.
Only the most recent FIR version, excluding attachments, is available on the Intranet. Previously issued FIRs and attachments may be obtained from the LFC office in Room 416 of the State Capitol Building.
| SPONSOR: | Rawson | DATE TYPED: | 3/2/99 | HB | |||
| SHORT TITLE: | Park Fee Schedule | SB | 709 | ||||
| ANALYST: | Valenzuela | ||||||
| Recurring
or Non-Rec |
Fund
Affected | ||||
| FY99 | FY2000 | FY99 | FY2000 | ||
| $ 0.0 | Indeterminate | Recurring | GF | ||
(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)
| Subsequent
Years Impact |
Recurring
or Non-Rec |
Fund
Affected | ||
| FY99 | FY2000 | |||
| $250.0 - $325.0 | Indefinite | Recurring | GF | |
(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Revenue Decreases)
Duplicates/Conflicts with/Companion to/Relates to
SOURCES OF INFORMATION
LFC Files
SUMMARY
Synopsis of Bill
Senate Bill 709 would amend and place into statute the park fee schedule. The bill also provides a waiver for parks who would choose to adopt a different fee structure, and allows the department to make the decision for granting such a waiver. Enactment would be immediate because the bill carries an emergency clause.
Significant Issues
The park fee schedule exists in the State Parks Division rules, not in statute. The bill would create the park fee schedule statutorily, therefore, placing the authority for changes with the Legislature.
As many are aware, as of December 31, 1998, the division recently changed its park fee schedule. In essence, this bill forms somewhat of a compromise between the fee schedule prior to and after December 31st. The proposed fee schedule is lower than the current fees, but slightly higher than the former schedule. A side-by-side comparison is shown below, with the associated percentage changes.
|
SB 709 Fees |
Fees (as of Dec. 31, 1998) |
% change (SB709 vs current) |
Fees (prior to 12/31/98) |
% change (SB709 vs prior) | |
| Daily Entrance | |||||
| Day Use (per vehicle) | 3.5 | 4.0 | -12.5% | 3.0 | 16.7% |
| Walk-in/bicycle | 0.0 | 0.0 | 3.0 | -100.0% | |
| Bud | 15.0 | 15.0 | 0.0% | 15.0 | 0.0% |
| Overnight Camping (per night) | |||||
| (day-use fee waived) | |||||
| Primitive Site | 7.5 | 8.0 | -6.3% | 6.0 | 25.0% |
| Developed Site | 9.0 | 10.0 | -10.0% | 7.0 | 28.6% |
| Electrical hook-up (per night) | 4.0 | 4.0 | 0.0% | 4.0 | 0.0% |
| Sewage hook-up | 3.0 | 4.0 | -25.0% | 2.0 | 50.0% |
| Electrical hook-up (per night) w/ annual permit | 4.0 | NA | NA | ||
| Electrical and sewage hook-up w/ annual permit | 6.0 | NA | NA | ||
| Annual Permits | |||||
| Day-use (good at all parks) | |||||
| Regular | 40.0 | 20.0 | 100.0% | 36.0 | 11.1% |
| Age 62 or older | 25.0 | 20.0 | 25.0% | 21.0 | 19.0% |
| Visitors with disabilities | 25.0 | 20.0 | 25.0% | 21.0 | 19.0% |
| Extra vehicle (limit one) | 5.0 | 10.0 | -50.0% | 5.0 | 0.0% |
| Single Park | 20.0 | NA | 10.0 | 100.0% | |
| Camping Permit | |||||
| Regular - in-state | 100.0 | NA | 89.0 | 12.4% | |
| Age 62 or older | 60.0 | 70.0 | -14.3% | 52.0 | 15.4% |
| Visitors with disabilities | 60.0 | 70.0 | -14.3% | 52.0 | 15.4% |
| 3rd extra vehicle | 5.0 | NA | 5.0 | 0.0% | |
| Replacement | 5.0 | 10.0 | -50.0% | NA |
The most notable differences in the proposed schedule is in the annual day-use and overnight camping permits. Foremost, Senate Bill 709 restores the annual camping permit for persons under the age of 62, but at an increased rate over the former schedule. Also, the proposed schedule increases the annual day-use permits more in line with the former schedule, whereas the current schedule significantly reduced this category of fees.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
Senate Bill 709 does not contain an appropriation. As with many of the bills that have been introduced in the session to amend the park fee schedule, enactment of this bill will have an impact simply because the division will have reprint its marketing materials and signs. The current fee schedule was not used to make budget recommendations, therefore an incremental gain or lose pursuant to any changes would not have an impact on the budget.
According to the department, the current fee schedule would generate an additional $360.0 for fiscal year 2000. Based on that information, the proposed schedule would produce slightly less than this estimate and could range anywhere from $250.0 to $325.0 of incremental revenue.
ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLICATIONS
The administrative impact would be minor.
CONFLICT/DUPLICATION/COMPANIONSHIP/RELATIONSHIP
Senate Bill 709 conflicts with Senate Bill 237 and Senate Bill 199. It relates to House Bill 460 and House Bill 26 and Senate Bill 52.
MV/njw:gm