If we're digging up Economist articles, this is another excellent one:

California: The ungovernable state
http://www.economist.com/node/13649050? ... 1_TPGQJDVD

Yes, the direct democracy initative was useful in the past; originally put in place to thwart the influence of big business barons. Odd how its evolved to where the whole initiative process (and government) is practically run by big businesses once again!

Regarding the parks list in the original post:

State Recreation Areas (SRAs): Most of those are off-road vehicle parks, and they charge use fees to cover their costs. Strange to see any of them on the list.

Governors Mansion SHP and Leland Stanford SHP: Jerry Brown never used the Mansion when he became governor back in the 1970s, and none of his successors did either. Why not close it down and sell it off?. Leland Standford's place can be sold; let the University buy it and run it if they feel its a significant part of their founder's legacy.

Henry Coe SP: Almost all 'wilderness'-type area. Great spring hiking, and a well-known MTB area with lots of demanding trails. Bet the Bay area MTBr's are gonna be pissed about this! And you don't want to miss the October Tarantula festival (the park is known for its abundance of tarantulas; those suckers are all over the place in the fall!)

Jack London SHP: Most of the 'park' is grape fields that are leased to wine growers in the area, so the place makes money. The actual Jack London houses are on only a small part of the park. Signage to it could be improved as its somewhat tough to find the access road up to it.

Thanks guys for the great reads. Last I was on summitpost much, a couple of you were still in CA. My wife and I were lucky to finish college and get into public sector jobs at the peak of the dot.com boom. We were given modest signing bonuses and later had enough seniority to avoid the layoffs that came with the ever worsening budget crisis. We also bought a house with state and local government loan assitance for educators before the housing boom peaked. That all was great, but ask a few folks in CA public education if they like their jobs more now or less now than they did five years ago. The answer to that question is not hard to guess. We're fortunate in many ways and happy enough, but have definately been looking at what else is out there.

I've had many great mountain bike rides in Henry Coe, but have spent the last several years enjoying the great County Park system we have in Santa Clara County. There are several great hikes that I can do with my dogs for free, and mountain biking is available too. It is not quite the same wilderness experience as Coe, but still lots of wildlife and scenery, faster to get to, and less restrictive (dogs allowed).

Anyway, the return on my small investment of quickly posting a couple of links was much more intriguing and in depth than I expected. Summitpost always provides some great resources. Thanks again!

SKI wrote:Cops get paid good for a reason.
. . .
Ive been to Colorado, Washington, Oregon, California and here in Nevada for testing. I have farrrr too many federal applications out there. It's hard times for LEO wannabes like me.

Not to get too far off topic, but in the real world, competition between applicants generally pushes wages down, not up. The immense competition for sworn public safety positions in California despite a long hiring process which has little to do with merit is prima facie evidence that the positions are overcompensated. That union contracts force layoffs rather than salary reductions is regrettable, but it doesn't make those who still have jobs any less overpaid.

Similarly, budget cuts don't need to force any state park closures. That the parks system would rather keep some parks running at full staffing and bar the public from others completely is regrettable. State parks are some of the most over-regulated, rule-encumbered, overstaffed public places in the state, save perhaps some county beaches in LA. They could easily keep the gates open, the trash cans empty and the bathrooms pumped at every park in the state, but they'd rather keep us, the public, off our land until we agree to fund them at 100%.

Steve Pratt wrote:The article says private non-profits are not allowed to take over administration of the parks due to union rules. I wonder what nonprofits are interested?

If this is true, then I am apocryphally mad. I think what this means is that groups such as the Pine Ridge Association, http://www.coepark.org/pra.html, are no longer allowed to do volunteer work and maintenance _that they already do_ because it effectively scabs over potential union jobs _that aren't done_.

I hate public unions so much.

One of the things that has led to California going down hill, is that there are too many people. Just as supply and demand, for example, have optimum levels, so does the number of people. As the number of people rose, the quality of life fell. Probably another factor is that the availability of cheap energy has dwindled.

Oh no! The newspaper I had set as my home page has been taken over by the MLC SC! I think the MLC SC might be running the CA government too! What should I do?
http://www.mercurynews.com/science/ci_18082254

The sad truth is that if they simply lock the gate and put up a closed sign, these places will get vandalized. You'd think in these tough economic times they could find a live on site caretaker or something to that effect in order to keep the places open. How are they going to protect the Providence Mountains cave and facilities from vandalism, for example. It's in the middle of no where. You'd think they could find a volunteer to live there in exchange for watching over the place.

willytinawin wrote:The sad truth is that if they simply lock the gate and put up a closed sign, these places will get vandalized. You'd think in these tough economic times they could find a live on site caretaker or something to that effect in order to keep the places open. How are they going to protect the Providence Mountains cave and facilities from vandalism, for example. It's in the middle of no where. You'd think they could find a volunteer to live there in exchange for watching over the place.

By the time they were done with the liability insurance and all the mandated expenses, it would cost a lot to have a caretaker. The cost of maintaining a restroom -- even a porta-potty-- on government land is phenomenal. Arizona pays over $3e5/yr to keep a restroom open on a highway stop.

To those who "hate public unions" so greatly, but love the amenities that those very unions once assured you of -- including niceties such as vacation time, health insurance, & family leave -- perhaps a bit of education is in order. You'll discover that the average public sector worker in CA draws a munificent 20K in pension after 20-odd years of serving you without carping. (After nearly 15 yrs, I, with [for those who care] multiple postgraduate degrees & varied work experience outside the public sector, can expect nearly 10k per annum: hot diggity!)

Public sector, private sector, unemployed: all of us here are united in our love of the wilderness. Can we quit the mudslinging & try to find a way to preserve what once lost will not be regained? Or is that too much like work?

LA

dyusem wrote:http://www.marinij.com/marinnews/ci_18097983

I sure hope that gets passed. At our local national conservation area, volunteers do a great deal of the work, and are very well organized. The government officials mainly act as buffers for the greater bureaucracy.

inconsolable wrote:To those who "hate public unions" so greatly, but love the amenities that those very unions once assured you of -- including niceties such as vacation time, health insurance, & family leave -- perhaps a bit of education is in order. You'll discover that the average public sector worker in CA draws a munificent 20K in pension after 20-odd years of serving you without carping. (After nearly 15 yrs, I, with [for those who care] multiple postgraduate degrees & varied work experience outside the public sector, can expect nearly 10k per annum: hot diggity!)

Public sector, private sector, unemployed: all of us here are united in our love of the wilderness. Can we quit the mudslinging & try to find a way to preserve what once lost will not be regained? Or is that too much like work?

LA

Totally valid points you raise, but I don't feel that it applies here. As it relates to state parks, union workers (likely service personnel) are paid to service facilities (trash pickup, bathroom cleaning, trail maintenance), but right now there is no money to pay them! By stipulating that nonprofits cannot do the work solely in place of the union members, even at zero cost, you now no longer have a service at all, ie "I'm taking my ball and leaving." Everyone loses. The reason the unions hate the idea so much is because it directly exposes that services can be maintained without the bureaucratic overhead; basically, them.

MoapaPk wrote:

dyusem wrote:http://www.marinij.com/marinnews/ci_18097983

I sure hope that gets passed. At our local national conservation area, volunteers do a great deal of the work, and are very well organized. The government officials mainly act as buffers for the greater bureaucracy.

Non-profits and volunteer groups do a great job at Coe as well as County Parks nearby. I hope for the sake of those who have gone to all that work, that parks that have that kind of public support remain open. Maybe some win-win type scenarios will come out of the CA budget mess after all.