I haven’t done any research into the proposed budget but it appears from looking at the link provided at the end of Nel’s post that San Onofre, along with most of the other socal state beaches face potential reductions in lifeguard staffing but not complete closures.
Was there something posted elsewhere in the budget materials that suggested complete closure of these beaches?
At this point it doesn’t look like the OC/SD beaches are slated for complete closure, and my understanding of the Topanga closure is the State Park inland and not the State Beach. Central and North Coast State Beach Parks do see some outright closures. Since all this is basically breaking now it’s still hard to get access to all the info. The following url gets you to the top of the Times analysis. There are other articles with it in the hard copy that it appears you have to “register” to get online, which I am loathe to do personally as the last thing I need is another password to forget. http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-budget11jan11,1,1401538.story?coll=la-headlines-california&ctrack=7&cset=true
remember when Bolsa Chica State Beach and South Huntington State beach were just dirt parking lots that the state had nothing to do with.
Now they paved it and charge us there to park.
Maybe going back to feral access is better.
Here’s a blast from the past…not a state park but now we do get to pay every day, except for a small free lot where this dirtbag paradise once existed.
Well, there’s no use in denying that California is/will be facing some big budget problems. Our real estate driven economy is going through a gigantic downturn. Foreclosures, personal bankruptcy, housing slump. No real estate, no property taxes, no state budget. Someone has to step up and make some hard decisions. It’s just too bad that education has to take a cut too. Us surfers have it easy - we can just drive to the next non-state operated beach. Where are the kids gonna go when they close schools?
Besides, it’s probably good that they close some of these beaches. The hardcore will find a way, the dabblers will stay home.
San Onofre is not closing according to the map that was posted. You can still surf that mushy wave with your dog. There will just be a possible reduction in lifeguards. That is all.
Howzit BillyBob, A while back I was pondering the thought that the State Governments might in some way start the real estate booms so that properties are worth more money which brings in more property tax dollars, just a thought.Aloha,Kokua
Oh yeah, that’s done all the time. It’s called re-zoning and sweetheart deals around here. The local govt’s are constantly rezoning industrial areas to residential and selling off public properties to private developers. All this creates more cheap housing (new property taxes) for the state and local govt’s. The mortgage companies feed the frenzy with the sub-prime loans to lure suckers who really can’t afford local housing. Why would you give someone a loan with no down payment???
But, we see what happens when this house of cards collapses… Everyone pays.
“The List” includes some of my favorite beaches including Montana De Oro. Local news is saying that they are in fact talking about a closure with patrols and penalties if caught trespassing.
Arnold is caught between a couple of rocks and a hard place… Lot’s of special interests are fighting for their piece of the pie. Prison inmates and illegals are better organized than we surfers are.
The state recently lost three class action law suits filed on behalf of inmates regarding medical care and due to lack of compliance to court mandates, the federal courts have appointed a federal overseer who dictates the terms required to comply. Needless to say, it’s costing the state a heap of money and California inmates end up receiving better medical case than some of us, including “benefits” like hormonal treatments. What’s next, sex change operations?
Subsidized health care for the poor on the other hand is scheduled for a reduction in part because of abuse by illegal aliens who are legally entitled to cruise in to any emergency room for treatment. Anyone in the medical field can confirm that illegals are burdening the system. Imagine being able go in to a grocery store, load up your cart and walk out without paying. That’s the way our medical system is handled.
You say access to medical care is a god given right? What about eating?
There are lot’s of other examples of how our hard earned tax dollars are being spent in ways I’d rather not see but I’m not blaming Arnold.
Fiscal responsibility is a worthy consideration but it’s pretty damn tough when the feds come in and tell you how much you’re going to spend on programs for which you didn’t plan.
His idea of releasing prisoners makes sense if you consider the crimes some people are locked up for committing.
In California we will soon be spending more on prisons than on public universities.
Maybe we should insist that border patrols be beefed up rather than allowing park rangers to look for trespassers if they close the parks.
Funny in a sick sort of way. If Ahnold would rescind the fat allocation for building new prisons he signed last year that would cover at least 1/2 the deficit needed. (We already have a far greater %age in prison than almost any other country in the world…)
The rest could easily come from cutting the tax incentives/tax loopholes given the oil companies.
Grey Davis was recalled because he was stumbling and bumbling, and incompetent. Arnold was voted in as a political outsider to get in there and kick ass and make the tough decisions to get the state’s budget and energy situation under control. I thought he may have the charisma to do it so I voted for him. I guess the old political machine finally won. He has been nuetered politically as far as I’m concerned and no better than Davis. I’d vote for another recall and send him back to making Terminator movies.
Interesting to watch this unfold because for good or ill ( I would say ill) the East Coast of Oz seems to follow the template set by California. From my own obs (last there in 96) and those of the numerous Cali emigres who reside in this area I would say we are 10-15 years behind. Thankfully our population being much lower has a decelarating effect on the mass urbanization and development of prime coastal areas.
But already they have bought in paid parking to Byron surfspots despite community outrage. Once the goverment has control of access it seems a slippery slope.
Is there anything that humanity doesn’t fuck up with it’s greed, vanity, stupidity and shortsighted lust for power. Fair dinkum, looking at it from a distance humanity is the greatest disaster this planet has ever experienced.
Hide your head in the sand, or fight a futile struggle ? What a choice for anyone who would rather leave something worthwhile behind for their kids.
The cold , hard truth is that there are just too many people on this planet; too many rats in a cage squabbling for an ever diminishing piece of cheese.
A cursory glance at history or basic ecology teaches that these types of drastic imbalances usually end with morbid readjustments : mass extinctions, fatalities on a global scale, warfare.
Who will be the generation carrying the can for our post-war profligacy?
Hard decisions will need to become the common currency and as yet I don’t see any global leader with the vision and will to even start to put us back on the right track. I think nature will be the final judge and her sentencing will be harsh and uncompromising.
1/16/08 - Arnold came out in favor of the Orange County Tollway that would pass through the Trestles/San Onofre area, even though it had been pretty much already shot down.
He lives in Pacific Palisades, so maybe he just has it in for south coast beach people.
There is a good-sized article about it in the Los Angeles Times today, although it seems to require registration to read it online this morning. But that’s no reason for us to suffer.
“I have concluded that this project is essential to protect our environment and the quality of life for everyone in California,” Schwarzenegger said in a letter to Patrick Kruer, chairman of the Coastal Commission. “The project can be built in a manner that will enhance and foster use of the coast and protect coastal resources.”
“the quality of life for everyone in California”…that’s interesting, because I would have guessed that not everyone could afford the toll road. Let them eat cake as they enjoy the view from their elevated toll road.
I hope the state doesn’t spend too much money on deciding how to deal with a 10 percent cut across the board. To me that means you close a state beach for one month. If the parks are numbered odd and even, then you can alternate them so that adjacent parks aren’t closed on the same month. Unfortunately our state will probably spend millions deciding how to cut 10 percent from the park budget.
What really depresses me is when I think about how small our park spending is compared to how much the federal government pays for the Star Wars defense system. We could have flush toilets and a new surfboard for everyone…even the North Koreans.
hope the state doesn’t spend too much money on deciding how to deal with a 10 percent cut across the board. To me that means you close a state beach for one month. If the parks are numbered odd and even, then you can alternate them so that adjacent parks aren’t closed on the same month. Unfortunately our state will probably spend millions deciding how to cut 10 percent from the park budget.
Ah, shucks…that’s too easy! Too even-handed and fair!
There’s alltogether too much common sense in that simple proposal. Unacceptable in this day and age. 9 out of 10 consultants and at least 19 out of 20 (if not more) lobby groups would probably disagree with you. It would, of course, take a lot of money and some long-term studies to find out the real way to deal with immediate problems. Tell the kids to stay in school and keep studying math and science…
Here’s an excerpt from CalCoast.org’s legislative update explaining (briefly) why closing down state parks and (especially state beaches) makes bad fiscal sense…
The Governor issued a proclamation last week declaring a fiscal emergency and calling a special session of the Legislature to deal with a $3.3 billion budget gap for 07-08. During the special session, which the governor declared last week, the governor will propose cutting $30 million set aside in the 07-08 budget for deferred maintenance at state parks and another $1 million for personnel, including lifeguards. To save $13.3 million in 08-09, the governor has proposed closing 48 state parks, some of which are state beaches, while lifeguard services at state beaches in Orange, San Diego, and Santa Cruz Counties by a minimum of 50 percent. Democrats in the Capitol have suggested that user fees may have to increased to keep state parks and beaches open.
The state park cuts, especially as they affect California’s beaches, are counterintuitive: numerous studies have shown that California’s beaches play an important role in its economy. King and Potepan (1997) estimated that the total direct impact of beach-related spending in the state was $10.3 billion. Add indirect (multiplier) effects as well as direct effects and the total is much higher: $27 billion. More recently, King and Symes examined the loss in spending to the state if its beaches disappeared. This report examined beach visitors’ propensity to go out of state—and out of the country—if beach tourism was no longer available in California. The report estimated a loss of $5.5 billion to California’s Gross State Product if the state’s beaches were closed or in disrepair.
Maybe Ahhhnold’s proposal to close down state beaches and parks was just a bluff all along…
According to an article in the Sacramento Bee, Ahhhnold’s plans to close state parks & beaches was done merely to ‘rattle the cage’ of lawmakers whom he expects to come forward with alternatives, including higher fees, to keep the parks open.
