[beachmouse]

Please go to any of these meetings and talk loudly at them if they pop up. There are probably many parks on the list where campground would be appropriate but many where they are definitely not and the way this is being shoved down everyone's throat with little to no debate compared to how the system usually works smacks of some sort of political payback ala the proposal to require golf courses to be built in state parks that got killed in the legislature this year.

These kinds of significant changes to a park plan should be much more carefully made and not smell of political favors and kickbacks.

State wants to add camping, RV sites at more state parks in Florida, including Honeymoon Island - St. Petersburg Times

"Many of the parks on that list are not suitable for expanding the camping," she said, naming Ichetucknee Springs State Park as an example.


"We didn't really get much detailed information." It passed 7-2.
The idea of letting private companies build and operate the campgrounds, she said, was mentioned but was not part of the vote.


Now DEP is pushing ahead with rapidly scheduled public hearings not just for Honeymoon Island but also for three other parks that are tops on its list: De Leon Springs State Park, Edward Ball Wakulla Springs State Park and Fanning Springs State Park. The hearings on Honeymoon Island, Wakulla Springs and DeLeon Springs are July 5, while Fanning Springs is on July 6.

[kyle19125]

Of course this seems like a brilliant idea to Governor Nimrod. How much will this proposal cost? How many of the dollars will have come from our cash-strapped education system that just lost more dollars in next year's budget? Anyone who voted for this moron should have their heads examined!

[vaughanwilliams]

Nothing says the great outdoors like having some lout in his 60 foot RV parked next to your campsite, air conditioner and cable TV blasting away. If the people of Florida let this happen (they will- Bubba's lovin' his RV), they'll never get the parks back pre-RV. NEVER. Look for profit driven contractors running the park system next.

[FloridaKash]

Not sure I understand why he would do this. Sure, it may make the parks self sustainable and less of a tax burden on the state.... which less of a burden isn't necessarily a bad thing. However, what about all these RV Parks that pay a nice chunk towards property taxes, bring in sales tax and employ people? I would think that if there is a cheaper/better alternative to their parks they are going to create less revenue and eventually downsize or go out of business. Seems like a double edged sword to me.

[randian]

Originally Posted by kyle19125

Of course this seems like a brilliant idea to Governor Nimrod. How much will this proposal cost?

Nothing, if done right. There are a number of private campground operators that will do the improvements at their cost and pay for the concession on top of it. Not all privately-operated parks have RVs. Some are raw. It depends on the terms of the concession. Open parks are better than closed parks.

[Spring Hillian]

How about RV areas and primitive camping areas separated by a decent distance to avoid the problems you list?

I think the idea gives a chance for more use of the parks, jobs, income to the state. 3 positive results.

Originally Posted by vaughanwilliams

Nothing says the great outdoors like having some lout in his 60 foot RV parked next to your campsite, air conditioner and cable TV blasting away. If the people of Florida let this happen (they will- Bubba's lovin' his RV), they'll never get the parks back pre-RV. NEVER. Look for profit driven contractors running the park system next.

[vaughanwilliams]

Originally Posted by randian

Nothing, if done right. There are a number of private campground operators that will do the improvements at their cost and pay for the concession on top of it. Not all privately-operated parks have RVs. Some are raw. It depends on the terms of the concession. Open parks are better than closed parks.

Sure they will-out of the goodness of their heart. Personally, I don't want my tax dollars and entrance fee going towards a private contractor. And I don't particularly want to see somebody making a livable wage replaced by someone making next to nothing. We've enough of those types of jobs already.

[randian]

Originally Posted by vaughanwilliams

Sure they will-out of the goodness of their heart. Personally, I don't want my tax dollars and entrance fee going towards a private contractor.

The grocery store does not feed you out of the goodness of their hearts, yet they do a pretty good job of it.

You'd rather see parks close than have somebody make a profit? It's more important to you to make a political point than it is to serve the public?

[beachmouse]

Originally Posted by randian

You'd rather see parks close than have somebody make a profit? It's more important to you to make a political point than it is to serve the public?

Bad cause/effect assertion there. A number of the day use parks on the proposed campgrounds lists likely run huge operating surpluses every year.

[vaughanwilliams]

Originally Posted by randian

The grocery store does not feed you out of the goodness of their hearts, yet they do a pretty good job of it.

You'd rather see parks close than have somebody make a profit? It's more important to you to make a political point than it is to serve the public?

The grocery store wasn't built with public monies nor is it supported by tax dollars (or is it? Hard to tell in the age of corporate welfare).

If anyone makes a profit administering state parks, I want to see "We The People" make it, not some faceless corporation who is beholding to no one except their stock holders.