Connecticut Senate Bill SB00386

Connecticut 2016 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/3/16
• Refer: 3/3/16
• Report Pass: 3/16/16
• Refer: 3/24/16
• Report Pass: 3/31/16
• Engrossed: 4/13/16
• Report Pass: 4/14/16
• Chaptered: 4/27/16
• Enrolled: 5/2/16
• Passed: 5/5/16

Caption

An Act Concerning The Fiscal Sustainability Of State Parks.

Impact

The implementation of this bill would modify existing statutes relating to park operations and user fees, thereby potentially altering visitor experiences at state parks across Connecticut. By aligning admission fees with those in surrounding states, the bill seeks to promote comparative fairness while simultaneously generating new funds to support park maintenance and enhancements. This could lead to improved facilities and services for the public, effectively fostering greater enjoyment and conservation of natural resources.

Summary

SB00386, titled 'An Act Concerning The Fiscal Sustainability Of State Parks,' focuses on enhancing the financial viability of state parks through the establishment of a per-person admission fee. The bill mandates the Commissioner of Energy and Environmental Protection to submit a report by January 1, 2017, detailing this fee's structure, which should align with fees from parks in neighboring states and aim to increase revenue from state park admissions and parking. Notably, provisions are included to exempt disabled veterans and senior citizens aged 65 and over from these fees, indicating a consideration for public accessibility.

Sentiment

The general sentiment surrounding SB00386 appears to be cautiously optimistic, with advocates highlighting the necessity of sustainable funding for the preservation and upkeep of state parks. This perspective champions the notion that equitable user fees could provide essential revenue, thereby ensuring that parks remain accessible and well-maintained. However, there might also be underlying concerns about the financial burden on frequent visitors and how it could affect long-term attendance and engagement with state parks.

Contention

While there is support for the bill related to revenue enhancement, a point of contention may arise regarding the implications of user fees on public land access. Some stakeholders could argue that introducing an admission fee may deter residents from utilizing parks, particularly those from lower-income backgrounds who may find additional costs burdensome. Additionally, discussions around the appropriate fee levels and the potential need for exemptions for various demographics could spark further debate among lawmakers, environmentalists, and community activists alike.