Editorial: Parks Fans Have Reason to Fear

Otto von Bismarck, the Prussian statesman, once said that politics is the art of the possible. In a letter to President John F. Kennedy, written while he was serving as U.S. Ambassador to India in 1969, economist John Kenneth Galbraith remarked that "politics is not the art of the possible. It consists in choosing between the disastrous and the unpalatable." If those are the choices, then former Wall Street titan and now New Jersey Governor John Corzine, who has a $32 billion budget shortfall staring him in the face, has been leaning heavily toward the calamitous side of the equation. First there was his plan for raising tolls on the state's most important highways, in some cases by as much as fifty percent over ten years. That New Year's present to the population arrived like a skunk at an outdoor wedding reception, according to pollsters such as Clay Richards of Quinnipiac, who likened voter opposition to a "brick wall."

Now he's done the Vulcan Mind Meld with state DEP head Lisa P. Jackson and come up with another sure-fire public relations win. "Budget Cuts Would Close 9 State Parks" was the headline in the Courier Post on April 1, the date being perhaps part of a subtle communications strategy. The Associated Press reported the same day on "Painful Cuts" that would target Monmouth Battlefield, and other parks. Details of the plan were sketchy, with each interpreter free to arrive at a different conclusion: the parks would all close; some would close and others would not; even the ones that would close would remain open to visitors; etc. On April 3 conservative Paul Mulshine of the Star Ledger weighed in with a blast at Democrat Corzine for grandstanding on parks to the tune of $4 million in savings while his party-mates in the Legislature refuse to touch treasured programs (like the $156 million "distressed cities" fund).

According to Mulshine, who spoke with DEP representatives, the parks that would be closed, would be closed. That's it. At the press conference announcing the plan Jackson was asked by a reporter whether closed meant the public would not be allowed on the land. Her reply? "If something's closed you shouldn't be in it." But not to worry. She had also earlier promised that "[e]nforcement won't be Gestapo-like. They'll just tell you to move on." Not to take a dig at Rangers, but to be honest most of the ones I have met in the woods already act like I shouldn't be there. How will they act when I really shouldn't be there? Can this actually be the plan? Closing Lebanon... sorry, Brendan Byrne State Forest and other huge, open areas of public land, and officially ruling that the public is not allowed to use them? Mulshine later spoke with Elaine Makatura of the DEP press office, who confirmed that Jackson meant what she said. The DEP has a budget shortfall, and doesn't have the $4 million to keep these areas open.

So, should lovers of State Parks and Forests such as Byrne, High Point, Ringwood, Monmouth Battlefield, Stephens, and others, fear the worst? I turned to the official DEP website in hopes of finding a definitive policy pronouncement, but the topic of possibly closing five state parks did not make the front page, not even in the "Hot Topics" box. I did find a link to the DEP Priorities and Action Plan, issued in January of 2007. Vision statement number one reads "Enhance stewardship of and access to existing lands, natural resources, and historic structures, and expand the acquisition of open space." Oops. A sub-point under this statement talks about the department's responsibility to manage the "first stable source of funding" for maintenance and capital projects at state parks, a $15 million annual revenue flow created when New Jersey voters approved Ballot Question #2 in November of 2006. One wonders if they haven't the right to feel a little hoodwinked.

Of course, lovers of the true Garden State can take solace from the fact that the one thing politicians do best is threaten dire consequences if their plans are not approved. Budget crises in which one party promises to lay waste to some treasured asset or other are not new phenomenon. A search on Google Books for "budget crisis" occuring before 1900 yields over 700 volumes. No government has ever been able to agree on where money should be spent, unless that government was an absolute monarchy. In the U.S. in recent years, as local governments have struggled with growing demands and shrinking revenue, they have regularly threatened the extinction of athletic, music, and arts programs. The reason for the choices is obvious. Nobody ever threatens Home Economics. Mere mention of music and sports is enough to send legions of suburbanites to vent their rage in blistering emails. But to whom will they vent when the Democrats control all of New Jersey state government? Corzine is walking a dangerous road, but it's unlikely that when he reaches its end we'll all be barred from our beloved parklands.