LEXIS-NEXIS® Congressional Universe-Document

Search Terms: "Conservation and Reinvestment Act", House or Senate or Joint

Document 42 of 92.

View Related Topics

APRIL 20, 1999, TUESDAY

SECTION: IN THE NEWS

LENGTH: 3292 words

HEADLINE: PREPARED STATEMENT OF
BERNADETTE CASTRO
COMMISSIONER AND STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER
NEW YORK STATE OFFICE OF PARKS
RECREATION AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION
BEFORE THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
SUBJECT - S.25,S.446,S.532 AND LANDS LEGACY
LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUNDING

BODY:

Thank you Chairman Murkowski and Members of the Committee for this opportunity to testify before you on the Conservation and Reinvestment Act of 1999, the Resources 2000 Act, and the Public Land and Recreation Investment Act of 1999. My name is Bernadette Castro and I am the Commissioner of New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation. I respectfully request that my written remarks in total be made part of the record.
I speak to you today not only as the Commissioner of New York State Parks, but also as a member of the Board of Directors of the National Association of State Outdoor Recreation Liaison Officers, as co-chair of the Legislative Committee of the National Association of State Park Directors and as co-chair of Governor George E. Pataki's Empire State Task Force for Land and Water Conservation Funding. I commend you, Mr. Chairman, and Senator Mary Landrieu for your leadership to re-establish the Land and Water Conservation Fund "state side" program through the introduction of this legislation, S.25, that will benefit urban, suburban and rural areas throughout the country. My compliments to the other sponsors of S.446 and S. 532, each of which would re-establish the LWCF state side program.
My testimony today will focus on the provisions of your bill and the other proposals that would re-establish the Land and Water Conservation Fund "state side" program.
As you know, in 1964 Congress created the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) to preserve, develop and ensure that all Americans had access to quality outdoor recreation and to strengthen the health and quality of life in our communities. It was a simple idea: a "pay as you go" program using revenues from resource use, primarily from Outer Continental Shelf oil and gas receipts that were to be used to support the creation of national and community parks, forests, wildlife refuges and open spaces.
Since its inception, LWCF has been responsible for the creation of nearly seven million acres of parkland, water resources, open space and the development of more than 37,000 state, municipal and local parks and recreation projects; 1,100 projects were undertaken in New York and resulted in 65,000 acres being acquired for recreational use. From playgrounds and ball fields, scenic trails and nature preserves, LWCF has been the key to providing places for all Americans to recreate, relax and get outdoors.
NYS Parks as the State is Outdoor Recreation Liaison, willingly shared our LWCF state side allocation with other units of government within the state and ensured that the funding provided for a wide variety of projects. Fully 58% of the funding that came to the state went for municipal park acquisition and development projects (cities 33%, counties 5%, towns 14.5% and villages 4.5%). Of the $200 million that came to New York, $123 million went to recreation development, $42 million went to major renovations and $25 million went to acquisition. We very much balanced our use of these funds so that they benefited all the residents of the state.
Let me give you some specific examples of how "state side" money has been used in New York.Over the years we have applied millions in LWCF state side funding to projects at Niagara Fails Reservation (State Park). Without this funding this oldest continuously operated state park in the nation, which sees millions and millions of visitors annually, would not be the treasure that it is today. These projects included the development and construction of a new visitor / information center, reconstruction of walkways, renovation of electric service and creative landscaping which interprets the system of Great Lakes.
On Long Island, at Jones Beach State Park, the largest public bathing facility in the world, we have invested millions in Land and Water Conservation Funds. This funding combined with state funding, has restored this jewel to its historic splendor. Each year, 8 million visitors from around the world enjoy this recreational resource on the Atlantic Ocean. Projects at this facility included total reconstruction of the 2-mile Jones Beach Boardwalk, restoration of the East End and West End Bath Houses and improvements to our parking areas and sewage treatment facilities.
In our urban areas we supported an application for a very special park, "A Playground for All Children." LWCF funding ($400,000) made it possible for the Flushing Meadow, Queens (New York City) community to construct a playground for all children; for those that have physical challenges, as well as for other children to enjoy. It has served as a creative facility that was undertaken well before the era of the Americans With Disabilities Act. It included interpretive trails, playground apparatus, a sports and game area, a water wheel, sports courts, a "rolling" hill and sports track.
Working with Onondaga County, we directed LWCF funding to the Burnet Park Zoo in the city of Syracuse; $1.1 million dollars was applied to bring this aging facility up to modern standards for the public to enjoy in a park setting. LWCF funding helped complete this $12 million dollar project.
As you can see, state side funding has supported a variety of projects.
Governor Pataki has been a leader in the effort to renew "state side" funding. Last year, the Governor called for the creation of the Empire State Task Force on Land and Water Conservation Funding. The purpose was to educate the public on the importance of state side funding, what it has accomplished and what it could accomplish in the future and to support those efforts in Congress to re-establish this federal funding source. On January 20, 1999, the Governor, through the Task Force, hosted over 400 leaders of parks and open space advocacy groups in Albany for a summit to educate and advance reinstating "state side" assistance. Governor Pataki has also contacted many Members of Congress in the past to express his commitment to this vital program and what it means to New York State. The membership of the Task Force is diversified and includes: Laurance S. Rockefeller as Honorary Chairman; John P. Cahill, Commissioner of NYS Department of Environmental Conservation as my co-chair; NY Secretary of State Alexander F. Treadwell, who administers New York's Coastal Zone Management program; Theodore Roosevelt IV; Mark Rockefeller, son of Nelson; several municipal organizations including the NY Conference of Mayors and Association of Counties; The Conservation Council representing sportsmen; and a variety of environmental organizations such as the National Audubon Society, the Nature Conservancy, Open Space Institute and Trust for Public Land, just to name a few.
It is critical that a stable source of funds for the LWCF be established. As you know, LWCF has been critically under-funded at approximately one-third of its annually authorized level of $900 million, with no funding provided to the state side matching grant program in recent years.
In New York, Governor George E. Pataki has been a leader in providing for the creation of recreation and open space lands and providing support for localities to develop outdoor recreation facilities.

Through the Governor's efforts we have a fully dedicated Environmental Protection Fund and a Clean Water / Clean Air Bond Act, each contributing financial support to localities wishing to expand their open space and recreational resources. New York State has done its share to provide some of the necessary resources for outdoor recreation and conservation.
However, we cannot meet the need for local parks alone. Since 1995, State Parks has received 1050 applications for park projects. Communities have sought to invest over $600 million in recreational facilities. Although most of these projects are solid, worthwhile park projects, 800 of them have yet to be undertaken. Federal support of these projects will help New York leverage the investments we have made through our Environmental Protection Fund and Clean Air/Clean Water Bond Act.
We want to continue to build on success stories in New York such as restoring the beautiful beaches on Long Island, to building shaded parks in New York City, to helping revitalize waterfront areas and small town parks throughout the state. Mr. Chairman, we applaud your efforts and your commitment to re-establishing a federal/state/local partnership by providing revenues for the revitalization of the "state side" grant-in-aid program of the Land and Water Conservation Fund.
Let me share with you what I believe should be included in any legislation that is advanced by the Senate:
1. The legislation should permanently provide $900 million dollars annually to support both the federal and state side of LWCF without the need for annual appropriations. There is a great need for a reinvigorated state side program in all the states. This funding should be evenly split between the federal and state side programs. These two programs complement each other and any new legislation should assure that they do not compete with each other for funding, nor should it place new limitations on the use of the funds that would reduce their effectiveness.
2. The legislation should also address and provide for full funding of important wildlife needs and coastal zone issues.
3. The state side program should fund acquisition, planning, recreation development and capital rehabilitation. The program should continue to fund a variety of projects thereby benefiting all residents of the state. Narrowing eligible projects to just acquisition would result in a diminished benefit to our urban constituencies. In New York, as well as in a good portion of the Northeast we have a very limited capacity to undertake acquisitions in our well-established cities. However, the demand to provide outdoor recreation resources in our urban environment has never been greater. As evidenced by our experience with applications from our local communities for funds from the Environmental Protection Fund and Clean Water / Clean Air Bond Act, over 80% of these applications are for park development rather than acquisition. Land and Water Conservation Fund should be giving municipalities what they want, not what some administrator in Washington thinks they need!
In addition, funding a variety of projects also ensures that we will provide recreational opportunities throughout the year. Many communities have told me that their recreational opportunities flourish during the summer, but when winter arrives, they find they have a void in recreational opportunities. An open ice rink can be an invaluable recreational resource to a community which may flourish during the summer but which community character changes dramatically during the winter when tourists are no longer there. They frequently find that their resident youth have no place to direct their energies at those times of the year.
It is worth noting that the state side program has in the past supported capital rehabilitation. These types of projects should be authorized by the plain language of the act and not left to interpretation. The Urban Park and Recreation Recovery Act (UPARR) provides for this type of project and S.25, the Senate version of CARA, includes language in this regard as it relates to eligible projects in the LWCF state side program.
There is another important reason why capital rehabilitation should be included within the context of eligible state side projects. As you know, the Americans With Disabilities Act has imposed upon state and local parks a demand that they make every effort to provide reasonable accommodation to those with disabilities. While we can all agree with the laudable goals of this act, we also lament in the fact that this act provided no funding to our park systems to achieve this goal. Including capital rehabilitation as well as park development money in the state side program provides a means to implement this unfunded federal mandate.
In relation to acquisitions, I would also recommend language within the statute that allows for the use of recreational easements. In New York we have been successful and the public has been accepting of our use of recreational easements. Easements are a tool which should be available to expand outdoor recreational opportunities on a permanent basis. Easements provide for recreational use without removing land from the tax rolls. While easements have been formerly allowed under the state side program they have not been encouraged.
4. The allocation of all state side funds should be based on a formula that recognizes the recreational needs of the state's residents, placing emphasis on population and land mass with a lesser component to be shared equally between all the states. Both NASORLO and NASPD oppose replacing the formula with a new nationally competitive grants program. As we have in the past, I am confident the New York State is in the best position to work with its local governments to implement a program that benefits all the residents of the state.5. Projects should be prioritized based on a state implemented public process and undertaken pursuant to a plan such as the state comprehensive outdoor recreation plan or the action agenda as proposed in the senate bills. In New York we are proud of the public process that we use to review projects and establish priorities for our open space program. We look forward to applying this process to state side funding and the creation of our State Action Plan as required by S.25 and several of the other proposals. Our state open space plan was established to work side by side with the State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan as required under the existing LWCF statute to be done once every five years. Our agency capital plan is also a fiveyear program. All the proposals call for an action agenda to be undertaken once every four years. Frankly, I can find no basis for shortening the existing interval.
At this point I would also offer as an aside that, considering the effort that will be put into the creation of a state action agenda, at a minimum, the National Park Service should coordinate with the state prior to awarding L/PARR grants to ensure a cooperative coordinated approach to funding urban park projects.
6. Any legislation that deals with revenues derived from the extraction of natural resources on the Outer Continental Shelf should not create incentives for that extraction. As a coastal state, New York is very interested in sharing an equitable portion of Outer Continental Shelf revenues with other coastal states which will help fully fund the Land and Water Conservation Fund. Revenue derived from this national asset should be reinvested into initiatives which provide benefits for future generations. The language contained in HR. 701 or HR. 798 relating to what revenues are captured for the purposes of this act, may assist in resolving the incentive concern. However as a representative of a coastal state, I do not believe eliminating the entire program as proposed in Resources 2000 is the best solution to this concern.
7. Most importantly, funding for this program must not come at the expense of other federal dollars which are provided in support of the states.
It is apparent from the outpouring of interest from groups throughout New York State that there is a great deal of momentum toward seeing a renewal of state-side funding for the LWCF and full funding for the entire Land and Water Conservation Fund.
For one moment, I must make some comments as New York's State Historic Preservation Officer, appointed pursuant to Federal law. While we have been primarily focused on the use of the Land Water Conservation Fund for support of federal land acquisition and the state side program, in the past Outer Continental Shelf revenues have also been used to support state activities to implement the National Historic Preservation Act. I hope that any successful legislation will include a component to provide this funding to the Historic Preservation Fund on a permanent basis and to increase funding over current amounts, so that each state may be able to provide grants to preserve historic treasures which are on the National Register of Historic Places.
Historic preservation is an economic development program that strengthens communities.

Some of our communities have invested heavily in their historic structures and have been able to participate in the economic benefits of heritage tourism, the fastest growing segment of the tourism industry. Saratoga Springs, Coming and Seneca Falls are excellent examples of what is possible. The future of many more of our communities particularly in upstate New York is wedded to how will they be able to save their historic but crumbling main streets. Many times the catalyst to this historic rejuvenation is an investment in a historic public resource such as a court house, city hall or library. Such a public investment acts to stimulate private investment starting the process towards urban rejuvenation.
For much of our state and local park system historic preservation is an integral part of what we do and what we are. At New York State Parks we operate several State Historic Parks; Saratoga Spa State Historic Park at the foothills of the Adirondacks; on Long Island, Caumsett State Historic Park and Planting Fields Arboretum State Historic Park; and outside of Syracuse, and the Old Erie Canal. These facilities, three of which are listed on the National Register of Historic Places, provide both historic interpretation as well as recreational opportunities to the public. We also operate 35 historic sites including Washington's Headquarters in Newburgh, the first state historic site in the country. Although these sites are managed primarily for historic interpretation, many provide outdoor recreation opportunities. Much of our system was constructed prior to World War II and is either eligible for listing on the National Register or already so listed. New York City's Central Park is the best known of our local parks which are listed on the National Register. It is in these cases, recreation rehabilitation projects bear little difference to an historic preservation project, and historic preservation projects can many times result in expanded recreational opportunities.
Substantial funding, equal to its authorized level, dedicated to the Historic Preservation Fund will augment existing state resources dedicated to providing for the preservation and adaptive reuse of historic resources.
Let me conclude by stating that each one of the proposals before you offers to restore a promise that was created in 1964. A promise that the revenues from the extraction of Outer Continental Shelf Resources would be invested in recreational resources for future generations to enjoy and benefit from. We have the opportunity with a restored Land and Water Conservation Fund to provide new parks, rehabilitated recreational resources and open spaces for all Americans to enjoy. Only the state side program provides those facilities which can be enjoyed on a daily basis. While we all treasure those places which we may visit once in a lifetime, we all need those places that are close to home and improve our quality of life on a daily basis. For our children, please restore the promise and re-establish the LWCF state side program.
On behalf of the Empire State Task Force for Land and Water Conservation Funding and the people of the great State of New York, I thank Chairman Murkowski and the distinguished members of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources for the opportunity to testify before you today.
END

LOAD-DATE: April 21, 1999

Document 42 of 92.


Search Terms: "Conservation and Reinvestment Act", House or Senate or Joint
To narrow your search, please enter a word or phrase: