April 2012 - Parks & Recreation - 50

" We look to the private provider to not only come in and provide
service but also to invest in the parks by putting capital
development into the parks. "  
-r. J. Cardin, Director, Maricopa County Parks & recreation
viable parks in among the stronger locations and requiring
the vendor to cover them all. This arrangement works when
longer contract periods are applied to the relationship.

The Original Model
Jim Bedwell is National Director of Recreation and Heritage Resources, the division within the U.S. Forest Service responsible
for recreation programs in forests and grasslands. Within his
purview are programs that protect and interpret archaeological and historic sites on Forest Service lands. Bedell estimates
that private vendors like RRM manage just over half of the Forest
Service's campgrounds. He's firm about the terminology associated with his program-he dislikes references to privatizing,
instead describing his relationship with RRM and other vendors
as " public-private partnerships. "
Concessionaires have managed Forest Service recreation programs for more than 25 years. " It's been quite successful, although
it hasn't been without its controversy, certainly, " Bedwell says.
" I'd say the good points are they provide good service more
consistently to the public in terms of day-to-day operations and
maintaining the sites, " Bedwell says. " When we operate our
own facilities, if there's a forest fire in the area, we may pull all
our people off running that campground to go fight the fire. You
might have to close the campground or certainly the services
and cleanliness might suffer for those couple of weeks. When you
have the private sector operating it, that's their job and they essentially have a contract to do that job and they stay focused on it. "
Bedwell says the arrangement calls for the vendor to take
their percentage of the fees and return a percentage to the
government.
" That's a net gain for us in revenues, " he says. " We've estimated a value of around $50 million on savings to the federal
budget. Since budgets are always stretched, those 50 million
dollars we can utilize to maintain other aspects of our operations-like wilderness management, dispersed recreation, and
controlling off-highway vehicle use, even our cultural resource
programs-which do not generate their own fees or they are
difficult to isolate. "
The downside to public-private partnerships in the Forest
Service tends to mirror the concerns expressed by park professionals. Bedwell says the Forest Service tends to lose presence and identity with the public. His uniformed personnel are
not out in front of the public answering questions and lending
assistance.
" Also-and this could apply to state parks-governments
work under a whole range of regulations and requirements and
you lose some flexibility when you turn over operations for 10
years or so that you would have had if you were managing on
your own. "
Bedwell cites his agency's relationship with Native American
tribes that often hold ceremonies in National Forests. The agency

48 Parks & Recreation   A P R I L

2 0 1 2    w w w . N R P A . O R G

will often close off portions of forests to accommodate the tribes.
That becomes problematic when the campgrounds are contracted to private vendors. In the end, the Forest Service must go
through a complex reimbursement process.
The Forest Service also runs into problems on the flipside of
concessionaire-operated campgrounds during forest fires. The
agency will often house fire-fighting crews at its campgrounds;
but when they are booked with campers through the private
vendor, the Forest Service runs into problems. " We just can't
kick out the concessionaire to take over the campground for two
weeks to fight the fire. "
For state and local parks considering such large-scale private-partnerships, Bedwell is cautious about recommending
his system.
" It depends on their situation, " he says. " Can they retain the
fees and put them straight back into the operations or do they
go to the state treasury? What's the nature of the state park? Is
it a highly concentrated use, like campgrounds and visitor centers-those things lend themselves to management by a private entity-or are they large, dispersed recreation-type parks
that have people all over and are complex and don't lend themselves much to private management? There are a lot of situations
to assess. There's not really a straight yes or no answer to this. "
Warren Meyer believes that lately when agencies come to
him, it's usually as a " last resort. " Whatever the reason was
that got them there, the options are two-fold: shut down or work
with a private vendor. Tom O'Rourke insists it should not come
to that.
" RMM is not the problem and really is not doing anything
wrong, " O'Rourke says. " They are coming into governments that
do not know how to manage an agency and have given up. For
me, it makes much more sense to fi nd someone who can manage your agency, not to give it away.
" Governments can do exactly what RMM does, " O'Rourke
says. " They can set up enterprise funds that do not need to have
the same government scrutiny that the general funds have, thus
giving them the flexibility that is similar to a private business.
There is not one thing that RMM does that a government can't
do themselves.
" As an example, in our agency we exist to improve the quality of life in Charleston County. If we wanted to, we could very
easily get rid of all the things that do not make money, but
that would disenfranchise many of the people in Charleston, "
O'Rourke says. " Instead, we choose to create enterprise ventures that will make a profit so that we can keep open places
that will never make money and were never intended to make
money. I would put our efficiency model up against anyone,
public or private. For us, it is not about money, it is about being able to provide our services for everyone. "
PHIL HaywarD is Editor of Parks & Recreation.
April 2012 - Parks & Recreation

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of April 2012 - Parks & Recreation
