Why Not Public-Private Partnerships for Parks?

by James A. Bacon

Few people outside the Roanoke area have heard of Virginia’s Explore Park, a 1,100-acre facility set in the mountains of Roanoke and Bedford counties. Launched with great fanfare in 1986 as a public-private partnership, the park offers mountain bike trails, a forester’s trail, a fishing and kayaking access point to the Roanoke River, special events like trail runs and adventure races — and a Film Center that has been involved with 16 film and documentary productions over the years, including the soon-to-be-released “Alone Yet Not Alone” (see trailer), which explores the conflict between English settlers and native Indians.

Virginia’s Explore Park is operated by an entity created by the General Assembly: the Virginia Recreational Facilities Authority (VRFA). The Roanoke community sank considerable funds into the venture but it never lived up to expectations,  and  it closed in 2007 during the adverse conditions of the financial meltdown and recession. But it has since reopened, and the VRFA board has a new plan, which it describes in a report to the General Assembly, “Virginia’s Explore Park Status Report.

The board has articulated a new vision: “to be a leader in providing outdoor recreation opportunities, stewardship of this region’s heritage, and advocacy for environmental conservation for the enjoyment, education and inspiration of present and future generations.” The VRFA, states the report, is poised to “reinvent” the park by seeking out concessionaires, developers and outfitters to create privately generated revenue streams. (Among other revenue-generators, the board recently agreed to authorize two cell phone towers on park property.)

The board touts the park as a potential model for other public-private partnerships around Virginia, “allowing the state to stretch limited resources and share the burdens and jobs of investment with local governments and private individuals, foundations and corporations.”

Here’s the catch: The board would like the state to step up as a partner. It doesn’t seem to be asking for much: just tweak the representation on the board, move the  park from non-state agency status to a line item in the Department of Conservation and Recreation, allow Virginia departments to assist and collaborate, and “consider” investing in capital development venues and revenue-producing programs.

It’s not like the VRFA is asking for a lot of money that the state doesn’t have, so why not? Maybe Virginia’s Explore Park can act as a template in our new age of austerity for expanding Virginia’s park lands through public-private partnerships. Let’s give it a try.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

3 responses to “Why Not Public-Private Partnerships for Parks?”

  1. I notice that the State Fair of Virginia – has filed for bankruptcy ….

    the problem with parks is this..

    the state actually gets designated to receive land for parks in wills … not infrequently.

    A few years back the state received some choice real estate on Lake Anna but it was years before they could open … and this is the key word… operate.

    parks require capital and maintenance and operations and by far..the biggest fly in the ointment is staffing…

    I’m all for some kind of a model that operates parks SOLELY from user fees but first I’d like to see some existing successful models….

    “parks”, in theory, are supposed to be “free” for all those folks who don’t own their own land to enjoy….. NoVa is one of the most “parked” places in the US but the staffing to maintain and operate those parks is not cheap by a long shot.

  2. Groveton Avatar

    I am told that these guys do a good job:

    http://www.guestservices.com/

  3. hARUMPHH

    The county has basically set aside my land as a park, albeit one that no one is allowed to visit. I’d like my park to have a revenue stream, too.

    So, if a park needs to have these kinds of concessions and activities to keep it afloat, why not the same for farmland? But, just try to get a permit for any kind of activity that is not strictly agricultural……….. In a month or so we will see what the new ordinance for allowable winery activities looks like: it will be interesting to see how restrictive it is.

Leave a Reply