Privatizing, saving

e-mail this story discuss this issue in our forums

State officials want to privatize some functions of state parks and that has opponents worried that jobs will be lost and visits will become more expensive. Those are legitimate concerns but park service officials believe that privatizing functions such as stores and golf courses will allow the service to improve its core mission of conservation and protection of natural resources.

Any privatization plan should be judged against those goals. If the park service can save money by handing over the operations of its stores to a private business, then there's clearly no reason for the park service to continue operating those stores. The same holds true for golf courses: If a private company can operate them more efficiently — without sacrificing service — then there's little rationale for not privatizing them.

The state already is in the process of centralizing its cabin and campground reservation system with a private company. It goes without saying that any privatization plan should be carefully scrutinized to make sure stores, golf courses and other services actually are being run more efficiently by private companies. Contracts should be quickly discontinued when private companies fail to perform up to high standards.

The bottom-line goal should be for the Park Service to save money through limited privatization so that more funding can be put into staffing and basic functions such as conservation and maintenance. Greater efficiency should also help prevent yet another increase in park admission fees.