Re: Theft of $5 Million in CO OHV Funds at Stake!!!
My apologies if the above comment sounds too 'cheeky'...the intent was aimed more at the reality of $3B shortfall....most likely any and all dollars tied to the state in some way will be considered for whether it it can be re-allocated in some way. But, as much as this discussion has identified some differences of thought, maybe a honest suggestion of solution is worth while to discuss...my thought here is more along the lines that for money to be truly protected from govt access, legislative statue is not enough, as it can be changed. It is almost impossible to draft legislation that is immune from future modification. The only way to secure resources for total control of their use is to make the organization a non-profit. They would not be able to collect user fees - which is a huge source of the revenue - but if there was a way to generate revenue without state required permitting and fees, then the organization could control exactly how the money was used. I am guessing that there were some local OHV non-profits in various areas that did this, but maybe just didn't raise enough funds to have much sway or input with local, state and fed agencies. But here are two examples that are by no means a parallel to the OHV program, but rather just marginally successful cases of public and private non-profits working together.
The CAIC is near and dear to me....From its own website: The CAIC is a program within the Colorado Department of Natural Resources, a state government agency. They have 20 staff that work out of 8 offices that cover the mountainous areas of Colorado. The CAIC is the public side of the partnership. The mission of the CAIC is to provide avalanche information, education and promote research for the protection of life, property and the enhancement of the state’s economy. These are the folks that produce the weather and backcountry avalanche forecasts. They teach avalanche classes to school kids, university students, and avalanche workers. The CAIC also works with CDOT to reduce the threat of avalanches to the State Transportation System.
The CAIC is a public entity that gets funding from a variety of public sources - there are no user fees as there are with OHV. Its focus from public funding perspective is to keep roads safe in coordination with CDOT. But the non-profit FoCAIC (friends of CAIC) has helped raise significant funds to partner with CAIC and help bring useful reporting for recreational users. From the website: The FoCAIC is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization that was created to financially support avalanche forecasting and education throughout Colorado. We accomplish this through fundraising that includes grant writing, events, individual fundraising, corporate partnerships, and our annual spring fundraising campaign. The FoCAIC has 2 full time staff members that work out of home offices and from road throughout the winter. FoCAIC also has a small Board of Directors that guides the mission of the organization and oversees the ED. The FoCAIC is the private side of the partnership.
What is interesting here to me is this - as it sounds a lot like the description of the OHV program: The relationship between the CAIC and the Friends of CAIC is an important public-private partnership that provides backcountry avalanche forecasts for everyone in Colorado–as well as; avalanche education for as many people as we can reach. The partnership allows FoCAIC staff to go to events, write grants, and build partnerships on behalf of the mission. And it keeps the CAIC staff in the snow so they can provide the best avalanche forecasts possible for you, the user.
Of course I don't know if the amount of funds is anywhere close to OHV, and of course a lot of that comes from the user fees. But its those same user fees that cause the conflict with govt intervention...When we pay for permits, then the state has taken over and regulating access of public land (which some may vehemently oppose on principal - although that is less my concern). When I 'pay' for the permit, I am a consumer paying for the right to access the land....its just an added benefit that those fees normally go to support the usage (albeit a legally required benefit for as long as the legislative statue goes unchanged). But its not a voluntary contribution - it is a user fee (let it be noted that many people also donate to the OHV fund - I can truly empathize with those who donated significant cash to the OHV fund only to see it get used in another manner). Anyway, the only way to avoid this issue is to have a non-profit that partners with public organizations - its worked sorta ok for 14ers initiative, and seems to be growing nicely with CAIC (albeit I believe with much smaller budget numbers). Just something to think about.
PS - Despite my arguments that it might be okay for the govt taking and using 5 million from the OHV fund for other purposes in this year, I do support OHV trail work. I'd be more than happy to help offset any pain and suffering caused here through volunteering to help with trail work with Trailridge Runners (do I have correct group?). Or if you start up a non-profit, I'll donate - which is saying a lot to for a person about to be unemployed (of course, I will be donating more to other causes that I feel are more important than OHV work at this time).
Reply W/Quote
)
