Cal. PRC § 5007 — California Code / Code prc / Division 5 / Chapter 1 / Article 1 / Section 5007
Section 5007
Status: in_force

(a) It is the intent of the Legislature that the department consistently operate the state park system to preserve public access and provide protection of natural, cultural, and historic resources. If budget reductions necessitate changes to the continued operation of state park units, it is the intent of the Legislature that the department achieve required budget reductions by implementing efficiencies and increasing revenue collection, or reducing services at selected units of the state park system, and that full park closures only be considered as a last option to address required budget reductions after all other feasible alternatives, including, but not limited to, entering into operating agreements with qualified nonprofit entities and local governments have been explored.

(b) For any park unit proposed for closure on or after July 1, 2014, the department shall document and publicly disclose the methodology, rationale, and scoring system used to evaluate and select park units proposed for closure, and shall select any units proposed to be closed based on consideration of all of the following factors:

(1) The relative statewide significance of each park unit, preserving to the extent possible, parks identified in the department’s documents including “Outstanding and Representative Parks,” the “California State History Plan,” and the “California State Parks Survey of 1928.”

(2) The rate of visitation to each unit, to minimize impacts to visitation in the state park system. Visitation shall be measured not only based on the raw number of visitations to the unit, but also to the extent that the total capacity of the unit is used.

(3) (A) The estimated net savings from closing each unit, to maximize savings to the state park system.

(B) For purposes of this subdivision, “net savings” means the estimated costs of operation for the unit less the unit’s projected revenues and less the costs of maintaining the unit after it is closed.

(4) The feasibility of physically closing each unit.

(5) The existence of, or potential for, partnerships that can help support each unit, including public and nonprofit partners and concessions.

(6) Significant operational efficiencies to be gained by closing a unit.

(7) Significant and costly infrastructure deficiencies affecting key systems at each unit so that continued operation of the unit is less cost effective relative to other units.

(8) Recent or funded infrastructure investments at a unit.

(9) Necessary but unfunded capital investments at a unit.

(10) Deed restrictions and grant requirements applicable to each unit.

(11) The extent to which there are substantial dedicated funds for the support of the unit that are not appropriated from the General Fund.

(12) The extent to which the closure of a park unit would disproportionately impact one community or region of the state over another, based on existing information readily available to the department. Nothing in this paragraph is intended to require the department to prepare, or contract for the preparation of, new studies or research to obtain information or analysis not already readily available to the department with existing resources.

(13) The extent to which the closure of a park unit would limit availability of facilities within state parks that are compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and subsequent amendments to the act.

(14) The extent to which closure of a park unit would impair firefighter access to water resources or otherwise increase fire risk.

(15) The extent to which closure of a park unit would increase public safety hazards or impair the state’s ability to protect iconic natural and historical resources.

(c) The commission shall hold a public hearing on any park unit closures that are proposed by the department on or after July 1, 2014, and information gathered at the hearing shall be considered by the department before any final decision regarding the proposed closure of a park unit.

(d) Notwithstanding Division 3.6 (commencing with Section 810) of Title 1 of the Government Code, a public entity or a public employee is not liable for injury or damage caused by a condition of public property located in, or injury or damage otherwise occurring in, or arising out of an activity in, a state park system unit that is designated as closed by the department pursuant to subdivision (a), except for conduct that constitutes gross negligence or is wanton or reckless. This immunity shall apply notwithstanding the fact that the public has access, whether invited or uninvited, to the state park system unit, and notwithstanding that the department may take actions such as patrols, inspections, maintenance, and repairs necessary to protect the state park system unit facilities and resources from deterioration, damage, or destruction. This immunity shall apply only to units of the state park system that are designated as closed pursuant to subdivision (a) and shall not apply to units that are partially closed or subject to service reductions but not closure. The closed units shall be maintained in a list by the department and the list shall be made publicly available and posted on the department’s Internet Web site. The list shall include the date the unit is considered closed. The immunity provided by this subdivision does not limit any other immunity or immunities available to a public entity or a public employee. The governmental immunity provided in this section does not apply to a third party or entity that has reopened a park listed as closed pursuant to subdivision (a). The immunity shall continue to apply to the state.