IS CORRAL BLUFFS FINANCIALLY VIABLE?
James Lockhart, Conservation Chair, Pikes Peak Sierra Club Group
(Note: The information below represents a more detailed setting out of issues presented to the El Paso County Parks Advisory Board at its February 11, 2008 meeting during the public comment session, or provided to them in a follow-up e-mail.)
El Paso County proposes to construct a 700-acre motorcycles-only recreational facility at Corral Bluffs east of Colorado Springs on land adjoining the existing Aztec Family Raceway, a motocross racetrack which would manage the county facility under a “public-private partnership” arrangement. On November 29, 2007, the County Commissioners approved a resolution authorizing purchase of 522 acres of land for the site. On March 11, 2008 at the monthly El Paso County Parks Advisory Board Meeting, when asked by a Sierra Club representative whether the County had done a feasibility study of the proposal, County Parks Director Tim Wolken stated in essence that “the master planning process is the feasibility study,” referring to the upcoming master planning process to take place in April and May of this year. For details of the proposed master-planning, see the article “IS PLANNING FOR CORRAL BLUFFS ADEQUATE?” on this website.
This lack of prior study, or at least lack of disclosure of any analysis, of the actual financial ramifications of the Corral Bluffs proposal is alarming. Corral Bluffs has been touted to both County Commissioners and State Parks officials as “financially self-sustaining from user fees.” Without a feasibility study to determine such basic questions as how large a market exists and what actual operating costs will be, it is difficult to see how such statements can be regarded as anything more than wishful thinking.
Like any proposed business, an OHV facility requires careful and detailed consideration of potential customer base, sources of income, operating costs, and potential liabilities. As a website entitled “So You Want to Build an OHV Facility” posted by the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (DCNR) at http://www.dcnr.state.pa.us/brc/OHVfinal.PDF puts it:
While “build it and they will come” succeeded in Field of Dreams, this approach often leaves too much to chance even with the best of ideas. One of the fundamental questions that you must answer is “Who will use this facility?”
The answers to these and other related questions need thorough examination and assessment. Not only will they be crucial to determine whether there is profit potential but they will also be useful in deciding the type and size of the facility.
Set out below is a discussion of the possible financial implications of a motorcycle facility at Corral Bluffs, based on public information obtained from the Internet regarding other similar county-owned facilities. Note that the facilities discussed below tend to be broad-spectrum OHV facilities, designed to serve a clientele that includes motorcyclists, ATV owners, and owners of other off-road vehicles such as jeeps. Corral Bluffs is proposed as a motorcycles-only facility. This only increases concern that it will not “pay for itself.”
1. OHV parks seem to have difficulty in being self-sustaining
An examination of a number of other county-owned motorcycle parks suggests that they typically cost more to operate than they take in from user fees and events proceeds. For example:
● A motorcycle park in Santa Clara County, California has required years of state grants to offset ordinary operation and maintenance costs. According to an April 21, 2005 county report, available at http://www.sccgov.org/SCC/docs/SCC%20Public%20Portal/keyboard%20agenda/Committee%20Agenda/2005/April%2021,%202005/KeyboardTransmittal-0040394.PDF the Metcalf Motorcycle Park's fiscal year 2005 operating budget was $375,700, out of which the state contributed $189,000 for park operations. The document notes that the park had a history of making — and often not fully receiving — state grants to keep it in operation. Santa Clara County asked and received the following amounts of state funds:
Fiscal Year 2004 −$346,000 requested − $179,000 received
Fiscal Year 2003 −$270,000 requested − $270,000 received
Fiscal Year 2002 −$260,000 requested − $221,000 received
This report also notes that this continued state support was necessary despite an enormous increase in the number of user, from an estimated 10,000 riders in 1992 to over 45,000 riders in 2004. In fact, increased usage was part of the reason for the park’s financial problems, since higher use meant higher impact costs. The report states:
Since the park opened in the 1970's, there has never been a soil replacement program. The depth of the tread of some trails has been reduced by at least 18 to 24 inches. Some trails are down to rock in many places and require time consuming repairs that cannot be performed while the park is open to the public. In addition to the time required to repair trails, a costly soil replacement program must take place, but is not possible at current funding levels.
● Stanislaus County in California is requesting $375,000 in state OHV funds for each of its two OHV parks for "operations and maintenance" in 2007-2008 (see grant applications at http://www.stancounty.com/er/parks/pdf/OHV-LG-FO-MGrant-Proposal.pdf and http://www.stancounty.com/er/parks/pdf/OHV-FR-FO-MGrant-Proposal.pdf )
● An OHV park in Morrow County, Oregon has made repeated requests for state grants in recent years (Generally go to the State Park and Rec site at http://www.prd.state.or.us/news.php enter a search for “Morrow” and scan the results to see the number of recent state awards.)
2. Loss or reduction of anticipated outside funding can put an OHV facility in serious financial difficulty
As the Santa Clara County website above notes, the Metcalf Motorcycle Park ran into serious financial problems when state funding was gradually reduced. See also the following, from http://dirtbike.off-road.com/dirtbike/ridenet.features.2005.santaclara/MCPs-Uncertain-Future/ArticleStandard/Article/detail/332398 :
MCP’s Uncertain Future
Like anything else that is government funded, MCP has found itself at the whim of a state budget process that is at best chaotic. Even though MCP is a county park, much of their funding comes from the State of California. At the beginning of this year MCP found out that their state funding is scheduled to be cut by nearly 80%.
The site goes on to describe how the funding situation required emergency meeting of the Parks and Recreation Commission to explore ways in which the funding shortfall could be made up. The site describes the matter of funding as “still not totally solved.”
3. Making an OHV park self-sustaining seems to depend on attracting competitive events, rather than just local recreational riders
Although County officials have touted a Corral Bluffs site as giving local recreationists an alternative place to ride, OHV parks in fact derive a substantial part of their revenue from organized and competitive events. This is highlighted by the Grays Harbor (Straddleline) OHV park business plan, is a detailed discussion of the finances of operating an OHV park in Washington State, at http://www.co.grays-harbor.wa.us/info/ORV/BusinessPlan.html. The business plan states:
A consecutive five-year record (between 1997 and 2001) shows park revenues for individual activities (day use) at $218,098 and revenues for organized events at $193,956.
The business plan notes that competitive and organized activities include “motocross racing, 4x4 play days, dirt track racing, drag racing, sprint racing, trail events, rally events, and poker runs” while independent or individual activities include “motocross practice, trail riding, track practice, and cross country riding” -- some of which appear to be tied to competitive events.
This suggests that although slightly more than half of an OHV facility’s income may come from individual activities, organized events and competitive events account for approximately 45% of all user income. This in turn suggests that these events would be held relatively frequently at Corral Bluffs. This is of concern in part because, as noted above, a failure to attract sufficient organized events can put a facility in a financial bind. However, it should also be a concern to neighboring landowners because more intensive uses, such as trials, enduro, and motocross events, mean more intensive impacts on them, as well as on the environment. Corral Bluffs very likely is not going to be simply a county park catering to motorized recreationists, but a business proposition, striving constantly to draw more visitorship and thereby increasing its own impacts.
4. Proper site analysis can be very expensive.
El Paso County Parks is proposing to spend only $40,000 to do planning for the Corral Bluffs facility. This seems to be a gross underestimate of the actual costs of doing a reasonably comprehensive analysis. According to an official Riverside County, California, website, http://www.clerkoftheboard.co.riverside.ca.us/agendas/2003/2003_05_06/03.12.pdf for a Riverside County paid $500,000 to EDAW Consultants for an initial feasibility study, then paid an additional $724,000 for a final study for its Laborde Canyon proposed vehicular recreation park.
5. Use of state OHV grant money can create a serious controversy when the money is used for mitigation purposes
OHV owners object when money paid into an OHV fund is used for purposes other than actually providing motorized recreationists with more places to ride.
See http://www.thumpertalk.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-317589.html for a description of the legal controversy that overtook Riverside County, California’s proposed Laborde Canyon vehicular recreation park in Riverside County, California when a large part of the OHV funds were used to acquire "mitigation land" set asides for environmental protection purposes.
These are all concerns that need to be considered in a detailed feasibility study. Such a study should be done by an independent evaluator, definitely not by someone already committed to the project. It should also be made available for public scrutiny by interested and informed individuals. It needs be done before El Paso County commits itself to the construction of a motorcycle facility at Corral Bluffs.
Persons interested in more information on the Corral Bluffs controversy can visit the Corral Bluffs Association website at www.savecorralbluffs.com and the Trails and Open Space Coalition website at www.trailsandopenspaces.org/.
Jim Lockhart, Conservation Chair, Pikes Peak Sierra Club Group