The following editorial appeared in the Red Rock News on January 19, 2000.
The issue has gone from "We need a groundswell of support before enacting forest user fees," to "The fees will probably start in March."
It has been a short trip with many pitfalls.
The biggest pitfall that forest planners apparently do not see, is that the majority of Sedona area residents do not want to pay double to use or travel on forest roads. In our Reader's Poll about forest fees, the vast majority of readers said they do not favor the fees.
The groundswell that forest planners are seeing is against fees, not in favor of them.
This Red Rock Passport program, started by the Sedona Beaver Creek Ranger District of the Coconino National Forest, would essentially double tax residents and visitors for driving on forest roads. The district wants to charge visitors and resident $5 per day or $15 per year for permission to use federally financed roads.
We though we paid bunches of federal income and business taxes along with heavy gasoline taxes to tak care of roads.
To ensure the new tax on forest use is collected, the district wants to construct three visitors centers at a cost of millions of dollars. Building at least one of those visitor centers south of the Village of Oak Creek would disrupt a natural area and lend itseld to further encroachments of buildings and pavement in the red rock area.
In the first year, revenue would be about $5.56 million, according to the latest Forest Service figures. The only problem is that administrating the project is expected to cost %5.84 million. This means the ranger district is in the hole by a cool quarter million dollars and would have to raise fees to make up the difference.
We keep hearing that forest users will not mind paying the fees if they know the money is going to take care of a deteriorating forest. That is based on a bogus research question that was asked in such a way as to force people to respond that they would not mind paying.
The Forest Service wants to improve access to public land and expand trails to accommodate more people. Is this not going to lead to more probelms and more cost?
The higher the fee charged the fewer the people who will use the forest. That's what some people want - a way to discourage others from coming to Sedona.
The problem is who will then pay the bills for this community. The City of Sedona depends on visitors to pay 60 percent, maybe even more, of the community infrastructure bills through sales taxes. The county depends on visitors to pay an extra sales tax that is spent on roads.
Take away the visitors, and who is going to pay the bills? Residents will be faced with higher sales taxes and maybe even property taxes should the forest service proposal push visitors from this area.
A recent perspective in this newspaper last week examined several attempts to charge fees for use of federal lands. The writer documented that in a wildlife refuge in Florida use dropped by 75 percent when users were charged a $1 use fee. The new revenue did not even pay for the staffed toll booths and administrative cost, much less provide any money for land improvements. The same situation apparently happened in California with the same disastrous results.
Charging for use of public lands and creating passes has failed in the past. What makes this proposal any different, when a large majority of Sedona residents responding to our Reader's Poll say they do not favor these fees?
To protest this new federal tax being imposed by the Sedona Beaver Creek Ranger District, we suggest residents and visitors need to call and write their congressmen and send copies of those letters to the Forest Service.
It may also be time to derail the sale of the ranger station on Brewer Road. If that is not sold, the district cannot afford to build three new visitors centers. The special federal legislation is making its way through Congress now.
This federal fee for permission to drive on roads already paid for by tax money is a terribly bad idea. The principle behind this idea is wrong. We suggest that the Forest Servie abandon this idea or, at the very least, offer it to a vote of the residents of this area before pushing forward any further.
- Thomas L. Brossart
Managing Editor