DCR Proposed Budget and Historic Parkways Transfer to DOT Are Troubling

DCR Proposed Budget and Historic Parkways Transfer to DOT Are Troubling

By Chuck Anastas and Doug Pizzi

Daylight is slowly growing longer, and the end of January is near – which means it’s budget time on Beacon Hill. We would be remiss not to point out that Governor Baker’s proposed fiscal year 2021 budget for the Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) leaves room for improvement.

Last year, for the current budget, the governor proposed a roughly $2 million increase in the Parks and Recreation Operations Account, 2810-0100. Advocates, including MCV, asked for $6 million. Ultimately, the Legislature, in its wisdom, added $7 million, bumping the account up to $47 million. To his credit, Gov. Baker did not veto the larger appropriation. But even with that sizeable increase, the largest in recent memory and perhaps ever, that account has still not caught up with the cuts made during the Great Recession.

So it’s a little disheartening that Gov. Baker is proposing to essentially level fund the 2810-0100 account for FY 2021, which, given inflation, is actually a cut. If DCR is ever going to recover from past cuts, that included at the time about a third of its staff, and actually give Massachusetts taxpayers and visitors the park system we deserve, we need continual progress toward that goal, not the two steps forward and one step backward this budget proposal represents. In addition to providing critical habitat for the natural world and carbon sequestration, DCR properties are a vital link between people and the outdoors, as well as a vital part of the $16 billion annual Massachusetts outdoor economy.

Gov. Baker has been forthright and supportive on the “clean” side of environmental policy with several climate change and energy proposals. We would hope that the “green” side of the environmental budget, specifically state parks, forests and other DCR assets, would be as much of a priority for this administration. Let’s not follow two years of significant budget progress with backsliding now.

Historic Parkways in trouble, again

Even more troubling than the proposed operations budget, however, is a proposal to transfer responsibility for operation and maintenance of several scenic parkways, now controlled by DCR, to the Department of Transportation (DOT). These include Storrow Drive and Soldier’s Field Road, among others. The Baker Administration’s proposal, via budget outside sections, dovetails with DOT’s plans to “straighten out” the Massachusetts Turnpike, a year’s long massively disruptive project that will open up access to the former CSX rail yard now controlled by Harvard University.

While we need to bring this section of The Pike up to 21st Century infrastructure standards, our DCR parkways are the living legacy of Frederick Law Olmsted and Charles Eliot. Handing responsibility for their operation and maintenance to DOT is literally letting the bull into the china shop. Boston’s historic, scenic parkways must remain in control of an agency that cares about trees, wildlife, pedestrians and cyclists these gems support. For DCR to no longer have input on the impact of the Mass Pike improvements is a mistake from which we will never recover.

If this warning sounds familiar, it’s because we have been here before. In 2003, when the Legislature combined the Metropolitan District Commission and the Department of Environmental Management to form DCR, there was ample discussion around who should control our scenic parkways, DCR or DOT. By the time state government took on transportation reform, it was a full-blown controversy. Julie Crockford and Sylvia Salas, then directors of the Emerald Necklace Conservancy and the Esplanade Association, respectively, penned an op-ed in the Boston Globe rightly calling for these historic parkways to remain in the hands of people who are dedicated to balancing environmental, traffic, bicycle and pedestrian needs, as opposed to folks whose primary concern is getting as many people from point A to point B as efficiently as possible.

Another reason to kill this proposed transfer is the fact that the Legislature last year, via another outside section, created and funded a $450,000 Special Study Commission to take a detailed look at DCR, it’s holdings and the way it operates those holdings. If done with care, thoughtfulness and due deference to our parks and those who use them, this could be a good thing. With representatives from the Legislature, environmental groups and the Administration, and provisions for public input, this special commission’s mission is essentially being preempted by the effort to give these historic parkways over to DOT before the Commission holds its first meeting. Let’s give the Commission a chance to do its work and make recommendations on what DCR’s portfolio and workload should be. The special commission is just beginning its work and its report is due at the end of this year. MCV is confident the Commission will see the light on keeping the parkways park-like and we urge the Legislature to reject this transfer proposal.

The DCR Stewardship Council meets at the State House

The DCR Stewardship Council held its first meeting of 2020 on January 10th. Ironically, the agenda included well-received presentations from Michael Nichols of the Esplanade Association and Laura Jasinski from the Charles River Conservancy, two of the organizations most impacted by the proposed transfer of the DCR parkways to DOT. Their working relationship with DCR in programming, maintenance, and care of the parks is impressive. Both organizations have websites that we recommend visiting. The Charles River Conservancy’s website includes a discussion of the Mass Pike reconstruction.

Meanwhile, the Stewardship Council, legislatively created with the 2003 MDC – DEM merger, continues to impress us with its work and commitment to DCR. Chairman Nate Walton is a member of the DCR Special Commission, and his voice will be crucial not only for the future of the state park system but also for the future of the Stewardship Council’s oversight role.

Finally, it’s important to note that another month has passed without the final four appointments to the Stewardship Council. Gov. Baker made exceptional appointments during 2019. But the lack of geographic diversity is hurting the Council, which for more than a year has had no representation from Worcester County west to the Berkshires, where most DCR acreage sits. A Berkshire seat is mandated by law. We understand that an appointment announcement is imminent there, which would leave three seats still vacant. Two of the vacant seats are environmental appointments made from a list of six candidates nominated by a select group of environmental organizations. The list has been percolating through the responsible NGOs for more than a year. We are hopeful that the Administration is reviewing those nominations, as well any nominee(s) for the final vacancy.

MCV would like to see these last three seats have representation from Central Massachusetts west. A full Stewardship Council will put the council in compliance with state law and pave the way for it to fulfill its function as a DCR partner.

Chuck Anastas is chairman of the MCV Board of Directors. Doug Pizzi is Executive Director.