Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the State Parks topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Panel advances bill to transfer Hugo Lake Park to state tourism agency amid questions about deferred maintenance and costs
Summary
Senate Bill 121 would transfer Hugo Lake Park to the Oklahoma Tourism and Recreation Department. Committee members discussed deferred maintenance, estimated repair costs and contractual liability; records provided to the committee shortly before debate stated costs of around $4.4 million for repairs and an annual operating estimate of $600,000.
Senate Bill 121, which would transfer Hugo Lake Park to the Oklahoma Tourism and Recreation Department, advanced in committee after the sponsor said the move would restore state control of a large park and support regional tourism.
Sponsor Senator Burns said the measure “transfers the Hugo Lake Park back to the Oklahoma Tourism and Recreation Department” and argued the park would relieve crowding at nearby Beavers Bend State Park and boost economic development in the area.
Department officials briefed the committee on deferred maintenance and operating costs. Director Sterling Zirley, Executive Director of the Oklahoma Tourism and Recreation Department, said the statewide deferred maintenance backlog for state parks is approximately $315,000,000. He cited varying repair estimates for Hugo Lake: road work performed by ODOT was given at about $6.5 million, other building repairs around $3.5 million, and he said a combined figure near $10 million had been discussed; later in the hearing a figure of $4,446,000 was reported to the sponsor as a targeted repair cost. The department estimated annual operating costs could be about $600,000.
Committee members also asked about contractual liabilities. The bill includes a provision that the department “shall succeed to any contractual rights and responsibilities of the previous operators.” The sponsor said the current operator was a nonprofit (Lyft Community Action Agency) leasing the facility from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; the sponsor asserted the existing contract has no money in it, and that the Corps has provided correspondence to the committee.
Action: the committee had a motion to “do pass” from the chair with a second, and the clerk called the roll; the transcript records the roll call but does not include a final tally and declaration of passage in the provided record. (Transcript excerpts provided to the committee during the hearing included the repair estimate of $4,446,000.)
Implications: if the transfer occurs, the department would assume operational responsibility for Hugo Lake and would be expected to address deferred maintenance needs; members expressed concern about taking on new park obligations while a $315 million backlog exists statewide.
