Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Discount Pass Program topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
State Parks weighs discount-pass changes amid budget strain and program-integrity concerns
Summary
State Parks staff presented options to the commission for revising discount-pass programs, including a limited-income pass expansion, tightening income verification, charging reservation/change transaction fees for lifetime disabled-veteran pass holders, and modest fee increases for the senior off-season pass.
State Parks staff told the Parks and Recreation Commission they are weighing several changes to discount-pass programs to protect program integrity and, where feasible, generate additional revenue amid a difficult state budget climate.
Communications Director Claire DeLong and Visitor Services and discount-pass staff outlined current passes, their benefits and financial implications: lifetime disabled-veteran passes (free camping for veterans with a qualifying disability rating), disability passes (50% off camping), the foster-family pass (free camping for eligible caregivers), the senior limited-income pass (50% off camping for those 62 and older who meet an income threshold) and the senior off-season pass (free camping outside a defined season but subject to a $10-per-night utility fee; currently $75 per year). Staff said the aggregate value of these discounts is roughly 17% of Parks’ earned revenue—about $8 million per biennium.
On revenue-focused options, staff suggested (1) charging reservation and change transaction fees for lifetime disabled-veteran pass holders (not cancellation fees), an approach the presenters estimated could save about $400,000 annually but acknowledged would require statutory change and could be politically sensitive; and (2) increasing the senior off-season pass fee from $75 to $100 and redefining the off-season dates, which staff estimated could yield about $45,000 annually.
On program-integrity changes, staff proposed updates to Washington Administrative Code (WAC) language to consolidate program rules (some rules are scattered across multiple WACs and RCWs), accept additional residency documents to improve accessibility, and tighten income verification for the senior limited-income pass. Staff noted that using a Social Security Administration Form SSA-1099 alone can miss other income; they recommended asking applicants who submit a 1099 also to provide an IRS letter of nonfiling to confirm total income.
Staff reiterated interest in a limited-income pass (expanding the senior-limited-income approach to residents of any age who meet the income threshold) to reduce access barriers for youth and underrepresented communities. They provided a rough, preliminary estimate—based on SNAP recipiency and foster-pass uptake—that expanding to a limited-income pass could reduce camping revenue by about $3.5 million annually, a figure staff stressed is a rough estimate that does not include potential administrative, IT or staffing costs to implement eligibility verification and related data-sharing steps with social-services agencies.
Commissioners asked for additional data and clarification. Commissioner Latimer asked whether staff could provide data on no-shows and reservation turnover; staff said they would provide high-level numbers. Commissioners also asked which changes require statutory amendment versus WAC updates; staff said off-season fee changes are via WAC, while altering reservation-fee exemptions for disabled-veteran passes would require statute. Several commissioners expressed support for program-integrity steps and cautious interest in fee changes, and some urged ensuring disabled veterans continue to be supported while limiting misuse.
Staff said next steps include returning with refined cost and revenue data, legislative versus administrative pathways for proposed changes, and operational impacts, and that any formal policy changes would return to the commission for approval.
