While I agree that some of the more civilized amenities you mention seem absurd for wilderness parks, I think it's good that California maintains a variety of parks with a variety of experiences from wilderness to civilized heritage.

If you think that $540M is a lot to run a 278 park system that serves a population as large as California's, you must need a mathematics refresher. If that was all spent on salaries plus a competitive benefits package, that would pay for 23 median-income workers per park. (It's pretty hard to attract quality talent on median income.) But wait, there are vehicle costs, road and building maintenance costs, campground amenities (like TP), and that's assuming no major problems like fires, floods, or a take-over for cannabis cultivation. So that brings us down to 2 or 3 employees on staff at any given hour of a full week's schedule. And we're still not counting higher-level administration and support. So do you still think $18 per vehicle is a lot of money to support the parks?

Are you happy the parks are closing?

Nope. Not happy, but this is a political ploy by Moonbeam, much the same as the one by Steroid Arnie.

Indeed, a tax increase during these times is a fabulous idea.

How about: allow property tax increases on commercial property...