Paying for Hillside

[gopherhockey]

Whats your opinion?

[Rocky Mountain]

This is a public trail so it should have public input into its future and not a select few making decisions. How about some type of democracy being implemented? This is going to be a hot topic this summer so get ready.

:cryin:

[KleinCrazy]

I believe that a donation box at the trail head would collect alot more money than a user fee will. especially when it is a discrimitaory fee on out-of-town riders.

If they want to keep the trail to themselves this is surely one way to do it.

[gopherhockey]

I apologize that my posts seem to be almost every other one. I'm trying to keep my opinions to myself sometimes.. but I'm also trying to help spark discussion. Anyway...

I have thought a lot about this today and STILL don't know where I stand on this topic. I have a few random thoughts, not all supporting eachother, and some not completely thought out.. ALL food for discussion and thought:

I never mind donating toward other people's efforts if they are, in turn, willing to donate towards others. Maybe Lebanon doesn't (currently) charge, but if people from Elk River are riding there maybe they should be sending donations to MORC.

On the opposite side, maybe everyone who puts in any substantial amount of trail volunteer work shouldn't have to pay at any regional trail.

I don't like having to worry that I brought enough cash or cash of the proper kind to a trail. (I don't like having much cash with me at all, for that matter...) I only ride up there maybe 2x a year, so a season pass is not the answer.

If I donate, ride, then my car is broken into (now that people know I have to bring cash to the trail) - do I now get to go after Elk River and/or BLAST for my damages? What kind of disclaimer is necessary to specifically state what I'm paying for and what I am not paying for...

If I forgot my $, will my car be towed? Does a ticket mean something is on my record somewhere? What will the fine be? Maybe if they just bill me the amount of the trail fee that woudn't be so bad and I'd pay willingly.

Perhaps there will be more car-pooling... 5 riders per car, $1 each to ride..

Who is administering those parking down the road and riding into the trail. Who is giving people their fines back that are parked there to walk but not ride.. etc. There has to be a method of dispute - one might think the effort necessary for this would outweigh the few hundred $ they may make.

Why do (many) people hardly blink an eye when spending thousands of $ on a bike, yet are the first to be totally offended by the thought of donating time or money.

Perhaps their method is all wrong. We are all willing to donate, just not like that.

How much time is taken away from trail building that has to be put into administering trail fees.

Elk River is a "ride it in" type of trail building philosophy... with less riders, won't it be more difficult to complete new trail?

If people are paying up at Elk River, perhaps they will be less likely to volunteer at other local trails. "I gave my $, now I'm exempt from any further donations.."

Maybe this will take away from club memberships. MORC relies on donations to the club, then turns around and funds great trail projects. If riders had to pay at the trail, perhaps there would be less memberships?

This could be the wave of the future due to park systems budget cuts. This might actually be a necessary evil to keep certain trails open. I'd rather pay than see a trial close... heck, I'd donate to a trail down in Florida that I've never ridden if it helped us all not lose another trail.

How much of the fees are going to the BLAST people working out at the trail? Is this really a city funding method, or a way to fund the trail workers.

Will they give free passes to those donating X amount of volunteer hours?

When I'm working at my local trail and talk to a rider that has never donated time or doesn't have a membership with a group like MORC, but seems to be out there every other day... I wonder if there isn't some way to get them to pony up a little for the effort that so many others put in.

What about people going to the trail that have NO IDEA there is a fee. If there is a fee, it better be blanketed all over every single web site and information book (new and old) warning people ahead of time... or, maybe they should spend the next year advertising fees for 2004 so word gets around. (isn't it a little late now?)

I could go on.. I won't. I hope this just sparks even more discussion. Much of this is playing devils advocate.. and not.. :kiss:

[TrailPatrol]

As a former Park Ranger, I may have a little more insight into the concept of user fees than the average bear. I don't think I can honestly fault Elk River for instituting a "user" or parking fee for Hillside.

If you look at the park systems throughout the metro area, you will find a mix of user/parking fees are the norm, rather than the exception. Minneapolis has "honor boxes" in many of it's parking lots, and Lake Calhoun has an electronic pay system. In Anoka County Parks, Bunker, Coon Rapids Dam, Coon Lake, Rum River Central, Rice Creek-Chain of Lakes and Lake George all have gates and fees, as do the parks in Washington County. Of course you have to either buy a sticker or pay a daily fee in all Three Rivers (Hennepin) Parks, too. Then there are the state parks, which all charge to get in the gate in a motor vehicle. Several years ago the Chequamegon National Forest instituted a "recreation" fee, again either daily or with an annual sticker.

Basically, all of these are "parking" fees. You pay for the privilege of parking on park/forest property. If you ride your bike onto the park, you don't have to pay to park, plain and simple. (If you have any doubts about what I am saying, take a drive down Mississippi River Blvd. in Coon Rapids on a Saturday evening, just north of the CR Dam entrance on Egret, and see the long line of cars that belong to people using the park, but not willing to pay the fee.) So if Elk River wants to collect a parking fee to offset their park maintenance costs, not only do they have the right to do so, but the precident in very well established.

What I do question, however is the amount charged for an annual pass. Chequamegon charges $10.00 for a sticker that gives you parking for over 1,000,000 acres of forest land. A state park pass is $24.00, and you get into the entire Minnesota state park system, and a couple of border parks in Wisconsin with it. I think Anoka, Washington and Carver counties all sell their passes for around $20.00 a year, and 3 Rivers Park Patron card/stickers are $25.00, allowing access to the 20-plus parks in the 3RPD system. Given those stats, $40.00 to ride your bike in one park seems quite out of line. It does, however, show the power that one person can have in the advocacy "game."

I am very willing to bet one of two things is going to happen at Hillside; Either use is going to drop dramatically, or people will start parking at Menards, Wal-Mart, wherever, and ride their bikes to the park.

Ride safe,
Hans

[SickBoy]

See my post in the other thread. The way they are structuring this is ridiculous.

Maybe an option should be added to the poll - "I'll occasionally donate but I don't want to pay every time" That would be what I would have voted for.

[BrightYellow]

I don't mind the idea of a "pay to play" system, if I know that the money is going towards keeping the trails open and maintained. I have no problem paying the couple of dollars down at Murphy to ride it, or even giving up $20 for a season pass. I know the money is going to Three Rivers, a non profit org., and they support multiple parks and I want to keep those parks open. That's the same reason I give money to MORC, because I know it is going directly towards the cause.

I like Elk, a lot, but $40/year is pretty steep. I'd like to know where that money is going. I'd like to see a plan on how the money is going to be used. I kind of agree with what John said, that if I HAVE to pay then I'll probably be less likely to help. After I pay to get in, I don't help Valley Fair maintain their rides.

[smeulebroe]

I would not drop 40 bucks to ride Hillside. I enjoy riding there but not that much. I would agree with everything that has been said. I already have a state park sticker and a three rivers sticker on my truck. These stickers give me year round use. The cost is alot less than 40. I also donate time and money to IMBA and MORC. Why should I pay a season fee for each trail I ride?

[Don Youngdahl]

This is the age of "user pays", and sometimes 2 or 3 times, like a tax-supported regional park that has an entry fee, and requires the X-C ski pass to use the trails. It seems reasonable to me for Elk River to charge a fee to ride at Hillside.

If the fee is too high, as the $40 annual fee is, that will bring out the worst in riders, who will circumvent the fee by parking elswhere and riding into the park. That strategy makes one feel good in the short run by beating the system, but in the long run, it could result in closure of a valuable riding area.

It is not surprising and there is a certain logic to the practice of charging out-of-town riders while not charging the locals. There is more than one city park in the metro area that is unfriendly to the idea of creating facilities that will be a metro-wide attraction, while the park is operated and maintained on their city budget.

Elk River was progressive enough to allow creation of trails at Hillside, so I think that some income to defray park operating and enforcement costs is justified.

Having said all that, I believe that a well thought out volunteer payment system would yield a higher net income to Elk River than the planned mandatory system.


Don Youngdahl

[SickBoy]

A trail user is a trail user regardless of where the trail user is from. My bike tires don't cause any less damage than someone from Elk River. The "Out of state" user fee may be justified in hunting (where there is a more quantifiable effect on natural resources) but IMHO it is not justified for use of a trail. What if, all of a sudden, everyone in Elk River took up mountain biking and people from other areas stopped coming? They'd be defeated by their own system. Pretty big hypothetical but it makes a point nonetheless. And for that matter, how will they event be able to tell what car is from what city when they come and check cars? Since presumably the owners will be out on the trail....????

I'm a Hennepin county resident... do I get a discount on a Three Rivers Parks pass? Last I checked, no. I will happily pay a user fee when it's comparable/competitive with similar offerings and I know what the use of the money is, but this is not one of those situations.

I say we let Elk River figure out the hard way on this one. I'm certainly not going to call them and complain. I know it's an immature attitude but I'll just park up the road and ride in. I have given my money to other memberships before and I'll do it again when I see fit. (AKA when I am not being discriminated against because I live in Minneapolis)

[TrailPatrol]

One of the points that I think is being missed here, and I touched on it in my previous post, is where this fee came from. I truly doubt that the Elk River Parks Board or City Council came up with this goodie by themselves. Somebody had to instigate it. Face it, $40.00 is more than the annual dues for MORC and IMBA. Basically, it smacks of making Hillside a private mountain biking club. Pay the "membership fee" or help out on the trail work, and you're in "the club."

Personally, I am not interested.

Hans

[Paul Bunyan]

The land belongs to the city of Elk River. It is the city of ER (taxpayers of ER) that completed the improvements to the parking lot and will foot the bill for other improvements such as water. I dare say that 95% or more of the taxpayers of ER will never use Hillside, even though they are paying for it. This to me is heinous. The representatives of the taxpayers of ER have every right to charge a fee to non-ER residents to ease the tax burden on their constituents. It is the users that should pay for a service.

Rocky Mountain,
It is a public trail that has been paid for solely by the taxpayers of ER, not by us. It is the representatives of the taxpayers of ER that should have the decision.

Bright Yellow,
Unfortunately, the way things are set up, there is no accounting or dedication of funds in most current Government schemes. The money will go to a general fund and Hillside may still close at any time or fail to get any of the money.

smeulebroe,
You should have to pay for each trail becaues each trail has a different owner.

Don Youngdahl,
You are correct. It sucks to have to pay several times for the same service. Yet we continue to elect Democrats and Republicans that perpetuate this idiotic system where I pay for your stuff, you pay for Bright Yellow's stuff and Bright Yellow pays for my stuff. In the process 1/4 to 1/2 the money goes to the actual service while 1/2 to 3/4 of the money pays a bureaucrat to transfer the funds.

SickBoy,
It's not about trail damage, but about who pays. The out-of-state hunting licence is intended to gain revenue, not preserve resources.

Hans,
ER has been considering these outsider fees for awhile for other parks as well. I heard last year that they were contemplating this for their ski trails.

Folks, Hillside is a great place to bike. We outsiders have been riding free and feel as if something is being taken away; which is why we are all upset. Instead of getting pi$$ed off that we have to pay to ride at Hillside, we should be getting angry that we have to foot the bill for for things that we don't use or benefit from (corporate and social welfare, stadiums, highway helper, public golf courses, debate on the state hotdish, aid to nations that build tools to attack us). Imagine how well off we would be if we were not footing the bill for every government program cooked up to benefit some special interest. We, then, would be able to better look out for our own interset. We could probably send a thousand dollars to Hillside (or MORC or Blast) and still have money left over.

[KleinCrazy]

Rocky Mountain,
It is a public trail that has been paid for solely by the taxpayers of ER, not by us. It is the representatives of the taxpayers of ER that should have the decision.

They might have paid for the Parking lot and water but the trail itself used no ER money AFAIK it was built by volunteer labor from BLAST, and I believe that a portion of race revenue also goes back to the park as a fee.


smeulebroe,
You should have to pay for each trail becaues each trail has a different owner.

Incorrect, if the trail is not on private land the trail has MANY MANY owners who had to give approval for any development made on the land and any fee's / improvements that were to be made. This is the backbone of a PUBLIC PARK, if descimitory fee's are charged, I have issues with it. Tell me of any other PUBLIC PARk (federal, state, county, local) which you know of that does not charge the same for everybody to use. I can not think of one.

If the fee was a general fee for all users I would have no problem with it. but making it only apply to out of city riders is what I have a problem with.

Folks, Hillside is a great place to bike. We outsiders have been riding free and feel as if something is being taken away; which is why we are all upset.

I have not been riding free, I contributed trail building time, fee's from the races I participated in, etc.

[Paul Bunyan]

KleinCrazy,

I have not been riding free, I contributed trail building time, fee's from the races I participated in, etc.

I, as well as many others, have been riding free. First of all I would like to thank you for your volunteer efforts at Hillside. It is by far the best MTB course that I have used in the cities. It is my understanding from previous posts that trail volunteers will park for free. This is only fair. I would like to volunteer, but I live three hours away and visit the cities infrequently, According to what I have read, folks like me (non-resident, non-volunteer) will be the ones paying to park..

They might have paid for the Parking lot and water but the trail itself used no ER money AFAIK it was built by volunteer labor from BLAST, and I believe that a portion of race revenue also goes back to the park as a fee.

The trail in and of itself is an intangible and therefore has no owner. The land, however, is tangible and owned by the city of Elk River; it's aquisition and current use is at the expense of the taxpayers of ER. If some numb nuts without a helmet wraps himself around a tree and sues, the liability is on the taxpayers of ER, not MORC, BLAST, Hennepin county, the State of Minnesota or the Federal Government.

The fact is that the city allowed volunteers to build a mountain bike trail on their land and we should be thankful for that. ER could just as easily allowed motorcyclists, or ATV riders do the same. Or the city could have sold the land to a major mass retailer for an astromomical sum of money and continued to collect huge amounts of money on the land via property taxes.

Incorrect, if the trail is not on private land the trail has MANY MANY owners who had to give approval for any development made on the land and any fee's / improvements that were to be made.

You are right, I should have made the term owner plural. The owners of Hillside park are the residents and taxpayers of Elk River. You are also right that the owners have to give approval for development, improvement and fees. This seems to be what they are doing charging those of us that are not residents.

This is the backbone of a PUBLIC PARK, if descimitory fee's are charged, I have issues with it. Tell me of any other PUBLIC PARk (federal, state, county, local) which you know of that does not charge the same for everybody to use. I can not think of one.

Use of the land in a public park is in of itself discriminatory. Public land use at Hillside discriminates against motorcyclists, golfers, loggers and pogo stick makers. These individuals could also benefit from the land. As you mentioned, it is the many owners, represented in this case by the city council and mayor, that decide (discriminate) which use of the land is valid. Also, as you have mentioned, it is the owners that decide on fee?s and fee structure and they have decided that they will not charge their residents.

[Vertigomotion]

Originally posted by KleinCrazy
Tell me of any other PUBLIC PARk (federal, state, county, local) which you know of that does not charge the same for everybody to use. I can not think of one.


Wisconsin State Parks charge fees for Mountain Bikers to use their trails, but hikers are free. I'm sure there are other examples of fee discrimination.

[soupboy]

...to me. Personally, I have more money than I have free time. I know I sound like a sh%t for that but it's true. Time is a precious commodity and I'm more than happy to invest in supporting MTB trails. I wish I had time for trail work, but I don't. I digress.

$40 is simply ridiculous. That is, unless, they are going to also build a jump park and BMX track. Add to that some form of rudimentary showers and complimentary cold beer and I'm ready to chip in.

I like Hillside, but it's not worth $40. The MN and Western WI-based trail support and advocacy groups (MORC, Blast, COGGS, WAMB, etc.) should band together and sell passes that cover all trails they support so that someone from ER, Eagan or Duluth can ride anywhere they want without being discriminated against.

There is more leverage in a united front than creating several different fiefdoms. Carving out little enclaves is purely divisive and will only lead to people trying to "beat The Man" by accessing Hillside by alternate means that the existing parking lot. This, in and of itself, would be fun for a while but would no doubt lead to more restrictive actions IMHO.

Sean

[gopherhockey]

Originally posted by soupboy187
...
I like Hillside, but it's not worth $40. The MN and Western WI-based trail support and advocacy groups (MORC, Blast, COGGS, WAMB, etc.) should band together and sell passes that cover all trails they support so that someone from ER, Eagan or Duluth can ride anywhere they want without being discriminated against.



That is an interesting concept - a wide-area pass that covers all trails. It would be difficult to pull off I'm sure, but that doesn't make it a bad idea at all.

It would be cool if something like that became more of a badge of rider support rather than an administrative nightmare. How cool would it be to ride through parking lots like Lebanon or Hillside and see each and ever car sporting some kind of area park support sticker/tag etc.

Interesting..


(then if anyone sees one car without a sticker, everyone bands together and tips it over... hehe, JUST KIDDING!) :laugh:

[SickBoy]

Originally posted by soupboy187

There is more leverage in a united front than creating several different fiefdoms. Carving out little enclaves is purely divisive and will only lead to people trying to "beat The Man" by accessing Hillside by alternate means that the existing parking lot. This, in and of itself, would be fun for a while but would no doubt lead to more restrictive actions IMHO.

I wholeheartedly agree. I am against one town taking actions into their own hands like this and not thinking on a grander scale. But, that's where the advocacy groups need to step in. It's unfortunate that the city of Elk River is going to have to learn about these kind of adversarial actions the hard way this summer.

I'm also extremely disappointed in the BLAST for being so narrow-sighted and assisting in the implementation of this worthless idea.

A state MTB trail pass is a great idea. The state (XC) Ski Pass system is also fairly successful from what I observe. How about this: The pass-counter that was set up at Lebanon measured trail use for X number of hours. If a statewide trail pass system was implemented and how the fees were divided was an issue, why not set up a similar system at each MTB trail at some point during the summer and then divide available funds based on the apparent usage level of each trail? The way I see this, each trail would then get cash to support trail work and maintenance (and shut up the city parks departments for trails on public land) and they would get a percentage of the cash appropriate to use with regards to other trail systems in the state.

That idea seems like it would be a winner to me.

[SuperClydesdale]

In what capacity are the folks at BLAST assisting in the creation and implementation of this user fee proposal?? Is this whole thing their idea?? The BLAST web site is of no help whatsoever.

Mark

:crazy:

[Gus]

I have to agree with mark it would depend on how much....I most definately do not mind paying to ride but there has to be some limit to how much people will pay...for instance I think I could find myself paying up to 5-7 dollars for a good trail but the only real way to find out if it is a good trail is if you have ridden it or pay once to find out maybe well find that people will really like it and wont mind paying a few dollars for a good ride :banana:

[simpkins]

howdy ye-all.
I am new to this forum and web site. However not new to the political BS of mtbing in MN. That is one of the main reasons I now reside in CO. I feel for U guys and gals out there who are being pushed into this pay to play formula that is becoming popular out there. It just blows my mind, cuz I still have quite a few friends out there who ride alot and I don't like to see them taken advantage of like this. Out here trails are free, they for the most part are either on national forest land, BLM land, or open space land purchased by individual counties with the use of moneys provided by from Lotto ( aka powr ball and colorado state lottery). It is a shame that the beaurocrats there in MN can't see to use some of the Lotto money there for such things. Also another thing that is free out here and they leach you for there are skateparks and bike dirt parks. It is truely a shame. I still like to come back there and ride the old haunts w/ my old pals, but what next a fee for Bloomington river bottoms? Once it starts it is very hard to stop. Lates, Simpy

[SickBoy]

Marty makes an excellent point. I don't mind paying to ride but a unified front would be nice. IF I have to pay, a single state trail pass makes the most sense and would be most likely to get my money. I would not at all mind paying anywhere from $20 to $40 per year for such a pass.

Obviously the worst case scenario is that every governing body controlling the land that any given trail is on takes their own approach to trail user fees and we all wind up buying trail passes to each different trail.

[smeulebroe]

I helped with trail work at Hillside today. As far as the fees associated with the trail, its sounds like a $20.00 fee for the season and a daily fee of $5.00 per vehicle no matter how many people (think clowns in a car :laugh: ) The city police will be patrolling the parking lot I guess looking to see if you have the season sticker in the window or the actual pass itself on you. I don't know how all of this will work out but thats my story and I'm stickin to it. It was a great day to be out and doing trail work! :D Oh ya and the trail is still closed until May 1st. Is the BLAST in contact with MORC as far as trail conditions?

[mtnbykr]

fyi

the city of duluth xc ski trails belong to the mn ski pass. this gets the city about $10,000 each year for grooming [paid per miles groomed]. the city spends around $150,000 for grooming/maintenance/etc. [this is in a "normal" snow year]. this year the city probably got $0 bcuz they didn't groom.

not that a state pass won't/couldn't work, just not the best way to raise $$ for a city's trail maintainence.

k

[SickBoy]

Judging by what was posted to the BLAST's web site I get the impression that this is a "This is what we're doing and if you don't like it you can shove it" impression.

That's the impression I get from the BLAST in general... their races used to be more racer oriented and now it's shifted to a "we're going to do our own thing, go take a long walk off a short bridge if you don't like it" thing.

Fine if their type of event suits you but their attitude in general rubs me wrong. Particularly with scheduling their events over top of other (ahem) bigger events. There are a lot of weekends during the summer when there is no offroad racing at all in MN. No need for flying in the face of more "conventional" racing organizations.

Granted, I am not completely knowledgable but from what I've observed, I have seen no collaboration with other organizations. When they start doing that, they'll get my money. Until then, MORC and IMBA keep my $$$.

[gopherhockey]

I have been asked by BLAST to close this discussion. Apparently word is getting around to the city of Elk River and they could potentially be in danger of losing the trail due to recent comments (most outside these forums).

So... I'm doing as they request and am closing this thread. I would like to say that pay or no pay, we cannot afford to lose any trails in Minnesota. I do not want to see the pay issue become a burdon for the land managers at Elk River causing them to resort to closing the trail entirely.

I'm glad everyone got a chance to discuss the pay situation. It is definitely a touchy one for any area. Lets let Elk River work with BLAST on this and see how things turn out. I have invited the guys from BLAST to post more information here about the trail and how the project is running.

I encourage everyone that discusses this topic via email or on the trails to do it in a way that does not damage the relationship with Elk River in such a way that might close the park. If you don't agree with the fee, maybe give BLAST some trail maintenance time, or at the very least support the local merchants of Elk River as you pass through town on your way to the trail.

This is the latest info on the fees themselves from BLAST:

"the fees for this year have now been officially set up at $25 for the season pass, $4 daily, free seasons pass for trail workers. There will be a paybox/envelope system for daily users. Seasons pass will be a card obtained from the Elk River Parks and Rec., to displayed in the window having one's vehicles license number. I think the box will be in place mid May. There will be a short time when riders will not have to pay from May 1-until it is officially installed."

I will close by saying that I hope the city of Elk River knows that even though bikers can get into discussions about things such as this, that at the end of the day we all value our trails and praise those that support their existence, and appreciate the efforts of those that maintain them.