I will be quoting from So. Cal's "Western Outdoor News". "Los Angeles County Parks loses nearly $2.8 million a year operating the lake ... Those of us on the outside looking in are in a state of disbelief that the county loses money on this facility... This lake, according to the county's figures, attracts over 800,000 visitors each year, and collects money from over 160,000 vehicles and 52,000 boats that use the lake. How can it lose money? We'll tell you how. There are 50 full-time county employees ... We've asked people in private enterprise who are familiar with the facilities at Castaic if they would need 50 people to staff and run that facility and they laugh out loud. Staffing is bloated beyond belief. The facility could be managed - and well managed - with half that number ... the county spends just a snick under $2 million a year on lifeguards alone... Easy solution: Fire the lifeguards, put up signs that either say "no swimming" or "swim at your own risk." ... Next you fire the 3 or 4 management people at county parks who are in charge of this facility ... and hire someone who will turn the facility into a cash cow ... something that could be done without even raising the basic fees charged to users." Now here is my input: Keep the lower lake's west shore open to swimmers with signs that say "swim at your own risk". No lifeguards. The upper lake open only to watercraft & shore-fishing. No lifeguards. Hire security patrol-men with boats to help maintain safety & security. I agree completely on the hiring of a management who can create more special events to bring in more money to the facility & community of Castaic. There are many types of events that can be done there without the outgoing cost of county funds, but rather the incoming funds of sponsors or commercial use. :7

You're quoting a WON Editorial; not a factual or responsible representation IMO

I'm sure that saner minds will do something besides fire everybody in sight.

There recently have been fences going up around the "free area" of the Lower Lake. It's about time IMO. We boaters have been paying since 1971. the swimmers at the lower lake (responsible for the
infamous 'castaic itch') have been polluting the water for free for decades. The free-picnicers have been playing on green grass paid for by the boaters. Start charging them for what they have been, and continue to be, abusing.

One-for-all and all-for-one? If one user has to pay; all users need to pay. nobody needs to get fired.

Maybe WON should look into the injury lawsuits filed against the lake for injuries caused directly by the owners/operators of the boats that they were riding in instead of just a knee-jerk "fire the employees".

Heard through the firsthand 'grapevine': There's a lot of people keeping their respective mouths shut over these serious accidents and resulting lawsuits; none of which were the responsibility of anyone else besides those who owned and operated the boats in question.

WON: your call for firings is irresponsible, at best.

First off, yes a WON editorial. 2nd, you think these OPINIONS are somewhat insane, then you have a strange & awkward preception of sanity. 3rd, I do agree that everyone using this facility should pay alike. You don't sound like you support the idea of having swimmers. You bring up a safety & security issue regarding injuries caused by boaters. That highlights the need for security patrols then the need for lifeguards. The security should have training in CPR & other life-saving knowledge. Security patrols should replace the lifeguards. Now, if the editorial is correct about the estimated 2.8 million loss per year. Then, it would not take a genius to figure out there needs to be some cut backs somewhere & possibly some increases on fees. Yes, this may include some layoffs! Now, what I don't get is: if a management in charge of managing a lake is losing over a million dollars a year in operation - don't fire them? That management must be RESPONSIBLE, anyways? I guess we should hope the management will figure it out by maybe just raising the fees like more per boat and per car? What they heck, better yet charge each person in the vehicle an enterance fee? That must be the RESPONSIBLE way to go, just keep raising fees til we all get fed up with paying higher prices & stop going there. That must sound SANE & RESPONSIBLE to you, wils. Right?

Gotcha all riled up, eh? GOOD!
Now, whatchagonnado? Stay home on election day?

I hope you have a sane mind and get out and vote.

As far as lay-offs go. No-doubt that some will take place. But 50% or more? Stop and figure out how many people are needed to run the upper AND lower lakes for 14 hours a day in the winter and 16+ hours a day in the summer. That's 2 shifts; 7 days a week; no overtime. You add up all of the people needed and I'll be back in a couple of days from vacation to compare notes.

2- 2 man patrol boats -upper lake 2 shifts
1- 1 man patrol boat -lower lake 2 shifts
2- ramp lifeguards -upper lake 2 shifts
1- ramp lifeguard -lower lake 2 shifts
1-2 ticket takers upper lake 2 shifts
1 ticket taker lower lake 2 shifts
swim beach? 4 lifeguards? 2 shifts
picnic area? gardners?
trash collectors - private contractor AFTER the trash is collected and put in the trash cans.
grounds maintenance - private contractor?
security patrol - private contractor/sheriff?
office staff
profit and overhead for whoever is in control (if it goes private)
insurance....

Of course If you eliminate some of the currently available activities, fewer employees would be needed. But thats not quite comparing what is happening right now. Right now 50 people is a real number for what is currently available to the genereal public. Cut back the services and you can cut back employees. And THAT'S where WON is headed in their editorial - cutting back currently available activites at a public recreational area. Leaving it a fishing only lake. THere's a lot of recreational boating taxpayers gonna get upset about THAT.

I agree with you. paying to go to a park that we have already paid for through our taxes is frustrating. But it is a reality nonetheless.

Add in the part about the water being moved to and from pyramid that is generating electricity which is being sold to consumers. Why isn't some of the profits from that going back to keep the lake open?

THe politicians are good at getting we citizens angry with each other over what THEY are doing. LEt's keep our focus in that we all want to continue to enjoy our public facilities.

Well, WON's figure was 50%+ for layoffs. I don't agree with that much. Although, the swim beach should be either eliminated or swim at your own risk. Lower lake would not need a lifeguard if that was the case. Security patrols should be enforced at the lower lake.

I am just tired of government officials (AKA - bureaucrats) mismanaging OUR MONEY (taxes). In my opinion they over hire staff to help offset the work load on themselves. I believe private industry works about twice as hard and so should they. x( x( Oh yeah, I do vote & not for PORK BELLY spenders.

It sounds like we agree. We just have two ways of expressing ourselves. :)

May I ask who is your choice for Governor during this recall? It seems we have gone a little political, now. "Shut mouths and idle hands create no difference in this world". :) :7

Small government sounds good to me. so, I guess, its gary coleman for me. :7

Very funny! :7 I'll go for the porn-star. :9