At least one of the "funds" that was mentioned in the initial Bee article can only be used for land purchases and capital improvements -- not operations. But there's still no excuse for locking up that money all those years when the parks desperately need so many fixes. Most of the state park projects that could have been funded aren't very big and wouldn't take long to develop. Some might even reduce operating cost. And if the funds just sit there, every year they're worth a little less due to inflation.

The state agency I work for (not Parks!) retrieves whatever money isn't obligated to its identified project/contract or well along in the process in the first 1/2 year of allocation and moves it someplace else where it can be used right away -- and then whatever isn't spent of that obligation in the next 2 years reverts back to the Fund of origin (extensions are very hard to get) so the work better move right along. Project managers are rated among other things on how fast and effectively they get delivery - blow it too often or too obviously and your career potential is limited (so sorry no 100K+ club for you). Money's hard to get, so we want to get something for it not leave it sitting around gathering dust (not interest).