Goodbye windshield stickers? Why Minnesota is looking to create a new kind of state park pass.

Managers of Minnesota’s state parks are working on a new entry permit option that could lower its cost, make the annual pass easier to get and draw more visits to the outdoors.

Legislation this session tasked the departments of Natural Resources and Public Safety with creating a plan for a pass that Minnesotans could buy when they register their vehicles or renew their tabs.

Part of the aim is to increase permit sales, bring in more money for park operations and promote more outdoor recreation.

Here is background on the concept and a timeline for when it could be implemented:

One potential model for Minnesota is Michigan, which allows residents to obtain a park permit through vehicle registration. Implemented in 2011, the program lets residents who opt-in when renewing their tabs pay $14 for a parks pass, a $5 savings from the regular price.

DNR northwest regional manager Ben Bergey, who has a background in other state parks systems and their funding strategies, is leading Minnesota’s park pass project. He said that one lesson from Michigan is not to expect immediate buy-in from residents. Michigan had about a 13% participation rate early on; now it is nearing 40%. Revenue more than tripled since the new pass began, to over $42 million by 2023.

In Minnesota, 6% to 8% of vehicles have an annual park pass, Bergey said.

Window stickers are the most common way Minnesotans pay for entry to state parks, but residents can also can buy a specialty license plate as an entry permit and renew it annually. The cost of the license plate includes a $60 contribution to aid state parks and trails.

“It takes time to build participation rates,” Bergey said, adding that marketing and clear messaging will be key to participation. “I would look at this as the long game. It is building success over time.”

A variety of funding streams — from special bonding bills to dedicated money to a small percentage of the state’s general fund — help the DNR operate.

Fees from park passes go directly to operating the state’s 73 parks and recreation areas, paying for staffing, maintenance, equipment and more. The DNR says those fees aren’t keeping up with costs.

The agency says there is a $50 million maintenance backlog alone, including parks facilities and heavily used sites like boat launches.

DNR Commissioner Sarah Strommen and Bergey said tying park passes to vehicle registration could benefit the state in several ways: more purchases, for one, but also motivating daily permit buyers to instead get annual passes, resulting in more revenue for the state and more visits to the outdoors.

“We need that increased revenue to keep pace [with parks costs],” Strommen said.

She said newly generated revenue would flow back to the parks but also to “other units of the outdoor recreation system.” State forests and their campgrounds, wildlife management areas used by hunters, birders, anglers and hikers, and scientific and natural areas all could benefit.

The last park permit price increase was in 2017.

The DNR floated requests to increase both the daily (from $7 to $10) and annual park permit (from $35 to $45) in the last two budget sessions, but legislators balked at those proposals.

The Parks & Trails Council of Minnesota, a nonprofit based in St. Paul, has a long history of supporting the parks. It has advocated for a new park pass model for at least a decade, said Executive Director Brett Feldman. He said a lower cost could have striking results, drawing more people onto Minnesota public lands. State parks annually get about 12 million visitors to camp or for a day trip.

“Surveys show that there is a point when people can’t afford [a park pass],” he added. “If you keep moving it up you are going to be pricing people out.”

Strommen said rejected fee increases by the Legislature were among the catalysts to come up with an alternative that would stick.

She said the DNR has already spent the past two years in workshops with a mix of stakeholders, including state government allies, tribal authorities, the cities of Duluth and New Ulm, conservation nonprofits and tourism groups. Their focus was partly the current fee structure; how to find new, stable funding; and where to direct it. Those discussions, she added, laid the groundwork for legislators this session to request a park pass proposal.

A draft of a plan is due next January to the Legislature. The new system could be in place in the latter half of 2027 if legislators approve, according to a DNR spokesperson.

Strommen said she doesn’t want Minnesotans to feel like a new park pass is something imposed on them. Like in Michigan, residents would control whether they opt in. But she is confident a new model will succeed, pointing to Minnesotans’ vote to extend the Clean Water, Land and Legacy Amendment, which uses lottery proceeds to aid conservation, as a good barometer.

The Parks & Trails Council’s Feldman said the plan is overdue. “We really believe in [a new park pass],” he added. “It is a great idea. It will increase access and make buying a pass easier.”