With temperatures hovering below the freezing mark, there’s not much going on at three popular South Whidbey public lakes these days.

But when spring arrives, Goss and Lone lakes in Langley and Deer Lake in Clinton will be hopping as locals emerge from their winter hibernation.

The question is, who will look after the lakes now that Island County’s budgetary woes are forcing severe cutbacks?

Why, South Whidbey Parks & Recreation, that’s who.

Last week, parks commissioners voted unanimously to accept maintenance responsibility from the county, covering the lake’s public- access sites for 2010.

Or maybe longer, depending on what happens on Feb. 9.

That day, voters will decide on whether to extend the parks district’s maintenance and operations levy for a period of four years. The proposed tax rate is a continuation of the district’s current levy of 15 cents per $1,000 of assessed property value.

Unlike previous levy proposals, the parks district is seeking a four-year levy, rather than one that runs for two years.

“If we’re going to take on a project of that nature, it makes sense to ask for a four versus two-year levy,” said Parks Commissioner Jim Porter. “The extra time provides taxpayers with a sense of stability that the rate won’t increase during that period.”

Accepting responsibility would also give the parks district the chance to bring the public areas up to parks standards, which are very high, said Porter. The three properties are owned by the Department of Natural Resources and have been leased to the county for the past 25 years.

“Our goal would be to continue providing safe access to the public, much like the port does with its boat ramps,” Porter said. “None of us want to see these fresh-water jewels shut down.”

Details of the plan remain sketchy — no agreement or contract has been drafted yet — but parks director Terri Arnold said beginning in January, the district would handle routine garbage collection, empty portable restrooms, continue landscaping work and other essential tasks.

Some things remain undecided, including whether parks hours will be changed, and which entity will be on the hook legally for mishaps at the lakes.

“Those questions will need to be hashed out as we come to an agreement with the county and state,” Arnold noted.

It’s also unknown exactly how much the takeover effort will cost the parks district. Even so, parks officials have a rough estimate of approximately $33,000 for the first year.

Arnold and maintenance supervisor Tom Fallon visited all three lakes to determine how much it would cost to maintain the properties.

“We recorded the physical assets, the level of service each needs and how many visits per week would be required,” Arnold said. “Our cost estimates are speculative at this point.”

Parks officials said there could be an initial one-time cost of $16,812, which would cover the cost of a truck, trailer, water tank (for cleaning restrooms), weed eater, blower and hand tools.

“We aren’t mobile now, so that’s what it would take to get us on the road,” Arnold said.

Labor, mileage and materials will bring the annual cost to the district for maintenance on all three parks to roughly $16,700.

Although neither the state nor the county is offering any financial aid to help the parks district maintain the lakes, the district can afford it. Balancing revenues against expenses — from the current levy, paid programs and concession income — the 2010 budget shows the district with a $158,864 surplus next year.

Facing severe budget shortfalls, the county asked the parks district last spring if it would be willing to assume maintenance-and-operations control of the three lakes.

County parks director Steve Marx said that he is unable to keep the lakes at their current level of upkeep because his department’s budget has been slashed.

“Our budget has been cut another 4 percent, to $196,000 for the entire county,” Marx said. “I have three full-time people to cover the county’s 34 parks, and the budget has been more than halved this year. I’m looking for volunteers, interested community groups or full partners to help out.”

Marx has recommended that the parks board wait to make a final determination on the length of its commitment until after the February election.

“Next year will be a test process for us, to see if the budget numbers match up with the work that needs to be done,” Porter said. “We’ve always been frugal with the public’s money, and this will be no different.”