$100,000 an acre for a golf course. Basically, they gave that land away, an $18 million piece of property, when there was another piece of suitable property the Government owned that could have been used for a golf course too, appraised at in the vicinity of $5,000 an acre. In terms of processes and advantage, the Federal Government ought to be taking a better look at what we give away and what we sell. There should be some logic in the process. Mr. TINDALL. We could not agree more. The point I made about staff of the U.S. Department of the Interior, which makes the initial reviews and does the auditing or followup on properties previously transferred, is important here also. The agency has at best one person nationally and part time three or four people at the regional levels and we are talking about region-based decisions in many instances. Under these conditions there is no way we are going to be able to take the rational approach you suggest. Concerning the use of commonsense on land use, my organization and I would agree, wholeheartedly. Local park and recreation systems and others have not made the best location decisions every time. We would agree with you, if that is your point. Mr. WALKER. Thank you very much. Mr. BURTON. Thank you very much for your testimony. You said that you had other information you are going to make available to us? Mr. TINDALL. I have copies of the National Audubon Society and Sierra Club statements. There are two other organizations that indicated a desire to submit statements. We will be submitting a list of examples, if you will, to show different kinds of economic manifestations of public park and recreation systems. We hope to have that with you within the week. Mr. BURTON. That is fine, because we will within 2 weeks or so have OMB before us, and I would like to have that information or whatever, at that time and the record of the committee will remain open for 5 days beyond the next hearing. Mr. TINDALL. There is a table which shows, on an annualized basis since 1965, the total revenues that have accrued to the land and water conservation fund from surplus sales. I will submit that for the record. Mr. BURTON. Without objection, all of those materials will be in the record. Thank you, sir. [The information follows:] EXAMPLES OF PARK AND RECREATION USE SURPLUS REAL FEDERAL PROPERTY PROGRAM CALIFORNIA Marin County received the U.S. Naval NET Depot which has become one of the most heavily used picnic and fishing parks in the area: 44,000 visitors last year. Surrounding towns have experienced significant business increases, especially in food services due to the influx of park visitors. The Marin County government will spend $89,843 this year maintaining and operating this 5.5 acre park. The City of San Rafael recently acquired approximately 3 acres of surplus Federal land used perviously as a Nike site. Bordering either side of the site is China Camp Park which is state run, and on the other side, 500 acres of open public land. The Nike site is located in hilly terrain and trails are being constructed through the state park, leading up to the acquired site. Picnic and rest areas are being provided; equestrian facilities are planned. The total public acreage will be approximately 2,100 acres with the City of San Rafael working directly with the State of California on this project. The local government has spent $70,000 cleaning and patroling this area. Visitation at the park is expected to rise considerably with the completion of this site. The City of Sausalito has acquired surplus Federal land previously used as the San Francisco Engineer Docks/Yard. There have been high costs accrued in cleaning the area; tennis court construction and landscaping have been completed at local government cost of $100,000. Phase II of this park will include handball courts, totlot, picnic areas and restrooms. The local government will spend an additional $100,000 before completion. Approximately 2,000 people a year are now using the tennis courts and high park usage is expected. This will be the only multi-use park in Sausalito. FLORIDA The City of Miami Beach received some 16 acres of surplus Federal land located adjacent to "Government Cut", the water passage used by cruise ships. Now a park, this area is the focal point for a major 220 acre urban redevelopment project. An expected $1.3 billion will be spent privately on redevelopment including, 9 hotels, 5,000 private residences, an indoor amusement center and 14 million square feet of commercial space. Local government will spend $5 million for development of the park. Facilities will include a band shell, boardwalk, restaurant, playground, jogging trail, tennis, beach, and underground parking. Before the Federal government took possession of this property it had been public land. NEW MEXICO The County of Los Alamos recently had 1,121 acres of surplus Federal land turned back to them. Most of the county had previously been used by the Atomic Energy Commission. This land is undevelopable, consisting mainly of high, rocky cliffs bordering the Rio Grande River. Well marked extensive hiking trails and lookout points now exist on this open land. There are 18,000 residents, mostly government scientists, living in the county. The cliffs received some recreation visits. Residents successfully police this area themselves for litter and enjoy recreation benefits available by acquiring surplus Federal land which is totally wacceptable for other purposes. The County of Los Alamos also acquired 295 acres of surplus Federal land which now has a rodeo arena, fairgrounds, softball fields and 160-horse stables which are rented. The county expects to develop a 16-acre community park with tennis courts in the near future. All work has been completed by citizen volunteers. This area is listed by NPS as having "compliance problems", believed to result from a proposed paved parking lot with water availability that could not be completed. Water is now supplied at this site. ILLINOIS In Arlington Heights, a housing subdivision was built surrounding 3 Federally owned Nike sites which a building contractor told perspective buyers would be a public golf course. No such agreement had been made. The citizens became very active in the "cause" of acquiring the Nike sites for a golf course. They acquired the 88 acres of land in 1977 and have since built a golf course and club house; 45,000 citizens a year use the golf course; banquets are constantly booked at the club house. The local government spent an initial $600,000 clearing the area and passed a referendum of $1.2 million to complete the project. The project now appears to be self-sustaining. PENNSYLVANIA The State of Pennsylvania has provided funding and scheduled development of a marina on part of the former Frankford Arsenal in Philadelphia. When completed it will be one of the largest marinas on the Delaware River. In addition to providing needed recreation opportunities for urban Philadelphia, this public benefit conveyance is expected to significantly enhance the marketability of the remaining federal acreage in the Frankford Arsenal complex. principles. In many instances the framework already exists within the states and localities for a systematic approach to intergovernmental real property management strategies. Existing land use planning tools, such as the Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan required by the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act, and similar state and local plans must play an integral part under the present federal property disposal program and any modifications which the Congress or Administration might make. We urge this Subcommittee and the President's Property Review Board to fully consider the potential impact of an accelerated surplus federal real property disposal program on local zoning and statewide comprehensive planning efforts. We agree with the observations of many other individuals and organizations that the current surplus property disposal system apparently places too much discretion in the hands of the General Services Administration, with the apparent result of delaying actual transfers. One result has been fewer surplus parcels made available for alternative public uses, including public recreation and parks. In addition, these conveyances appear to take a much longer period of time than might be reasonable, at a greater cost to the parties involved. Streamlining the rather arduous and sometimes arbitrary GSA disposal process should reduce federal costs for maintaining idle parcels and reduce the uncertainty which often surrounds the fate of property administered by GSA. Having expressed our general support for better management of federal real property assets and more efficient processes to dispose of surplus property, where appropriate, we caution against an overly simplistic assets/liability balance sheet approach to the proposed disposal program. The remainder of our statement will call to the Subcommittee's attention certain other conditions which should be addressed in a federal real property transfer program. A Full Accounting of Long-Term Public Costs and Benefits Apparently, one objective of H. Res. 265, pending before this Subcommittee, and S. Res. 231 in the Senate, is to accelerate the movement of federal real property from the public to the private sector. The language of these resolutions and testimony by the Administration presumes that the accelerated sale of federal real property to the private sector creates increased revenues for the national treasury. In this context, fundamental differences between the private sector and the federal government must not be ignored, especially as these public-private ventures may ultimately result in significantly different [Mr. Tindall's prepared statement follows:] STATEMENT OF NATIONAL RECREATION AND PARK ASSOCIATION BEFORE SUBCOMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT ACTIVITIES AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, I am Barry S. Tindall, director of Public Affairs for the National Recreation and Park Association. We appreciate the opportunity to express our views on various proposals to accelerate the disposal of federal real property for revenue development purposes. We are especially concerned with the probable impact of such proposals on the availability and management of surplus federal real property for public uses such as public parks and recreation. Our testimony focuses principally on federal real property disposal programs administered by the General Services Administration pursuant to Section 203(k) (2) of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act as 1949 as amended (40 USC 484 (k) (2)), rather than lands and land transfer programs administered by the Bureau of Land Management under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act and other statutes, and other Federal land managing agencies under a wide range of natural resource statutes and regulations. However, I am accompanied today by representatives of organizations which have a major interest in real property transfers as they may impact on Federal natural resources management systems. They will repond to any questions the Subcommittee may have on land management systems. The National Recreation and Park Association is a national not-for-profit organization engaged in a wide range of research, education, policy and program assessments in the area of parks and recreation. Our members perform an array of civic, professional and technical functions to meet America's diverse recreation demands. For the most part, our members are associated with public recreation and park systems. The Association welcomes and supports a continuing inventory of federal real property which determines the incidence of surplus federal real property and its fair market value and fully evaluates potential public and private use in a systematic fashion. This identification and transfer/sale process must be orderly, objective and based on sound planning and marketing |