10 



The bill includes a much needed directive to the Park Service re- 

 quiring that half of the fees generated in a park be reinvested back 

 into its operating budget of the park. The remaining half is di- 

 rected to reducing the $2 billion backlog of infrastructure repair in 

 the Park Service. The Park Service already is instituting these 

 practices, and my bill will enact them into law requiring no expen- 

 sive bureaucratic adjustment. 



This is one of the key recommendations that has been made 

 many times by various commissions on reforms for the Park Serv- 

 ice, including the Grace Commission. This provision is common 

 sense since many popular parks are being loved to death by the 

 public and are in desperate need of infrastructure repair and up- 

 keep. 



H.R. 773 also changes the policy which grants possessory interest 

 in structures built on park system land by concessioners. 

 Possessory interest which is only granted in Park Service conces- 

 sion contracts — no other Federal land agency uses this atypical 

 title arrangement for concession contracts — forces potential conces- 

 sioners or even the Federal Government to buy capital assets such 

 as a hotel at an inflated cost from a retiring concession business. 

 Why? 



Current law values these structures at their replacement cost 

 which increases over time giving a concessioner an increasing 

 asset. As you can guess, estimates of possessory interest are very 

 high because the structures are located in the park system with a 

 captive market. 



Under my bill, structures will be valued by the straightline de- 

 preciation method over a 30-year period which is the method used 

 in GAAP, General Accepted Accounting Principles, and in similar 

 real estate transactions. Should a concessioner decide not to renew 

 his contract, he will be fully reimbursed for his assets based on de- 

 preciation. This is the manner in which other concessions are con- 

 tracted by State parks in private land development agreements and 

 is fair to the taxpayer and to the concessioner. 



I would like to point out to my colleagues that some of the larger 

 Park Service concessioners operate successful concessions for State 

 parks, airports, and other public venues, winning these contracts 

 on a competitive basis and without the guaranteed lock on a per- 

 manent contract which they have with the National Park Service. 



Mr. Chairman, because of preferential right of renewal and 

 possessory interest, we do not have open bidding for the conces- 

 sions in the park system. Consequently, the Federal Government 

 receives less than three percent of gross receipts from concessioners 

 which are not even invested back into the parks. That is why the 

 Citizens Against Government Waste and the National Parks and 

 Conservation Association are endorsing my bill. 



I do want to make it clear that I am not questioning the good 

 service concessioners are giving to park visitors, but the policies in 

 the 1965 concessions law may have been necessary then to get peo- 

 ple into parks, but now they simply are not prudent. Our national 

 parks are visited by 275 million people annually, and these num- 

 bers are expected to increase to half a billion in five years. 



Mr. Chairman, I am aware that you have introduced a bill that 

 would set an across-the-board concessions policy for Federal agen- 



