CIVILIAN CLOSURES

[Lenny Siegel <lsiegel@igc.org>]

From: Lenny Siegel <lsiegel@igc.org>

CIVILIAN BASE CLOSURE
With four rounds of Base Realignment and Closure either consummated or 
underway, the federal government now has a great deal of experience 
facilitating the transfer of former military base property. Special 
laws have been passed to compensate host communities hurt by Defense 
downsizing and, by both intent and coincidence, to make it easier for 
the military to cut back its operations.
Civilian federal agencies, however, are stuck with the old Surplus 
Property Disposal Act, which provides no incentive for shedding federal 
property. Any revenues generated by the sale of surplus property go 
directly to the federal treasury. Leasing to private parties is usually 
impossible or impractical. Meanwhile, agencies must fund cleanup and 
compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act out of their 
operating budgets.
So, despite the fact that facility closure would often bring 
substantial long-term savings on operations and maintenance, federal 
property managers are reluctant to bear the up front costs.
Learning from the base closure experience, some federal agencies are 
reportedly developing proposals for legislation that would allow them 
to keep a portion - such as half - of their property sales revenue. 
While this would reduce the deficit-reducing impact of sales which 
would happen without the change in law, it would certainly increase 
income - in federal terms, the sale of property is income - by 
encouraging more property transfers. Since such an approach means 
reducing the physical size of government and returning more property to 
the private tax rolls, it should appeal to conservative Republicans as 
well as Democrats.
I haven't seen any draft bills, but I believe that there are more 
detailed lessons from base closure. Leasing should be encouraged as a 
short and medium-term form of transfer. Opportunities for local public 
involvement should be mandatory. And agencies should somehow be able to 
"borrow" - through revolving funds, escrow accounts, etc. - against 
future sales revenue so they can carry out activities, such as cleanup 
and infrastructure repair, to make cleanup possible.
No seriously legislative proposal is expected, however, until next year 
at the earliest.
Lenny Siegel