>>Development can be a good thing but it isn't always. Before people go nuts wanting to develop Federally owned land, they really need to think about what the ramifications could be, both on the local and national level.
<<
Government, being a political entity and not an economic one, is very good at purchasing parcels away from citizens with their own tax monies in order to give the appearance of being a "steward" of national assets. Yet we hardly ever hear of government disposing of these assets.
And that is exactly why I proposed an independent commission, much like the BRAC, to first of all inventory all federal land assets, secondly to categorize them, and thirdly to examine them in light of national priorities such as the ongoing budgetary impact of each parcel's operation and maintenance costs, the intangible (non-economic) values of each parcel, and asking for proposals for development of some parcels, even development of portions of the margin.
Of course, this will excite socialists and enviro-libs (a redundancy I know), but they love to trot out the theme of demanding the taxpayers "sacrifice" to fund the high spending. Yes, exactly, let us "sacrifice" by allowing US citizens and US companies to purchase US land back from the government, thus unfreezing these illiquid assets and bringing government revenues in balance with spending.
I recently was in Steamboat Springs, Colorado. Parcels of raw land up in the mountains were going for quite a pretty penny.
For example, this recent ad:
>>
Private location, close to Steamboat, Heavily wooded with Aspens, several springs. Spectacular views. Abundant game! Property consists of 3 tracts. $1,600,000 ~ MLS #111980
<<
from:
http://www.livingchoices.com/home/homedetail.aspx?mid=N145&hid=534610838&refer=bvc
Or just google "steamboat springs real estate parcels acres" for some eye-popping values.
It is just being stuck on stupid not to sharpen the pencil, put on the eyeshades, put the brain in hard-nose mode and get serious about being fiscally responsible with the nation's balance sheet and I & E statement.
Any decent corporate Board would require their CEO to rationalize every single corporate asset on an ongoing basis. Why do we allow our country to be run with any lesser a standard?
Instead, too many of us cheer when the country's CEO uses his authority to lock up a Saudi-sized tract of low-sulfur coal as a "precious wilderness area", and to buy votes in the process.
I don't know if you have considered the probability that large scale sales of Federally owned land would dramatically drive down real estate values in adjacent areas.
Your proposal would totally screw private landowners in many if not all of these areas. Anybody who relied on the equity of their land would be a big loser if the market became glutted with newly deassessed Federal land.
Your idea sounds great from a purely ideological standpoint, but it sounds like a disaster from a real estate business perspective.
Supply and demand my friend. If you increase supply (land available for sale) you have to also increase demand at the same or a greater rate, otherwise prices go down. If we start putting hundreds of thousands of acres up for sale, we stand to destroy real estate values in many areas, thus destroying the tax base. Even if you only sell to big institutional buyers (like a Disney Corp.), you are going to run out of prospective buyers very quickly and even those will only want to purchase the choisest parcels available. Desert land in Nevada simply isn't going to bring much buyer interest.
Have you ever been to the northern Poconos in Pennsylvania ? It's a beautiful area with lakes, woods, streams, ski areas, all within 4 hours drive of millions of wealthy people in the greater New York City area. Vacant land in the northern Poconos is very cheap...why ?, because there is far more land for sale there than buyers willing to purchase it.