AgdaPkt 2004-04-26 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

�I . �3 - 4 In addition, the Ciry provides almost $1 million per year to the Park Service in in- kind support, including housing, utilities, and road and trail maintenance. I do not understa.�d the basis for the $5.2 million portion of the proposed fee that is above and beyo ul the Pazk's $2.8 million costs. This �5.2 million "rent" translates to $757 per acre over the 6871 acres the City uses. To the best of my knowledge, a per-acre fee of $757 is considerably greater than what other municipalities are charged for the use of the public lands. The Federal Power Act specifically exempts municipalities from fees for the righu to put hydropower facilities on navigable waters, as long as the hydropower is used for municipal purposes. 16 U.S.C. 803(e). Even if you compared San Francisco to private entities, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's Fiscal Year 2004 fee schedule sets the rate in Tuolumne County, the home of Hetch Hetchy Reservoir, at $3330 per acre. The highest rental fee charged to private Federal Power Act license holders in California is $39.98 per acre. This is a fraction of $757 per acre. Thus, the Department of the Interior appears to be breaking new ground with its proposal to charge fees of this magnitude for municipa! use of the public lands. I would like to ask if the Department propose to assess fees approaching $757 per acre to other similarly situated municipalities, and if so, who else might be charged such fees. I understand that your proposal will require legislation to amend the Raker Act in order to authorize the increased fees chazged to San Francisco. I appreciate your prompt response to these questions about your agency's proposed Fiscal Year 2005 budget." ###