PILT fly-in: promotes public lands program on Capitol Hill

Photo by Jeff Arnold
(l­r) Rep. Bob Smith (R-Ore.), chair, House Agriculture Committee, and Dave Schmidt, commissioner, Linn County, Ore. and president of the Western Interstate Region, take a moment to relax during PILT fly-in briefings.

The Payments In Lieu of Taxes (PILT) Fly-In '97 was a huge success with 15 county representatives, including commissioners, treasurers and state association staff, making visits to nearly 150 congressional offices, providing PILT information about each county in each state, and discussing the reasons for supporting the PILT Program.

The county representatives asked members of Congress for two things: First, they asked for a $6 million amendment to the upcoming supplemental appropriations bill for FY97 to cover new lands included in the program.

Late in the 104th Congress, the Alaska delegation was successful in obtaining a change to the PILT statute that includes, for the first time, the unincorporated boroughs of their state in the PILT Program. This authorization occurred after the FY97 appropriation was passed and will put additional financial pressure on the program.

Second, fly-in participants asked for increased funding for the program for FY98. Congress included $113 million for PILT in FY97. The Administration's request for FY98 is $101.5 million, a substantial retreat from its previously submitted levels.

The county officials were particularly successful in taking the PILT message to members without substantial federal land acreage in their states and districts. Many of these members have been reticent to support the PILT Program in the past because they didn't see any benefit to the state or district. Materials helped explain the connection between non-public land jurisdictions, and the counties with substantial public land acreage.

By every measure, the efforts of these county officials were fruitful, and may prove to be a critical part of a successful campaign to increase PILT funding.

Why Congress should care about PILT

By Michael Hightower
NACo president

Why should a member of Congress from a nonpublic lands region care about the Payments In Lieu of Taxes Program (PILT) when there are few acres of public lands in the state or district?

The real question is: Does anyone from the state visit national parks, national monuments, national forests, Civil War battlefields, public rangelands or wildlife refuges? Of course they do

Visitation of our federal public lands is up dramatically, and is expected to continue to increase as more and more Americans "take to the road" to vacation and visit these national treasures.

According to the National Park Service, there were a total of 268.6 million recreational visits to national parks alone in 1994. And this number does not take into account the national forests and other recreational lands. All of these treasures are truly worth visiting and maintaining.

But who really supports the "outdoors experience"? Who is responsible for ultimate disposal of the trash and other waste from the visitors? Who is responsible for many of the roads and other infrastructure leading to these sites? Who has the responsibility for search and rescue operations, the law enforcement and the emergency medical assistance that is almost always necessary as Americans visit public lands? Contrary to popular belief, it isn't the federal government.

It is America's public land counties and their taxpayers. Yes, all Americans pay taxes to help defray the costs of maintaining our federal public lands, but most Americans forget that every acre of federal land in a county is one less acre the local government can assess to maintain the very public health and safety services everyone expects and demands when they visit these areas.

Congress recognized this problem in 1976 when it passed the Payments In Lieu of Taxes Act, and reaffirmed that understanding as recently as 1994, when it substantially increased the authorization for the program. Unfortunately, the real dollars, the appropriations, have not followed.

The PILT Program gives counties (and some relief to their taxpayers) a small payment per acre of federal "entitlement land" (not all federal acreage), which only partially offsets county costs of supporting federal lands in the county. It is a major "underfunded mandate" that needs to be eliminated so public land counties can continue to support the growth of recreation, travel and tourism on federal lands.

County officials, like those that have delivered this message, are struggling to keep the services, like those mentioned above, funded and operating to make the "outdoor experience" on federal public lands positive and rewarding. The PILT Program assists them in meeting their budgets.

So what can you do? Simple, support funding for the PILT Program at the highest possible level. The authorized level for FY98 is $184 million. Please help all Americans enjoy their experience on America's public lands by helping the counties meet their needs when they visit. Please help America's public land county taxpayers ask your member of Congress to fully fund the PILT Program.