Bill Overview
Title: LODGE Act
Description: This bill expands the current authority of the Department of the Interior to enter into agreements with housing entities to provide rental housing for employees. The bill allows Interior to enter agreements with other federal agencies, state or local governments, tribal governments, or other public or private organizations for purposes of facilitating housing accommodation projects for rent to field employees and members of the public on public lands, including National Park System units; off public lands in the vicinity of system units; or on a combination of such lands. Interior may allow field employees and members of the public to occupy and lease project quarters. Field employees and members of the public shall be prohibited from subleasing housing units or quarters developed or leased in accordance with a housing partnership agreement under this bill, including all forms of short-term rentals. To the maximum extent practicable, priority for occupancy in project quarters shall be given to field employees. Interior may collect, or authorize entities who have entered into partnership housing agreements under this bill to collect, rents directly from field employees and members of the public occupying housing units or quarters. The bill modifies the lease-to-build program to allow Interior to lease federal land and interests in land to qualified persons for the construction of field employee quarters for any period not to exceed 60 years (under current law not to exceed 50 years).
Sponsors: Rep. Moore, Blake D. [R-UT-1]
Target Audience
Population: Field employees and the public needing housing on or near public lands.
Estimated Size: 1500000
- The bill primarily targets and directly impacts field employees of the federal government who require housing near their work locations.
- This bill also addresses housing accommodation projects that involve members of the public, especially those needing housing on or near public lands.
- The bill influences the Department of the Interior and other federal and local agencies involved in housing development.
- Housing entities participating in this initiative, including private organizations and government bodies, will be involved and impacted.
- Communities near national park system units or public lands could be indirectly affected due to potential changes in local housing markets and availability.
Reasoning
- The policy primarily targets federal field employees who need housing near their work locations, particularly those on or near public lands like National Parks.
- The availability of housing on public lands may indirectly affect the local community by potentially changing local housing markets and availability.
- Due to budget constraints, the policy will initially have a limited impact and is unlikely to cover all federal employees needing housing; thus, initial impact will be more focused.
- The policy affects government agencies, federal employees, local community members, and housing entities involved in this initiative.
- Consider the variation in impact based on existing availability of housing and geographical distribution of federal employees.
Simulated Interviews
Park Ranger (Grand Teton National Park, Wyoming)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I love working in the parks but the cost of living nearby is a constant strain.
- If the policy provides affordable housing options, it would greatly improve my situation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 3 |
Wildlife Biologist (Yosemite National Park, California)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm often uncertain about my housing from season to season, which is really stressful.
- The idea of stable housing year-round is very appealing.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Research Scientist (Everglades National Park, Florida)
Age: 28 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Temporary housing is okay for now, but it's hard to plan for future needs.
- A fixed, reliable housing option would seriously relieve stress.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Housing Developer (Denver, Colorado)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could open new business avenues for housing development close to parks.
- We need to ensure these projects are also financially viable for developers.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Retired Citizen (Rapid City, South Dakota)
Age: 61 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy might affect local rental prices and availability.
- I'm concerned about how it will impact local residents not employed by the federal government.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
IT Contractor for Department of the Interior (Phoenix, Arizona)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I rent in the city, so I don't expect much change from this policy.
- However, it might help colleagues who work more remotely.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Community Planner (Missoula, Montana)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Integrating federal housing projects into local plans is key to sustainable development.
- Collaboration with federal agencies could yield positive outcomes for both employees and local residents.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Graduate Student (Flagstaff, Arizona)
Age: 23 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Finding affordable, short-term housing for internships is difficult.
- This could present more opportunities and flexibility for students entering the field.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Federal Employee - Bureau of Land Management (Anchorage, Alaska)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy has little effect on me personally as I'll soon retire.
- However, it sounds beneficial for attracting future employees to remote areas.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Environmental Lawyer (Boulder, Colorado)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's crucial to ensure public land policies do not exclude local communities.
- There needs to be a balance between available resources for employees and public accessibility.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $12000000)
Year 2: $10000000 (Low: $7500000, High: $13000000)
Year 3: $9000000 (Low: $7000000, High: $12000000)
Year 5: $8000000 (Low: $6000000, High: $10000000)
Year 10: $7000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $9000000)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The capability of the Department of the Interior to manage and oversee housing agreements effectively.
- Potential inflationary effects on local housing markets, particularly in areas with limited housing supply.
- Impact on local real estate markets and public perception of increased federal housing projects.
- The feasibility and timeline for partnership agreements to become operational are crucial.
- Environmental assessments and compliance with relevant laws.