Glacier National Park, West Side Discovery Center and Museum
Prepared by Glenn Eugster, Assistant Regional Director, Partnerships Office, National Capital Region
Final December 20, 2004
Introduction
On March 9, 2003 Director Mainella requested the National Capital Region to assist the NPS Washington Office with an internal review of the fundraising campaigns for a variety of partnership construction projects greater than $5 million. The Glacier National Park West Side Discovery Center and Museum (Discovery Center) was one of the projects identified for assessment. This document is a report on NPS's fact-finding/ gap analysis. Note, this project has been refereed to, in writing and verbally, as a discovery center and museum, a visitor center, a transit center, interpretive facility, and a transit-staging center. For the purposes of this report the project is referred to as Discovery Center.
Background
NPS had a series of discussions between the National Leadership Council, the House and Senate Appropriations Committees, the Development Advisory Board, and some of our park and regional offices about the relationship between public and private partnerships, park projects and NPS funding. During these discussions it has become apparent that there are inconsistencies in the way NPS structures, manages, implements and monitors some partnership agreements, including fundraising agreements, plans and campaigns, the relationship between these efforts, priorities for funding park projects, and communication with the Congress.
Specifically NCR was asked to examine the proposed Glacier National Park West Side Discovery Center project, identify real and perceived problems and matters of concern, identify options to respond to the problems and concerns, and identify ways that NPS can assist parks and regional offices in building better partnership projects. This information is to be shared with NPS managers to assist them in their decision-making.
The approach used for this fact-finding and analysis involved a review of relevant documents made available by headquarters, the regional office and the park; personal and telephone discussions with key leaders; a meeting with park and regional office managers; and analysis of the information collected. It is important to note that the time schedule for this analysis was limited. Further research may reveal different facts and lead to additional or different conclusions.
Individuals that were contacted and provided information to this report include:
Mick Holm, Superintendent, Glacier National Park
Dave Dahlen, Supervisory Park Ranger, Glacier National Park
Becky Debs, Lead, Construction Group, Intermountain Region
Gary Brandow, Administrative Officer, Glacier National Park
Rick Frost, Public Affairs Specialist, Intermountain Region
Chris Niewold, Senior Staff, National Partnership Office
Chris Jarvi, Associate Director, Partnerships, Interpretation, Volunteers, Outdoor Recreation, and Education
Sue Masica, Associate Director, Park Planning, Facilities and Lands
Facts
Park Name: Glacier National Park
Project Summary: The 1999 General Management Plan (GMP) for Glacier National Park indicates, "A visitor service, education, and exhibition of museum objects can be provided with the construction of a new discovery center and museum. A facility will be built north of the Going-to-the-Sun and Camas Roads T-intersection, in the Apgar area. The new center, which will replace the interim contact station at Apgar, will be a full-service, accessible, year-round facility".
Name of Partner(s): Glacier Fund (National Park Foundation); Citizens Advisory Committee (formed to guide Going-to-the-Sun Road studies and advise NPS on how to best accomplish road rehabilitation); Federal Highways Administration (to possibly fund the Discovery Center as a "measure to minimize environmental harm").
PMIS: # 60161 (A&B) includes the construction of the Discovery Center and the design and development of the exhibits and other interior components. Note: IMR indicates, "The PMIS record 60161 does contain information on the project. An update needs to occur to add in the cost for the facility itself, but the descriptions exist for facility and exhibit/media".
Estimated Gross Cost: The proposed Discovery Center is expected to cost $7-9 million for the 15,000 square foot building.
Targeted Completion Date: Uncertain. NPS leaders indicate that they are probably a year away from establishing a partnership that focuses on a visitor center project.
Breakdown of Funds Needed:
NPS share: $ Unknown
Other Federal Funds: Unknown
Private, Donated and State and local funds: Unknown
Operations Funds Needed: $ Need estimate
Cost-Offsets: $ Unknown
Chronology and Status of Planning, Partnership and Fundraising Activities
November 5, 2003 Record of Decision for the rehabilitation of the Going-to-the-Sun Road within Glacier National Park approved
May 15, 2003 Going-to-the Sun Road Rehabilitation Plan/ Final Environmental Impact Statement approved
July 15, 1999 Glacier National Park General Management Plan approved
1999 Glacier Fund, an initiative of the National Park Foundation, is created to support priority projects for Glacier National Park.
Background
The 1999 Glacier National Park GMP recommends that "The National Park Service will construct a discovery center and museum inside the park in the vicinity of the T-intersection north of the West Glacier entrance station". This facility will provide a quality visitor center and museum, and will replace an existing small visitor contact station in Apgar Village.
From this entrance visitors follow the 50-mile Going-to-the-Sun Road (GTSR) which is the only route through the park that directly links the east and west sides. Numerous studies and investigations have been conducted by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and private contractors to assess the condition of the GTSR and the appropriate actions necessary to correct structural deficiencies. Road repairs are to be made while maintaining visitor uses and access to the GTSR similar to current conditions. This "shared-use" alternative was recommended by the Congressionally funded Citizen's Advisory Committee in 1999 and part of the Record of Decision on the EIS.
The GMP recognized the importance and the need for a discovery center and museum. About 60% of park visitors enter through the west entrance. Park documents indicate, "Because the road is the park's primary automotive route, it defines the circulation pattern. Use has increased from fewer than 40,000 cars in 1933 to more than 660,000 cars annually in recent years".
The existing building used as the Apgar "Visitor Center" is a converted two-bedroom house that attracts 190,000 people annually. Park visitation in recent years has been over two million. The Apgar facility is small and frequently overcrowded. NPS leaders and park documents indicate that "the facility is woefully inadequate to meet the basic park functions of providing orientation, safety, protection, and interpretive and educational messages". The GMP notes that this entrance to the park is key and that "visitors need to receive important messages about resource protection, safety, educational and orientation messages upon entry to the park, not halfway through their visits".
In 2003, as part of it's planning and design to rehabilitate the Going-to-the Sun Road, NPS approved a Record of Decision for the road rehabilitation. It was recognized in the document that the impacts of the road rehabilitation are expected to be over at least 7-8 years and are likely to decrease total tourism expenditures an average of $9 million annually.
As a way to minimize the potential impacts to visitors, businesses, and tourism from the GTSR rehabilitation NPS agreed to:
Provide improved information, orientation and interpretive information for visitors.
Implement several visitor development strategies to offset impacts including expanding the existing transit fleet to 14 vehicles with shuttle service throughout the length of the Road…"
In addition, since the discovery center will focus on transit staging, as well as information and orientation for visitors, a part of the center was to be constructed using FHWA mitigation funds.
Assumptions
The context for this research includes the following assumptions, identified by NPS park, regional and headquarters leaders, about the project.
NPS has approved the West Side Discovery Center and Museum concept and the road rehabilitation project for the GTSR.
NPS leaders indicate that "Glacier National Park doesn't have a partnership construction project at this time". They have a road construction project and are considering different ways to fund the Discovery Center either through FHWA highway mitigation project funds or through a combination of NPS funds (i.e. fees, line-item construction, private fundraising, etc.)
The GTSR road construction and Discovery Center proposal are linked in the GMP and Environmental Impact Statement for the park, and the Record of Decision for Rehabilitating the GTSR. The public, as a result of civic engagement practices used to develop plans for the park and the GTSR, expects that the road will be repaired and the Discovery Center built.
The exact amount of funding for GTSR road construction, and mitigation measures, is uncertain and the final budget will help determine if FHWA funds can be used to fund all, or part, of the Discovery Center. If FHWA cannot fund the Discovery Center NPS will need to explore other agency, public and private funding sources to complete the facility.
Issues
At the outset of this research it appeared that NPS Washington leaders had a different perception of this project than park and regional leaders. For example, certain NPS leaders in Washington believe that the Discovery Center should be considered a partnership construction project because it is likely to require non-NPS funding. These leaders indicated "There are so many unknowns and uncertainties about the West Side visitor center. I don't think anyone[in Washington] is clear on what partnership really does or does not exist and whether there's anything beyond the concept going back to the General Management Plan".
The park staff has had conversations with the Glacier Fund Board about the possibility of entering into a formalized partnership, but both agree that feasibility and capacity of the Fund to make such a commitment, and the actual needs of the park to accomplish the project are preliminary questions that must be answered before a partnership is established. In the meantime, there is an implied assumption in the Environmental Impact Statement for the GTSR that the facility will be 100% federally funded. Should other FHWA funding be unavailable there will continue to be public expectations that NPS will complete this project.
NPS leaders indicated "The Visitor Center, in the public's eye, is a priority. The expectation is high--the question NPS faces is how do we realize expectations?"
A portion of the Discovery Center will focus on transit staging, as well as information and orientation for visitors. This part of the center was to be constructed as part of the GTSR Rehabilitation Plan using FHWA mitigation funds. The Federal Highway Bill originally proposed $140-170 million for road including $45 million for mitigation. However, demands on the Federal Highway Bill may make it difficult for FHWA to provide all the money that is needed for the road and mitigation projects.
NPS has determined that it will not use FHWA mitigation funds for the Discovery Center. Park and regional leaders indicated that "they will look at other strategies to make the project happen". NPS leaders noted that "maybe instead of funding it with mitigation money it would come from a combination of sources (i.e. FHWA, fee, line-item construction funds, etc.)".
There appears to be different opinions on the size and scope of the Discovery Center. NPS leaders indicate that the Transportation Center is 9,000 square feet and an additional 6,000 square feet is for interpretation and education. NPS management has determined that the Discovery Center will not be constructed using mitigation funding. A possible alternative proposal that was mentioned is to have a transit system with a minimum interpretive center.
The idea of a Visitor Center is supported by the Montana's Senators, House members, local governments and a Citizen Advisory Committee that was created to guide the road studies and advise NPS on how to best accomplish rehabilitation. NPS leaders noted that "Senator Burns and Bauccus have supported the mitigation proposals and the need for the visitor center. There is interest in having the Visitor Center by 2010--the Centennial of the Park". NPS leaders also indicated that, "If we take this off the table they (Senators) will still have an interest in finding a way to fund this project". They believe that "the Delegation will come to NPS and ask 'What can we do?'"
NPS is a partner with The Glacier Fund--an initiative of the National Park Foundation. The Fund, created in 1999, supports priority projects of Glacier National Park. The Fund is one of the most successful of NPF's "Local Programs" and donations to NPS are approaching $1 million in cash and inkind donations.
In March 2004 at the National Friends Alliance Meeting, a representative of the Glacier Fund indicated that they "were working on a capital campaign for a visitor center". This comment implied a more formal relationship had been established, which according to park staff, it has not. NPS park leaders indicate that they had discussion with the leaders of the Glacier Fund and they are
Exploring the feasibility of supporting the Discovery Center. The Glacier Fund leaders have contributed over $600,000 of project money to the park over the past three-years. According to NPS park staff neither the park nor Fund management has committed to fundraising the Discovery Center.
The Superintendent of Glacier indicated that he was unsure of the viability of private fundraising for this purpose. "I want to make sure partners have the capability for raising money, plus a maintenance endowment". The leaders of the Fund share the superintendent's view on the viability of fundraising and are now conducting a strategic planning effort for Glacier Fund. NPS and the Fund leaders are looking at priorities for 5 to 10 years from now, fundraising feasibility and capability, and the need for a visitor center. Three months ago the Board had its first strategic planning session. The Fund hired a consultant that is helping them determine whether or not it would be feasible to do a capital campaign.
Options
The following options can and should be taken to address the Glacier National Park West Side Discovery Center project issues within the identified assumptions.
1. The Glacier National Park Discovery Center is not a partnership construction project at this time, but informal discussions have taken place. Because of that, it is in the best interests of the park, the project and NPS to manage this effort consistent with the June 2004 Guidance for Partnership Construction Projects. Following the intent and details of the guidance will help NPS manage funding, internal and external collaboration and public expectations in a positive manner.
2. NPS should clarify the project name, PMIS #, description and scope to help better describe what is proposed, what is needed, and the construction and operation costs of the facility. This basic information will clarify project intent, funding needs and help to respond to, and manage, public's expectations.
3. NPS should seek to clarify what mitigation funds will be available for the Discovery Center from the GTSR Road Rehabilitation Funds of the Federal Highways Bill.
4. Since NPS will not use mitigation funds for construction of the Discovery Center, NPS should look at line-item construction funds, fee demonstration funds, the Glacier Fund, and other sources of public and private funding for this project.
5. NPS headquarters should require the Superintendent of Glacier National Park, and all other superintendents of partnership construction projects, to complete and update on a regular basis (to be determined) a Project Data Sheet. NPS headquarters should design and implement a computer program to provide for an easy way for superintendents to communicate with WASO about their projects.
The data sheet would describe where the project is in terms of design and planning, compliance with NEPA, fundraising, civic engagement, etc. This type of basic information would help improve communications at all levels of the agency, with Congress and partners.
