In the beginning, the MHPI was centrally run by OSD Office of Competitive
Sourcing and Privatization. DoD contracting personnel were not familiar with the complexity inherent in this new approach to military housing construction: unfamiliarity with these different kinds of negotiations, plus the new legal, financial, and budget issues that appeared as the program got underway. Therefore, progress in negotiation of contracts and beginning construction was notably slower than originally envisioned. For example, the first project award, known as NAS Corpus Christi/Kingsville-I (Texas) for
404 units took place in July 1996. The second, named Everett-I (Washington) and encompassing 185 housing units, was awarded in March of 1997. In August 1998, another project …show more content…
(Else, 2001)
In October of 1998, Defense Secretary William S. Cohen delegated operational responsibility of MHPI to the individual Services, with oversight and final approval authority vested in the Housing Revitalization Support Office (HRSO), under the OSD
Office of Competitive Sourcing and Privatization. In 2000, another project, Fort Carson,
Colorado, for 2663 units, was finalized. (Else, 2001)
After a couple of years of initial close control of the privatization process,
OSD later let the services run the program as they saw fit. The Navy and the Marine
Corps, whose privatization endeavor is the focus of this paper, viewed privatization not only as a way to improve housing, but also as an investment opportunity. Through a program called Public Private Ventures (PPV), both the services teamed up with private industry to form limited liability companies to speed up military housing construction.
The arrangement required the services to contribute equity up front, but also gave them the benefits of receiving revenues generated by the joint
Sourcing and Privatization. DoD contracting personnel were not familiar with the complexity inherent in this new approach to military housing construction: unfamiliarity with these different kinds of negotiations, plus the new legal, financial, and budget issues that appeared as the program got underway. Therefore, progress in negotiation of contracts and beginning construction was notably slower than originally envisioned. For example, the first project award, known as NAS Corpus Christi/Kingsville-I (Texas) for
404 units took place in July 1996. The second, named Everett-I (Washington) and encompassing 185 housing units, was awarded in March of 1997. In August 1998, another project …show more content…
(Else, 2001)
In October of 1998, Defense Secretary William S. Cohen delegated operational responsibility of MHPI to the individual Services, with oversight and final approval authority vested in the Housing Revitalization Support Office (HRSO), under the OSD
Office of Competitive Sourcing and Privatization. In 2000, another project, Fort Carson,
Colorado, for 2663 units, was finalized. (Else, 2001)
After a couple of years of initial close control of the privatization process,
OSD later let the services run the program as they saw fit. The Navy and the Marine
Corps, whose privatization endeavor is the focus of this paper, viewed privatization not only as a way to improve housing, but also as an investment opportunity. Through a program called Public Private Ventures (PPV), both the services teamed up with private industry to form limited liability companies to speed up military housing construction.
The arrangement required the services to contribute equity up front, but also gave them the benefits of receiving revenues generated by the joint