Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
This bill would establish the Fort Ontario Holocaust Refugee Shelter National Historical Park in New York as a unit of the National Park System. It directs the Secretary of the Interior to acquire lands shown on a specified map, administer the park under existing NPS law, allow cooperative agreements, and complete a general management plan within three fiscal years after funds are available.
Support for commemoration versus concerns about federal costs
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward substantive establishment of a National Park Service unit: it defines the unit and purpose, ties administration to existing NPS law, specifies acquisition authorities and certain limits, references a mapped boundary, and sets basic procedural triggers for establishment and planning.
This bill would establish the Fort Ontario Holocaust Refugee Shelter National Historical Park in New York as a unit of the National Park System.
It directs the Secretary of the Interior to acquire lands shown on a specified map, administer the park under existing NPS law, allow cooperative agreements, and complete a general management plan within three fiscal years after funds are available.
The park’s stated purpose is to preserve and interpret the stories of 982 World War II refugees housed at Fort Ontario from August 1944 to February 1946.
Noncontroversial, administratively straightforward park establishment favors enactment, but depends on future appropriations, land acquisitions, and legislative scheduling.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward substantive establishment of a National Park Service unit: it defines the unit and purpose, ties administration to existing NPS law, specifies acquisition authorities and certain limits, references a mapped boundary, and sets basic procedural triggers for establishment and planning. The bill is well-integrated with existing statutory frameworks but provides minimal fiscal detail and limited additional accountability or contingency planning.
Support for commemoration versus concerns about federal costs
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Support for commemoration versus concerns about federal costs
Strongly supportive.
The bill preserves a humanitarian and civil-rights–relevant history and creates federal protections and interpretation.
Advocates would want robust educational programming and community consultation with survivors and Jewish organizations.
Generally supportive but pragmatic.
Views the bill as a reasonable, bipartisan commemoration with modest federal footprint, while seeking clarity on costs, acquisition methods, and timelines.
Prefers transparent funding and local-state coordination.
Cautiously receptive to commemorating Holocaust refugees but skeptical about expanding federal land and new Park units.
Concerns focus on federal acquisition authority, ongoing maintenance costs, and precedent for additional NPS units.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Noncontroversial, administratively straightforward park establishment favors enactment, but depends on future appropriations, land acquisitions, and legislative scheduling.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Support for commemoration versus concerns about federal costs
Noncontroversial, administratively straightforward park establishment favors enactment, but depends on future appropriations, land acquisit…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward substantive establishment of a National Park Service unit: it defines the unit and purpose, ties administration to existing NPS law, specifies ac…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.