• Impact on Regional Mobility-Some policy makers express concern about ceding operational and pricing control of key transportation assets under long-term concessions. They have noted that state or regional transportation agencies may lose the ability to influence traffic patterns due to contractually agreed-upon road pricing adjustments by the concessionaire. Depending on the term of the lease, this limitation could persist for as much as 50 years or longer.
• Potential Loss of Control-Some fear that involving the private sector through a long- term contract gives up too much control of the public asset. While long-term agreements do in fact transfer many aspects of operating control to the private sector, the degree of the impact and the potential to reverse course in certain circumstances can be care- fully prescribed and managed in the contractual arrangement. The inevitable tradeoffs and associated risks can and should be managed to the benefit of the public through rigorous contracts with the private sector that dictate specific performance levels and recourses for non-performance that traditional direct public-sector delivery approaches would not provide.
• Non-compete Clauses-Critics have singled out as a concern the use of "non-compete" clauses, whereby the public-sector partner gives up its right to construct competing facilities in the vicinity of the leased transportation facility. This critically important issue can and should be handled through the contracting process, as demonstrated in recent transactions. States, for instance, can retain the absolute right to build and maintain any and all facilities at any time by agreeing to compensate the concessionaire for any significant adverse revenue impacts.
• Foreign Ownership-Based on recent transactions and the participation of foreign investors in the U.S. marketplace, there has been concern expressed about turning over operation of key infrastructure assets to foreign-controlled entities. As just noted, however, these arrangements should be governed by carefully constructed contracts and explicit government oversight. Potential national security issues should be fully addressed by existing federal laws governing foreign investment in critical infrastructure. Finally, foreign investors have owned or prudently and efficiently managed infrastructure facilities in the United States for many years, just as U.S. firms rely on the availability of open investment opportunities in other countries.