Search

Land exchange may reappear in October, opposition 'concerned' over access, equitability - The Sheridan Press

sutitong.blogspot.com

DAYTON — Members of a local volunteer committee are concerned state officials could revisit a proposed land exchange near Dayton sooner than expected, after the item was tabled in August in part due to “immense public comment” opposing the trade.

The Columbus Peak Ranch, LLC, land exchange proposes trading 628.35 acres of privately-owned land located east of Dayton for 560 acres of state trust land located northwest of Dayton. The State Board of Land Commissioners, which includes Gov. Mark Gordon, Secretary of State Ed Buchanan, Auditor Kristi Racines, Treasurer Curt Meier and Superintendent of Public Instruction Jillian Balow, considered the exchange at its Aug. 5 meeting, voting to table the matter “indefinitely.” Opponents voiced concern at the meeting and in writing that the land proposed for the swap has less water, less wildlife habitat, less biodiversity and other features that made it an unequal trade.

“The matter that was tabled in October was tabled to an indefinite date, which means that it could come back at any time. It could come back in October, it could come back in a year. The board did not give us guidance in that respect,” Jason Crowder, SBLC deputy director, said this week.

The board directed community members and the applicant, landowner Ross Matthews, to enter into negotiations to yield a more equitable trade, Crowder said. Before voting to table the issue, Dayton resident Gale Smith asked the board if it was typical for a land swap like the Columbus Peak Ranch to generate such opposition.

“Is it normal, or is it concerning, that there is 90% opposition to a land swap like this? Is it normal to have all five members of the Sheridan County legislative makeup opposed to it, both senators and representatives, and four out of the five county commissioners are opposed to it?” Smith asked. “It speaks volumes to the possibility of losing such a cherished piece of property in Sheridan County.”

Crowder said on Aug. 5, the board had a “robust conversation” about what it wanted to see in the proposed transaction, based on the immense public comment heard at the meeting and submitted in writing before the meeting.

“The board wanted to see some type of a back-and-forth between the community and the applicant to see if there was some way that a solution could be had, if it was different than the one that was proposed to them,” he said.

The State Lands Action Team came together after the meeting, and includes volunteers Smith, Mike Barrett, Rick Parish, Rick Clark and state Rep. Cyrus Western, R-Big Horn, who joined together to represent citizen concern over future access and the equitability of the land swap. The existing parcel of state land includes a “very high capacity” Bear Claw Love No. 1 Reservoir, and only seasonal stock water ponds that are visible by drone footage on the current private land. In videos posted in July to Facebook, Smith’s son was able to catch fish after fish at the state reservoir.

“We have learned the state owns a portion of the water rights in the large reservoir, and that water has value,” Clark said, adding he understands water is being sold from Park Reservoir to Sheridan Area Water Supply Joint Powers Board for as much as $4,200 an acre foot.

“That could represent potentially over $220,000 every year to the state of Wyoming,” Clark said. “I am not saying the state is ever going to want to sell that water, but who knows for sure? Why should the state and the public give up this highly valued commodity? As I understand, if the land is traded, the state will lose its current portion of its water rights in the reservoir.”

One appraisal of the lands in question indicated that state land had a market value of $2,296,000 while the Columbus Peak Ranch property has a market value of $1,885,050. Therefore, even if the proposed swap occurs, Columbus Peak Ranch would pay the state $410,950, which would then be deposited into the Public Buildings at the Capitol and the Agricultural College Permanent Land Funds for use.

Parish said the committee requested a subsequent appraisal, and one that considered water rights in question.

“We didn’t think the appraisal was accurate,” Parish said. “If the property is traded, will it cause issues for accessibility to get that water out of there? Or future sales or things of that nature?”

Crowder said the SBLC received “indication that communication is occurring” between the local community and the landowner, and that the applicant has requested the board bring the exchange back in October.

“The board gets to decide if that is going to happen,” Crowder said. “We did receive that request, and we are working through all the information to see if it meets what the board expected in August.”

But there have been no formal negotiations between parties, according to the State Lands Action Team, and only preliminary discussion between Western and the landowner and applicant, who did not return multiple requests from The Sheridan Press for comment.

“I would think it is probably a little too fast to bring this back up, but I am looking forward to working with Mr. Matthews and finding a middle ground,” Western said to The Press. “We are just getting started on those conversations.”

For the matter to come back in October, right when many people concerned about the future of the state parcel are out hunting, seems inappropriate, several members of the State Lands Action Team said.

“The problem is, a lot of the people that are on this committee and a lot of the people who have voiced concerns about this are sportsmen,” Parish said. “Hunting season started Aug. 15, and lots of people are out. I myself was up bowhunting just this morning. On Oct. 7, the rifle seasons are going for multiple species.

“I was thinking we would have six months to talk about negotiations,” Parish said.

The official public comment period has closed, and all comments were provided to the board, but Crowder said he will continue to collect public comment on the issue to forward to the board.

“We are happy to accept more,” he said. “The formal public comment period is closed and there is not a new one, but if there are folks who want to send more in, they can send them directly to me. I will make sure the board gets them prior to them reconsidering the transaction, whenever that is.”

He also indicated as staff prepares materials for the October meeting, they would likely include any intention of untableing the issue. That procedure would then be included in the regular course of public notice for all board matters, which happens about a week before the meeting.

Parish said he appreciated public involvement in the process.

“This is a valuable piece of land that will only grow in value in the future,” he said. “Comments can be given all the way up to the Oct. 7 meeting. I hope that people who weren’t aware of that the first time around are more aware of it this time. There was a big differential in people who were for and against it, because we value having open space.

“If it was a fair trade … I am not against the process, or against Mr. Matthews,” Parish said. “He has a right to do this, but we, as citizens, have the right to say that we don’t agree with it or think it is a fair trade.”

Adblock test (Why?)



"exchange" - Google News
September 18, 2021 at 05:15PM
https://ift.tt/2XwVr7C

Land exchange may reappear in October, opposition 'concerned' over access, equitability - The Sheridan Press
"exchange" - Google News
https://ift.tt/3c55nbe
https://ift.tt/3b2gZKy
Exchange

Bagikan Berita Ini

0 Response to "Land exchange may reappear in October, opposition 'concerned' over access, equitability - The Sheridan Press"

Post a Comment

Powered by Blogger.