My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
White Paper: Option for Land Protection Component
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
1001-2000
>
White Paper: Option for Land Protection Component
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 4:38:00 PM
Creation date
6/9/2009 3:37:15 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8461.300
Description
Land Issues
State
CO
Basin
South Platte
Water Division
1
Date
11/30/1999
Author
Marty Zeller, Mary Jane Graham
Title
White Paper: Option for Land Protection Component
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
74
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
I,and 8ntity White Paper November 30, 1999 <br />E. Canstraints on an Eirtity Owning Land Under Nebraska Law <br />If Program habitat land is not to be held by a govemment, the Land Entity wilt <br />need to be a non-profit to hold lands in Nebraska. Article XII, Sec. 8 of the Nebraska <br />Constitution states that no corporation or syndicate shall acyuire an interest in any #itle to <br />real estate used for farming or ranching. The term "syndicate" is defineci very broadly <br />with the intention to exclude anyone ather than farmers living an the land and their <br />families. Nan-proftt corporations are an exceptivn to this prohibition. <br />V. Non-Leggl Factors in Evaluating Options <br />In the interviews conducted with the signatories and stakehnlders, a number af <br />palicy or implementation issues were raised which are not strictty Iegal but which are <br />important to understanding how various parties will weigh the pras and cons of the Iand <br />protection options. They may be factQrs in evaluating whether the various patential I,and <br />Entity structures meet Program needs. <br />tegislarive Action Required - Given the high prafile of the Covperative Agreement, <br />legislative change may be plausihle to accommodate svme options that are nat within the <br />state or federal authorities as they currently exist and are summarized above and in <br />Appendix A. As a practicai matter, however, the more interaction required with federal <br />and state legislative bodies, the langer the process and the more potentially unpredictable <br />the results of such intsraction. On the other hand, if achieved, legislative approval of any <br />selected approach will clearly validate the Pragram_ <br />Certatnty/Predictability - Concerns exist on aly sides at f nding a halance between <br />flexibility in decision making and assuring that the Land Eritity carries out its tasks in a <br />manner that is consistent with Program intent and agreements, and does not develop an <br />independent mission. <br />Ability ta Respond Quickly - In land negotiations, an ability to respond to landowner <br />circumstances quickly may mean the difference between success and failure. <br />Accnurrlability - Aetivities and expenditures must meet the standards of f scal <br />accountability and record-keeping of the four signatories. <br />En[tungered Species Act - Actions of any Land Entity must meet Endangered Species <br />Act objectives of the Program. The signatories are all cancemed that land protectian <br />products are high quality, cost effective and a good retum for the time and effart <br />expended. <br />Level of land/habitat protection acheeved (temporary/permanenl) - Some Iand <br />protection techniques will achieve protection for a term of years or af a temporary nature <br />such as leases and management agreements. Others, sueh as pu.rchase of conservation <br />9
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.