Laserfiche WebLink
Land Entity White Paper November 30, 1999 <br />condition of land, the rights sald, and the strings attached) will be sornewhat different. <br />Working with goveaunent money means that values will have to be determined by <br />independent appraisal processes that attempt to take into account the nuances of <br />transactions structured to the different needs and requirements of landowners. Ensuring <br />fairness in dealings with landflwners is a oriticaj elernent of how iransactions should <br />occur, and determining fair market value for each transaction will be essential to funding. <br />These are implementation issues that will apply to any land entity selected. <br />Potential to increrrse federal nr state presence in now private matters - I.acal <br />stakebolders are concemed that the actions of the Land Entity not lead to more state or <br />federaI involvement in Jocal issues, particularly ones that are cuxrently private, than is <br />absolutely justified. <br />Distributfon of Assets in the evenr of Program faelure - If the Program were to fall apart <br />prior to campletion, both parties and stakeholders axe concerned that there be an agreed- <br />upon, balanced decision-making process for the dispositian of the assets. <br />VI. Land Entity Options <br />Choosing an effective organizatianal structure to carry out the Program's land <br />component appears to involve three key decisions: <br />l. Relationshtp tv the Governtng Committee. What will be the delegation of <br />autharity from the Goveming Committee to the Land Entity? The options <br />range frorn strong oversight and control by the Governing Committee to a <br />broad delegation of pawer to a strang, semi-autonomous Land Entity. <br />2. Entity Structure. There is a need to match the land pratection, management <br />and restoration functions of the Land Entity with the appropriate <br />governmentat, quasi-governmentai, non-profit, or hybrid structure best <br />capable of ineeting Program objectives. <br />3. Local itepresentation Optians. How and to what degree will the governance <br />structure and Land Entity be responsive tfl local interests in decision-making <br />and management? While the Land Entity must be responsive and accountabte <br />to the federal and state signatories, tv what degree will the interests of local <br />communities and landowners where projects will be taking place be taken into <br />account? <br />The sections below laok at a range of options to address these #hree key variables. Part A <br />considers the potential optians for how a Land Entity will fit into the overall Program - <br />options for how to divide land component functions between a Land Entity and other <br />Program governance struc#ures. Part B looks at the options available for the structure of <br />the Land Entity. Part C exarriines the options for representing local interests. In <br />37.