White Paper: Option for Land Protection Component

Home Browse Search

Land Entity White Pager November 30, 1499 • Responsiveness to Local inrerests To what degree will it iikely be respansive to Iegitimate locai concerns, issues and involvement? • Eifieiericy. Will the entity likely aperate in a cost-effective, timely and reliable fashion in carrying out the business of implementing the broad Program abjectives and goats? How costly will it be to establish the various alternatives? • Coordi?ratian and Communacations. The Land Entity wiIl perform diverse tasks, some of which will alsa be carried out on Program lands the Land Entity does not hold and/or by different organizatians. Effective coordination will be essential to keeping these activities eompatible. Effectively communicating with neighbors and local governments regazding the Program and Land Entity acrivities will aiso be needed to improve acceptance and buy-in, since property rights and land use can be emational issues. • Accounting and accountability. Since the Land Entiry will receive funds from the federal and state governments, the ability to satisfy complex accounting ana accountabiliry requirements wiII be essential. • Flerlbllity in developing trarrsactiortx The way in which land transactions are negotiated is significant because there are a numbsr of different options for protecting tand that relate ta its priarity for protection, landowner objectives, cost and other factors. The negotiating entity must be able to utilize a full menu of sophisticated techniques if it is tv be successful and tailor transactions to meet both landowner and Program abjectives. A menu of potential land transaction techniques is included in Appendix B. Many of the techniques identified invoive partial interests in property, such as leases or conservation easements, or may require complicated tax planning such as bargain saies or land trades. As a result, the land transactians necessary to provide a range of optians to meet both Pcogram and landowner objectives, are often complex and involve specialized expertise. The specialized nature and potential complexity of the real estate transactions neeessary to protect tand effectively needs to be taken into account in the design of the Land Entity. The following six organizations or organizational structures are presented ta describe a range of alternatives available to serve as the Land Entity. Combinations of these alternatives or a hybrid of one or more are also possible. 1. Fxisting State and Federa! Agencies Establish a Joint Land Prograrn (JLP) The three states and D4I wauld be the key entities to comprise an intergovemmental Joint Land Program {JLP}. Each af the states would designate the divisian within siate government to be responsible for representing the state. For example, in Nebraska, the state might designate the Natural Resources Commission since it is the operational agency mast involved with the Pragra.m, or the Game and Parks Commission. The intergovemmental cooperative agreement (or metnorandum of agreement) that adapts the Platte River Recovery Implementation Pragram couid also create the JLP as a companent of that Program. A JLP could be, but need nat be, 19