White Paper: Option for Land Protection Component

Home Browse Search

Land Entity White Paper Novemher 30, 1999 Interlocal Cooperation Act, except that it does not explicitly autharize agreements with other states. Wyoming's attomeys are of the view that, although the joint activities cantemplated in the proposed Program are not explicitly authorized, provided a pubiic benefit is obtained for Wyoming, there is nothing to bar the state from participating in and funding joint Program activities. Calorado appeazs to have wide aptions, 6ut has no experience applying them and rnay need legislative actian to do so, Colorado's Revised Statutes and Court Rules provide that govemments (including other states) may cooperate or contract with one another to carry out any function with the approval of the legislature. A contract can call far the joint exercise of powers, including the establishment of a sepa?. legal entity to do sa. Sec. 29-1-203. Whiie apparently authorized, um;ie is little experience with this statute in intsrstate or joint state/federal undertakings. For example, on the Colorado River, the state of Colorado makes its contributions independently, and it is not clear on the face of the statute what cooperative situations would require legislative approval, or what form of legislative approval is needed. It seems likely that state appropriatians for a Program in an agency's budget wouid constitute appraval, if needed. There is at Ieast a sFnall possibility that joint actions wauld need more comprehensive legislative action before funding could begin. B. Constraints on Trartsferring Funds ta a Program Land Entity and on the Entity's Use ojFunds Each of the four govemments has an obligation to account for taxpayer funds. No matter what form a Land Entity might take, funds will need to be reieased under one or more of four sepa.rate arrangements rvith the individual govemments ta transfer and account for funds. When a Program Land Entity and/or land management commirtee is in place, the govemments will need a budget oversight and approval pracess simi[ar to the ane that now precedes the transfer of state and federal funds under the Cooperative Agreement. Presently, four separate agreement administrators formally sign for their respective governments, authorizing the release of funds to a contractor. Issues that might cause one govemment to question making a payment are handled through the Governance Committee or its finance subcommittee, rather than separately- between ane government and the contractor. In varying degrees, each government imposes comprehensive conditions on the receipt of funds so that it can demonstrate that the taxpayers' maney was spent as agreed. All four govemments have accauntability requirements; funds will neen to be matched to specific tasks carried out in specific time periods, with records demonstrating that funds were expended as approved. Several key federal regulations raise issues described below that are beyond accountability and may affect how the role of the Land Entity is viewed or selected. 7