Casper to resume talks with Conservation Fund and BLM on Trail Center acreage; council seeks boundary clarifications

Phil Sinnerlife, city staff, told the Casper City Council that staff wants to reopen conversations with the Conservation Fund and the Bureau of Land Management about land around the Trail Center that the BLM has identified as of interest for future programming and conservation.

Sinnerlife said the parcel in question is city-owned and any transfer would be between the city and the BLM, with the Conservation Fund acting as an intermediary to facilitate the transaction and to assist with funds the BLM could bring to the project. He said the Conservation Fund’s role is to “work for the both of us and can make that facilitation happen” and that the BLM’s stated goal is to keep the property from being sold for private development and to preserve it for future programming and conservation.

Council members raised concerns about a northeast corner of the exhibit that has been used for an outdoor expo and that some councilors want to preserve for future parking. Councilor Pat said he still likely would vote against a boundary that dispossessed that corner, saying he wanted to “protect that corner for parking.” Phil Sinnerlife and other staff said they could amend the blue‑line exhibit to retain some of the roughed‑out parking footprint and that the council would have opportunities later in the process to approve survey work and a formal agreement.

Councilor Amber warned that pushing the transfer boundary too close to the Wyoming Center could hinder future renovations of the facility. Staff said they can leave additional room in the exhibit to anticipate future growth of the center and that the blue line in the exhibit is adjustable and not final.

Council members also asked about the procurement and legal process. A councilor asked whether a state statute discussed in a recent legislative session — which the council recalled might require parity for swaps or swaps with federal entities — would apply. Carter and staff clarified that the current plan is a sale (not a swap) to a federal agency and that state bid‑provisions apply to private transfers, not transfers to other government partners. Eric, identified in the discussion as legal counsel, said staff would review any legislative changes and provide a legal opinion before bringing a final agreement to council.

On the procedural question of how the property could be transferred without public bid, staff said bidding requirements apply to transfers to private buyers; transfers to other government entities or through a government‑to‑government process do not trigger the same bid rules. Staff said they had previously vetted the intermediary structure with the Conservation Fund and were comfortable that using the intermediary to facilitate an eventual transfer to the BLM would not defeat the exemption from competitive bidding for government transfers.

Ending: Council did not take a formal vote but the consensus was to allow Carter and staff to resume discussions with the Conservation Fund and BLM, while staff will return with survey work, legal review and a formal agreement for later council action. Staff emphasized the council will have multiple formal approvals ahead of any final transaction.