Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Federal Land Disposal 30x30 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee backs resolution urging federal disposal of certain federal lands and opposing '30x30' conservation push
Summary
Senate Concurrent Resolution 1018, which expresses legislative support for BLM disposal of certain federally held unappropriated lands and opposes the federal "30 by 30" conservation initiative, passed the committee 4–2–1 after public testimony highlighted conflicting views on recreation access, economic value and conservation.
The Senate Federalism and Lands Committee gave a due‑pass recommendation to Senate Concurrent Resolution 1018 on Wednesday, a nonbinding resolution that urged the Bureau of Land Management to dispose of certain federally held unappropriated lands and opposed the federal "30 by 30" conservation initiative.
Sponsor remarks: The sponsor framed the resolution as a statement that Arizona's ability to manage its tax base and natural resources should be preserved. "How much more land can Arizona afford to lose?" the sponsor asked during committee debate, saying the resolution opposes federal initiatives that would transfer or restrict private and state land in the name of conservation.
Public testimony: Zachary Santoyo, identifying himself as a member of Backcountry Hunters and Anglers, testified against the resolution and warned that transfers of BLM land to state trust land or private ownership would reduce public recreation access and raise recreation costs. "Selling trust land has become the state's best tool to generate the revenue," he said, adding concern that state trust lands are more restrictive than current federal access.
Sierra Club testimony: Sandy Barr of the Sierra Club Grand Canyon Chapter also opposed the resolution and sought to correct characterizations of the 30x30 initiative, saying the national effort emphasizes collaborative, locally led conservation and that Arizonans have historically supported protecting public lands in bipartisan fashion. Barr urged lawmakers to reject the resolution.
Committee action and context: The committee adopted a two‑page Fincham amendment that specifies the resolution refers to federally held proprietary interest class‑4 unappropriated lands. Committee debate reflected a familiar split: sponsors and some members framed federal land disposal as necessary to restore state control and revenue capacity; opponents warned about lost recreation access, conservation objectives and long‑term public benefits. The committee recorded a 4–2–1 vote in favor; supporters said the resolution is nonbinding but communicates the legislature's position to federal authorities.
Next steps: SCR 1018, as amended, will move forward to the full Senate. Because it is a concurrent resolution and not statute, it expresses the legislature's view rather than changing law.
