Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Conservation Easement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Green River council unanimously denies donation of Woodside parcels as conservation easement
Summary
After hearing a presentation from the donor group about an 85-acre Woodside donation that included water rights, the Green River City Council voted unanimously to deny accepting the charitable conservation easement, citing questions about valuation and donor motives.
The Green River City Council on Tuesday unanimously voted to deny a proposed charitable donation of Woodside land earmarked for a conservation easement.
Mark Realty, who introduced the proposal, told the council the group had acquired roughly 62 half-acre lots (about 85 acres total) and sought to donate them to the city as open space. He said the donation would include a portion of water rights and that the donation process the group uses involves subdividing parcels on paper, accepting individual donations then vacating the subdivision to make the parcel whole.
Heather Burrows, a title agent, described the water rights tied to the property (water-right number 91-3772) and told the council that roughly 40% of the group water right would transfer with the parcel; she said the group total was for 300 ELUs and that the water right had an early priority date (stated as 02/16 and later referenced verbally as an 1800s priority). Burrows said water-right changes and relocations are subject to state-engineer approval.
Councilmembers pressed the presenters on valuation, appraisal practices and easement terms. Council discussion focused on whether the donation represented a straightforward charitable conveyance by a longtime landowner or a commercial transaction in which parcels were acquired and subdivided then offered to the city. One councilmember said the pattern looked like "a corporation or company that's just trying to make a bunch of money on buying tracts of ground, selling a bunch of it off, then claiming they're donating it to the city," and moved to deny the donation. That motion was seconded and the council voted in favor of denial.
Council members also sought clarity on permitted uses under the proposed easement. Presenters said the easement would preserve surface uses from development and mining but could allow recreational uses (examples cited included camping, hunting and other open-space activities); preexisting utilities would likely remain in place but new infrastructure and structures would generally be restricted.
The council did not take additional action on the parcel after denying acceptance of the conservation easement; the presenters had asked for an accelerated timeline because they were seeking to complete the donation before year-end.
The council's denial closes this request for city acceptance of the Woodside parcels; the council did not adopt any follow-up direction beyond the vote to deny.
