Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Trust Land Transfer topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press commissioners for clarity after DNR trust-land transfer application is revised to ~198 acres
Summary
Public commenters raised questions about a Department of Natural Resources trust-land transfer that was originally around 400 acres and later revised; commissioners explained the DNR public-comment process and advised residents how to submit comments while acknowledging citizen concerns about tax impacts and habitat claims.
Residents raised repeated concerns at the March 17 meeting about a Department of Natural Resources trust-land transfer application that initially covered roughly 400 acres and — after DNR review — was reduced, commissioners said, to about 198 acres.
Multiple speakers asked why the county and affected junior taxing districts were not notified earlier and questioned the fiscal and habitat analyses supporting the transfer. Joe Schmidt, who said he was a long-time volunteer in regional marine-restoration efforts, urged the commissioners to "not stop now," asked for the county'9s position, and recommended an independent appraisal and additional scrutiny of endangered-species assertions in DNR materials. "I'9m wondering how this all get pulled together," he said, and asked whether the county could hire a respected forester to perform a separate appraisal.
Commissioners explained how the DNR trust-land transfer process works: any public agency may apply and a public-comment period follows technical review by DNR staff; the county encouraged citizens to submit comments via DNR'9s Trust Land transfer website. The chair said DNR staff reviewed the original application and determined about half of the land was operable timber that should remain in trust; the applicant revised the application to limit acreage to areas with steep slopes, limited road access or habitat protections. One commissioner urged improvements to DNR notification to ensure junior taxing districts have timely information.
Speakers also raised concerns about the prospect of trading nonproductive trust land for more productive timber and the potential consequences for tax rolls if revenues shift. Commissioners and staff said DNR has been responsive to county questions in the past but that the county is unlikely to hire an independent forester routinely; they encouraged residents to make formal comments to DNR and to follow up with county staff for additional clarification.
The record shows active public engagement and a county pledge to pursue more information from DNR. No final county action on the transfer was taken at the March 17 meeting; the DNR public-comment window and its internal review process determine the next administrative steps.
