Infuriating

Yesterday, on our Facebook page, we posted this important story about the Federal Government withholding $53M of WY's money from them.  I am posting it again here, in hopes that people will wake up to the fact that the Federal Government does not play by "the rules".  It is time to stand up as states and claim the jurisdictional rights that are already ours!

The original story can be read at http://www.wyomingnews.com/articles/2013/03/27/news/01top_03-27-13.txt

Feds hold on to $53M owed to Wyoming

Mead blasts Department of the Interior's newly announced decision to keep mineral royalties

By Trevor Brown
tbrown@wyomingnews.com

CHEYENNE -- Gov. Matt Mead denounced a recent decision by the federal government to withhold $53 million in mineral royalties payments owed to the state.

The U.S. Department of the Interior notified state officials Monday that it is withholding the funds as a result of the federal sequestration.

The move would cost the state about $10.6 million each month for the period of March through July. And more cuts could be required in August or September.

Mead criticized the decision, saying the department is unfairly passing the federal cuts on to the state.

"When (Wyoming) reduced its budget by over 6 percent, it did not achieve its reductions by withholding mineral revenue due under state leases," he said in a statement. "That would be taking someone else's property.

“Similarly, the Department of the Interior should not be able to meet its budget reduction by taking mineral revenues, which belong to the states under the law.”

Renny MacKay, a spokesman for Mead, said the funds were profiled, meaning it was money that was expected to come in when lawmakers put together the 2013-14 biennium budget.

“We don’t know how this will impact the budget until we get all the revenue (numbers) in,” he said. “But what we do know is that this is $53 million that was owed to us that we won’t get now.”

To put the potential $53 million reduction in context, the 6 percent budget cuts lawmakers approved earlier in the year will result in $61 million in reductions for the coming fiscal year.

Mead said he is working with state Attorney General Greg Phillips and Wyoming’s congressional delegation to see what resources are available to them.

Federal law requires Wyoming to receive 50 percent of the revenue from mineral leasing on federal lands.

But Gregory J. Gould, director of the Department of the Interior’s Office of Natural Resources Revenue, wrote to the state that the cuts are needed as a result of the automatic budget cuts that began to go into effect March 1.

Department of the Interior officials did not respond to calls seeking comment Tuesday afternoon.

State Treasurer Mark Gordon said he too will fight to prevent the reduction from going through.

“The opportunity to take a lot more of what the states are properly owed proved to be too tempting to the federal government,” he said in statement. “We are using every means necessary to make sure our state is made whole.”

Mead also lashed out at the Department of the Interior for giving the state little notice in making the announcement.

“This is no way to achieve adequate notice or give our state an opportunity to respond before the action is under way,” he said. “As far as communications go, this method of passing along significant information that greatly impacts Wyoming gets a grade of F-minus or worse. It is not acceptable.”

If the state is unable to stop the federal government from withholding the funds, it will be the second major budget hit from the federal government in the past year.

Congress passed a bill last July that stripped Wyoming of more than $700 million in Abandoned Mine Land funds that the state had expected to receive over the next decade.

State and congressional leaders similarly vowed at that time to fight the federal cuts. However, they have been unsuccessful thus far in doing so.

Commissioner Doug Heaton Explains...

Well over ten years ago, an astute Mark Habbeshaw foresaw the efforts of an ever expanding federal government to claim jurisdiction and then close access to public lands through road closures.  Mark almost single handedly waged a war to stop the intrusion.  He organized a working group to study solutions and finally ran for and won a commission seat from which he eventually filed suit claiming jurisdiction over roads by quiet title under Revised Statute 2477 authority (RS2477).  Subsequent County Commissions have persisted in and expanded the effort to include virtually all of the roads in Kane County.  Those arguments have been before the court for years and finally we got our first decision granting quiet title to a majority of the roads claimed in the original suit.

Two years ago the State of Utah decided to join the effort and filed suits on behalf of the remaining counties that have similar roads.   The pending litigation includes many thousands of roads and promises to go on for years unless this precedent setting decision paves a way for a satisfactory negotiated settlement. 

The impact of this decision is ground breaking.  It validates the assertion that local jurisdictions that RS2477 claims are valid and affirms both jurisdiction and ownership of the roads claimed, setting precedent for the rest of the state and the nation to follow. 

Environmental groups have opposed this action, knowing that an absence of roads is a prerequisite for wilderness designation which appears to be their predominant goal.  They are offended that commercial concerns including mining, timber harvest, grazing and mineral and oil extraction are allowed to take place on the "public lands".  The primary tools to stop those activities have been wilderness designation, environmental regulation and endangered species critical habitat.  Road closure is a major objective in their agenda to preclude the public from access to the lands. 

The trap for the public is that preservationist propaganda fails to mention the fact that should they accomplished their objective, those who wish to enjoy what they they have contributed to preserve will find it inaccessible by vehicle. Unless they are young and vigorous enough to hike 50 miles they will have to "view" the scenic wild-lands from the perimeter.  Comparing the vast areas proposed for preservation versus our ability to see only limited distances that experience will prove disappointing.  We even lose the ability to enjoy pictures of it as commercial photography is also prohibited.  It kind of violates the principles of the American Disabilities Act doesn't it.

We are excited to announce that the Court has now ruled that we can keep and maintain these roads for public use.  It is a great victory for those who desire to enjoy these lands and for those who depend on the resources that must be accessed by road.  The decision not only grants title and jurisdiction, but also provides access widths for maintenance where required.