Christmas Mountains Transfer Hits Additional Roadblocks

It is starting to look more and more like the Christmas Mountains may not make it into the hands of the National Park Service anytime soon. Notes the Fort Worth Star-Telegram:

Texas Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson’s continued insistence that the state get paid for the pristine Christmas Mountains could slow down any potential transfer to the National Park Service by at least a year, a federal park official said Friday.

The National Park Service has expressed an interest in acquiring the land, which was donated to the state for conservation purposes but which Patterson had attempted to sell to private interests.

William Wellman, superintendent of Big Bend National Park in West Texas, said that the park service will likely have a proposal ready for the state by February.

But he said that the insistence by the Texas General Land Office that it get paid for the 9,269-acre tract could seriously complicate any potential transfer.

“You’re looking at a year delay if you were to involve federal funds — it would definitely be a hurdle, and I don’t know if it would be insurmountable,” Wellman said.

Patterson’s office has said that it is its interpretation of state law that it cannot give the property to the park service — even though the property was donated to the state in 1991 for conservation purposes, and even though the General Land Office pledged when it accepted the donation that it would remain in state hands or go only to the National Park Service.

Let’s be honest: this is a weird, sticky situation, and while I don’t think Patterson is necessarily handling the situation to my linking, he believes he is trying to do his job.

Land under the custodial control of the General Land Office is for the sole purpose of making money for the Permanent School Fund. That’s what Patterson is trying to do and that’s his bottom line. I understand that and respect that he makes that a priority.

Where I disagree with Commissioner Patterson is on his decision to ignore the stipulations in the deed:

The written deed further stipulated that if the General Land Office ever tried to transfer the property to any entity other than the park service or the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, the land office would first get the donors’ written permission.

Patterson sparked a public outcry when he announced earlier this year that he would ignore that provision, which he called unenforceable.

I’m not a land and title lawyer, so I don’t know whether that provision is enforceable or not. However, when Patterson’s predecessors accepted the property, they made an agreement to honor that provision, and Patterson should honor it.

I’ve also got concerns about Patterson’s continued carping about guns and the land:

A strong Second Amendment advocate, Patterson also has expressed an unwillingness to offer the land to the park service if the agency insisted on enforcing its regular firearms restrictions on the property.

When you are talking about preservation of the land, that shouldn’t be an issue. In addition, when you are talking about selling something, which Patterson is, this shouldn’t be an issue either. If you are trying to do the best thing for the Permanent School Fund, I’m not sure firearms rights come in to play.

Popularity: 5% [?]

Technorati Tags Christmas Mountain, Jerry Patterson

Bookmark It