PEAX Equipment

State Land in Jackson, WY headed for auction

appaloosa

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 29, 2014
Messages
470
Location
Upper Green River, WY
I am surprised this hasn't garnered more interest here, but this has been quite the saga. Despite strong public opposition, the Office of State Lands is recommending an auction for 640 acres of prime wildlife habitat near Grand Teton Park. Grand Teton Park has interest in purchasing it, but can't pay more than its appraised value, so the state is clearly playing hardball. Personally, I wish it would just remain with the state, but selling to the Park would certainly be better than the realestate developers who are currently licking their chops.
We'll see if the State Land Board has any last minute plans to stay the auction, but given the clowns who currently hold the seats, I am not holding my breath.

 
The hypocrisy of the osli and land board is staggering.

They claim to have a fiduciary responsibility to maximize the monetary gain with the land sale in question, ok great.

But, they refuse to reappraise Columbus Peak property in that 2 year old exchange that is clearly way undervalued with an old appraisal.

I guess when the exchange benefits a private individual who contributed to a few local campaigns, fiduciary responsibility to school kids is less of a priority.

It's ridiculous and such a blatant example of making up the rules as they go along.

And @Oak has it right, classic case of why the states should never be trusted in regard to federal lands transferring to States.
 
What does the state currently make off of this parcel per year? I'm interested to do a ROI based on that number.
 
What about the future value?

Why does the OSLI and Land Board have to sell it right now?

There really is no concern for anything other than what they can get today, the future isn't important to them. Those pesky school kids 10-15-50 years from now can just pound sand.
 
I'm not necessarily advocating for the sale of this land - I'm only trying to understand all positions because knowing all sides of it helps me understand the full picture of what is involved.

Well maybe my math isn't correct on this and I'm sure I'm leaving some key things out but....

As pointed out "the commissioners must manage state land in the best way to raise money for public schools"

What if the best way to manage it is to take the cash from the sale and invest it?

If the land is sold at a price of 80 million and what if it was put in a simple CD/bond type investment with basically no risk and even at 0.5% the annual interest earned is $400,000 right?

$400,000 per year (removing it and started at 80 mil in the bank again each year) made on 640 acres/year sounds good doesn't it?
 
What about the future value?

Why does the OSLI and Land Board have to sell it right now?

There really is no concern for anything other than what they can get today, the future isn't important to them. Those pesky school kids 10-15-50 years from now can just pound sand.
Do you know if it would come with a landowner tag if I bought it? I like the way Utah does theirs.
 
I'm not necessarily advocating for the sale of this land - I'm only trying to understand all positions because knowing all sides of it helps me understand the full picture of what is involved.

Well maybe my math isn't correct on this and I'm sure I'm leaving some key things out but....

As pointed out "the commissioners must manage state land in the best way to raise money for public schools"

What if the best way to manage it is to take the cash from the sale and invest it?

If the land is sold at a price of 80 million and what if it was put in a simple CD/bond type investment with basically no risk and even at 0.5% the annual interest earned is $400,000 right?

$400,000 per year (removing it and started at 80 mil in the bank again each year) made on 640 acres/year sounds good doesn't it?
You're making a lot of assumptions, one being that it will be invested instead of squandered. Another is potential future land values greatly increasing. What if the land values double in the next decade? Was it a good decision to sell it now? Rule and law changes regarding the money from the sale, etc. etc.

Plus investing is sketchy both short and long term depending on who determines the investments, etc.

The problem is, once the land is sold, the money from the sale spent, you're done. No more revenue coming in and no other way to make money from land you no longer own.

IMO/E, both the land and the money will be pissed away and the State will have its hand out asking taxpayers to fund schools.
 
You're making a lot of assumptions, one being that it will be invested instead of squandered. Another is potential future land values greatly increasing. What if the land values double in the next decade? Was it a good decision to sell it now? Rule and law changes regarding the money from the sale, etc. etc.

Plus investing is sketchy both short and long term depending on who determines the investments, etc.

The problem is, once the land is sold, the money from the sale spent, you're done. No more revenue coming in and no other way to make money from land you no longer own.

IMO/E, both the land and the money will be pissed away and the State will have its hand out asking taxpayers to fund schools.
I understand the points you are making and you are probably correct about what will happen with that money at the sale and there probably are rules/laws that they have to follow about it.

As far as future value goes, that could be said about a lot of locations in regards to land prices and what will happen to them in the future. For the most part, they always go up and go up way higher and faster than predicted it seems. That doesn't necessarily mean that no one should ever not sell land just because they can get more for it 5 years down the road.

My scenario was of course hypothetical and simply just a thought about trying to assess just how ridiculously valuable that square mile is.

Just for fun, here is another hypothetical for you Buzz: How about a state land sell and repurchase?

Would you if you had the power of the land board sell the 640 acre parcel for 80 million with the stipulation that you need to take that and purchase two properties like this for the state? Wouldn't two parcels like this example here yield more for the state public schools by far?
 
I understand the points you are making and you are probably correct about what will happen with that money at the sale and there probably are rules/laws that they have to follow about it.

As far as future value goes, that could be said about a lot of locations in regards to land prices and what will happen to them in the future. For the most part, they always go up and go up way higher and faster than predicted it seems. That doesn't necessarily mean that no one should ever not sell land just because they can get more for it 5 years down the road.

My scenario was of course hypothetical and simply just a thought about trying to assess just how ridiculously valuable that square mile is.

Just for fun, here is another hypothetical for you Buzz: How about a state land sell and repurchase?

Would you if you had the power of the land board sell the 640 acre parcel for 80 million with the stipulation that you need to take that and purchase two properties like this for the state? Wouldn't two parcels like this example here yield more for the state public schools by far?
Its pretty obvious, you've never had to deal with a land board or legislature...

Who's going to show up to make sure your hypothetical comes to fruition?

Lots of people with great ideas, and very few that are willing to do the work to make it happen.
 
I understand the points you are making and you are probably correct about what will happen with that money at the sale and there probably are rules/laws that they have to follow about it.

As far as future value goes, that could be said about a lot of locations in regards to land prices and what will happen to them in the future. For the most part, they always go up and go up way higher and faster than predicted it seems. That doesn't necessarily mean that no one should ever not sell land just because they can get more for it 5 years down the road.

My scenario was of course hypothetical and simply just a thought about trying to assess just how ridiculously valuable that square mile is.

Just for fun, here is another hypothetical for you Buzz: How about a state land sell and repurchase?

Would you if you had the power of the land board sell the 640 acre parcel for 80 million with the stipulation that you need to take that and purchase two properties like this for the state? Wouldn't two parcels like this example here yield more for the state public schools by far?
I don't know all of the intricacies of this type of stuff, but this is exactly where my mind went as well. I have no idea what kind of power a land board has in terms of being able to purchase, but it seems to me that getting $80 mil for 640 acres could be used to purchase a ton of land elsewhere in the state that could be opened up to the public and generate considerably more revenue than the current 640 acres.
 
Back
Top