How People Voted
29% For, 71% Against
Take Action
![]() ![]() |
Alert Your Friends and Colleagues |
![]() ![]() |
Write Your Representative in Congress |
| Save & Share | |
| del.icio.us | |
| Digg | |
| Yahoo! | |
H.R. 3299, To provide for a boundary adjustment and land conveyances involving Roosevelt National Forest, Colorado, to correct the effects of an erroneous land survey that resulted in approximately 7 acres of the Crystal Lakes Subdivision, Ninth Filing, encroaching on National Forest System land
- This item is from the 110th Congress (2007-2008) and is no longer current. Comments, voting, and wiki editing have been disabled, and the cost/savings estimate has been frozen.
Comparing revision saved on October 3, 2008, 07:48:50 (webmaster), with revision saved on December 3, 2008, 19:49:33 (webmaster):
H.R. 3299 would provide for a boundary adjustment and land conveyances involving Roosevelt National Forest, Colorado, to correct the effects of an erroneous land survey that resulted in approximately 7 acres of the Crystal Lakes Subdivision, Ninth Filing, encroaching on National Forest System land.
== Detailed Summary ==
<summary>
Modifies the boundaries of Roosevelt National Forest, Colorado, to exclude from it a parcel of real property consisting of approximately seven acres that was erroneously included within the Crystal Lakes Subdivision, North Filing,Subdivision as depicted on a result of the failure of a 1975 survey of the Subdivision to correctly locate the original quarter corners as specified. map dated July 15, 2008.
Directs the Secretary of Agriculture to use the authority provided by the Small Tracts Act to convey all interest of the United States in and to the real property excluded from the boundaries of Roosevelt National Forest under this Act to the landowners whose real property adjoins the excluded land and who have occupiedoccupy the excluded land.
Authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to sell or exchange to the city of Norfolk, Virginia, certain real property under the administrative jurisdiction of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), including land and improvements, located in good faith reliance onNorfolk if the Secretary: (1) determines that such conveyance is in the best interests of NOAA and the federal government; and (2) has provided prior notification to the appropriate congressional committees.
Requires the proceeds of any conveyance under this Act to be made available for: (1) activities related to the operations of, or capital improvements to, NOAA property; or (2) relocation and other costs associated with the erroneous survey. sale or exchange.
</summary>
<!--Leave in the 'summary' tags if you want the latest summary from the Congressional Research Service automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. -->
== Status of the Legislation ==
<status>
Latest Major Action: 10/2/2008: Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
</status>
<!-- Leave in the 'status' tags if you want the latest reported status from THOMAS automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. -->
== Points in Favor ==
(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)
<!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! -->
== Points Against ==
(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)
<!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! -->
Cost per :
Learn More
RSS Feeds for This Bill
Keep yourself updated on user contributions and debates about this bill! (Learn more about RSS.)




Visitor Comments
Bob Frelinger
May 28, 2008, 10:42am (report abuse)The people who purchased land in the Crystal Lakes subdivision did so in good faith. It was not their fault that the survey conducted on behalf of the developer was incorrect. Additionally, the government is only now, after more than 20 years, bringing up the issue. The lapse of time makes it all but impossible to go after the developer and surveyor. Asking the property owners to pay the government for land they already paid the developer for makes no sense. The only responsible decision at this point in time is to approve this legislation.