[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 82 (Tuesday, June 11, 2013)]
[House]
[Pages H3265-H3266]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
FRUIT HEIGHTS LAND CONVEYANCE ACT
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules
and pass the bill (H.R. 993) to provide for the conveyance of certain
parcels of National Forest System land to the city of Fruit Heights,
Utah.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 993
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Fruit Heights Land
Conveyance Act''.
SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) City.--The term ``City'' means the city of Fruit
Heights, Utah.
(2) Map.--The term ``map'' means the map entitled
``Proposed Fruit Heights City Conveyance'' and dated
September 13, 2012.
(3) National forest system land.--The term ``National
Forest System land'' means the approximately 100 acres of
National Forest System land, as depicted on the map.
(4) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Agriculture.
SEC. 3. CONVEYANCE OF CERTAIN LAND TO THE CITY OF FRUIT
HEIGHTS, UTAH.
(a) In General.--The Secretary shall convey to the City,
without consideration, all right, title, and interest of the
United States in and to the National Forest System land.
(b) Survey.--
(1) In general.--If determined by the Secretary to be
necessary, the exact acreage and legal description of the
National Forest System land shall be determined by a survey
approved by the Secretary.
(2) Costs.--The City shall pay the reasonable survey and
other administrative costs associated with a survey conducted
under paragraph (1).
(c) Easement.--As a condition of the conveyance under
subsection (a), the Secretary shall reserve an easement to
the National Forest System land for the Bonneville Shoreline
Trail.
(d) Use of National Forest System Land.--As a condition of
the conveyance under subsection (a), the City shall use the
National Forest System land only for public purposes.
(e) Reversionary Interest.--In the quitclaim deed to the
City for the National Forest System land, the Secretary shall
provide that the National Forest System land shall revert to
the Secretary, at the election of the Secretary, if the
National Forest System land is used for other than a public
purpose.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Washington (Mr. Hastings) and the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Grijalva)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Washington.
General Leave
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that
all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend
their remarks and include extraneous materials on the bill under
consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Washington?
There was no objection.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as
I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 993, introduced by our distinguished subcommittee
chairman, Mr. Bishop of Utah, would authorize the Secretary of
Agriculture to convey approximately 100 acres of National Forest System
land to the city of Fruit Heights in Utah. Fruit Heights is completely
surrounded by Federal land and is in desperate need of a place to
develop a cemetery. This legislation would convey a small parcel of
Federal land for that important public service.
I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I reserve the balance
of my time.
Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 993 would transfer 100 acres of Forest Service land
to Fruit Heights, Utah, at no cost to the city, for use as a cemetery.
The parcel of land in question was purchased by the Federal Government
in 2002 for over $3 million from the Land and Water Conservation Fund.
It is obviously not ideal for Federal taxpayers to give away land
that was purchased with Federal money just 11 years ago. However, the
bill makes clear that should the land ever be used for anything other
than a public purpose, the parcel will come back to Federal ownership.
We do not object to H.R. 993, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I'm very pleased to yield 4
minutes to the author of this legislation, the gentleman from Utah (Mr.
Bishop).
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Fruit Heights, Utah, is a city of around 5,000
people. In the center of Davis County to the east are the mountains
which are owned by the Forest Service. Surrounding it to the south is
the city of Farmington, which has a landlocked cemetery and only allows
Farmington residents to be buried there. On the west and the north is
Kaysville and Layton, which has a cemetery which faces the same
situation and is restricting who can be buried there, as well.
Fruit Heights really has a significant problem. The only way they can
go is east, up the mountain, on land that is currently owned by the
Forest Service but is within the boundaries of Fruit Heights itself. So
on this map, the brown, barren area without trees is what's owned by
the Forest Service. Totally surrounding the Forest Service land are
houses, and only residential roads can get up to this particular area.
Running through the middle, blasted in there, is a canal which will be
preserved for canal use and be dedicated to that. Above it, the area
that is above that, still within the city of
[[Page H3266]]
Fruit Heights, is too steep for any development.
So, by city ordinance, they have already said, when they receive this
land, that will be permanent open space. The area below the canal here
is the land in question that would be transferred to the city for the
purpose of a cemetery, which they drastically need. They have been
through every area they have as potential in Fruit Heights City. This
is truly the only area.
It is true that a nature conservancy group purchased this land from a
citizen in Fruit Heights and then sold it at a profit to the Federal
Government to be used as habitat for mule deer. The Mule Deer
Association is neutral on this bill, neither opposing it nor in favor
of it, and they basically privately say that if it's a cemetery,
they'll probably have more forage potential for the mule deer than they
have right now.
This is what is necessary. I appreciate the minority's working with
me on this particular issue to find the realization that there is a
need for a cemetery. I thank them for their support. I thank the
chairman for putting this crucial issue forward, which to us may be not
crucial, but to those dying to get into this place, it is indeed
crucial.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I advise my friend from
Arizona I have no further speakers, and I'm prepared to yield back if
he is.
Mr. GRIJALVA. I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I yield back the balance of my time and
urge adoption of the resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings) that the House suspend the
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 993.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________