Property Rights

[farmers_son]

Spoken like someone who, I am betting, does not have any crown land.

Actually, it seems to me that these lands are being arbitrarily taken from the leaseholder without compensation. There is no question the previous leaseholder would have had equity in the lease prior to the Province transferring the land to the Municipality. Assuming this land is simply sold to the highest bidder and the previous leaseholders do not receive some recognition or value for their years of stewardship and the resulting increased value of the lease, where does that leave all the other leaseholders in this Province?

I am in the process of buying a Crown Lease. It would seem that I should be very concerned that my investment might be rather short term and evaporate into thin air at the whim of Government. Although I would never do it, the smart move would seem to be to take all I can from the lease as quick as I can and not worry about the future of the land. In other words, if the Government is going to treat its leaseholders like the private sector treats renters then the leaseholders will need to start treating the land like rented land and rob it for all it is worth. At least in this area, most rented land is in pretty bad shape after 5-10 years while the Crown land is farmed just like the deeded land. Go figure….

[coppertop]

The lease holder on tax recovery land is NOT having the land taken away, they have the opportunity to bid on the purchase of the land or to lease it again, along with the rest of the public.

When land is owned by the municipality it is owned in the name of all the citizens of that municipality. Is it fair that one citizen has lifelong use of lands with no sunset clause or no opportunity for other citizens to use the same lands ? If operators wish to have ultimate control over lands then they should buy the land, not lease it from the public and expect it to be theirs forever.

There must be an element of fairness in all access, and the ability to use crown or municipaly owned lands. I would suspect that the MD of Taber has done due diligence in any decision they have made to request the lands in question be transferred to the municipality.

In my experience municipalities do not do themselves any favor by acquiring more land, usually it causes more headaches than you can imagine.

[coppertop]

just wanted to add this, No I do not have a grazing lease, but I do have years of experience in serving the public. Every decision made by municipalities and government regarding public land has got to be for the greater good vs being in the best interest of one citizen.

[WRAPper]

Wanted to step in on this one, as in our county we don't have many if any tax recovery lands that I am aware of. Howevermour county has recently as well decided to get out of the land businesss in cases where they have small parcels, such as former school sites and also some abandoned railroad allowances that came to them through the other levels of government.
We also happen to be within the "acreage belt" which seems to be in an ever expanded circle around the urban areas. I know that if our councilor supported a move to tender these lands to the highest bidder and in effect created an acreage in the middle of some of these long established farms we'd be seeing a new councilor this fall. That said he's on record for getting these parcels amalgamated into the existing quarters at fair market value and that is really what should happen with all these lands develop a fair market value calculation for all crown parcels like this and as in most other rental scenarios give the renter or quarter owner the last right of refusal amalgamating it into the quarter and get this issue put to bed it's simmered for years and needs to done with.
And as far as property rights WBrower tell me when and where and I'll support you fully. It has been one of my largest issues between oil and gas and hunting etc it's time that we control what we own in this province.

[coppertop]

A lot of municipal reserve parcels out in rural municipalities were taken at the time of subdivision of lands. There is no MR required on the first parcel out, but after that 10% of the remainder is either taken as MR or cash in lieu.

My preference has always been cash in lieu with the exception of a large multi lot subdivision where MR lands can be used for a play ground, community centre etc.

In our county there was some abandoned rail line and the county worked with the landowners to allow these lands to be stand alone subdivisions if that is what the landowner wanted, and in many cases this is what was requested by the landowner. They were buying up the abandoned rail line and selling it as acreages, the only drawback was when there was no access to the parcel, then subdivision was denied. The landowner then had to amalgamate the land into the quarter.

I support landowners having the final refusal to meet the top bid on leases, and tax recovery lands, but I do not support these lands remaining with one leaseholder forever without having some mechanism triggered to ensure that the public is receiving full value for the rental of these lands.

I also feel that anyone bidding on leased land whether it is crown land or municipally owned land should prove they need the land for grass, and that is all they should be leasing. They should be fully compensated for damage to grasslands, fences etc. during the course of resource extraction but the resource revenue should to to the crown. It goes to the municipality on all municipally owned lands that I am aware of.

[wbrower]

To date three constituencies have passed Property Rights resolutions that will come before the P.C. AGM in Edmonton this coming May.

Property Rights resolutions have passed there before but previous governments have simply ignored them.

This time there may be a little more momentum. Rural Alberta seems to be waking up to the fact that we have been short changed by provincial governments and MLA's, who's primary interests have been to feather their own nest, and look after the interests of Resource Companies, rather than looking after our interests.

[coppertop]

Have any of these resolutions requested that property rights be entrenched in a new Land Use Policy Framework ? I would suspect that is the vehicle that will deal with these issues. Of course, as you know these resolutions are debated at the party AGM, and party members from both rural and urban Alberta will likely join in the debate.

[WRAPper]

Property rights have alot more places than just in dealings with land.
If the Alberta gov't had worked on proerty rights the CWB issue would have been solved long ago.

[wbrower]

Do you mean that if we had property rights Farmers would not have been put in jail for exercising their right to sell what they grow to whom ever they choose? Seems fair enough.

[WRAPper]

I've always believed this to be the case, never asked for a legal opinion on it but it makes sense.