Login with username, password and session length
Good Morning Mr. Aal.Please be advised that the Freedom of Information Act does not have provisions for answering questions or inquiries, specifically to “ … whether the Forest Service had a position with respect to the interpretation of the deed restriction as it relates to the proposed placement of a public private partnership to include the construction of approximately 114,000 square foot buildings of which approximately 75,000 square feet are for limited public use and private utilization.” I have forwarded your email to Mark McEntarffer in the Recreation/Special Uses Office regarding your inquiry. As the FOIA portion of your request has been completed, you may contact Mark for further information.
Subject: RE: Update on #2018-FS-R3-02496-FMr. Aal,Please let me know if I can answer any questions for you.Thanks!
Subject: RE: Update on #2018-FS-R3-02496-FGood morning, Thank you for reaching out. My specific question has to do with a proposed private development, for a private enterprise, on a parcel the Forest Service deeded to the town of Payson locally identified as “North Rumsey Park.” I will copy and paste my prior question to Mr. Bosworth. I am trying to see if the Forest Service has a position on the deed restrictions? The full detail is below. I can of course provide any additional detail on the proposed project, or the deed, you may need. Thank you in advance for any clarification you can provide. *-*-*March 14, 2018Ms. Helena TsosieHtsosie@fs.fed.usDear Ms. Tsosie,Thank you for your assistance in the recent records request case number 208FS-R3-20496-F. The original request to Mr. Bosworth included a request for a position with respect to parcel number 302-23-444. When the Forest Service deeded the property to the Town of Payson in 1987 there were deed restrictions via the conveyance. The deed read in relevant part as follows:“Title to any real property acquired by the Town of Payson pursuant to this Act shall revert to the United States if the town attempts to convey or otherwise transfer ownership of any portion of such property to any other party or attempt to encumber such title, or if the town permits the use of any portion of such property for any purpose incompatible with the purpose as specified in section 3 of this Act.” Section three reads as follows:“Real property conveyed to the Town of Payson pursuant to this Act be used for public open space, park and recreational purposes.”The original request to Mr. Bosworth requested clarification whether the Forest Service had a position with respect to the interpretation of the deed restriction as it relates to the proposed placement of a public private partnership to include the construction of approximately 114,000 square foot buildings of which approximately 75,000 square feet are for limited public use and private utilization. We are requesting a formal response from the Forest Service with respect to the apparent deed restrictions and the proposed development of the land for a public private partnership.Thank you again for your assistance completing the Freedom of Information Act request.
Good Morning Mr. Aal,We have not received any information or notice of a private development planned for the parcel in question.If you have an official notice of the project please forward it on to us.I have copied our Regional Land Adjustment Program Manager on this email so she is aware of the potential situation.Thanks!
Good morning, Thank you again for the follow up. The matter stems from a proposed deal with the Town of Payson, (TOP), Community Center Partners, (CCP) and Varxity Development, (Varxity). I am not surprised that the Forest Service has not been placed on notice. My conversations with Mayor Swartwood and Town Manager Garret, clearly reveled that to be the case. By way of background, the Town has commissioned a feasibility study to use “North Rumsey Park” for placement of a recreation center, training facility, and two hockey rinks. The total estimated size is 114,000 square feet. Of that, approximately 27,000 square feet is for a community rec center. The balance is for use by Varxity for development of facilities to be used in conjunction with development of a proposed 600 student private “Elite prep school” focused on hockey training for future division one scholarships. There is limited public use envisioned as the majority of the park complex would be for use of Varxity. The conversation has changed to now include use of ball parks, etc. The ballpark parcels were not deeded via the Forest Service. The parcel deeded via the Forest Service is the build out area of the hockey rinks and training facility. The proposed deal is contingent on use of public lands. Most recently the principal of Varxity is quoted as saying:“I need access to their fields. That is truly what we need. We need access to those ball diamonds and they are willing to allow an arena to be built on their property that we can lease from them and use. That is what we need: a willing partner that sees the economic benefit,” Moore said. “If they build the arenas on public land, then that is a benefit to me because I don’t have that cost.”Attached please find a copy of the Town ordinance commissioning the study (# 3065), a copy of the deed for the parcel with restrictions from 1987, and two articles from the local paper detailing the plans. There is of course additional information available if it would be of help. Please do not hesitate to contact me for any additional information. The deed restrictions on the land stipulate the land will revert back to the Forest Service if the deed is “encumbered.” I am inquiring if the Forest Service views a commercial build out for a private enterprise, and an anticipated long term lease(s), as an “encumbrance” on the title or if this would be consistent with the “open spaces” and “public use” envisioned by the Forest Service during the transfer of the land and required via the act of transfer. Thank you,
Definition of duplicitous: marked by duplicity : deceptive in words or action duplicitous tactics— duplicitously adverb