S-277-119
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 207.
What it does
This bill would release a federal reversionary interest in land located in Chester County, Tennessee, meaning the federal government would give up its right to reclaim that land if certain conditions are no longer met. It would also convey — that is, transfer ownership of — mineral interests in the same county from the federal government to another party. The bill's full details and specific acreage are not included in the available text.
Who benefits
The direct recipient of the mineral rights and the land interest (likely a local government, private landowner, or developer — not specified in the bill text). Chester County, Tennessee residents and local government, who may gain greater control over local land and subsurface resources. Businesses or individuals interested in extracting minerals from the affected parcels. Local tax rolls may benefit if the land transitions to taxable private ownership.
Who is hurt
The federal government and, by extension, the general public would lose any future claim to the land and its mineral resources. Environmental or conservation groups that prefer federal oversight of mineral extraction on federal lands. Neighboring landowners or communities who may be affected by future mineral extraction activity on the conveyed parcels. Taxpayers who may lose the long-term value of federal mineral assets.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that releasing federal reversionary interests and conveying mineral rights to local or private parties returns control of land to the communities closest to it, reducing federal bureaucratic involvement in local land management. They contend that local ownership can spur economic development, generate county tax revenue, and allow mineral resources to be put to productive use more efficiently than under federal stewardship.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that transferring federal mineral interests to private or local parties permanently removes public assets from federal oversight, foreclosing future options for conservation or public benefit. They contend that without full bill text specifying acreage, mineral type, and compensation terms, it is impossible to assess whether the public receives fair value for the transferred resources, raising concerns about accountability and transparency in federal land disposal.