Land Acquisition Solutions Brainstorm by Kerstin Larson

Shared checklist - potentially shared documents. A shared location where we can share.

judygrew — 2023-10-31 15:04:38 UTC

The $1 million threshold - increase [to what?]

judygrew — 2023-10-31 15:05:08 UTC

When over $1 million, put the PIP organization or checklist on the partners - so they know the format. More complete initial property packet.

judygrew — 2023-10-31 15:06:24 UTC

Have a written agreement of a timeline and formal signoff on due diligence items. You'll either raise objections or approve within this timeframe. We already have a formal signoff on appraisals. To eliminate confusion and ambiguity. Title, condition of property, survey and appraisal.

judygrew — 2023-10-31 15:08:08 UTC

Continue to decrease review and timelines by doing reviews in house.

judygrew — 2023-10-31 15:08:57 UTC

Use a PIP form with adequate information. Now we have different forms with different info. Get on the same page.

judygrew — 2023-10-31 15:09:25 UTC

Ensure all items on the PIP are truly needed for the appraisal.

judygrew — 2023-10-31 15:10:10 UTC

Get more detailed PIP form early in the process. So we know exactly what we're looking at. The more the partners know what we are looking for, the more likely they can provide it up front.

judygrew — 2023-10-31 15:11:34 UTC

Look at the threshold more as a proven quality threshold rather than a dollar threshold. Once you show your work is complete and correct you move to a standard where you keep more of the details in your own files. A certain number of technical reviews and then you don't have to do a SRA at the $1 million threshold. (Other ways we can work this). Includes updating attachment E.

judygrew — 2023-10-31 15:13:38 UTC

Combine the grant acquisition packet form with the PIP

judygrew — 2023-10-31 15:15:11 UTC

Pertaining to appraisal instructions - provide training or letters on instruction for various scenarios so that appraisal instructions meet DNR needs.

judygrew — 2023-10-31 15:15:56 UTC

Do a different type of appraisal process - more of a formula based. Landowners want to know what we're offering and we do a lot of work just for them to reject it. Before we spend a lot of time and money. A formulaic way to make an offer

judygrew — 2023-10-31 15:18:07 UTC

Example: the RIM process with BWSR. Something related to the assessed value with the county. In ten minutes they can give the landowner an idea of what it mike look like. [this is for easements - somehow do for acquisitions.]

Use a restricted use appraisal - can get back in a week to ten days. It is not all the homework to get up to state standards. A light version of appraisal. If landowner interested, can continue on.

judygrew — 2023-10-31 15:19:37 UTC

Tanner - I can get them an appraisal in a few weeks. Proving all of it takes a long time. Significant issues when you get the appraisal back and then issues crop up. You have to do a giant disclaimer.

State reviewed appraisals - can partner order the appraisal review with the State conducting a check?

judygrew — 2023-10-31 15:25:38 UTC

Get technical reviews to a level of quality?

Greg - a technical review is all the same USPAP and yellow book. As far as a restricted report, there are two definitions of appraisals. An appraisal report and a restricted. All of the same analysis and market data will be the same. They present it in a one page letter. A restricted appraisal is not a shortcut.

Katherine - we were not doing a technical review, it was an audit. We found a quality difference in the technical reviews.

Tanner - they should be the same. Where is the mandate that the state is the one that orders the appraisal review. Some of them are checked to ensure the appraisal review did all the necessary things. What mandates that the state order the appraisal review.

Katherine - the mandate is in Appendix E.

Update attachment E - that is the current resource. Update to reflect the improvements we are talking about.

judygrew — 2023-10-31 15:33:11 UTC

Inform appraisal reviewers that a certain percentage of reviews will be audited.

judygrew — 2023-10-31 15:34:30 UTC

Update internal survey review process.

judygrew — 2023-10-31 15:35:19 UTC

Hire more Project Managers. One new hire is imminent, but hire staff with more legal expertise to provide legal assistance to the PMs. USFWS have positions like this. {maybe a paralegal). Or expand training and ability to work as assistants to PMs and the legal/attorney side.

judygrew — 2023-10-31 15:37:04 UTC

May require reclassification of the position, including likely an audit.

Attorneys authorize speaking to people directly.

judygrew — 2023-10-31 15:38:36 UTC

Provide list of needed information

Attorney review - template to provide background information to attorney.

judygrew — 2023-10-31 15:41:03 UTC

Provide templates or examples. Examples so that partners and partner attorneys can see an example of something they can agree to. E.g., a tile agreement. This prevents extra steps going back and forth. A reference room or the details the attorney will review.

judygrew — 2023-10-31 15:42:24 UTC

Have been able to get examples of items that have been done and that were acceptable.

Fewer DNR attorneys work on acquisitions. Communication and expectations would improve. Attorneys would gain more experience with repetition of issues. Deliverables would improve.

judygrew — 2023-10-31 15:45:47 UTC

Training and more frequent communication between DNR and partners.

judygrew — 2023-10-31 15:46:07 UTC

Title review - doing twice. Improve somehow.

judygrew — 2023-10-31 15:46:31 UTC

Benchmarks and consistent expectations on the amount of time steps should take. Prioritize if not meeting goals.

judygrew — 2023-10-31 15:47:04 UTC

Resource for partners to follow - we do that in Web LRS. You can go in and figure out where the project is at.

judygrew — 2023-10-31 15:47:44 UTC

Increasing Commissioner required review levels - currently $3 million. This is in op order 6 and can be discussed and changed as needed. Op order 6 update is in process.

2023-10-31 16:07:36 UTC

Op Order 6 is named Land Acquisition Procedure.

Survey review guidelines. What will and won't likely be called out by an attorney in survey review? Have examples of items that have been called out as a resource for partners.

2023-10-31 16:07:42 UTC

Conduct title review simultaneously (partner and DNR)

kerstinflarson — 2023-10-31 16:45:11 UTC

Not have partners enter the chain of title

kerstinflarson — 2023-10-31 16:46:50 UTC

DNR could use partner title review and have some sort of indemnification of DNR in case there are future liabilities. (unsure whether grant agreement would allow this)

kerstinflarson — 2023-10-31 16:47:44 UTC

Continue with ordering title insurance from same company that partners order from.

kerstinflarson — 2023-10-31 16:52:41 UTC

More information about what DNR would expect on title insurance would be helpful.

kerstinflarson — 2023-10-31 16:52:59 UTC

Mitigate risk that partner will not be able to remedy DNR's concerns after partner has acquired the property.

kerstinflarson — 2023-10-31 16:54:22 UTC

Example: recording of NOGR that does not encompass a boundary line that needs to be addressed. Could we hold off on the NOGR until title issues are completely resolved?

May require grants management statute that defines what criteria are required before state will take land and pay partner.

Potential to use additional funding to hire attorneys dedicated to working on acquisition.

kerstinflarson — 2023-10-31 17:02:16 UTC