PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 22, 2000
Vests in the United States: (1) specified real property owned by Environmental Land Technology, Ltd. (ELT) within the Red Cliffs Reserve in Washington County, Utah; and (2) specified real property owned by ELT which is adjacent to the land within the Reserve, but is landlocked as a result of the creation of the Reserve.Directs the United States to pay specified compensation to the owners of any such real property from the permanent judgment appropriation or from another appropriate Federal Government fund. Requires the Secretary of the Interior, in the absence of a negotiated settlement, or an action by an owner, to initiate a proceeding seeking a determination of just compensation.Prohibits the Secretary from allowing any unauthorized use of such lands, except for the termination of all current activities and the removal of any equipment, facilities, or personal property.Requires the Secretary, if requested by a land owner, to credit a surplus property account to be established in the name of the owner. Allows the land owner, using the credit in such account, to bid as any other bidder for surplus property, wherever located.
People & committees
Rep. Hansen, James V. [R-UT-1] · R–UT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H8710-8711)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H8710-8711)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 4721.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H8710-8711)
Mr. Hansen moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 559.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 106-928.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 106-928.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks and Public Lands.
Referred to the House Committee on Resources.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.4721 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.4721 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.4721 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.4721 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.