By John Miller, Associated Press
11/17/09
BOISE, Idaho — Idaho
agreed Tuesday to pay $50,000 and pledged to follow anti-discrimination
rules to settle a federal lawsuit against state officials who awarded
grazing leases to ranchers, not the environmentalist who had offered
more money.
The Idaho Board of Land has also committed to
revising its rules to allow conservation groups to lease state
endowment trust lands, a big change after years of fierce litigation.
The board's five members are the governor, state controller, secretary
of state, attorney general and superintendent of public instruction.
In
2006, Washington state businessman and environmentalist Gordon Younger
was the high bidder on seven Idaho grazing leases, but lost when the
Board of Land with then-Gov. Jim Risch gave the leases to livestock
owners. Younger, who planned to manage the lands to restore what he
called "their degraded streams and wildlife habitats," sued in U.S.
District Court on grounds he was the victim of discrimination.
Laird
Lucas, attorney for Younger's Lazy Y Ranch Ltd., said Tuesday he's
optimistic this settlement and the Board of Land's revised leasing
rules represent a departure from the past, when conservation groups
were bullied out of winning state grazing leases and left no other
option than to sue.
"If someone is willing to put up money for
conservation on state lands, we want them to be treated fairly," Lucas
said. "This is the first time we've achieved reform in how state lands
are managed."
The state's new leasing rules, whose changes
address more issues than just this lease dispute, await final approval
in the 2010 Legislature.
There, they could still face opposition from livestock-industry advocates.
If the rules are rejected, Tuesday's settlement allows Younger to refile his claims against Idaho.
But
"if legislative ratification does occur, Lazy Y waives, forfeits and
otherwise relinquishes any and all right to refile such claims,"
according to the pact, which also requires Board of Land members to
"recognize their obligation to apply applicable statutes and rules
consistent with federal or state equal protection requirements."
The
Idaho Constitution demands Board of Land members carefully preserve
state endowment trust lands, to secure the maximum long-term financial
return to benefit public schools.
Ranchers have contended their
industry's impact on local economies should also be taken into account,
but that argument has failed to persuade judges: Western Watersheds
Project, an environmental group to which Younger is a contributor, in
1999 won unanimous Idaho Supreme Court decisions rejecting
grazing-lease preferences for ranchers.
Clive Strong, a deputy
attorney general and natural resource law specialist, said Idaho's new
leasing rules will help create a level playing field for all parties
interested in securing a lease - and help the state avoid costly
lawsuits.
"The Land Board recognized the current process was not
working and was leading the way to litigation," Strong said. "It was
determined to find a better process."
According to Tuesday's
settlement, state officials didn't acknowledge wrongdoing, but will pay
$50,000 to cover the Lazy Y's litigation fees. Lazy Y, meanwhile, held
open the possibility of bidding for the 10-year leases again when they
become available.
Jon Hanian, a spokesman for Gov. C.L. "Butch"
Otter, and David Hensley, Otter's staff lawyer, didn't immediately
return phone calls seeking comment.
~~~~~~~
Of the many sections of the Ku Klux Klan Act, the most influential today is the little debated section 1983. The section provides in part:
Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation,
custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of
Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the
United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the
deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the
Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an
action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for
redress....
The language of the statute is much the same as it was in 1871.
Interestingly, the 1874 revisions resulted in the apparently
inadvertent insertion of the words "and laws," which has resulted in a
large expansion of the statute's coverage. Reference to the District of
Columbia and to territories was added in 1979.
Section 1983 allows people to sue for state and local violations of the
Constitution and federal law. It enables private citizens to
affirmatively enforce these rights. Lawsuits may be brought in federal
or state court, and the remedies available for violations include
damages and injunctive relief. A key to Section 1983's revitalization
was when the Supreme Court breathed new life into the Fourteenth
Amendment. The Court developed an extensive theoretical framework for
the due process and equal protection clauses, under which it recognized
a wide variety of federally protected rights. Also, in Monroe v. Pape
(1961), the Supreme Court interpreted Section 1983's "under color of
law" requirement to cover cases in which state and local officials were
not acting in accordance with state law but in violation of it. This
was the beginning of a series of interpretations that loosened the
judicial stranglehold on civil rights legislation that had been passed
during the Reconstruction era.
