In property and buildings, further providing for price paid for acquisitions and improvements.
Summary
HB1811 amends Title 34 of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes to change how much the Pennsylvania Game Commission may pay to acquire land for game lands. Under current law, the commission may pay a fair and reasonable price consistent with local market value, but for certain counties there is a statutory cap. This bill removes the general $400-per-acre cap from the main rule and keeps a specific $400-per-acre limit only for game lands acquisitions in counties of the sixth, seventh, or eighth class.
In practical terms, the bill gives the Game Commission more flexibility to pay market-based prices for land acquisitions in most counties, while preserving a lower ceiling in smaller-class counties. The measure applies only to land purchased for game lands and does not alter the commission’s ability to use federal or other cost-sharing funds. It takes effect immediately upon enactment.
Impact
The bill would amend Section 705(a) of Title 34, narrowing the existing acreage price cap so that it applies only to game lands acquisitions in sixth-, seventh-, and eighth-class counties. For all other counties, the Pennsylvania Game Commission could pay a fair and reasonable price consistent with local market value, without the former statewide $400-per-acre limitation. The change affects state land acquisition policy, the Game Commission’s purchasing authority, and landowners negotiating sales for public hunting and wildlife management lands.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests the bill was generally supported, though not unanimously. It was reported out of the House Game & Fisheries Committee on a 26-0 vote, indicating strong committee consensus. It later passed the House floor by a substantial margin, 167-35, showing broad but not universal support. The absence of committee transcript discussion limits insight into detailed arguments, but the vote pattern indicates the bill was viewed favorably overall.
Contention
The main point of contention appears to be the removal of the broad $400-per-acre cap for most counties, which could raise concerns about higher public spending for land acquisitions and the use of state funds. Supporters likely view the change as necessary to align purchases with current market values and improve the Game Commission’s ability to acquire suitable habitat and game lands. The remaining cap for sixth-, seventh-, and eighth-class counties suggests an effort to balance flexibility with cost control, but the differing treatment by county class may also be a point of debate.
In grounds and buildings, further providing for acquisition of buildings, sites for school buildings and playgrounds, and disposing thereof; and, in charter schools, further providing for provisions applicable to charter schools and for applicability of other provisions of this act and of other acts and regulations.
In oil and gas wells, further providing for Oil and Gas Lease Fund; and, in general budget implementation, further providing for Federal and Commonwealth use of forest land.
In disposition of Commonwealth surplus land, further providing for limited definitions, for annual property survey, for property disposition and for conditions upon conveyances; and making an editorial change.