Mike Kennedy (R-UT)
Upper Price River Watershed Project Act of 2025
A Republican bill with no cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill, known as the ``Upper Price River Watershed Project Act of 2025'', directs the Secretary of the Interior to transfer specific Bureau of Land Management land to the city of Price, Utah. The land consists of approximately 124.23 acres as shown on a specific map dated May 8, 2025. The transfer includes all right, title, and interest held by the United States in that land. The City of Price may use this land for public purposes as they define them. This conveyance is subject to any valid existing rights.
Yes· 3 of 6
- Scored +5
Would people in cities be better off under this?
The city of Price gains direct control over 124.23 acres of land for local public use.
- Scored +5
Would people in rural areas be better off under this?
The city of Price gains direct control over 124.23 acres of land for local public use.
- Scored +5
Does this invest in rural communities?
The transfer of land to the City of Price allows the local municipality to utilize the land for its own defined public purposes.
The opposite
- Scored -2
Does this better protect public land such as parks and forests?
The bill transfers control of Bureau of Land Management land to a local municipality, which reduces direct federal management of the public land.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Land Ownership for Local Use: The Secretary shall convey the land to the City so it can be used for public purposes as defined by the City (Section 3(a)). This allows the local community to control the land for its own public needs.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Existing Rights Restrictions: The conveyance of the land is subject to valid existing rights (Section 3(a)). This means there may be other legal interests or rights attached to the land that could affect how it is used.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — The city of Price gains direct control over 124.23 acres of land for local public use. Would people in cities be better off under this? — The city of Price gains direct control over 124.23 acres of land for local public use. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — The land may be used by the City for public purposes that could benefit local residents. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — The land may be used by the City for public purposes that could benefit local residents.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this leave more decisions to the states? — The bill transfers land ownership from the federal government to a local city government.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this invest in rural communities? — The transfer of land to the City of Price allows the local municipality to utilize the land for its own defined public purposes. Does this better protect public land such as parks and forests? — The bill transfers control of Bureau of Land Management land to a local municipality, which reduces direct federal management of the public land.
- 10/14/2025
- Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
- Introduced in House
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.