Fact check:
The forum headline overstates it. There is a real, ongoing discussion about a small land exchange that would let a private developer build a short connector road into Yosemite.
There is
no giveaway, no large chunk of the park changing hands, and no public evidence of a big quid-pro-quo donation.
The “give” framing is the main distortion.
What the proposal actually is
Kingsbarn Realty Capital (through Sanctuary at Yosemite LLC) bought the ~83-acre Hazel Green Ranch just outside Yosemite’s western boundary in February 2024 for $4 million. The parcel sits near the Big Oak Flat / Highway 120 side of the park, roughly five miles from the Mariposa Grove.
Existing access is a long, winding route over Forest Service roads—often described as 10+ miles from a park entrance and ~90 minutes to Yosemite Valley.
The company wants a short road (described as about a quarter-mile strip, or “under a half mile” / “under a mile”) connecting its land to a park thoroughfare. Because NPS cannot simply grant park land, staff have been working on a
land exchange: the Park Service would transfer that small strip (or an interest/easement in it) and receive land of
equal appraised value elsewhere in California that Kingsbarn would buy and convey to the government. Net park acreage would not shrink if that is how it is structured.
Lanny Davis (Clinton-era counsel now representing Kingsbarn) confirmed the company is pursuing the exchange and argues a shorter route would cut vehicle miles and emissions. He says it is a statutory land exchange, not a gift. Interior/NPS say no final decision has been made and any proposal would have to go through environmental review, public notice, and equal-value rules.
History: this idea was rejected before
The previous owner, Lewis Geyser, spent years trying to get a similar private road / easement so he could build a resort.
The Park Service said no under Bush and Obama. He sued in 2007 and lost in district court and again in the 9th Circuit in 2012. Courts held the government must provide an exit for inholdings but does not have to create a
new road when an existing Forest Service route already exists.
Career staff treated the issue as closed until the new owner reopened it after the 2024 purchase.
What Interior disputes
Interior’s line, given to multiple outlets, is that the NOTUS story (the source the forum thread quotes) “relies on anonymous allegations to manufacture a political narrative that simply is not true,” that there has been no political pressure to a predetermined outcome, and that claims of secretly handing over NPS land are false. They emphasize process and that nothing is finalized. NOTUS and later NYT reporting cite four people familiar with the talks plus documents; they describe unusual pressure from Interior political leadership, regular meetings, and progress reports to political appointees. Those are competing characterizations, not settled public records.
The donation angle
Jeff Pori (Kingsbarn CEO) made small-dollar donations totaling a bit over $4,000 to Trump’s 2024 campaign and related committees, mostly starting in late 2024. That is public FEC data.
It is not evidence of a “sizeable donation” in exchange for the deal; forum posters treating it as proof of a payoff are leaping.
Davis is a Democrat and frames his involvement as environmental. None of that proves or disproves influence; it is just what is documented so far.
Bottom line
- True: Discussions of a land exchange for a short access road to an 83-acre private parcel bought in 2024; prior administrations and courts blocked a similar request; the strip is tiny relative to the park; process is not finished.
- Misleading in the thread title and OP: “Give,” “parcel off,” “quietly working to give part of Yosemite,” and implied big-money corruption. Equal-value swap ≠ giveaway. “Part of Yosemite” is a sliver. “Quietly” is contested—Congress got a vague notice earlier in 2026; the public story broke Aug. 28.
- Open questions: Appraisal of Yosemite land is hard; critics say the private parcel’s value would jump if it gets a park gate, so “equal value” elsewhere may not capture that. Any actual deal would still need NEPA, public process, and legal authority. Counties say they were not consulted. Nothing has been approved.
The accurate description is: the Trump Interior Department is considering a small equal-value land exchange that previous administrations and a federal appeals court rejected, so a developer can build a short private connector into Yosemite. Whether that is good policy is a separate argument from whether the headline is accurate.
Fact check: https://justplainpolitics.com/threads/trump-is-quietly-working-to-give-part-of-yosemite-
grok.com
www.notus.org
View: https://youtu.be/y5JCvRfWoGw?si=w_jx2PEyAL1D-_7a
