DNR begins $30 Million Monon South Trail Development

[Cavman]

Philosophically I don't think the government should "necessarily" be funding projects such as this. Context is important.

I believe that ONLY AFTER all other infrastructure has been fully funded, then spending may(?) progress on such luxury(?) products.

However, I'm also somewhat pragmatic. The Indiana budget is about $18.5 billion, or $18,500,000,000 for those who like zero's (not Japanese.) So a $30M project compared to $18.5B is about 0.00162%. In other words, if you are wanting to be fiscally conservative and squish waste, and if you wanted to save Indiana taxpayers $1,000, then cutting this project would save $1.63 (rounding up.) If we're not squishing $185,000,000 then we're not even saving 1%.

I'm not saying it's not fiscally irresponsible, I'm just saying this is not the bugaboo I'd get in a twist over.

And by the way, maybe(?) it isn't fiscally irresponsible. Maybe... Projects like this may draw companies, employees, jobs to the state. There is an argument to be made that says younger workers like things to do after work. Projects such as this may(?) draw companies from which tax revenues will offset the cost. It isn't the strongest argument but it isn't a weak one either. The problem is that it is very hard to measure.

Regards,

Doug

Makes alot of sense. I just think we keep tolling bridges and roads to pay for them. Seems like ya should spend that 30 million on them and get rid of the tolls

 

[Shadow01]

Looks like it will be abandoned railroad?

I thought in Indiana that any abandoned RR automatically reverted ownership back to the land owner.

 

[Shadow01]

The rail line is abandoning it. A federal program meant to bank rail corridors for potential future use (Rails to Trails) will pay for the land acquisition. Adjacent property owners who would normally receive the sliver of land when abandoned are instead paid for the land.

Do the land owners get a choice or is this a forced sale?

 

[snorko]

It is under eminent domain.

 

[Shadow01]

It is under eminent domain.

They were working on the abandoned RR between Covington and Veedersburg about a decade ago and several of the landowners filed a lawsuit and I never found out the outcome of the suit, but the trail never happened and the farmers now farm that portion of ground. Maybe the Rails to Trails decided not to use their funding defending a lawsuit?

 

[DragonGunner]

The Panhandle Trail….old railroad was told, to get a 3 million $ grant to extend on it then they had to get $125,000 raised by private donations. I guess this would show enough interest. They raised the $ very quickly. The plus side of this is that bikes don’t have to be on the roads and highways with cars. As a kid I was on the roads all the time. No way I wanna do that now. The traffic in the same places are terriable, probably be killed and haven’t seen any bikes there in decades. Now folks have a place to ride, some go to work or go to town. At least that’s something for some tax $ compared to other garbage nobody uses.

 

[jamil]

I read somewhere that CXS owns the railway and is abandoning it, and that the state is acquiring it from them. I don’t knw if there are any eminent domain issues involved.

Anyway, I would rather governments not involve themselves with funding parks and recreation resources. A small percentage of the population makes use of those resources. Not to say parks aren’t worth the investment. It’s just not taxpayers who should fund it.

If Holcomb wants his personal legacy building project, he should seek private funding for it. Create a foundation, not as governor, but as a citizen, and solicit donations for the cause. I would donate to that because I’d love to have that trail in my back yard. It’s not fair to taxpayers in, say, Stueben county, to pay for my recreation and Holcomb’s legacy/ego.

The Parklands in Southwest Louisville is a better example of how to fund a recreational trail. It’s a beautiful trail. It’s all funded through a 501(c)(3) org. If a recreational trail is such a passion for Holcomb, why can’t he fund it though something like that? Because why go through those hassles to build your personal legacy when you can just use your pull with the legislature to do it.

**** Holcomb. But I’ll ride on his ***dam trail and get my money’s worth out of it.

 

[Jaybird1980]

Do the land owners get a choice or is this a forced sale?

U.S. Supreme Court Says Ownership of Abandoned Railroad Right of Way Reverts to Landowner

In an 8-1 decision, the United States Supreme Court has reversed the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals to find that fee simple ownership of an abandoned railroad right of way vested in the owner of the surrounding tract, not in the United States, which had claimed a reversionary interest.

www.calt.iastate.edu

U.S. Supreme Court upholds property rights in rails-to-trails case

Earlier today, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in the “rails-to-trails” property rights case, Marvin M. Brandt Revocable Trust v. United States—a case in which PLF attorneys participated as an amicus curiae. By an 8-1 margin, the Court ruled in favor of the property owner, upholding...

pacificlegal.org

 

[Ingomike]

U.S. Supreme Court Says Ownership of Abandoned Railroad Right of Way Reverts to Landowner

In an 8-1 decision, the United States Supreme Court has reversed the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals to find that fee simple ownership of an abandoned railroad right of way vested in the owner of the surrounding tract, not in the United States, which had claimed a reversionary interest.

www.calt.iastate.edu

U.S. Supreme Court upholds property rights in rails-to-trails case

Earlier today, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in the “rails-to-trails” property rights case, Marvin M. Brandt Revocable Trust v. United States—a case in which PLF attorneys participated as an amicus curiae. By an 8-1 margin, the Court ruled in favor of the property owner, upholding...

pacificlegal.org

This has little affect on building trails. It is just about who gets the eminent domain money in many cases. At one point the Monon in Carmel was stalled by dozens of lawsuits but then the city withdrew, took the land by eminent domain and placed the money in escrow for whoever the courts decided was the legal owner.

 

[Ingomike]

Anyway, I would rather governments not involve themselves with funding parks and recreation resources. A small percentage of the population makes use of those resources. Not to say parks aren’t worth the investment. It’s just not taxpayers who should fund it.

Kind of hard to acquire land to build a miles long trail without eminent domain.

 

[Ingomike]

I read somewhere that CXS owns the railway and is abandoning it, and that the state is acquiring it from them. I don’t knw if there are any eminent domain issues involved.

It is rare the RR just owns the whole thing and that their are no legal disputes between the entities…

 

[Jaybird1980]

This has little affect on building trails. It is just about who gets the eminent domain money in many cases. At one point the Monon in Carmel was stalled by dozens of lawsuits but then the city withdrew, took the land by eminent domain and placed the money in escrow for whoever the courts decided was the legal owner.

You keep saying that as if it's true. It all depends on how the land was acquired for use to begin with. If it is an easement it is supposed to return to property owners. If they then want to try for eminent domain they can.

 

[JTKelly]

We dont have the funds to police the streets, much less a bike path…

Lawrence county has SBS 4 whlr they use to police the trail. I've seen them on there a heck of a lot more than I've seen them on the road in front of MY HOUSE.

People should exercise at home in front of their own house. Law abiding taxpayers shouldn't have their land stolen just because they don't happen to be doing jumping jacks on that spot, that particular day. They put up with enough trash from the littering on the roads.

Eminent domain is to used for VITAL PUBLIC PROJECTS not play lands. Let them steal your land next to the railroad and pretty soon they want 50 feet of your land next to the road, the next year the utility line easement would make an awesome atv trail...

 

[Ingomike]

You keep saying that as if it's true. It all depends on how the land was acquired for use to begin with. If it is an easement it is supposed to return to property owners. If they then want to try for eminent domain they can.

I spent several years supporting and volunteering with a rails to trails organization. I learned a lot.

The court cases over ownership have little affect on the trails, as they will use eminent domain to obtain what they want anyway. Where do you get that an “easement“ is the primary way this was done? As I posted several times before there were many ways the RR obtained their right of way, different from line to line, and in the case of north Indy, parcel to parcel.

One I read about years ago that made me chuckle, was in another state, a group of landowners tried to stop a trail, they forced those building the trail to use eminent domain to get the land. Since they had to do eminent domain, they redesigned the trail to what they wanted, not what fit on the trail, and took even more land.

Rarely are eminent domain cases lost by the government.

 

[Ingomike]

Eminent domain is to used for VITAL PUBLIC PROJECTS not play lands

That is not the law. Public use is the law as I understand it.

Let them steal your land next to the railroad and pretty soon they want 50 feet of your land next to the road, the next year the utility line easement would make an awesome atv trail...

It already is that bad. In Some counties they want 60 feet from the road and a thirty foot easement around the place to subdivide…

 

[Jaybird1980]

I spent several years supporting and volunteering with a rails to trails organization. I learned a lot.

The court cases over ownership have little affect on the trails, as they will use eminent domain to obtain what they want anyway. Where do you get that an “easement“ is the primary way this was done? As I posted several times before there were many ways the RR obtained their right of way, different from line to line, and in the case of north Indy, parcel to parcel.

One I read about years ago that made me chuckle, was in another state, a group of landowners tried to stop a trail, they forced those building the trail to use eminent domain to get the land. Since they had to do eminent domain, they redesigned the trail to what they wanted, not what fit on the trail, and took even more land.

Rarely are eminent domain cases lost by the government.

I get that they are mostly easement from the fact that Congress passed the 1875 Right of Way act that mostly limited the railways to a 200 foot Right of Way, which the Supreme Court later determined these are easements.

It was harder for the railroads to just buy up chunks of land after 1875, so they went to easements. They had to pay for the Right of Way, and if the land was to no longer be used for railroad it was to revert ownership back to the property owners.

If you did work with Rails to Trails you should already know that.

 

[Ingomike]

If you did work with Rails to Trails you should already know that.

Why can’t you discuss with the BS personal crap? I was involved in the reality of current times, not what I read on the internet.

 

[Ingomike]

It was harder for the railroads to just buy up chunks of land after 1875, so they went to easements. They had to pay for the Right of Way, and if the land was to no longer be used for railroad it was to revert ownership back to the property owners.

Indiana had railroads 45 years before 1875, the Monon began about 1847 and was up and running in 1854. That would make 1875 far after the land acquisition for the Monon.

I cannot speak for the others but if they were built in that same era I suspect they have similar situations. Then there is the practical reality that agents of the railroad probably did whatever was necessary to get a signature on a ROW agreement.

 

[Butch627]

I doubt any of the current landowners were alive when these tracks were put in place and bought or inherited their land with the knowledge that the tracks being there were a fact of life. As someone who uses bike trails whenever and wherever I can I am happy to see new trails being built.
Anyone who ponders travel if TSHTF should be aware of bike trails and how to use them for their benefit.
Ive never seen trash anywhere near any trail that is described in this thread, is it left there by the people who use the trail or nearby miscreants?
I am proud that the trail in Crown Point got national exposure when Antifa marched down it. First time I saw the news clip I instantly knew where it was.
There are lots of stuff the DNR does that I don't care about and does not benefit me, that doesn't mean that I am against it.

Be glad its Indiana in Chicago a 2.7 mile trail cost 95 million a few years ago. https://www.the606.org/

 

[jamil]

Kind of hard to acquire land to build a miles long trail without eminent domain.

Why take land from people for a ****ing recreational trail? Especially a trail relatively few people will use. If private money can entice people to sell some lamd to make the trail, fine.