DNR begins $30 Million Monon South Trail Development

[Ingomike]

There are no disputes as to whom owns the land.

Why were they in court?

 

[ancjr]

Why were they in court?

To attempt to avoid answering for having sold an abandoned right of way. It's been settled.

 

[Ingomike]

To attempt to avoid answering for having sold an abandoned right of way. It's been settled.

Who sold something they did not own?

 

[ancjr]

Who sold something they did not own?

The US govt.

 

[Ingomike]

The US govt.

US government was not involved. Who is?

 

[ancjr]

US government was not involved. Who is?

I have the case filing in front of me.

 

[Ingomike]

I have the case filing in front of me.

Post it. For the Monon? That is what I am posting about.

 

[ancjr]

Post it. For the Monon? That is what I am posting about.

US Court of Federal Claims Case 1:18-cv-00306-mms

 

[ancjr]

The gist of the case, as I understand it, was that the US Govt "sold" in whole or in part(s) the State of Indiana's ROW. I know CSX claimed that they owned it, but whoever claims it today is of little consequence as they did not obtain it legally.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

US Court of Federal Claims Case 1:18-cv-00306-mms

 

[ancjr]

View attachment 251552

Yeah, I never could find it either.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Yeah, I never could find it either.

You said you had it in front of you.

 

[manifest destiny]

The U.S. does have a history of selling that which they don't own, claiming ownership to that which they don't own and taking back ownership of that which they previously gave away. I appreciate trails. I don't appreciate the state taking land via eminent domain for commercial development or in this case railway right of ways. At a minimum, should the right of way go up for sale, homeowners attached to the right of way should be allowed to bid against the state for ownership. Thirty million in the scheme of things isn't much money. But in aggregate, 30 mil here, 30 mil there starts to really add up. Trails seem to benefit society on the whole. But that shouldn't come at the expense of individual land acquisition via eminent domain. Or via lawfare for claims against abandonments stretching back hundreds of years.

 

[ancjr]

You said you had it in front of you.

I have a hard copy. Could not find it online.

 

[ancjr]

The U.S. does have a history of selling that which they don't own, claiming ownership to that which they don't own and taking back ownership of that which they previously gave away. I appreciate trails. I don't appreciate the state taking land via eminent domain for commercial development or in this case railway right of ways. At a minimum, should the right of way go up for sale, homeowners attached to the right of way should be allowed to bid against the state for ownership. Thirty million in the scheme of things isn't much money. But in aggregate, 30 mil here, 30 mil there starts to really add up. Trails seem to benefit society on the whole. But that shouldn't come at the expense of individual land acquisition via eminent domain. Or via lawfare for claims against abandonments stretching back hundreds of years.

I don't think the hand waving here involved eminent domain per-se. The rail trail law Reagan sign into law, in 1983 IIRC, is what is involved here.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

I have a hard copy. Could not find it online.

Where did you get that?

 

[ancjr]

Where did you get that?

From my lawyer.

 

[ancjr]

This is like playing 20 questions

 

[DoggyDaddy]

This is like playing 20 questions

Well it just seems odd that it's not posted publicly. I wonder where your lawyer got it? Not doubting you, but it just seems like if it were legit, it would be on that site.

 

[Ingomike]

This is like playing 20 questions

I have said repeatedly that the acquisition of the right of way occurred in several different ways. There is no one size fits all for the many railroads that are involved. I have seen no that the feds are selling the land.