DNR begins $30 Million Monon South Trail Development

[Ingomike]

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.

Somethings are bigger than private money can or will do. That is why the founders gave us eminent domain.

 

[oze]

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.

I don't hunt, and I don't fish. Where do I apply for a tax rebate?

 

[Libertarian01]

I generally do not like the use of eminent domain. Actually, I despise it.

However, I DO see the need for it. We need military bases, highways, prisons, power plants, etc. There should be a very strong attempt to use all means available OTHER than just taking w/ eminent domain. However, some basic infrastructure needs do need to be built and sometimes geography cannot be avoided.

If we need to build a highway there will be property owners that need to be worked with. Avoid eminent domain to the best of your ability but as a very last resort it can be used as a the "project" must be built.

Where I would almost unilaterally oppose its use is by taking property from one private party and giving it to another private party. That should almost never be done. The only exception I see is for something like a power plant, water purification facility, natural gas distribution center and lines, power lines, etc. While those are private they still serve the entire community and as such I can see eminent domain justified in their construction.

So to me the question justifying the use of eminent domain becomes: is a bike trail "infrastructure?" Reluctantly, right now, I don't like my answer but I have to say "yes." It is an improvement to land that is available to all citizens and may improve the quality of life of all citizens able to use it. It can be argued that it becomes one of many selling points to attract businesses which will collaterally increase the quality of life in the state. It's just like parks, rest stops, gun ranges, etc.

Regards,

Doug

 

[Ingomike]

I generally do not like the use of eminent domain. Actually, I despise it.

However, I DO see the need for it. We need military bases, highways, prisons, power plants, etc. There should be a very strong attempt to use all means available OTHER than just taking w/ eminent domain. However, some basic infrastructure needs do need to be built and sometimes geography cannot be avoided.

If we need to build a highway there will be property owners that need to be worked with. Avoid eminent domain to the best of your ability but as a very last resort it can be used as a the "project" must be built.

Where I would almost unilaterally oppose its use is by taking property from one private party and giving it to another private party. That should almost never be done. The only exception I see is for something like a power plant, water purification facility, natural gas distribution center and lines, power lines, etc. While those are private they still serve the entire community and as such I can see eminent domain justified in their construction.

So to me the question justifying the use of eminent domain becomes: is a bike trail "infrastructure?" Reluctantly, right now, I don't like my answer but I have to say "yes." It is an improvement to land that is available to all citizens and may improve the quality of life of all citizens able to use it. It can be argued that it becomes one of many selling points to attract businesses which will collaterally increase the quality of life in the state. It's just like parks, rest stops, gun ranges, etc.

Regards,

Doug

Well stated…

 

[JettaKnight]

Yes.

This came to light in Fort Wayne, when a cyclist was hit and killed while crossing a road that intersected with a bike path. There was more to it: a driver approached the crossing and waved the cyclist through. Another car attempted to pass the stopped car, then struck and killed the person on the bike. Lots of PSAs came from it; I was surprised how many well-intentioned drivers didn't know this rule. Me, if I'm on my bike on a trail and have to cross a street, I make it a point to avoid eye contact with drivers, taking a drink of water, checking shoe laces, etc.

I have angrily mouthed "go!" and waved them on.

 

[JettaKnight]

I live in NE Indiana and most likely will never set eyes on this trail, let alone feet or bicycle tires. But I definitely support it. Fort Wayne has lots of interconnected biking/hiking paths; unfortunately, none yet SW where I am. I look forward to trail expansion out here.

I live close to the Pufferbelly Trail and ride it regularly, and often to work and back. It's a huge boon to everyone around including home owners as it increases their property value. It's a massive factor in the quantity of life for our denizens.



This thread proves that INGO can complain about anything.

 

[Libertarian01]

I live close to the Pufferbelly Trail and ride it regularly, and often to work and back. It's a huge boon to everyone around including home owners as it increases their property value. It's a massive factor in the quantity of life for our denizens.



This thread proves that INGO can complain about anything.

That's not true! That's not true! You're wrong! We cannot JUST complain about anything...

We can also argue about anything!

 

[jamil]

Somethings are bigger than private money can or will do. That is why the founders gave us eminent domain.

For a ****ing recreational trail? I mean. a big interstate highway yeah, I get that. This is recreational trail.

And. The Parklands of Floyd Fork cost $125M. It was paid with 100% private funds. Why can't Holcomb's wet dreams be created with private funds? Hell, I'd make use of that trail as it's starting in New Albany. I'd chip in. Why make people who have zero use for it pay for it too?

I'm not asking that they use private funding to build I69 for **** sake. This is a recreational path on a former railway.

 

[Ingomike]

For a ****ing recreational trail? I mean. a big interstate highway yeah, I get that. This is recreational trail.

Yes. So only cars get thoroughfares that need vast stretches of land? Other modes of transportation are out, including walking, biking, and others?

 

[SnoopLoggyDog]

Yeah, am I the only one who kinda likes trails? And roads?

You are not alone. I'm a member of the Kokomo Lowriders and we ride recumbent trikes on pretty much all of the public trails in the northern half of Indiana. The trails get a lot of use and bring in trail users from other states.

The South Monon trail is part of the bigger U.S. Bicycle route system. https://www.adventurecycling.org/routes-and-maps/us-bicycle-route-system/national-corridor-plan/
Indiana will be the point where the routes split into Northern and Mid-U.S. cross-country bikeways.

Trail riding is much safer and more relaxing than riding on the road. Our club does use public roads but we always go single file and stick to low use county roads. I'm the youngest member of the group (early 60's). Most are in their 70's and 80's. It is a great way to get exercise, see the natural beauty of this great state and meet really nice people.

 

[jamil]

Yes. So only cars get thoroughfares that need vast stretches of land? Other modes of transportation are out, including walking, biking, and others?

It’s a recreational path. Take up a collection.

 

[jamil]

I live close to the Pufferbelly Trail and ride it regularly, and often to work and back. It's a huge boon to everyone around including home owners as it increases their property value. It's a massive factor in the quantity of life for our denizens.



This thread proves that INGO can complain about anything.

If you get aome benefit from that trail. Why can’t you pitch in? Was it paid for with state funds? I’m not using it. It doesn’t increase my property value. If it’s paid from tax dollars I’ve paid in, why should I have to pay for your ****?

 

[Cavman]

If our state was 100% debt free and all roads and bridges were in good order than maybe spend some on trails.. but when the state says we can't lower some taxes cause its not fiscally responsible, then spending 30 million on a trail seems ridiculous

 

[jamil]

Or not spend any on trails and lower the tax rates.

 

[Cavman]

Or not spend any on trails and lower the tax rates.

Even better

 

[jamil]

If you want a trail in your back yard, start a foundation. Get some rich virtue signalers convinced it will boost their virtue rating to level 3b. Let them take it from there.

 

[SnoopLoggyDog]

If you want a trail in your back yard, start a foundation. Get some rich virtue signalers convinced it will boost their virtue rating to level 3b. Let them take it from there.

The Nickle Plate, Panhandle Pathway, Converse, Sweetser Switch and Cardinal Greenway trails all have grass-roots associations, with volunteers for fundraising and upkeep of the trails. They coordinate their activities through the DNR and Rails-To-Trails association. The planning, funding and coordination to build a trail can take years. In the end, it results in a recreational outlet used by many Hoosiers.

 

[jamil]

The Nickle Plate, Panhandle Pathway, Converse, Sweetser Switch and Cardinal Greenway trails all have grass-roots associations, with volunteers for fundraising and upkeep of the trails. They coordinate their activities through the DNR and Rails-To-Trails association. The planning, funding and coordination to build a trail can take years. In the end, it results in a recreational outlet used by many Hoosiers.

I support trails. I don't support making people pay for them who don't benefit from them. If all those trails were paid for with private money, I don't have an issue. And I don't mind if they coordinate through the state DNR. Yes. Funding takes years.

Again, using The Parklands Floyd's Fork, southwest of Louisville, as a model, it took 80 land transactions with zero of that land acquired through eminent domain. It cost $125M to complete, so people can't say that the $30M for Monon South is too big a project for private funding. It took years in the making to open the first phase, and several more years to complete. The parks department maintains it but the funding for that comes from donations. Not from the state. Not from local governments.

I'm not against recreational trails. We often throw the bikes in the back of the truck and drive the hour it takes to get to the parklands. Take a 2 hour ride, and then drive home. I'd love to have something closer, which the Monon South trail would be much closer. I'd be happy to donate money for something like that. I'd rather that state or local governments not pay for it. It's not fair to people who live in areas that can't make use of it.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I support trails. I don't support making people pay for them who don't benefit from them. If all those trails were paid for with private money, I don't have an issue. And I don't mind if they coordinate through the state DNR. Yes. Funding takes years.

Again, using The Parklands Floyd's Fork, southwest of Louisville, as a model, it took 80 land transactions with zero of that land acquired through eminent domain. It cost $125M to complete, so people can't say that the $30M for Monon South is too big a project for private funding. It took years in the making to open the first phase, and several more years to complete. The parks department maintains it but the funding for that comes from donations. Not from the state. Not from local governments.

I'm not against recreational trails. We often throw the bikes in the back of the truck and drive the hour it takes to get to the parklands. Take a 2 hour ride, and then drive home. I'd love to have something closer, which the Monon South trail would be much closer. I'd be happy to donate money for something like that. I'd rather that state or local governments not pay for it. It's not fair to people who live in areas that can't make use of it.

A friend of mine is on the city council, in Bedford. He also works as a contractor. We were talking one day and he asked me if I’d ever thought about running for something. I said I’d never get elected because my campaign slogan would be (paraphrasing) “we don’t need it; we can’t afford it”. Republicans, even fiscally conservative ones like government spending as much as democrats do. We can all rationalize why luxuries like bike paths ought to be paid for out of the taxpayers’ pockets.

 

[jamil]

A friend of mine is on the city council, in Bedford. He also works as a contractor. We were talking one day and he asked me if I’d ever thought about running for something.

Now why would anyone run if no one's chasing him?

Seriously, I don't think I'd ever run for office. But if there were a party of "Nope" I'd join it.