DNR begins $30 Million Monon South Trail Development

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I suspect that the reason people are so eager to justify spending other people's $30M for the bike paths in their own backyards, rather than trying to use private means, it's just way easier to have the government do it.

Little to no chance of failure. Virtually no chance funds will fall short. Virtually no chance the people who are against the idea can have any real say to stop it. No chance that land owners can opt out. It's about risk. If it's funded privately there's a fair chance it won't happen. Get uncle sugar agree to do it, it's a done deal but for the doing.

Getting daddy involved seems to be the go-to for a lot of people regardless of their political leanings. Rather than being the thing of last resort, we tend to start with government involvement.

 

[oze]

If you don't stand in firm, overt support of Ukraine, you're literally Hitler. If you don't have Ukrainian colors on your profile in any social media, you're literally Hitler. People I know who are left wing pacifists are pushing for the US to keep sending money and arms. People are broken. Their side has taken over their model of the world. They don't have a worldview now. They have a side.

Point is. They're against war until their side is for it. Then they're for it. Because they derive morality from their side, not their model of reality.

The person I spoke of believes that no war is justified. Ever. Including WW II. Peace.

 

[oze]

The level of INGO outrage over the State kicking in $30 mil for a trail they won't use has me gobsmacked. I won't ever use it either, but I'm glad to kick in my share. What does that come to, a nickel?

I'm out. Thanks for the giggles.

 

[Butch627]

The level of INGO outrage over the State kicking in $30 mil for a trail they won't use has me gobsmacked. I won't ever use it either, but I'm glad to kick in my share. What does that come to, a nickel?

I'm out. Thanks for the giggles.

I think maybe someones parents didn't buy him a bike when he was a kid and he is still mad about it.

 

[eldirector]

I used to be involved in Indiana's trail programs. Not anymore. Just gets... tiring... seeing all of that cash flow.

Are trails nice? Sure. Nicer than roads? No, I don't think so. Nicer than bridges? No, not really. Nicer than schools? Probably not. I'd put them pretty far down on the "nice to have" list, and not even on the "need" list.

But, hey, if folks get their fancy trails, they tend to ignore all of the other waste. So, trails it is.

 

[jamil]

The level of INGO outrage over the State kicking in $30 mil for a trail they won't use has me gobsmacked. I won't ever use it either, but I'm glad to kick in my share. What does that come to, a nickel?

I'm out. Thanks for the giggles.

Outrage? I’m not angry. I’m voicing an opinion. I think a recreational trail isn’t important enough to spend other people’s money on. If it requires eminent domain to acquire property for it, I don’t think a recreational trail is important enough to take property away from its rightful owners. Don’t confuse a resolute opinion with anger.

 

[jamil]

I think maybe someones parents didn't buy him a bike when he was a kid and he is still mad about it.

Because I want to be consistent when I say I want the government to be fiscally responsible with our tax money, and appropriately apply the power of the state in matters of eminent domain?

BTW, I had a really nice Schwinn stingray with the chopper handlebars. I had a playing card clipped to the frame with a clothespin so it would make noise as I peddled.

My dad worked two jobs and wasn’t always around. I had watched him use tools, so I figured out how to take the training wheels off myself. I taught myself how to ride it without the training wheels. Since then I’ve always had a bike. I’ve always worked on my own bicycles. I love bike trails as much as anyone. We just have different opinions about how land should be acquired for them and who should pay for them.

Can you think of something other people think the government should pay for that you don’t?

 

[DragonGunner]

I hi

I used to be involved in Indiana's trail programs. Not anymore. Just gets... tiring... seeing all of that cash flow.

Are trails nice? Sure. Nicer than roads? No, I don't think so. Nicer than bridges? No, not really. Nicer than schools? Probably not. I'd put them pretty far down on the "nice to have" list, and not even on the "need" list.

But, hey, if folks get their fancy trails, they tend to ignore all of the other waste. So, trails it is.

I home schooled so ya the trails are better than school by far. They can use my tax money for trails. My plates for roads. My own hometown years ago tore down the old school rather than update it. We tried in vain to stop it. Millions of dollars later tore it down and built a huge fancy one. Literally 10 years later not enough kids and they were going to close it! Out of pure shame they only have 3 elementary grades active and ship kids from another town in for those grades. The other grades from our town are shipped to the other town to their school. Thus keeping the multi million $$$ mistake and waste open. All these years later we in this county are still ticked. LOL.

 

[jamil]

I hi

I home schooled so ya the trails are better than school by far. They can use my tax money for trails. My plates for roads. My own hometown years ago tore down the old school rather than update it. We tried in vain to stop it. Millions of dollars later tore it down and built a huge fancy one. Literally 10 years later not enough kids and they were going to close it! Out of pure shame they only have 3 elementary grades active and ship kids from another town in for those grades. The other grades from our town are shipped to the other town to their school. Thus keeping the multi million $$$ mistake and waste open. All these years later we in this county are still ticked. LOL.

Alright. There's a way you guys can put your money where your mouth is.



But. No eminent domain for bike trails. Recreation is just not important enough to use the power of the state to expropriate land from the owners. Well. Unless the owners are Bill Gates or China. Then you have my blessing.

 

[Ingomike]

Are trails nice? …I'd put them pretty far down on the "nice to have" list, and not even on the "need" list.

In the era of texting drivers they are a necessity…

 

[K_W]

I live a stone's throw from the Monon.

The best and safest way to enjoy the Monon is to go to one of the restaurants along the trail and watch the pretty ladies go by.

The trail is plagued with vehicle vs pedestrian deaths, muggings, and rude road bikers. If I do use it, I turn around at 54th st.

 

[Ingomike]

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.

In looking something up I came across this.

“The CSX (formerly Monon) Railroad line connected Chicago and Indianapolis for more than 100 years. According to attorney Alan Townsend at Bose McKinney, who represented the City of Carmel during the land acquisitions for the Monon Trail project, CSX had either purchased outright parcels from landowners—mostly farmers at that time—or had written documents that were written as easements that gave the railroad company the right to use the land so as long as it was operating its railways. In later years, discerning who actually owned these parcels—246 in total—proved to be a convoluted task, to say the least.”

Several ownership bouts went to the state supreme court…

 

[Ingomike]

I live a stone's throw from the Monon.

The best and safest way to enjoy the Monon is to go to one of the restaurants along the trail and watch the pretty ladies go by.

The trail is plagued with vehicle vs pedestrian deaths, muggings, and rude road bikers. If I do use it, I turn around at 54th st.

Trails are certainly no different than the community they go through, they are no better or worse. When accounting for the areas the trail goes through, the negatives does not seem to be remarkable for the millions of users a year that use the trail.

 

[JTKelly]

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

That is a flaw in the government to be fixed, not a trait to be emulated.

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…

Some counties, most counties, in the county, not in the county ALL ARE DIFFERENT THINGS. They all WANT the same thing, they are not all the SAME thing. Just because ONE is one way doesn't mean all the others have to be or should be the same way.

And easements and property lines are NOT renegotiated every time an owner dies or the land changes hands or the county buys a new piece of equipment that reaches further.

 

[Ingomike]

That is a flaw in the government to be fixed, not a trait to be emulated.


Some counties, most counties, in the county, not in the county ALL ARE DIFFERENT THINGS. They all WANT the same thing, they are not all the SAME thing. Just because ONE is one way doesn't mean all the others have to be or should be the same way.

And easements and property lines are NOT renegotiated every time an owner dies or the land changes hands or the county buys a new piece of equipment that reaches further.

Lots of words, not seeing quality in this post as it makes no sense to my post quoted…

 

[manifest destiny]

But. No eminent domain for bike trails. Recreation is just not important enough to use the power of the state to expropriate land from the owners. Well. Unless the owners are Bill Gates or China. Then you have my blessing.

Hear, hear!

 

[ancjr]

Will be glad when this foolishness is cancelled and I get paid for my trouble.

 

[JTKelly]

In looking something up I came across this.

“The CSX (formerly Monon) Railroad line connected Chicago and Indianapolis for more than 100 years. According to attorney Alan Townsend at Bose McKinney, who represented the City of Carmel during the land acquisitions for the Monon Trail project, CSX had either purchased outright parcels from landowners—mostly farmers at that time—or had written documents that were written as easements that gave the railroad company the right to use the land so as long as it was operating its railways. In later years, discerning who actually owned these parcels—246 in total—proved to be a convoluted task, to say the least.”

Several ownership bouts went to the state supreme court…

It is only convoluted when people who have no right to something want to take from the people it rightfully belongs to.

 

[Ingomike]

It is only convoluted when people who have no right to something want to take from the people it rightfully belongs to.

No it is not. This involves contracts created over 150 years ago. The quote I posted clearly indicates there is enough uncertainty that the dispute goes all the way to the supreme court. Clearly the parties are struggling to prove who the rightful owner of the properties is.

 

[ancjr]

No it is not. This involves contracts created over 150 years ago. The quote I posted clearly indicates there is enough uncertainty that the dispute goes all the way to the supreme court. Clearly the parties are struggling to prove who the rightful owner of the properties is.

There are no disputes as to who owns the land.