The Warren County Commission and a county resident continue to debate the procedures of using eminent domain. Wanda Thomas feels the county is ignoring what she believes is a simplified approach to …
This item is available in full to subscribers.
We have recently launched a new and improved website. To continue reading, you will need to either log into your subscriber account, or purchase a new subscription.
If you are a digital subscriber with an active subscription, or you are a print subscriber who had access to our previous wesbite, then you already have an account here. Just reset your password if you have not yet logged in to your account on this new site.
If you are a current print subscriber and did not have a user account on our previous website, you can set up a free website account by clicking here.
Otherwise, click here to view your options for subscribing.
Please log in to continue |
The Warren County Commission and a county resident continue to debate the procedures of using eminent domain. Wanda Thomas feels the county is ignoring what she believes is a simplified approach to obtaining easements to move forward with paving and upgrading highly traveled county roads. Commissioners, on the other hand, question Thomas’ claims and stated the procedure is not as easy as Thomas claims it to be. Following up June 23 from a meeting held a month earlier, Thomas contends the county can mail a certified letter to a landowner stating its intent to obtain an easement. If ignored, the county can publish a legal notice in the newspaper. If the landowner still doesn’t respond, the land the county is seeking then becomes the county’s, Thomas claims. If the landowner does respond and disputes the eminent domain procedure, it’s then up to the property owner to pay for the appraisal and to come up with a value for the land the county is seeking to obtain. A judge would then make a ruling if no compromise is reached on the property’s value, Thomas contends. The three commissioners, however, disagree the procedure would be that simple. They fear the legal expenses related to having attorneys oversee any court action by utilizing eminent domain. They also oppose it because of the precedent that would be set by paying for an easement and the possibility of having a reduced amount of money to use on an annual basis for road upgrade projects. Thomas feels the county commission needs to do a better job of prioritizing where tax money dedicated to paving roads should be spent. Roads that the commission is planning on resurfacing this year include Pendleton Cut-Off, Royal Drive, Shepherd Glen, Shetland and South Rock Church Road. Thomas questioned why Royal Drive, Shetland and Shepherd Glen were being paved ahead of more heavily traveled road such as Stracks Church Road or North Stringtown Road. Commissioners noted they have been met with resistance from several landowners, which has led to the county moving elsewhere to pave less traveled roads first. The county is seeking additional 10-foot easements on each side of the road. County policy requires a 60-foot easement. “When everybody sees that we’re working together why bring in attorneys and squabbling,” Presiding Commissioner Arden Engelage said. “We can get a road where everybody sees a benefit and everybody works toward that goal. We’re saving taxpayers money. We’re getting more roads done. It might not be the road you want done. They are all county taxpayers. They are all county roads we are working on.” Nonetheless, Thomas feels the decision-making process on what roads are being paved is not under the control of county officials. “We are letting (property owners) run the county,” she said. “You are letting them make the decision on what roads are getting paved. That is sad, that is your decision. You should do whatever you have to do to get it done. You should say, I’m going to pave Stringtown Road and if that costs me so much, so be it. That is the right thing to do. You are taking the easy road out.” But if the county began using eminent domain to acquire an easement, Northern District Commissioner Dan Hampson said, more residents would hold out wanting to get paid in return. “If you take it by eminent domain, you have to give them money,” Hampson stated. “Secondly, once you do that, the path of people giving easements to the county will quickly dry up.” Thomas said the county should delay paving some of the roads scheduled for this year to focus more on North Stringtown Road. Paving North Stringtown and Stracks Church would also eliminate performing maintenance on both roads monthly, Thomas pointed out. Commissioners said while it’s their intention to pave North Stringtown in the future, county crews must first replace a bridge and prep the road. This is the first full year the county is receiving funds from the continuation of a half-cent capital improvements sales tax. County voters in February 2008 approved 70 percent of the sales tax revenue being allocated for road maintenance with the remaining 30 percent going for other capital improvements. The continuation of the sales tax went into effect July 1, 2010. Since then, approximately $745,000 has been generated and $437,000 spent, according to commissioners. The county used the funds collected last year to pave Schreckengast, Town Branch and Bluff roads. One landowner on both Schreckengast and Town Branch contributed to the project to offset the county’s expense. In her initial meeting with the commissioners, Thomas also claimed the county was required by state statute to have a highway commission, which is set up much like a planning and zoning commission with members appointed to oversee county road projects. Though the commissioners failed to get a response from the county’s attorney by last week’s followup meeting, they feel the statutes are outdated and applied to only when county road systems were being established.