Politics & Policy

Families Losing Homes for Bike Trail

Minnesota county claims eminent domain over land owned for generations

A handful of Minnesota landowners could soon see their treasured riverfront property along the Mississippi River turn into a bike trail under eminent domain. For one man, this would mean losing land that has been in his family since 1896.

Dakota County is resorting to land seizures to build the Mississippi River Regional Trail in an effort to qualify for millions in federal land grants. The county must start be ready to start construction on the project by March 31 or else risk losing the funds. While most of the desired 127 acres for the project have already been acquired through purchases and negotiations, the few remaining holdouts are suing the county after officials sought “quick-take condemnation” of their property.#ad#

Sisters Nancy Drews and Joni Sargent, whose father wanted to pass the land along the river to his grandchildren before he passed away in November, are taking Dakota County to court after it reneged on previous negotiations. After numerous “good faith” meetings with the county, Drews and Sargent told the Hastings Star Gazette that they were in talks about an offer for one to two acres of their 10-acre property.

But in November, the same month their father died, the county commission voted to take the whole parcel. “The board has come to the conclusion that it is time to move forward,” one member said after the vote. “We’re just coming to the head now. It’s time to move forward.” In their vote, the county commission also seized the other remaining properties.

Drews, Sargent, and their neighbors argue the county didn’t have to take all the property for the project, which would also include a picnic area and dock along the river. A Dakota County lawyer countered that under Minnesota state law the county doesn’t have to prove the condemnation is “absolutely necessary,” but instead just “reasonably necessary or convenient for the furtherance of a proper purpose,” according to the St. Paul Pioneer Press.

On top of all that, the landowners say they’re not getting a fair price for their property. The county commission voted to pay a total of $2 million for the four remaining properties; Drews and Sargent contend that their father could have sold just his own land for $1.3 million a few years ago.

Wednesday afternoon marked the first day of the hearing in court, where backers of the landowners gathered outside the courthouse in support, even if some believe it is already a lost fight. “It’s a real sad thing,” Gunter Drews, Nancy’s husband, said. “History is going the way of the bulldozer again.”

The sisters said they will continue to do everything in their power to hold on to the land they grew up on. “It just means way too much to us,” Drews said. “We can’t lose it.”

— Andrew Johnson is an editorial associate at National Review Online.

Most Popular

U.S.

The Gun-Control Debate Could Break America

Last night, the nation witnessed what looked a lot like an extended version of the famous “two minutes hate” from George Orwell’s novel 1984. During a CNN town hall on gun control, a furious crowd of Americans jeered at two conservatives, Marco Rubio and Dana Loesch, who stood in defense of the Second ... Read More
Religion

Billy Graham: Neither Prophet nor Theologian

Asked in 1972 if he believed in miracles, Billy Graham answered: Yes, Jesus performed some and there are many "miracles around us today, including television and airplanes." Graham was no theologian. Neither was he a prophet. Jesus said "a prophet hath no honor in his own country." Prophets take adversarial ... Read More
Film & TV

Why We Can’t Have Wakanda

SPOILERS AHEAD Black Panther is a really good movie that lives up to the hype in just about every way. Surely someone at Marvel Studios had an early doubt, reading the script and thinking: “Wait, we’re going to have hundreds of African warriors in brightly colored tribal garb, using ancient weapons, ... Read More
Law & the Courts

Obstruction Confusions

In his Lawfare critique of one of my several columns about the purported obstruction case against President Trump, Gabriel Schoenfeld loses me — as I suspect he will lose others — when he says of himself, “I do not think I am Trump-deranged.” Gabe graciously expresses fondness for me, and the feeling is ... Read More