The eminent domain issue may be reaching some consensus in terms of policy as there were no major objections announced during the countywide transportation meeting earlier this month after an update from a subcommittee tasked with drafting the policy.
Tim Bannwolf, a member of the Kendall County, Boerne and Fair Oaks Transportation Committee and one of the individuals heading the subcommittee tasked with drafting the committee’s policy recommendations, noted several “semantical” changes were made to the draft policy on eminent domain at the behest of committee member John Kight, who took issue wither earlier drafts.
A policy draft was shared among the committee members but withheld from the public until a final version is up for consideration. And while there were no major points of contention, it remains clear some fine-tuning still is necessary.
Committee member Jonah Evans, who has become the main voice on the committee for landowners opposed to eminent domain, asked that language be added to the policy noting there has been extensive conversations with public input.
“The committee had extensive conversations and received much public input in respect to the use of eminent domain by the city of Boerne, the city of Fair Oaks and Kendall County to facilitate expansion of existing intersections or roadways or the construction of new greenfield roadways,” Evans read from his drafted policy amendment. “Eminent domain is a controversial topic for citizens and the county. And concern lines drawn on a map through property can result in property being taken by the government has caused distress.
“The committee strongly believes the construction of new greenfield roadways should be the absolute last option. Not the first choice in meeting the county’s mobility needs, and alignment should be selected in such ways to minimize eminent domain.”
Evans went on to suggest the policy note that any land acquisition done by local municipalities adhere to the major thoroughfare planning process – a concept Evans has pushed for since early discussion about eminent domain and land acquisitions – which would mean cities and the county would plan for new roads only as land is already being developed.
Further, Evans had a list of suggestions for how a municipality should behave if land acquisition is deemed absolutely necessary. He said bifurcation of property should be avoided at all costs and only used as a final resort. He also drafted policy recommendations that would urge municipalities to avoid environmentally sensitive or historically significant areas or any conservation easements during construction of new roadways.
When it comes to land acquisition to connect a “short” section of road where two sections are disjointed by land unlikely to be developed, Evans said this should only occur in “very specific, limited circumstances,” including when it would greatly benefit the community.
While it was agreed this should only be done for “small” sections of land, the definition of small remains unclear. One version of the draft policy identified a “small” section of land as being less than 100 yards, but Bannwolf noted this was likely too narrow of a parameter.
Another ongoing point of contention is the use of conservation easements by residents to avoid road through their property. Bannwolf said residents shouldn’t “run out” and get a conservation easement once a mobility plan is issued. He suggested the committee’s policy set a parameter for how long a conservation easement existed before being considered in eminent domain conversations.
“If it’s (a conservation easement) a good idea, they should’ve done it a decade ago,” Bannwolf said. “Not all of a sudden when a road is needed.”
Evans noted such an arbitrary time frame was unwarranted, and fellow committee member Northern Hendricks said the catalyst for why people get a conservation easement shouldn’t be held against them if they’ve held the land for years. She suggested eminent domain shouldn’t be used where a conservation easement exists regardless of when the easement was obtained.
While the policy has yet to be finalized, the host of subcommittee members agreed to meet again before the entire transportation committee’s May 31 meeting. The committee was intended to cease operation come June, but that deadline has moved before and seems likely to move again.
Eminent domain is the right of a government or its agent to expropriate private property for public use, with payment of compensation.
Comment
Comments