Attorneys to talk out Bayfield County trail issue
By RICK OLIVO
The Daily Press
"Our purpose is to make you aware of a very different view of the law as it applies to this right of way, which we believe will show that the federal government has no reversionary interest in the right of way and therefore the County has no claim either," said a letter addressed to the board.
The letter was signed by Washington D.C. attorney Cecilia Fex, Madison attorney Pamela McGillivray and Milwaukee attorney Dennis Fisher. All three are representing various clients who are property owners along the corridor.The trio also addressed the board during its regular September meeting, with Fisher saying he "disagreed vehemently" with the legal opinion offered by Seattle attorney Charles H. Montange, on whose advice the board has based its trail policy.
"The history of the best evidence available shows that reversionary rights did not exist," Fisher said.
Fisher said the property owners affected by the corridor controversy would fight for their rights.
"The costs will be enormous," he predicted. "Even if the county is right, there will be claims for the taxes they have paid and claims for government takings."
Fisher said the cost of the legal battle was something the county should take into account when making a decision about pursuing the corridor issue.
"These are not made as threats; we don't want litigation."
Fisher offered to negotiate with the county's attorneys to find an out of court resolution to the issue and reiterated the potential cost to the county's taxpayers if the matter wound up in court.
"Is the trail worth being held responsible for thousands or millions of dollars in costs? The board has to step up and take a position," he said.McGillivray said the matter was really about the people in the Bayfield County community.
"These people relied on that property being theirs," she said. "Is it fair, now, after 150 years that we are going to revisit that?"
McGillivray asked the county board to take a position against the use of the corridor for any trail purposes.
Fex, who said she worked on rail to trail issues exclusively also warned the Board that litigating the matter would be "exorbitantly expensive," but that was something the landowners were willing to bear in defense of their homes.
"We are very much hoping that this is something we don't have to do," she said.
Fex maintained the county didn't have the right to the corridor through original federal grants. She said part of the corridor came from hundreds of private grants to the railroad, and not subject to any federal reversionary clause. She called the Montange summary "a novel argument" that would not find support with the court.
Prior to the attorney's presentation, speakers for and against conversion of the corridor into a trail again spoke to board members, and petitions both for and against use of the corridor were placed on record.
Following the attorneys' presentations, the county board went into closed session and conferred with their attorney via a telephone conference. When they returned to open session, the board unanimously passed a resolution calling for negotiations between the various attorneys. The resolution read:
"The county is interested in following through with the suggested negotiations proposed by Mr. Dennis Fisher with the property owner's representatives to achieve a negotiated settlement on the trail issues, and to authorize the county chairman and the county administrator to engage in discussions regarding the former Chicago-Northwestern railroad right-of-way along with their legal counsel."
In consideration of those negotiations, the board agreed to postpone an ad-hoc trail committee session planned for Monday.