With questions and allegations about the Five Island Recreational Trail on their minds, opponents and supporters of the proposed recreational development appeared before the Palo Alto County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday to air their concerns. With over 40 area residents turning out for the session, the district courtroom was pressed into service to hold the audience for the gathering.
Kristin Ruiz, a resident on North Huron Street, served as spokesman for the group of area residents with concerns and objections to the proposed trail. “I tried very hard to make this very objective and factual and this is not a witch hunt. We have a lot of questions that we want to ask about the trail and we have some concerns regarding the trail and specifically how the landowners were approached.”
“After researching trail initiatives, researching right-of-way law and visiting with neighbors, we decided we did have some rights and felt a need to be heard,” Ruiz said. “We are concerned that the trail committee is aggressively moving forward without giving the public the opportunity to openly review and comment on the plan.”
Ruiz identified four major concerns over the trails issue, the first being that the trail committee provided incomplete information to the board of supervisors, as well as landowners, over getting approval for use of right-of-way for the trail, and getting the board of supervisors to grant use of the right-of-way.
The potential for legal issues over deeds was also identified, as was the trail plan, cost estimates, ownership and partial development concerns.
The final point of concern addresses the trail route, and how it would limit access to the lake for the elderly, handicapped and sportsmen.
Ruiz asking why the Board of Supervisors did not have the Trails committee hold a public hearing before granting approval for the use of the right-of-way, or at a minimum, why none of the supervisors personally went to visit with landowners who would be affected by the move.
“I spoke with some folks from Dickinson County who are part of that trails group, which is a part of county government,” Ruiz said. “They told me the golden rule of successful trail development is public hearing, public hearing, public hearing.”
Addressing the legal issues, Ruiz noted two landowners held deeds with easements for use for public roadways. “We’ve consulted with Dave Jennett of Storm Lake who has experience in easements and right-of-way issues, based on the specific language used in the deeds, he believes there is a specific issue here.”
Ruiz also questioned the cost estimates. “We believe that the actual estimates for the three-mile trail are under estimated. Perhaps it’s because we don’t fully understand the $500,000 estimate…that translates to $166,000 per mile.”
Ruiz noted that the Dickinson County trail costs $350,000 per mile, due to the complexity of development.
Ruiz went on to ask many other questions regarding ownership, liability, maintenance, drainage, funding, construction and locations. Also addressed was how the elderly, handicapped and sportsmen could access the lake if the trail were constructed along the lakeshore.
“In my personal opinion, not the opinion of the board, we got ahead of ourselves in granting use of the right-of-way,” Board Chair Ed Noonan said.
“I really hadn’t heard any complaints until now about this trail,” admitted Supervisor Keith Wirtz. “But, I think you folks have some legitimate concerns.”
“I thought the information in the paper was keeping people informed,” Supervisor Ron Graettinger said. “But if it wasn’t, and if we need a public hearing, then that’s what we need to do.”
“We were advised that most of the people had been contacted and that it was all OK,” Supervisor Jerry Hofstad said. “That’s how I made my decision, but I see now it was the wrong decision and we need to back up and wait a little while before we go forward.”
“I agree with Ed,” Supervisor Leo Goeders said. “I think we jumped ahead and think we need a little more information. I want to say that I’m in favor of the trails, but we need a little more information.”
Trails Committee Chair Steve Hoyman updated the board and tried to address some of the concerns raised earlier in the session. “We’ve tried to meet with Kristin several times but have been unable to get her to come to our meetings. I think that would have solved a lot of the problems. People not knowing, obviously it’s been in the paper, but that’s all kind of here and gone.”
Hoyman noted that trees were removed near Gappa Point after full consultation with the Gappa family, along with the County Conservation Board. “As far as the land that we’re crossing in the county, to the best of my knowledge, we’ve got everyone’s OK, except the Frinks, and I understand their concerns, but it wasn’t until the last week, the Wednesday or Thursday before the kickoff date that they actually told me, ‘No we’re against it.’ That was the first that I’d ever heard that they were against it. We had been working with them for quite some time.”
Hoyman pointed out that the trails committee did not visit with landowners along the route if the trail did not physically cross their property. The route was also disclosed in the newspaper, so claims that there was no knowledge of the route were not true. It was also pointed out that when statements were made that “nobody is for this” the statement was flawed.
“Start out with Duhigg Park – that’s controlled by County Conservation and they’re in full support of this,” Hoyman said. “Head back in towards town. Mollie and Ryan Veldboom have been very supportive and are working with us; Ned Munn has been supportive and is working with us; the K&R Property, Dr. Richards is a developer and he sees the positive part of building a trail and he is working with us…The statement that there’s no support out there, that’s simply not true.”
Landowner Tim Siemers noted that he and his wife weren’t opposed to the idea of a trail, but have concerns over the height of the trail, regarding drainage and snow issues, as well as liability where the trail runs across their property. “Steve and Joel have been good to work with, but we have still these concerns for our own protection,” Dawn Siemers agreed.
The meeting ended with an observation by Gerard Ruiz. “It sounds like people are hearing differing things about this project. If we could all get in one room and all hear the same information, it might answer a lot of these questions and concerns.”
