Print this story | E-mail story | This story has 18 comments Add your own | iPod friendly
Turtle Lake sewer work still on hold
Landowner asking five times the price for right of way
Published Wednesday, June 13, 2007
Right-of-way negotiations continue to stall the South Turtle Lake storm water sewer system project, forcing the county to discuss possible eminent domain proceedings to get the project under way.
“It’s a project we need to pursue and get the water to a point where it’s being lowered,” Highway Engineer Rick West said.
Negotiations between the county and the Gerhardson family are at a standstill until Thursday. The county has made an easement offer to the Gerhardsons of $3,600, but the family received a second appraisal of $16,000. Other area residents, concerned about delays, don’t want to allow more time.
“It isn’t fair,” Jerry Stine said. “They’re ripping people off for their land and we’ve got people who are about to lose their homes.”
“We’re so close to a solution,” Lake Improvement District Secretary Chuck Worum said.
In the interest of proceeding, West alluded to the possibility of beginning the eminent domain process, albeit as a last resort.
“I would hope we could successfully negotiate,” West said. “Until we know what kind of latitude their counsel has in negotiations with us, there is not much we can do.”
County Attorney David Hauser noted there is a public purpose in authorizing eminent domain, since the county already has made an offer and given the Gerhardson family time to get their own assessment. There are time frames to follow if the two parties cannot reach an agreement, including a possible 90-day provision of notice to the Gerhardsons concerning eminent domain.
“There is no reason not to continue to talk to them,” Hauser said. “That is always the best result.”
“If in the end this is non-negotiable, it’s not just a matter of money,” West said. “Some provisions in the correspondence from their counsel we can live with and some we can’t.”
The county also could approach the Gerhardsons about purchasing the parcel of land outright. Another option is to look at another outlet location but that will take more time negotiating with different land owners.
“It’s a moot point if we can purchase the property,” Commissioner Syd Nelson said.
Chairman Dennis Mosher made the motion to pursue eminent domain saying, “We can always pull back but we need to continue to push this.”
Comments
The Daily Journal is happy to host community conversations about news and life in Fergus Falls and the surrounding area. As hosts, we expect guests will show respect for each other. That means we don't threaten or defame each other, and we keep conversations free of personal attacks. Witty is great. Abusive is not. If you think a post violates these standards, don't escalate the situation. Instead, flag the comment to alert us. We'll take action if necessary. It's not hard. This should be a place where people want to read and contribute -- a place for spirited exchanges of opinion. So those who persist with racist, defamatory or abusive postings risk losing the privilege to post at all.Posted by tp (anonymous) on June 13, 2007 at 2:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Nice. Home and cabins are being destroyed, and one family decides that want more money for an easement. As I understand the drain pipe is going through a slough on their property, and the short and long term damage is minimal. Greed prevails.
Posted by la (anonymous) on June 13, 2007 at 6:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I think most forget that this problem not only effects residents on S. Turtle, but North Turtle Lake as well. We have both private and public roads under water, farm land either unaccesible or under water, 100+ ft. of shoreline lost(lake is up 4+ft). If you recall from previous articles, N. Turtle's "natural flow" was illegally blocked via culvert under old rail bed, some years ago, when discovered, it was opend briefly to relieve N. Turtle, but complaints from S. Turtle forced to stop that. I hope this easment is settled , vs. eminent domain, creating a lot of delays for relief for so many on "BOTH" N. & S. Turtle Lakes.
Posted by Bettyheck (anonymous) on June 13, 2007 at 8:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)
If the South Turtle Lake Commission can aquire land somewhere else to get this project up and running then I say do it. If the Gerhardsons want to show they care more for money then they do for their neighbors then forget them and find another route to go. I'm sure there are people more than willing to contribute to this project.
Posted by Blitzen (anonymous) on June 14, 2007 at 6:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)
If it is money the Gerhardson's are seeking, it appears to be short sighted and selfish. I wonder how they can sleep at night? People are loosing their investments and are suffering.
Looking at a USGS topo map, their property appears to be nearly an island already. Looking at Google Earth, it is even more dramatic looking. Should the water continue to rise, they will flood out, just like everybody else. In the end, how much will that cost?
The pressure on roads, homes, and septic systems cannot last much longer.
Posted by ibejim (anonymous) on June 14, 2007 at 9:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)
It seems to me the real problem here is that homes and cabins have been built too close to the water. There are natural outlets from the lake and therefore it should be left alone. When the water level gets high enough the water will flow out. It's unfortuanle for land owners, but developers and owners should look at this data before purchasing or building. People shouldn't alter lake levels so they can have a price of shoreline!!!
Posted by Blitzen (anonymous) on June 14, 2007 at 11:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The ordinary high water level is determined by the DNR. Setback on a particular parcel is governed by Land and Resource on the county level. These properties were built with the blessing of the county. Rather unfair of you to place this the shoulders of the owners and developers, IMO.
You can't put this horse back in the barn, sir. It's much too late for that. Kudos to the county for stepping up to the plate and pushing for a resoloution.
Let's let the lake raise another 6-8 feet so it will flow naturally. Let's allow all that proptery, roads, and septic systems go under. Let's kill two local business ventures also. I'm sure you'll be more that willing to pick up your share when that tax base disappears into the water....
Posted by ibejim (anonymous) on June 14, 2007 at 11:34 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The water level is determined by nature. Apparently the "ordinary" high water level isn't accurate. Perhaps this is a rare occurance which was wrongly disregarded. It still appears that these structures are where they don't belong.
Posted by Blitzen (anonymous) on June 14, 2007 at 12:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
...Not so rare actually. Simple topography.
When most of the land was platted and developed the area was in an extended dry cycle. Now, we are in a high water cycle.
I don't believe there was any purposful wrongdoing on any agency or indvidual part.
The fact remains is there is a problem, and it is at crisis level. It is bigger than North and South Turtle. Johnson, Crooked, Pebble, Bass Elbow to name just a very few. Throw in the numerous county and township roads in the area also.
Just lettting nature take is course in many situations is not viable.
Posted by tp (anonymous) on June 14, 2007 at 2:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
ibejim- Nice simple solution you have there....
My cabin was built in the mid 1960's, and the distance to the water was about 100'. The water has risen 8' or more already, and is now lapping around the foundation.
All we're looking for is a reasonable solution to the problem. Holding up a project to protect more than 100 homes and cabins to get a large cash payout for access though non-productive land is unreasonable.
Posted by cjm (anonymous) on June 14, 2007 at 6:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I have had a cabin South Turtle Lake for over 40 years and never expected the lake to reach the level that it has, so should we suffer because we didn't look at a map and say hey in a few years we will be under water. Hope the greedy people can sleep well at night.
Posted by tp (anonymous) on June 16, 2007 at 10:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Seems to me that if the small parcel of land that the pipe will go though the Gerhardson's land is worth 16k in easements, the County really needs to go back and reassess the taxable value of their entire property....
Posted by h2o (anonymous) on June 17, 2007 at 10:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)
It never fails me to see the true nature of the human race when faced with a common problem, how most will band together to overcome the issue for the benefit of all and yet there is always one that falls to the dark side.
The LID (lake improvement district) board members have sacrificed countless hours-days-months over the years to resolve the water level problem and now with the hour at hand the Gerhardsons deem it necessary to fill their pockets at the cost of the land owners of the lake.
If any extra financial consideration is granted by the county at all, it seems only prudent that our LID members be first in line followed by the rest of the land owners minus one.
Let the Gerhardsons find a different way to buy themselves into heaven.
Posted by umm (anonymous) on June 20, 2007 at 9:42 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I don't have a horse in this race. I used to vacation on South Turtle as a child and have many fond memories, but that's the extent of it. I heard about this issue a few days ago and immediately assumed the number this Gerhardson guy was looking for must be huge ($millions?).
Forgetting the topography and rain cycle issues, this article has me shaking my head. Is it true to say that this impasse is over $12,400? I can't get too upset with Gerhardson over that. You people on the lake need to organize yourselves and each toss $124 in a hat and drop it off -- TODAY. You don't need to be happy about it, but you NEED to do it.
...or you could continue to sit on your hands and watch the next house have waves lapping against the siding.
Posted by Blitzen (anonymous) on June 20, 2007 at 10:50 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Organize ourselves? Really, now. Perhaps you should educate yourself. We have been rather organized for the last 8 years trying to solve this problem. There has been a lake association formed, and out of that came the formation of the Lake Improvement District (LID). We pumped for 4 years, and that did solve the problem for a short time, but the DNR and US Fish and Wildlife directed us to find a permanent soloution. At this point the county stepped in and the storm water district was formed. This project is being implemented by the county, not the residents. The residents will pay for it, however. If it were that simple to just pass the hat and pay off the Gerhardsons, it would have been done. Lord knows, $124 would seem a cheap way to get this done when we have probably spent in excess of $200,000 to pump in past years. This is the county's issue to negotiate with them, not the lake residents. If you want something to shake your head over, consider that the Gerhardson property will flood out like everyone else in the lake basin should this project stall out. Then what will their property be worth? Your statement that the residents have been "sitting on their hands" could not be farther from the truth. Many volunteer hours, blood, sweat and tears have been expended. Give me a break.....
Posted by umm (anonymous) on June 20, 2007 at 11:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)
My apologies, but try to read the article as an objective newcomer to the situation. A bit more history (at least a quick summary such as yours) would have made a huge difference to this.
I think nearly everyone not invested to your level who sees $12,400 and 100 houses in the story coupled with the picture at the top, might come to a similar conclusion.
Good luck with this, and I hope it gets worked out quickly.
Posted by Blitzen (anonymous) on June 20, 2007 at 11:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Sorry if I came off a bit harsh, but you get edgy when you house is in danger.
Do a search on the Journal site, and there is a fair amount of stuff to read about going back to 2001 or 2002.
Posted by b15 (anonymous) on June 20, 2007 at 4:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)
If it only ran $124 I'll gladly pay for myself and a few other people.
I'm not as bad off as others but this is getting ridiculous. If I could help save 100+ properties I'd let you run a jackhammer in my yard 24/7 for 3 weeks.
Obviously, I was raised a bit differently from the Gehardson's. It also seems as though today's opinion chimed in on the issue as well.
Posted by Billy (anonymous) on June 29, 2007 at 4:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)
It's a shame that someone who works for such a large Company as Mr. Gerhardson does that he would cause all of these problems over a few thousand dollars. This should be settled on a golf course or the special olympics. Shame Shame.
Post a comment
(Requires free registration.)