Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Works Highway Right Of Way topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Highway staff announce state grants for park access and bike-trail phase; board discusses selling excess right-of-way bought in 1986
Summary
Public works staff reported two recent grants — $375,000 from a state park road account for access near Bemidji State Park and $770,000 toward a safe‑routes bike‑trail phase — and sought board direction on divesting several excess right‑of‑way parcels acquired during a 1986 road relocation.
Bruce (Highway Department staff) told the board that Beltrami County recently received two grants: a $375,000 state park road account award to support access work tied to an existing project near Bemidji State Park, and a $770,000 award toward a safe‑routes/safe‑schools bike‑trail phase intended to connect the high school to downstream segments.
Bruce said the Casa 20/North Side project near the lake is now roughly two‑thirds funded and estimated “about $3,000,000” in total cost; the $375,000 grant is targeted to public recreational access. He described the bike‑trail funding as percentage funding for phase 3 (from the high school to Gene Dillon), following city‑led phases 1 and 2.
The longer discussion concerned several parcels of excess right‑of‑way the county acquired when a county road was relocated in 1986. Bruce explained that the county had bought a large parcel during the relocation and that subsequent smaller slivers of that parcel are no longer needed for the road. He said the county has surveyed the parcels and met with adjacent landowners who expressed interest in acquiring adjoining pieces, and the land‑committee, natural resources and highway staff have been working on a divestment approach.
However, Bruce and staff discovered complexities: a 2007 county resolution vacated a segment alongside one resort (described in the staff presentation), but the county apparently never executed a deed to transfer title; other slivers were never properly vacated or conveyed under the road‑vacation statute and instead should follow the county property‑sale statutory process. Bruce said the sale route requires setting a minimum price based on the county assessor and, where present, the county must retain mineral rights. He asked for direction to proceed with the statutory sale process and to update the draft resolution with assessor values and mineral‑rights language.
Commissioners discussed fairness and timing. Commissioner Winger argued the county should not charge landowners more now because the technical mistakes occurred decades ago and said the value should be based on what it would have cost at the time. Other commissioners favored moving forward with the sales process but asked staff to confirm statutory requirements for offering parcels to adjoining owners and to the township where a township road corridor exists. Bruce committed to consult the county attorney and assessor and return with corrected resolutions and recommended next steps.
No final sale resolution was adopted at the work session; staff were directed to continue preparing the necessary legal documents and valuation details for future board action.
