Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rails To Trails topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee sends revised New River rails‑to‑trails resolution to full commission after lengthy public comment
Summary
After extended testimony from New River residents and trail advocates, the operations committee approved forwarding a revised Rails‑to‑Trails resolution (with law‑director revisions) to the full commission; speakers emphasized grant leverage and local representation while some residents warned of privacy and safety risks.
The Anderson County operations committee voted to send a revised Rails‑to‑Trails resolution recognizing potential benefits for the New River community to the full county commission, while asking the law director to review and amend language before final action. The vote followed nearly three hours of presentations and public comment that highlighted both economic opportunity and local safety concerns.
Supporters, including Nancy Manning of Tennessee Citizens for Wilderness Planning, said county endorsement is crucial to secure grants, private donations and state agency support that would fund trail acquisition, design and management. "Support from Anderson County gives this project credibility moving forward," Manning told the committee, and she said the corridor has been rail‑banked to preserve future rail use while allowing interim trail use.
Residents from New River said they do not oppose community investment but want stronger protections and local control. Jimmy Burge, who said he will serve on the trail sponsor’s board as a New River representative, told commissioners he agreed to join so "somebody in our area has a direct voice in shaping the future of the trail." Several residents, including Loretta Weber and Karen McCamey, urged commissioners to ensure management plans address public safety, privacy and local hiring so that benefits reach New River families.
Committee members and the law director discussed the legal and management steps required after acquisition. The Trust for Public Land (identified in testimony as the trail sponsor) and the trail sponsor’s option to purchase were described as part of the acquisition sequence; RJ Corman currently holds the corridor and an option is expected to be exercised later in the year. Nancy Manning described planned due diligence including title searches, environmental assessments and boundary surveys, and outlined three layers of security and management: natural deterrents from trail use, volunteer/unarmed stewards, and paid/uniformed or off‑duty law enforcement for higher‑level security.
The committee’s action was procedural: members directed the law director to review the draft resolution and send a revised version to the full commission. The committee’s vote to forward the resolution was recorded as passing; the full commission will consider final adoption. The committee also heard questions about the corridor’s length and county mileage; Manning reported the corridor segments that lie in adjacent counties and noted the trail sponsor arrangement and rail‑banking structure.
What it means: If the full commission approves the resolution and funding for later stages is secured, the project proponents said the trail would pursue state and private funding for acquisition, then proceed to design, construction and a written management plan addressing maintenance and security. Residents asked for explicit commitments on local input, nuisance protections, and local hiring when design and management contracts are negotiated.
The committee’s discussion and the public comment period clarified key unresolved items that the law director said he would research, including the legal definition and implications of rail‑banking and potential language to protect adjacent private property. The committee transmitted the resolution to the full commission with those issues to be addressed in the law‑director revision.
