Property owner agrees to allow West Point levee work to proceed while compensation is negotiated

The West Point City Council on a recent meeting heard a proposal from an attorney representing a property owner near the town levee project to allow construction to proceed on the owner’s land immediately, with compensation to be negotiated or determined later.

Attorney Mike Tad told the council his client, identified in the meeting as Al Pagel, does not want to block the flood-control project but wants to protect his property interest. Tad said the owner would sign an agreement granting the city access and consenting to necessary work on his land, then pursue a valuation of any taking after the project is complete. "It's kind of like buying the car now and we're going to figure out the price later," Tad said, describing the proposed structure.

City counsel (referred to in the meeting as Damien) warned council members that allowing construction to begin before compensation is resolved can lock both parties into the physical state of the project. He explained the alternatives if no voluntary deal is reached: an appraisal process or a formal eminent-domain proceeding where court-appointed appraisers set just compensation. "If construction commences... you're locked in," Damien said, urging that any interim agreement include a clear dispute-resolution or appraisal timetable.

Council members pressed for limits on any open-ended arrangement. Members raised concerns about flood-insurance impacts for Mr. Pagel and potentially for other properties downstream, and noted that final insurance and FEMA re-mapping assessments often occur only after construction and can take months or longer. One councilor said FEMA's re-evaluation timeline is uncertain; another emphasized the need to align any agreement with the owner's insurance renewal schedule.

Project staff told the council the levee work aims for completion in September 2025. Councilors and the owner’s attorney agreed the governing body should see a draft access-and-compensation agreement several days before the April 1 meeting so it can be considered on that agenda. Tad said his client preferred to avoid litigation and was willing to cooperate if the city incorporates a reasonable timeline and dispute-resolution process into the agreement.

The council asked staff and the city attorney to prepare the draft agreement for distribution in late March so members have time to review it before the April meeting. No formal compensation figure was agreed upon in the meeting; the parties discussed appraisal options and the possibility of a later eminent-domain valuation if voluntary settlement fails.