Ads by Yahoo!

" The Illinois Central did abandon the line and pulled up the tracks and hauled the tracks and ties away. They then sold the land which they were given when the railroad was first put in. The railroads had already sold other adjoining land they were granted by the government as an incentive for building railroads through undeveloped areas. (The T. P. & W. was selling land for $2.50-$6.00 per acre in 1856 for land that bordered the railroad from Eureka to El Paso. They weren't allowed to sell the land until rail service was available.) The article also states that *municipalities* could get the land. I see nothing about private citizens being given the land, especially if it did not adjoin property they already owned. I doubt that we've heard the last of this one. "

" What would be more interesting to learn is how much did the attorney's make? "

" Why do I get the feeling that you work for the IRS? "

" bet the IRS gets into this and gets their share out of it. the 1920 railroad act said to give the land back to the original owner. those that are getting it now because the owner is not around from death, etc. the new owner is recieving a gift from the railroad and will most likely have to pay taxes on it. the judge is gone and "HERE COMES THE IRS" "

" You had both better use this "found" money for the bike trail. None of that lottery magic the state used either for schools. This is extra money that can be used to fund and expand the trail. Will you do the right thing? "

" What about Mr Furrow? Does he have to give all that land he "purchased" to El Paso or the County? As for the original purchasers. If they have sold it since they bought it what about taxes? Does this change capital gains? Do they need to file an amended return? If someone other than a municipality purchased it and then sold it does this mean it no longer has a clean title? So many questions. Can of Worms is now open!! "

" the judge in the case that determines the settlement makes the Railroad company pay fopr the lawyers fees as well. Otherwise the municipalities had to pay 30% for land they, by rights, owned anyway. "

" The word attorney should not be allowed to appear more than 5 times in any single article. "

" What happens if you bought some land that was not next to your property. Should the town or township have received the money. I am sure they were not doling the land out free. "

" Well, that's .001% of the Big Judy debt right there! "

" I did read the article and it said, "Congress adopted a policy in 1920 stating if a railroad abandoned the line and didn’t want the land back, municipalities could have it." First of all, that statement should not be relied upon, because Congress does not adopt policies; Congress legislates laws and the Executive Branch formulates policies, based upon its interpretation of those laws. And, policy is not law. But, putting that aside, temporarily, there are still two parts of the policy to consider: 1) railroads must abandon the line and 2) railroads must not want the land back. Considering part 1), railroads SELLING lines is a far cry from ABANDONING the lines. Considering part 2) in light of the appellate court's ruling, what makes you think the railroad does not want the land back? "

" How much will the land owners really get, after the lawyers get their cut? "

" If you read the article, you'll see that the FEDERAL law states that if abandoned, it goes to the municipalities, not the federal government. "

" Good to hear a story that gives back to the communities instead of losing something. Hopefully, the municipalities involved will use the funds to improve or extend existing facilities "

" If railroads inappropriately sold property that was originally acquired free through federal land grants, then should not that same property revert back to the federal government? Methinks I'll start a class action lawsuit. "