Reno County commissioners authorize eminent domain for McNew Road, Mills Avenue easements
The vote followed an executive session on the preliminary acquisition of real estate.
Sign up for our free newsletter and never miss a story.
Sign up freeReno County commissioners cleared the way to take easements by force if needed for the S. McNew Road and Mills Avenue rebuild, approving the twice-tabled Resolution 2026-33 on a 4-1 vote Wednesday, Aug. 26. The meeting record does not say how many parcels or landowners the resolution covers, or how many easements remain unsigned.
County Counselor John Settle said the resolution authorizes the county to begin eminent domain proceedings if necessary and does not prevent continued negotiations with property owners. He said an eminent domain case could be dismissed if an easement is obtained through negotiation. Settle also described one tract where ownership is difficult to establish because the last known owner has been deceased for many years and multiple potential heirs may be involved. He said condemnation could be a more efficient way to obtain the limited easement the road project needs without resolving ownership of the entire tract.
Commissioner Randy Parks cast the lone no vote. Before voting, commissioners discussed property rights, the limited size and location of the easements, taxpayer costs, economic development and their general reluctance to use eminent domain. The record does not give the dimensions or acreage of the easements, nor what condemnation would cost taxpayers in appraiser fees, court costs or awards.
Commissioners had tabled the measure twice to allow more time for negotiations with property owners. The meeting record does not include Parks' stated reason for opposing it, though prior news coverage of the county's eminent domain debate has attributed his position to a commitment to protecting private property rights.
Citizen Journal reported earlier that the road work is driven by a new Evergy power plant and that the rebuild is to be funded through a $5.41 million county bond deal. The meeting record from Aug. 26 does not state the project's total cost, a construction start date or a completion timeline, and does not say whether that bond issue has closed.
This article was written using our proprietary AI system, Cronkite. The final decision to publish this article was made by a human. For more info, read our AI policy.
Found a mistake? Have a news tip or feedback to share? Contact our newsroom using the button below: