I work for a government agency. Often the executive leadership doesn't want to give an inch anywhere because they've got a thousand other cases just like this where all those people will say hey what about us so the thinking is hold the line everywhere.
I have had one case where I convinced them the facts are very unique and there was good faith confusion in the area and some of our past generations of people had added to the confusion so maybe in this one case we should solve the issue by granting an easement and it won't create an undesirable precedent because this particular section is messed up in a unique way.
But other than that it's very hard to solve difficult RE problems, we can't just q/c it like a private entity could. We would have to declare it surplus and I can tell you the forest doesn't want their forest declared surplus.
...But not just any Railroad...A?ÿ?ÿpublic benefit corporation/authority...The Metropolitan Transportation Authority in NY. The lawyers are going to have a field day with this.
We surveyed an old and very thin piece of property for a re-development project and found that there was an old sidetrack easement through it. Currently the location of the easement runs through two buildings and a parking lot. All of this sits on top of about 15 feet of fill were trucks used to sit under the tracks to get coal. The tracks have been gone for around 60 years and the buildings erected shortly thereafter...but there is no mechanism for release of the easement in the documents.
So after a year or so of negotiations with the MTA they come back and say they want six figures in payment in order to release a 50'x500' easement that hasn't been used in over 60 years and that currently has buildings on it. Currently the lawyers say that adverse possession cannot happen against a?ÿpublic benefit corporation/authority but are looking for other means.?ÿ
"...w(h)ere trucks used to sit under the tracks to get coal."?ÿ What a compelling public interest in the sidetrack easement. /s
"The tracks have been gone for around 60 years and the buildings erected shortly thereafter.."
That may be a good argument in itself.
I wonder if the MTA can lobby, or if it is dependent on public funds? If so, there's always some legislator that doesn't like them for one (probably good) reason or another. They can be a valuable ally, both in power and information about soft spots in the belly.
Then there's the press. That can actually be fun.
I've always wanted to do an op-ed about the railroad's appetite for million's in public taxpayer money, while all the time stiffing reasonable requests for things like this.?ÿ - drool.
?ÿ
Any updates?
Most every RR that I have ever encountered is an entity to itself and are protected against many situations like this in the same way States and Nation are protected against claims of use and overlap.
What their deeds, grants and sovereignty quotes and monuments mark are what they own fee simple absolute and no claims can be made against that.
They also do not use terms like adverse possession and easement for what is happening to their land.
It is possible to obtain a permit to travel alongside or cross their property when it is done properly and does not hinder their purposes in any way.
good luck
