Published: May 09, 2008 11:35 pm         

Garrett dismisses eminent domain letters

Frostburg man questioned whether county would take land for wind turbines

The use of eminent domain in Garrett County isn’t going to happen in the foreseeable future, according to the county commissioners.

“We’ve always supported the property rights of the property owners of Garrett County and we will continue to do that,” Commissioner Fred Holliday said. “At this time, I don’t see anything in the near future that’s going to require eminent domain. There’s no reason to do it. What’s going to happen down the road, you can’t say. At this time, there’s no indication whatsoever.”

The question of whether the county would use eminent domain in regards to industrial wind turbines was raised by John Bambacus of Frostburg through several e-mails and in letters to local papers. He questioned if the county would use eminent domain to seize property in order to see that turbines would be placed on Garrett County land.

Monty Pagenhardt, county administrator, who said that he responded to those questions in both e-mail and a letter to the editor, explained that it was at Bambacus’ request that the issue be addressed in a public meeting.

Bambacus said that he had done research on the issue of eminent domain and in doing so, he found a resolution passed in August 2005 to protect the property rights of county residents.

“This is a powerful resolution, one of the most unequivocal resolutions I’ve ever read,” Bambacus said. “And you make, or the previous board, makes a comment at the end that you want to stick with the original intent of the founding fathers. This is a very tough statement.”

Bambacus said that the resolution was timed with a decision made by the Supreme Court that allowed eminent domain to be used for economic development and other less traditional purposes.

Charlie Thorne, an Oakland resident, asked about the letter to the editor written by Pagenhardt and county attorney Mike Getty. He said that he felt the letter led him to believe that the county might stand by the decisions made by the Supreme Court, rather than the resolution.

Denny Glotfelty, commission chairman, said he stands by the resolution.

Pagenhardt explained that the letter said that the county could do those actions, not that it would or had plans to do so.

“Philosophically,” Commissioner Ernie Gregg said, “I’m opposed to the use of eminent domain. There would be very stringent and compelling reasons for the use of it. Certainly (industrial wind) is not one of them. I think it’s a hypothetical, a ‘what if’ question. ‘What if the sky falls?’ ‘What if the world ends?’”

Contact Sarah Moses at smoses@times-news.com.