JEFFERSON CITY — The Missouri Court of Appeals Southern District on Friday reversed an Oregon County judge’s ruling that would have forced the state to sell portions of a planned state park located along the Eleven Point River.
The represents a win for parks boosters and Attorney General Eric Schmitt, who had appealed the lower court’s ruling following advocacy from public lands supporters in 2020.
Former Gov. Jay Nixon, a Democrat whose administration arranged the purchase of roughly 4,200 acres in Oregon County in 2016, cheered the decision on Twitter on Friday.
People are also reading…
“Eleven Point State Park Saved by correct ruling by Missouri Southern District Court of Appeals decision today,†he said. “Our outdoors are a shared Missouri value. Thanks to all.â€
Schmitt is among 21 candidates running in the Republican primary for U.S. Senate on Tuesday.
The park plans had proved controversial after lead mining settlement funds were used to purchase the property.
Nearby landowners sued the state in 2017 over the purchase, arguing 625 acres were affected by a scenic easement. Use of the land as a park “would destroy the wild and scenic nature of the easement,†plaintiffs argued at trial.
Oregon County Circuit Court Judge Steven Privette ruled the easement restrictions, “under any reasonable interpretation,†meant the land cannot “be used by the public as a park.â€
Privette ordered the state to sell 625 acres affected by a federal easement — not all 4,200 acres of parkland. The land that would have been sold is along the western side of the river.
But a panel of three appellate judges sided with the state. Judge Jack A.L. Goodman wrote the opinion, and Judges Jeffrey W. Bates and William W. Francis Jr. concurred.
“An easement restricting particular rights or uses on a property does not interfere with (the Department of Natural Resources’) ability to acquire and possess such property for park purposes,†the ruling said.
“The Scenic Easement’s restrictions on the use of park property are actually consistent with DNR’s constitutional duty to ‘administer ... the conservation ... of natural resources’ and its statutory obligation to preserve land with ‘scenic, historic, prehistoric, archeological, scientific, or other distinctive characteristics or natural features,†the ruling said.
It continued, “The trial court’s judgment holding that the public’s actual physical access to 100% of park land is a requirement for DNR to acquire and possess land for park purposes, in spite of DNR’s plain statutory and regulatory authority to the contrary, is in direct contradiction to the plain language of DNR’s authorizing statutes and regulations.â€
Derrick Kirby, a Doniphan, Missouri-based attorney representing the three plaintiffs in the case — Van and Elizabeth McGibney, and the James Conner Irrevocable Trust — said Sunday it was yet to be decided whether his clients would appeal.
“We will have to discuss the Opinion with our clients in more detail before any decisions are made,†Kirby said in an email. “They, of course, are disappointed in the outcome and are greatly concerned that the Eleven Point River now will lose its unique and scenic qualities given the evidence adduced at trial related to the Department of Natural Resources’ intended operation of the Park.â€
Missouri House Republicans have voted several times to force the sale of the property, arguing the settlement money should’ve been spent on lead cleanup projects in areas affected by mining.
But proponents said spending money to preserve the parkland was an acceptable use given that other land in the state had been damaged by mining.
The easement in question, created by Congress through the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968, extends a quarter-mile from the banks of the Eleven Point River on both sides.
Originally posted at 9:30 p.m. Friday, July 30. Updated at 5:10 p.m. Monday with statement from the attorney for the plaintiffs.