Depot’s ownership questioned again

By NATE HUBBARD/Staff

The long-term ownership of Rural Retreat’s historic train depot remains up in the air.
Now the temporary control of the station has become a point of contention, too.
A motion from the original owner of the depot, Jack Weaver, was filed Monday in Wythe County Circuit Court seeking to prevent town employees or contractors from going on the property as both sides await a ruling from the court on the legality of the town’s condemnation petition.
Weaver, through various limited liability companies, including most recently Huckleberry Farms LLC, unquestionably owned the depot from 1989 until eight months ago when Rural Retreat Town Council approved a resolution to condemn the station.
Immediately after the governing body’s vote, town attorney Mike Sobey submitted a condemnation petition and a “certificate of take” to Circuit Court.
According to a definition provided by the Code of Virginia, the certificate provisionally terminates the stake of the previous property owner – in this case Weaver – and gives the condemnor – the town – temporary title to the property while the condemnation proceedings are pending in the court system.
Weaver and his attorneys, however, have argued that the town’s petition and certificate were filed illegally and that ownership of the depot should therefore remain with Weaver until Judge Josiah Showalter Jr. has ruled otherwise.
The motion filed Monday asks Showalter to issue a temporary injunction to bar anyone associated with the town from going into the station or the surrounding land that Weaver leases from Norfolk Southern Railway Co.
Weaver asks that the injunction remain in place until Showalter rules on Weaver’s request to have the court toss out the town’s condemnation petition.
Showalter heard arguments in late August from Sobey and one of Weaver’s attorneys, Tim Kirtner, about the validity of the town’s petition, but the judge has remained mute on the issue since and has given no timetable for when he will issue his written opinion on the matter.
In the meantime, Weaver’s request for the temporary injunction was sparked by the town’s decision to go forward with applying for a grant to restore the depot even as its ownership rights to the station remain murky.
Weaver’s attorneys actually sent the motion to Circuit Court last month after Town Council held a public hearing about seeking a grant during its Nov. 10 meeting. The first copy of the motion, however, was not immediately entered into the court system and the defense sent an identical second copy Friday that was filed by clerks Monday.
During Town Council’s Nov. 24 meeting, the governing body, by a 5-0 vote, approved a resolution to apply for a TEA-21 grant with a Dec. 1 deadline “to establish a project for the restoration of the Rural Retreat Train Depot.”
The grant funds, which will be awarded in spring 2010, come from federal tax dollars, but the money is doled out by the Commonwealth Transportation Board.
According to the resolution, the town agreed that if it receives the grant, it will use town funds to pay for a minimum of 20 percent of the “total cost for planning, design and restoration” of the station, a standard requirement with TEA-21 grants.
Unapproved minutes from the meeting state that Town Manager Raymond Matney estimated the town’s 20 percent commitment at $80,000.
But Lori Guynn, the town’s treasurer, said Tuesday that the Lane Group, which is providing preliminary architectural services to the town for the depot project at a cost of $3,500, had since revised its figures. Guynn said the new estimate for the “whole ball of wax” to restore the depot is $859,000 – meaning the town’s commitment of local taxpayer funds would be $171,800.
Based on 2008 U.S. Census Bureau estimates that placed the town’s population at 1,346, the cost to each Rural Retreat resident in local taxes to restore the depot would be $128.
If the court rules against the town or if the governing body otherwise decides to drop the project at a later date, the resolution approved last month also states that the town will reimburse the Virginia Department of Transportation for any funds it expends prior to the town’s cancelation notice.
In his latest court filing, Weaver mentions the grant application and accuses both town and Lane Group employees of trespassing on the leased land surrounding the depot and inside the depot itself as they gathered information to submit the grant.
The town “seems intent upon ignoring the questions as to the validity of said certificate of take raised in Respondents’ demurrer … and proceeding with respect to the subject property as though [the town] had already received a ruling in its favor,” Weaver states in the latest court filing.
Attorneys with the Pulaski law firm of Gilmer, Sadler, Ingram, Sutherland & Hutton, which is representing Weaver, did not return a message seeking additional comment about Weaver’s temporary injunction motion.
When reached Monday, town attorney Sobey said his policy is not to comment on pending cases.
Matney said the town believes its certificate of take filing gives it the right to be in the depot until the judge says otherwise.
“I think so,” he said when asked if he thought it was legal for town and Lane Group employees to enter the depot.
Matney said he sees the town’s right to be in the station while the case is pending as “not a big deal” either way. He said the town is more anxious to get Showalter’s written opinion on the long-term ownership issues debated during the August court hearing.
As of Tuesday morning, the court hadn’t issued any ruling on Weaver’s temporary injunction motion or the overall validity of the town’s condemnation petition.
Nate Hubbard can be reached at 228-6611 or .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).