Sparta residents go up against Sandersville Railroad expansion

SPARTA, Ga. — A battle between the Sandersville Railroad and Sparta residents could have implications for property law across the state and nation.

A hearing began Monday in Atlanta to help determine whether a railroad can legally condemn property to build a 4.5-mile rail line to serve a rock quarry and possibly other industries.

In March, the railroad filed a petition before the Georgia Public Service Commission to obtain authority to condemn the land and take it through eminent domain, against property owners’ will.

In May, the property owners teamed up with the Institute for Justice to fight back. Others who live nearby, organized as the No Railroad In Our Community Coalition, are represented by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

MORE | Georgia wildlife officials report decline in wild turkeys

Janet Paige Smith, a leader of the group, says the railroad would further burden a neighborhood with many Black retirees on fixed incomes.

“We already suffer from traffic, air pollution, noise, debris, trash, and more from the Heidelberg Quarry, but this project would make everything worse,” Smith testified.

Now a hearing officer will take up to three days of testimony, making a recommendation to the five elected of the Georgia Public Service Commission, who will ultimately decide.

The line would be built by the Sandersville Railroad, which is owned by an influential Georgia family. It would connect to the CSX railroad at Sparta, allowing products to be shipped widely. Sparta, in Hancock County, is about 65 miles west of Augusta.

People in the rural neighborhood don’t want a train track ing through or near their property, in part because they think it would enable expansion at a quarry owned by Heidelberg Materials, a publicly traded German firm.

Some residents already dislike the quarry because it generates noise, dust and truck traffic. ers say if the railroad is built, the quarry will move its operation farther from houses, trains will reduce trucks on roads and the railroad will build berms to shield residents.

MORE | Ga. Supreme Court deals setback to law regulating DAs

But owners say losing a 200-foot-wide strip of property to the railroad would spoil land they treasure for its peace and quiet, hunting, fishing and family heritage.

“Sandersville Railroad does not care about the destruction of my family’s property or our way of life,” Donald Garret Sr., one of the owners, said in written testimony in August. “They just care about their own plans for my property, which won’t serve the public, but will just help them expand their business and the quarry’s business.”

In August after expert testimony was filed with the commission, Institute for Justice atorney Attorney Betsy Sanz called the eminent domain maneuver “an unconstitutional land grab which would serve no legitimate public interest,” adding that it’s “eminent domain abuse.”

In his testimony, law professor Donald J. Kochan said that a “condemnation that chiefly serves the interests of one company and its network of contractors is not a ‘public use’ or in service of ‘public purposes.’”

Kochan goes on to say the taking is “not a taking of necessity from private property owners to serve truly public interests and the public as a whole. Rather, this is a naked wealth transfer.”

Railroad expert Gary Hunter also submitted testimony, challenging the feasibility of Sandersville Railroad’s plan.

MORE | CSRA residents can prepare for mysterious dog illness sweeping U.S.

“I have reviewed Sandersville’s direct testimony, and in my expert opinion, the project is not economically feasible. It would take decades to recover its costs,” Hunter argues in his testimony.

The Libertarian-leaning Institute for Justice was on the losing side of a landmark 2005 case allowing the city of New London, Connecticut, to take land from one private owner and transfer it to another private owner in the name of economic development. The decision set off a widespread reaction, including more than 20 states ing laws to restrict eminent domain.

Can railroad seize the land?

Railroads have long had the power of eminent domain, but Georgia law says such land seizures must be for “public use.” Opponents targeted the project by saying it would only benefit the quarry and doesn’t meet the definition of public use.

“This is not a taking of necessity from private property owners to serve truly public interests and the public as a whole. Rather, this is a naked wealth transfer,” Daniel Kochan, a law professor at Virginia’s George Mason University, testified for opponents.

MORE | Making a difference: ‘It’s bigger than you, bigger than me’

The Sandersville Railroad says there are other s, including a company co-located with the quarry that blends gravel and asphalt for paving. Several companies have said they would truck products from the Sandersville area and load them onto the short line, noting they want access to CSX, but opponents question whether that business will materialize.

The case matters because private entities need to condemn private land not only to build railroads, but also to build other facilities such as pipelines and electric transmission lines. There’s a particular need to build additional electric transmission lines in Georgia and other states to transmit electricity from new solar and wind generation.

Sandersville Railroad President Ben Tarbutton III said in testimony that the Institute for Justice is engaged in “transparent efforts to change federal and state constitutional law regarding condemnation.”