KALAMAZOO, MI (WKZO AM/FM) – Some members of a local family that has been fighting the seizure of their beachfront property by Kalamazoo County for over 60 years have lost their case.
Probate Judge Curtis Bell knocked down all their objections to eminent domain and ruled in favor of the County, saying they had demonstrated a public purpose for use of the property.
The parcel in question is landlocked on three sides by Prairie View Park and on the fourth by Gourdneck Lake. The County first tried to acquire the small cabin and the yard around through eminent domain in 1960, when they created the park, but the Tolanda/Johnson family resisted it then.
They came up with an agreement that the County would have first rights to buy the land when the original owners died. That finally happened a couple of years ago, but their heirs still refused to sell, saying that deal was no longer valid. After failed negotiations and other court challenges, the County Board authorized the use of eminent domain, resulting in this ruling.
Loraine Tolanda, one of the heirs who wanted to honor the original agreement, says it has divided their once tight family.
County Spokesperson Taylor Koopman released a statement saying they have empathy for the family, “We recognize their emotional connection and personal investment…Our intentions have always been rooted in serving the greater public interest.”
The County would still have to pay a fair price for the land, and this ruling is subject to appeal, if the family wants to continue the fight.
FULL COUNTY STATEMENT BELOW:
“First and foremost, we extend our empathy and understanding to the individuals associated with the private property. over the years. and maintaining a safe and enjoyable experience for all park visitors. The Court’s ruling aligns with our perspective in upholding the integrity of Prairie View Park and reinforces the careful consideration that has gone into this matter.
It is essential to emphasize that the County’s decision to pursue this course of action was not taken lightly. It was the culmination of a thorough examination of the legal, safety, and liability aspects associated with the presence of the private property located within a public park. Moving forward, our priority lies in determining just compensation and providing a fair outcome that recognizes the value of the property.
The County has a possessory interest in the property, but is waiting to be advised on whether the plaintiffs intend to seek a right to appeal. We do plan to work closely with their counsel to coordinate any transition.”
