Friends of the River Executive Director Defends Project Amid Questions Over Land Acquisition

A public comment from Jane Anderson, executive director of Friends of the River Foundation, focused attention on one of the main disputes surrounding the Smoky Hill River Renewal Project: whether the current land acquisition process is about taking homes or acquiring riverbank property needed for the project.

Anderson told commissioners that residents had a chance to vote on the issue in 2016 and that the measure passed. She also said the city and Friends of the River do not want anyone’s house.

“ Nobody wants anyone’s house,” Anderson said. “The only building that’s actually going to be in the way the trail is the storage unit for the community theater.”

Her statement is accurate.

Salina voters did approve a sales tax increase in May 2016. The city’s river project page states that voters approved increasing Salina’s sales tax from 8.40 percent to 8.75 percent for 20 years, with a portion of those funds going toward Smoky Hill River Renewal projects. The city says that once the annual debt service for Kenwood Cove was retired, about $1.3 million per year would be allocated to the river project, generating an estimated $20.8 million over 16 years.

The gray area is that the 2016 vote was not a parcel-by-parcel vote on today’s land acquisition. It approved a sales tax funding source. It did not, by itself, answer every future question about easements, title work, riverbank access, floodplain impacts, or property rights.

That distinction matters because the current city action is more specific than the 2016 vote. The commission considered Resolution No. 26-8355 and Resolution No. 26-8356, both tied to land acquisition and public use for the Smoky Hill River Renewal Project.

According to city agenda materials summarized in prior Salina311 reporting, Resolution No. 26-8355 set just compensation for property interests needed for the project. The proposed amount was listed at $1,021,760 or less for 43 parcels, plus up to $44,000 for title insurance and closing costs.

Resolution No. 26-8356 dealt with the city acquiring or owning legal interests in property along the Old Smoky Hill River channel. City documents state the city needs property interests from the high bank on both sides of the river channel for recreation, drainage, riverbank maintenance, and control of public access in dry portions of the channel.

That supports Anderson’s broader point that the project is not being presented as an effort to take homes. The documents focus on the river channel, high bank, public access, drainage, maintenance, and related property interests.

But property owners’ concerns are not imaginary either. The city is not just asking people to support an idea. It is pursuing legal property interests tied to specific parcels. Even if a house is not being acquired, a property owner may still be affected if the city obtains an easement, fee interest, access right, or other control over part of the riverbank.

That is the central issue.

Anderson’s statement is fair as a defense against the claim that the city wants people’s houses. The record reviewed does not show the project as a home-taking effort. But the land acquisition process is still real, formal, and significant. It involves dozens of parcels and more than $1 million in proposed compensation.

The cleaner way to frame it is this: voters approved a sales tax that helped fund the river project, but they did not vote on every land-acquisition detail now before the city. The city may not want anyone’s house, but it does want property interests along the riverbank. For affected owners, that difference matters.