Polk County landowners sue over rail-trail compensation claims

More than 80 Polk County landowners have filed a federal lawsuit seeking compensation after the Surface Transportation Board authorized railbanking and recreational-trail use of a 12.2-mile former railroad corridor from Grimes to Des Moines. The case argues the federal action created a taking of private property rights and should trigger Fifth Amendment payment.

Why it matters: - The lawsuit could determine whether owners along the former railroad corridor are owed money for a federally authorized rail-trail conversion. - More than 80 landowners say the railbanking process imposed new rights on their property without just compensation. - The case could affect nearly 100 parcels tied to the corridor.

What happened: - Stewart, Wald & Smith filed a lawsuit in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims on behalf of landowners along an approximately 12.2-mile railroad corridor in Polk County, Iowa. - The case is titled Central Iowa Ready-Mix, Inc. v. United States, Case No. 26-1100L. - The corridor runs from Grimes to Des Moines and includes the approximately 0.8-mile Clive Spur. - The properties involved are in Grimes, Urbandale, Windsor Heights, Clive, West Des Moines and Des Moines. - The suit seeks monetary compensation from the United States for what the landowners say is a taking of property rights under the Fifth Amendment.

The details: - Norfolk Southern Railway Company owns the corridor, and Iowa Interstate Railroad, LLC operated it under lease. - On April 14, 2026, the railroads jointly asked the U.S. Surface Transportation Board for authority for Norfolk Southern to abandon the line and for Iowa Interstate to discontinue service. - On April 27, 2026, the Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation, with support from cities along the corridor, asked for authority to negotiate interim trail use and railbanking. - The Surface Transportation Board later authorized the federal railbanking process. - The lawsuit says that authorization imposed a new easement across the landowners’ properties and prevented their state-law rights from becoming unencumbered when railroad use ended. - The suit does not seek to stop or delay the proposed trail. - The sole defendant is the United States. - The lawsuit is not directed against the Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation, the supporting cities, Norfolk Southern, Iowa Interstate or any future trail operator. - Landowners may be entitled to compensation if they own the land beneath or adjoining the corridor and the railroad held only an easement limited to railroad purposes. - Potential recovery may include the reduction in property value caused by the trail-use and railbanking easement. - Eligibility and recovery depend on title history, the documents that gave the railroad its interest and Iowa property law. - Federal law generally sets a six-year statute of limitations for claims against the United States.

Between the lines: - The case is part of a broader national pattern of rails-to-trails disputes, where landowners argue that public trail conversions trigger compensable takings. - Stewart, Wald & Smith said it has handled numerous successful Iowa rails-to-trails cases and expects that experience to help landowners in this matter. - Some participating landowners support recreational trails but argue the public should not gain use of private property without paying owners. - A lawyer for the firm said the process moved quickly and the lawsuit seeks only the compensation required by the Fifth Amendment.

What’s next: - Stewart, Wald & Smith expects to return to the area in the coming months to meet with additional landowners and explain the claims process. - Affected owners may need to act quickly to investigate and preserve claims because each property requires an individual review. - Interested landowners can contact Reed Ripley at ripley@swslegal.com or Stewart, Wald & Smith at 816-303-1500. - The firm said other owners along the corridor are not automatically included in the case.

The bottom line: - The lawsuit is about money, not stopping the trail, and it tests whether federal railbanking converted private corridor rights into a compensable taking.**