Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Right Of Way Dispute topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee tables Highway 13 right-of-way tree dispute after adjoining landowner demands payment
Summary
The Highway Committee tabled further action on a dispute over trees removed in the State Highway 13 right of way after an adjoining landowner demanded payment or return of timber; county staff said the timber was on state right-of-way and offered alternate trees and a work-on-right-of-way permit.
ASHLAND COUNTY, Wis. — The Ashland County Highway Committee on June 9 tabled a dispute over trees removed along State Highway 13 between Glidden and Butternut after an adjoining landowner said county-permitted wood removal deprived him of timber and demanded payment.
Highway Commissioner Matt Hinkle briefed the committee on the dispute. Hinkle said three individuals applied for work-on-right-of-way permits for trees in the DOT right of way; two removed wood and one, identified in discussion as Charles (Chuck) Hirschrider, did not receive an emailed permit due to a typo in the address on the submission. Hirschrider later contacted county officials and sought either the timber or payment in the range of $6,000 to $7,000, Hinkle said.
Hinkle told the committee the land in question is state-owned right of way and not taxed to the adjoining owner, citing a deed showing the state acquired the right of way in 1935. He said county practice has been to help people obtain DOT permits but that the county will change its internal practice so county staff do not prepare or submit a private landowner's permit application to DOT; applicants must now contact DOT directly.
Hinkle said the county offered to cut additional trees later in the season that the landowner could have, and that the highway department can issue a work-on-right-of-way permit for the landowner to take available trees. He also said DOT policy gives some preference to adjoining landowners for "firewood" left inside the right of way, though Hinkle noted the county typically cuts logs longer than the six-foot firewood length that DOT policy references.
Committee members discussed whether a county employee had cleared the wood during work hours and reiterated that the trees were in state right of way; members sought clarification from DOT staff and county staff. The committee ultimately moved to table the matter to gather more information and to allow staff to follow up with the landowner. Several committee members suggested setting a deadline for the landowner to accept the county's offer of alternate trees.
What happens next
The committee tabled the issue and asked county staff to follow up with the adjoining landowner to determine whether he will accept alternate trees the county can make available. If the landowner persists in seeking payment, county staff said the complaint would move through risk management and DOT channels.
