Residents oppose closure of 475 feet of County Road 3919; commissioners take no action

Henderson County Commissioners Court on Thursday heard a public hearing on a request to close approximately 475 feet of County Road 3919 in Precinct 3; residents urged the court not to close the roadway, and the court took no action.

The request matters to neighbors because the segment provides local access for mail delivery, weekly trash service, school buses and occasional commercial or agricultural vehicles, residents told the court. If closed, some speakers said, large vehicles would have to turn on private property to access homes and farms.

During the hearing, Taboris Clayton Cook Sr., who lives at 7611 County Road 3919, said the circular section of roadway has been "a county road" for as long as he can remember and that closing it would force trucks and delivery vehicles onto his property and damage his land. Kimberly Allen, a family member of long-term property owners in the area, described the road as part of family property and "a rite of passage" she has known for decades. Kenneth Gibbons, who keeps cattle nearby, said he uses the circle to turn large hay trailers and that closing the road would require him to back onto private yards. James Brown and other residents said the county has historically maintained portions of the pavement and that its presence indicates county ownership or maintenance.

Rick Davis, the property owner who filed to close the segment, told the court he placed a game camera at the entrance during the notice period and recorded no vehicle use of that entrance; he said the main, county-maintained access to the property is on the opposite side. Davis said his property now encompasses much of the circle and that the contested 475-foot segment is the portion he seeks to close.

County staff and the county attorney's office explained the legal standard. County legal staff cited "Transportation Code section 02/1051," telling the court that the commissioners court has authority to open, discontinue, close, abandon, vacate or alter roads; they said a full closing, abandonment or vacation ordinarily requires a unanimous vote of the court, while a truncation or shortening of a road's final portion may not. Commissioners noted a factual dispute in the record about whether the segment functions as a de facto turnaround used by neighbors.

Commissioner McCam introduced the public-hearing motion; Commissioner Richardson seconded. Several residents spoke against the closure. One commissioner said they could not in good conscience support a motion to close given the community opposition and the unresolved factual disputes. Because no commissioner moved to close the road at the conclusion of discussion, the court recorded "no action at this time" and proceeded to the next agenda item.

The court did not make a formal decision on future steps such as ordering a survey, requiring an alternative turnaround, or scheduling a further hearing; those possibilities were discussed but not directed by the court.

The contested segment is described in court documents as approximately 475 feet in Precinct 3 and lies near properties at 7611 County Road 3919, 5675 County Road 3918 and 6818 County Road 3918. Residents and property owners can expect the matter to return to the court if a motion is later filed or if commissioners request additional factual findings or engineering input.