Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Dispute Processes topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission discusses county role as fence viewers, tables decision to consult county counsel
Summary
Commissioners reviewed state statute language about the county's role as fence viewers for agricultural boundary disputes, discussed whether commissioners or designees should perform visits, and agreed to consult county legal counsel before deciding a formal procedure
Commissioners reopened an old-business item about fence viewing and property-line disputes. Staff and commissioners reviewed statutory language (K.S.A. chapter 29 fence provisions) that assigns fence-viewer duties to county commissioners or their designees and includes a small forfeiture for unreasonable neglect.
Discussion points: A commissioner outlined that statute language generally requires the board or its designees to serve as fence viewers in each township. Commissioners discussed practical options: performing viewings themselves, designating a commissioner per district, or appointing county employees or a designee to conduct viewings. Staff and others noted some counties publish a written procedure and a nominal fee ($7.50 referenced in the meeting) to formalize the process.
Legal advice and actions: Commissioners expressed caution about liability and the possible need for legal counsel. One commissioner said he will gather information and draft a procedure and then consult the county attorney (referred to as "Bob"). The body agreed to table the item for further legal advice and to schedule a follow-up meeting with counsel.
Ending: The commission did not adopt a procedure at the meeting. Staff was directed to consult county legal counsel and return with recommended language and an implementation plan; a follow-up was tentatively scheduled for next week but no specific deadline was formalized in the public transcript.
