Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Roads And Rights Of Way topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press county on Lawrence Ryle Road right-of-way; commission declines immediate action
Summary
Multiple residents sought a county determination on whether a disputed strip of land is a county right-of-way; the commission heard testimony and evidence but took no immediate enforcement or closure action, directing that staff retain the matter for further review.
Residents and property owners raised a long-running dispute over Lawrence Ryle Road (a deeded strip of land) during public comment, asking the Taylor County Board of County Commissioners to clarify whether the roadway is a county right-of-way and whether the county will pursue a road-closure petition or otherwise act to resolve encroachments.
The complainant described deeds and surveys he said show a 40-foot strip deeded to the county and said the county has maintained roughly a third of the deeded area for decades. He told commissioners he would pursue legal remedies if the county declined to claim the remainder of the right-of-way.
Multiple residents spoke: one asserted he had cleared land and been accused of wrongdoing; another (Jesse Massey) said clearing appeared to begin a dispute that the county permit process ought to have addressed. The complainant said he had obtained a licensed survey and legal documentation backing his position and said a portion of the strip remains unmaintained.
Commission response and staff guidance County staff reported finding a deed showing a 40-foot strip dedicated "to be used for highway purposes," and that only about a third of the deeded area has been maintained as a road historically. Staff told commissioners they could not determine ownership or take immediate action without further review and that, absent a formal petition to close the road, there was no staff action to pursue at that time. A commissioner summarized the options: the county could file a petition to close the portion it does not claim, or the landowner could pursue ownership through the courts.
Outcome and next steps The commission did not vote to take enforcement action or to file a road-closure petition at the meeting. Staff and commissioners indicated the matter remains unresolved: if the county wishes to pursue a roadway closure the commission would need to initiate a formal process, including advertisement and a public hearing; otherwise an owner may pursue private legal remedies. Commissioners asked staff to retain the materials and advised that no immediate staff enforcement would be pursued based on the information presented at the meeting.
Ending Speakers cautioned both sides about escalation; the meeting closed the item for that session with the county saying there was nothing immediate for staff to pursue based on the deeds and maintenance history presented.
