Tanglewood residents press county over gated subdivision; county counsel says roads will remain private pending legal review

Residents of the Tanglewood Lakes subdivision delivered extended public comments at the Linn County Board of Commissioners meeting, pressing the county to treat roads inside the subdivision as public and to take action after years of disputes over gate access.

Eva Lehi Hasmaki, who identified herself as a Tanglewood Lake resident, gave detailed testimony recounting a multi‑year dispute over gate access that she said left some residents effectively unable to access their homes. She cited a district court ruling by Judge Andrea Purvis and referenced case law and statutes she said supported the view that subdivision roads became county roads when plats were recorded. “Given the dedications, the surveys, the filing, and acceptance of the final plat maps… I don't see how you can say the roads are private,” she told commissioners, and said residents had pursued every available remedy before removing an access gate in 2023.

County legal counsel responded in open session, saying the court matter the speaker cited was a criminal proceeding concerning specific defendants and did not resolve civil questions about maintenance or county acceptance of the roads. Counsel advised the commission the county’s position at the meeting: the roads would remain private for now and the county would not take action that would imply a change. The counsel also asked residents to provide documentation for review; staff and the county attorney said they would review the materials and advise the commission later.

Representatives of Tanglewood pressed for written assurances. Chuck Stevens, president of the Tanglewood board, asked why the county would not provide a written statement to clarify the status and to avoid repeated litigation. Resident Jim Andershot asked how the county’s view aligned with the judge’s ruling that had found certain roads public for the purposes of a criminal matter.

County counsel said the underlying criminal case addressed a different legal standard and did not require the county to assume maintenance or alter its longstanding practice. Counsel said the commissioners could revisit the question if civil litigation or a formal petition for acceptance were filed, and invited Tanglewood’s attorney to continue conferring with county counsel to explore partnership or assistance agreements for road work or other needs.

The commission did not adopt a resolution or pass a formal order at the meeting. Counsel asked residents to submit the full documents and judge’s order for review; staff said a grey folder of materials would be scanned and the county attorney would examine the submission. Commissioners noted they would respond after counsel’s review.