Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Litigation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Fallon County weighs settlement options as landowners threaten separate suit over recognition petition

Fallon County Board of Commissioners
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

County counsel told commissioners the Thielen family may file suit to stop a Sept. 9 hearing unless the county agrees to compensate for land needed for a contested road easement; staff discussed appraisals, timing and the tradeoffs between settlement and litigation.

Fallon County’s attorney briefed commissioners on a dispute tied to a petition to recognize a county road, telling the board that counsel for Bobby and Missy Thielen indicated they would file an independent lawsuit against the county if the parties do not negotiate compensation for land needed to resolve an easement gap.

The county attorney said the matter involves a stretch where the county does not have a recorded easement and that, depending on surveys, as much as roughly 13 acres of land could be implicated by the right‑of‑way crossing. Counsel for the property owners proposed determining fair market value through appraisals (each side selects an appraiser and the two select a third or accept an average). The Thielens’ counsel also said attorney fees might be sought by the landowners in certain claims.

Commissioners and staff discussed options ahead of a Sept. 9 hearing: (1) negotiate and seek a settlement (county agrees to a method for fair market value and the landowners convey easements), (2) ask the court for a continuance to allow appraisals and talks, or (3) proceed and litigate the petition to recognize the road (a declaratory action). The attorney warned the timeframe is tight to complete appraisals before the hearing and suggested drafting a settlement framework for review by the next county meeting. Commissioners also considered the broader implication that other county roads may lack recorded easements and that the issue could recur across many miles of county roads.

No settlement was approved at the meeting; the county attorney offered to draft proposed settlement language for board review and suggested further talks with the landowners’ counsel to see whether terms can be reached without opening broader litigation.