Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Section Line Closure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Stark County approves closure of section line near West Dickinson after resident complaints
Summary
Resident Dean Karski petitioned to close a section line near his West Dickinson property after repeated damage by riders. County legal staff advised the underlying easement remains even if a section line is closed; the commission voted to close the 700-foot segment in the petition and directed staff to record and execute engineering documents.
A Stark County resident’s petition to close a section line near West Dickinson won approval from the commission on Oct. 22 after a discussion of property damage, easement law and next steps for documentation.
Dean Karski, who identified himself as “a farmer, just West Dickinson,” told the commission that local riders had damaged the area and “they just tore through everything.” Karski presented photos and said county staff had inspected the site. He asked whether the county could record a closure that would prevent future use.
A county legal advisor identified in the transcript as Amanda said she had circulated a legal opinion explaining that section lines are created by federal survey and a public easement associated with a section line does not disappear when a county closes the road. As Amanda put it in the meeting, “that easement, which is the section line, never goes away.” The attorney’s advice prompted discussion about the practical effect of a closure and whether a later county could re-open the easement.
Commissioners discussed the petition’s boundary, which the petition and engineer’s drawing set to begin 700 feet south of 30th Street; commissioners noted a possible need to amend the petition to add an additional 700-foot closure but said that would require the other landowner’s consent. The chair summarized the practical approach: approve the current 700-foot petition now and allow the petitioner to return later to seek further closure if needed.
The commission moved to close the section line as described in the petition; a second was recorded for the motion by Commissioner Fran Chuck and the body approved the motion by voice vote. The transcript shows commissioners and staff agreed the county’s engineer who prepared prior documents (referred to as Andrew/Highlands in the record) would draft the closure document for execution and that the recording of the closure should provide public notice.
The meeting record indicates next steps: the engineer will prepare the closure document for execution, staff will arrange recording to provide public notice, and the petitioner may return to seek an amendment that would add the adjacent 700-foot segment if the other landowner signs. The commission adjourned after the item.
