Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council deadlocks 2–2 on closing Ashford trail easement; attorney to issue guidance
Summary
A 2–2 tie prevented council from adopting a resolution to set a public hearing to close a trail easement in the Ashford subdivision; debate included references that a lawsuit involving Council member Clark had hindered committee progress. The town attorney will circulate an opinion on whether the matter can be reintroduced and how to proceed.
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Oak Ridge Town Council failed to adopt a resolution of intent to set a public hearing to consider vacating a public trail easement in the Ashford subdivision after debate on Jan. 8 ended in a 2–2 tie.
Town Manager Bill Bruce introduced resolution r2026-02, which the manager said was a procedural step required by statute to set a hearing in February. Council members split on whether the resolution merely set a hearing date or constituted substantive action. One councilor said the motion was “simply a housekeeping matter” and was consistent with an earlier timeline. Another council member said they were uncomfortable removing a public trail easement that is in the public interest.
The record includes an exchange during which a council member said the work of the committee had been put on hold in part because of a pending lawsuit brought by Council member Clark, which affected committee members’ ability to proceed. Council member Clark and others characterized the Jan. 8 vote as only setting a hearing date and not making a final decision.
After the 2–2 vote the motion failed. Town Attorney Michael Thomas said he would review the council’s rules and circulate an opinion on whether two council members could add the matter to a future agenda and under what timing constraints the council may reconsider an issue that was defeated by a tie.
What’s next: Attorney Thomas will issue written guidance on reconsideration and agenda procedures; the item may be revisited at a later meeting depending on procedural requirements and whether a majority of council requests placement on a future agenda.

