Planning commission debates who should verify recorded covenants before permits

Ripley County planning commissioners spent a substantial portion of the meeting discussing proposed changes to application materials intended to surface recorded covenants and easements before permits are issued.

Members and staff debated whether the county recorder should be asked to perform a cursory check, whether applicants should be required to provide a recent title search, and what the county could reasonably verify. Commissioners and attendees described limitations in online records and in the recorder's ability to certify exhaustive searches, noting that many covenants are recorded in miscellaneous records not scanned into systems.

During the discussion, speakers said a basic title search runs about $150–$225, and that a 30‑year search window is common but may miss older recorded covenants. One commissioner suggested adding a simple checklist or a disclaimer above a recorder’s signature that would read to the effect of "to the best of our knowledge there are no recorded covenants or easements" and then require the applicant to secure a title search if uncertainty remains. Others warned that placing full responsibility on the recorder is impractical and could expose county staff to undue burden; instead, the group favored placing primary responsibility on applicants while giving the recorder a limited, clearly described role.

The commission asked staff to consult the recorder's office and local title/abstract companies (several local names were suggested during the discussion) and to return with revised application language that clarifies the burden on applicants, acceptable evidence (for example, a title commitment less than 60–90 days old), and any required disclaimers for recorder assistance. No ordinance or code change was adopted at the meeting; the item will return after staff consultation and drafting.