Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Dispute topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Minister Carrie Cox, property owner Guy Mead accuse Lewis County officials of land‑rights abuses, call for review
Summary
At a Lewis County Fiscal Court meeting, minister Carrie Cox and property owner Guy Mead alleged long‑running boundary disputes and procedural misconduct by county officials, citing disputed surveys, an injunction on property use and questioning county legal bills; no formal county response or vote is recorded in the transcript.
At a regular meeting of the Lewis County Fiscal Court, Carrie Cox, a local minister and magazine publisher, told the panel that her family has been subject to an injunction and denied use of land they continue to pay taxes on for nearly a decade. "We have been injuncted from exercising our property rights that we currently and continue to pay taxes on for nearly a decade now," Cox said, arguing that survey records and a deed dating to the 19th century show different boundaries than the county’s map.
Cox alleged county officials and contractors engaged in improper conduct, saying county surveyor Mike Ruggles altered the PVA (property valuation administrator) map shortly before a lawsuit was filed and that county attorney Ben Harrison has a conflict of interest in handling the matter. She said the FBI public‑corruption team has visited her to discuss the case. "The FBI's public corruption team has been at my door multiple times to discuss this situation," Cox said.
Guy Mead, who identified himself as the owner of the same parcel discussed by Cox, showed what he described as an 1891 will and survey and told the fiscal court the historical documents support the family’s boundary claims. Mead said the county’s PVA drawing was changed "four days before the suit was filed against me" and urged the court to review the historical records to avoid unnecessary attorney fees paid by taxpayers.
Both speakers named local actors and specific records: Cox referenced depositions in which she said the county’s surveyor admitted a point in the deed was not where shown on the county map; Mead displayed a multi‑page will and survey and pointed to a map location he described as "Point C." Both characterized the issue as unresolved and urged county leaders to take corrective action.
The fiscal court heard the comments during its public‑comment period. The judge and other members acknowledged the remarks and asked for time to review the material, but the transcript does not record a formal response from county staff or a vote or directive taken at that meeting.
The speakers’ claims include allegations of fraud, map changes, conflicts of interest by county counsel, physical assaults and property damage. None of these assertions was adjudicated or refuted on the record during the meeting; the transcript contains no county rebuttal or detailed status update from the county attorney’s office.
The fiscal court did not take a formal vote or issue a public‑record response during the session covered in the transcript. The speakers asked the court to review deeds, surveys and deposition testimony and to consider alternatives that might reduce legal costs to taxpayers.
