ORDER NO. :~145E
MOTION OF REAFFIRMING STATUS OF THE Y.O. RANCH ROAD AND
HAPERMACHER RANCH ROAD AS COUNTY MAIN1"AINED ROADS
On this the 1st day of J~_ine, came on to be consider^ed the
matter^ of whether or not the Y. O. Ranch Road and Haber^macher^
Ranch Road are Co~.~nty Maintained Roads.
After hearing the evidence presented the Co~_ir^t deems anc
finds the following:
1. It has .j~_-r^idiction and ven~_~e in this matter.
~'. D~_~e and pr^oper^ notice was given to all inter^ested
parties .
3. All necessary and proper parties appear^ed before the
Co~_~rt.
4. Evidence was pr^esented and testimony was taken.
5. Thr^ee affidavits signed by for^mer^ Commissioner^s of Fir^ect
# 4 Roger Stone, Pilly G~_~ther^i e, Lee Goff, Affidavit signed
by Char^lie Lee, lien^r' Co~_inty Employee, stating the r^oads in
q~_iestion have been co~_inty maintained far some 40 year^s, and a
F~etition signed by var^ia~_~s landowner^s wishing for^ Kerr Co~_inty
to pave the roads. Pills were s~_~bmitted to the Co~_tr~•t with
the work that has been done on the roads.
A motion was therefore made by Commissioner Oehler, seconded
by Commissioner Holekamp, unanieously approved by a vote of
4-0-0, to reaffirm the stat~_~s of the Y.O. Ranch Road and
Habermacher Road as Co~_~nty maintained Roads as they are
Co~_~nty r^aads.
Item No. ~.4
Consider' whether~ of Not the Y. 0. Ranch Road and Haber~macher~
Road are Co+_inty Roads.
Mr. Oehler^ stated that Mr~. Jack N.lein has asked him to take
the r~oad off the Co~.~nty Maintained list'? We ar~e her^e to find
o+_~t whether^ or~ not these r~oads have been county maintained.
I wo+_~ld 1 ike to hear' what ever~yone has to say on this matter^.
Attor~ney, Felix I~.lein addr^essed the Co+_~r^t stating he is
r~epr^esenting Mr~. War^r^en F'.lein on whether~ or^ not the Y.O.
Ranch Road is a Co+_~nty Maintained r^oad.
In 1988 the Commissioner^s' Co+_~r^t adopted a list of Co~_inty
Roads which list the Y.O. Road as a Co+_~nty Road. The
+_initi~ed system was developed in 1988 with var^io+_ts r^oads on
the list. The Schr^einer^s' have +_~sed this rand since the
193~'s. In 19.?~1 this r~oad was b+_~ilt by the Schr^einer~s' after^
the per'mission was given by Mr~. l~Jar~r~en h:lein. The road was
relocated at a later' date in 1986. The Schr^einer~s asked to
be able to p+_~t in an impr~oved r~oad and I was told the
Schr~einer~s had done the wor^k with their f+_~nds and at no time
has the Co+.inty maintained the r~oad. Rit Jon- Attor^ney for-•
Mr~. Schr^einer~ stated he wo+_~ld o+_~tline the Schr~einer^s
+_inderstanding and position. The Sc•hr^eir~er^s and Warren FClein
ar~e ver~y close. Basically in 199?, they^e has been a
mis+_inder'standing because this r~oad has been maintained since
the 19.?,~'s. In the late 198~'s the ca+_inty paved the r~oad and
has alway=_. been maintained by the Co+_~nty. Fr~om 197 to the
pr~esent the p+_iblic has come and gone on this r~oad at will for~
over' ~~ yr~s. Ther^e has been no r^eq+_~est to +_~se the r~oad or^ a
denial to +_ise the r^oad. Commer~cial Deliver^ies have +_tsad this
r~oad, Schoal P+_ises, G+_~est of the Schr~einer~s' and in r~ecent
histor^y landowner~s have +_ised the r~oad to gain entr^ance to
their' pr~oper^ty. No ane has ever-• been stopped fr~om +ssing the
road.
In 1988 the co+_~nty confir-•med it was Go+_inty maintained. The
Schr~einer~ family has r~eq+_~ested a doc+_tment from r+lr^. F'.lein
stating this b+_~t they have not r~eceived it as of yet. They
can't agr~ee to a non-stat+_~s and cannot permit it to be c~_it
off fr~om +_isage. War~r~en Klein - stated Mr^. F'ollar~d dr~ew +_~p a
doc+_~ment and tho+_ight the Schr~einer~s had r^eceived a copy. At
time I wo+_~ld call the Ca+.~nty after' a bad r~ain and ask if they
wo+_ild came and clear' the r~oad off. As far' as the Co+_inty
coming o+_~t to wor^k on the r~oad I don't ever' r•emember^ hear~ing
any wor~k being done on the r~oad. Attar~ney for^ Mr^. Klein
r~eminded the Co+_ir^t of Ar-•ticle 68 "G" S+.~b sec•tion A the Ca+_~nty
may acq+_iir^e r^oad by p+_~r'chase, condemnation, or^ dedication.
~Ther^e has not been any co,_~r't determination. It also states
that yo~_~ must p,_~blish and report a doc,_iment showing
acq,_~isition, and give written notice to each landowner. None
of these pr^er^eq~_~isites have been followed. Mere maintainance
of the road does not establish adverse possession. It is not
a road that is pr^ivate it is a p,_~blic road. Rit Jons - F'rior
to 1981 most r^~_iral roads were covered ~_tnder^ this section,
this stat~_~e only addresses private roads. This case doesn't
address p~_~blic r^oads prior to 1981. The list confirmed that
the r^oads wet^e maintained. Rit Jons - By it being on the
Co~_inty road list did not imply it was dedicated to the
Co~_tnty. This is a co,_~nty r^oad and is designated as a public
road. Attor^ney Klein-G?~_~estion: Mr. Oehler, do yo~_i know where
this r^oad is located? Yes Sir, it is 17 miles west of Mt,
Home consisting of I.E/1~ miles of a road ,_ip to the gate.
This road does go thr^o~_~gh Warr^en Klein's property. Attorney
What I am asking for is this road to be taken off the Co~_~nty
r^oad list? Commissioner Holekamp, Are we going to be
reimb~_tr^sed on work already done on r^oad? Answer^: I tha~_~ght
tt-,e Schreiner had paid for the work that was done an road.
Gary Ker^sey spoke far the Haber^macher^s' and their road. He
stated that Haber^macher^ Road is also known as Y,lein Leinweber^
Road. This r^oad goes thro,_~gh the N,lein F'r^oper^t y. We have
affidavits signed by F_x-Commissioners Roger Stone, Billy
G,_itherie, Lee Goff and Milton Lee a Co~_~nty Maintainance
Employee. A petition signed by the landowners wishing to
have the work done on the roads. The co~_~nty has maintained
this r^oad for over 4~ yrs. We have bills where paving and a
base was done on the road by Jack Smith who was an
administr^atar-~ of the Raad and Br-~idge Uepar^tment at that time.
The bill is a total of ~6,1~~.~~ dating 1985-1986. In 1988
there was a list s~_~bmitted to the Co,_~rt to accept the roads
in the Co~_~nty. Several of these r^oads wer-~e in vat^io~_~s
conditions and Habermacher-Klein Leinweber^ Road is on this
list as being co~_inty maintained. Ther^e is a co~_~rt or'der'
#18~1~, that states this road is a co~_~nty maintained road in
P'r'ecinct 4.
Rit Jons- The Y.G. Ranch Raad has been neglected far the past
two years and I wo~_~ld like for' it to contin,_~e to be co~_~nty
maintained. Mr. Odom, Road and Bridge Administrator stated
years ago he had looked at the two r^oad. On October' ~~~ 1986
we did some work on the r^oads totaling to ffi1,149.~~. I have
not done any maintainance c~_ir^r^ently on the road d~_ie to it
being in litigation. Warren Klein - if the Co~_inty did do
some wor^k on the road the Co~_inty didn't have per'mission to do
so. Ted Lackey, a Go~_inty Employee stated I maintained bath
roads when Commissioner G~_ither^ie and Commissioner, Stone wet^e
in office.
Charles H~aber~macher^ - the Co~.~nty did do r^oad wor^k and I don't
think the Ca+_~nty wo+_~ld have spent this money to have repairs
done if it was not a co+_~nty r^oad. Mr. I'.lein - Commissioner^
G+_~ther^ie did maintain it and would come out ever^ytime I
called. Especially when it was election time. The Co+_inty
took and removed all metal cattle guards and replaced them
with cement. Neil Klein - how are we s+_~pposed to keep
trespassers o+_~t or from coming on this road? Halekamp- There
is a constable that wor^ks that area and does prosec+.ite people
for- tr^espassing. David Motley stated we have cases in Cv+.~nty
Co+_tr°t at Law that are prosec+_tted for trespassing.
Mr^. Habermacher' was told if he ever- sold the property that
the p+_ibl is wo+_~ld not be able to +_~se this rand. So he asked
the Klein's to give some type of easement to the property.
Altho+_~gh he has no intention of selling the pr^oper^ty b+_~t he
didn't think this was r^ight.
i'.athy 1'.lein I-'.eblinger addr^essed the Co+_~rt stating then^e were
three people that owned property. Mr. Habermacher wanted an
easement to the pr^oper^t y, b+.~t I was the only one he spoke to
of the three owners. This road goes between tree ho+.~se and
the barn. hlone of the FSlein' s 1 ive on the pr^operty. The
disc+_~ssion held was very infor^mal b+.~t tF-~en again he only
spoke to me and my father^ not the other^ twa owner^s. There
has never' been an agr'cement on the road maintenance. It only
went to the family that lived down to the end of the road,
and the Klein's didn't want to give a permanent easement.
Commissioner Gehler stated that he beg 'to differ with her'
with that they^e wer^e same other, people that lived on that
road b+_~t co+_ild not r^emember^ their names. How are they
s+_ipposed to get to their property? Mrs. Kebl inger^ stated
that their was another way o+_~t. I lsa Pai ley, Assistant
Ca+_~nty Attorney stated she spoke with t+lr. Kersey abo+_it an
easement. I enco+_~raged him .=.trongly not to do the easement
beca+_~se this wo+_~ld indicate the road was not a F•+_~blic rand.
Mr, I'.ersey stated the only reason he was trying to get an
easement was to save his client some money on litigation
fees. Mr. lilein stated that the rand r~_~ns right near- his
pens and he wo+_~ld have hear^d the wor^k being done if it was
done, and if there was any work being done on the road it was
for the convenience of the Y. Cs. and not me.
After all the testimony was heard it was the decsion of the
Co+_~rt to r^eafirm that the Y. G. Ranch Road and Habermacher
r^oad ar-e Co+_~nty r^oads and will contin+_~e to be maintained by
the Co+_mty.
CoMM i SS I oNERS~ COURT AGENDA REQUEST
*PLEASE FURNISH ONE ORIGINAL AND FIVE COPIES OF THIS REQUEST AND
DOCUMENTS TO BE REVIEWED BY THE COURT
MADE BY: Bruce Oehler
MEETING DATE: June 1, 1993
OFFICE: Commissioners' Court
TIME PREFERRED:
SUBJECT: (PLEASE BE SPECIFIC) Consider whether or not the Y.O. Ranch Road
and the Habermacher Ranch Road are County Roads.'
EXECUTIVE SESSION REQUESTED: YES _~ NO
PLEASE STATE REASON FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION
ESTIMATED LENGTH OF PRESENTATION:
PERSONNEL MATTER - NAME OF EMPLOYEE:
NAME OF PERSON ADDRESSING THE COURT:` Bruce Oehler ,
Time for submitting this request for Court to assure that the matter is posted 1n accordance
with Article 6252-17 is as follows:
* P'teetings held on Monday: 12:00 P.M. previous Wednesday
TH! S REQUEST RECEIVED 8Y:
THIS REDDEST RECEIVED ON : t~
All Agenda Requests will be screened by the County Judge's Office to determine 1~
adequate fntormation has been prepared for the Court's formal consideration and actior
at time of Court meetings. Your cooperation will be appreciated and contribute toward:
your request being addressed at the earliest opportunity. See Agenda Reques~
Guidelines.