County not obligated to maintain road

Tuesday, July 19, 2011

McCOOK, Nebraska -- Red Willow County, Nebraska, is not obligated by law to maintain a graveled road in a subdivision northeast of McCook.

Also, trying to maintain his policy of treating everyone equally, commission chairman Earl McNutt made a motion, seconded by fellow commissioner Steve Downer, not to accept a petition from Calabria Subdivision residents requesting that the county take over their road as a county road maintained at county expense.

County Attorney Paul Wood said at a commissioners' weekly meeting Monday morning that because the Calabria road does not meet either City of McCook or Red Willow County road standards, the county has no obligation to maintain it. Wood said that according to an on-site inspection by the county's roads superintendent, Lloyd Smith of Valentine, the Calabria roads are not wide enough to meet county road standards, which require a minimum width of 20 feet with three-foot shoulders.

The Calabria roads may have been designed that way in a plat (design) approved by the City of McCook 11 years ago, Wood said, but they were not then built to any standards. "There is no evidence that the Calabria roads were ever built to any standards. What physically happened does not match" the plat presented to and approved by the city, Wood said.

Developer George Giorgione said to Wood, "I done what the city told me to do," and then to commissioners, "You didn't maintain it (the road) for 11 years. What do you expect?" Giorgione questioned why he was even at the meeting, and then stormed from the commissioners room.

Wood told commissioners McNutt, Downer and Vesta Dack that while the board can legally accept the petition, it would be setting a precedence that would allow every other subdivision to request the same treatment for its roads. If the county were to accept the Calabria road as a county road before it was brought up to county standards, the county would be required to bring it up to standards and then continue to maintain it, Wood explained during discussions of the past several weeks.

"You can't do for one and not for all," Wood said.

McNutt agreed, explaining that his motion to deny the petition has nothing to do with Giorgione, or with any Calabria residents personally. "I want to handle all subdivisions equally," McNutt said. " ... as I have for the past 12 years."

Calabria resident Doug Joyce asked commissioners, legal obligation aside, whether accepting the petition and maintaining the Calabria road may be simply "the right thing" to do because of bus routes and mail routes into and out of the subdivision. Fellow resident Adam Wilhelmson said, "I know it's an expense, but it might be the right thing to do."

Wood said that the county board would have to come to a consensus to define "the right thing," and decide how far to go and where to start and stop. The answer right now, he said, is is in the statute.

Commissioner Vesta Dack agreed with Joyce and Wilhelmson, saying, "It's distasteful to me that, as a county, we can't help." Dack voted against McNutt's motion and Downer's second to deny the residents' petition.

McNutt said the subdivision road situation may be addressed in the county's zoning regulations that are in the process of being updated.

Wood strongly recommended that, if the board is considering simply blading and graveling the Calabria roads because it's the "right thing to do," commissioners write a policy "so it can be applied in the future evenly and equally. You can do it," Wood said, "But you'll regret it without a policy."

McNutt told Calabria residents to get their roads up to county or city standards (whichever is more stringent), "and then we'll revisit it." Downer agreed.

Calabria resident Adam Wolford asked commissioners to look objectively at the Calabria subdivision as an opportunity for economic development. "There's the opportunity to develop 20 to 22 more lots," Wolford said. The roads are a small part of development possibilities, he said.

Wood told Calabria residents that any engineer they might hire to look at their roads should work with the county's roads superintendent and his study of the roads. "Identify which standard is more stringent," Wood said, "Work with the county's agent. Literally do it (bring the roads to standards) and have the county inspect it."

Joyce said residents can't get Giorgione and his wife (who are the homeowners' association) to improve their roads, and now they can't get the county to improve their roads. He asked about creating a special taxing district for the subdivision's roads improvements, and Wood told him that yes, there are statutes and procedures to do just that.

Dale Dueland said that Pierson Addition residents hired an engineering firm and created an improvement district, explaining that residents "imposed an assessment upon ourselves," to pay for road improvements and maintenance.


Red Willow County Sheriff Gene Mahon said that he suspended routine drive-throughs of the Calabria Subdivision pending Lloyd Smith's determination whether the subdivision's roads had indeed been dedicated to public use when they were built, and were no longer private property only.

Mahon told Calabria residents and commissioners that he and his officers would have responded as usual, and according to state statute, to any calls at the subdivision.

Routine drive-throughs by sheriff's officers resumed after discussion and action on the Calabria roads during the commissioners' meeting Monday morning.


During budget talks, commissioners recommended that elected officials work with a tentative proposal for raises, calculating them at the same rate as last year: $50 a month for 40-hour-work week employees; $43.75 for 35-hour-work week employees; and 30 cents/hour for part-time employees.

McNutt said commissioners are waiting for the county's valuation before deciding definitely on raises. County Assessor Sandra Kotschwar said there would be "some growth" in ag land valuation increases, but "not a lot of growth" in McCook.

Commissioners encouraged elected officials and county employees to recognize the value of the single and family insurance benefits provided by the county, although some changes are inevitable, he said, because the cost of insurance is continually increasing.

Clerk of the District Court Bev Dodge agreed, suggesting that county employees could stand a bigger deductible or higher co-pay. "We have a great benefit," Dodge said. "A 'Cadillac plan,' a blessing."

Comments
View 16 comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
  • It's called "karma". Giorgione new what he was doing 11 years ago and what the eventual outcome would be. now the residents are paying for his lack of respect to build a proper subdivision.

    -- Posted by FNLYHOME on Tue, Jul 19, 2011, at 12:56 PM
  • Disappointing. Very disappointing. There are nearly thirty children living in that subdivision... many of whom ride the school bus daily. Every resident pays their taxes... just like every other county resident. Karma? None of the homeowners knew of the scuffle 11 years ago; most of them did not live in McCook during that time. "...it(maintaining the roads) would be setting a precedence that would allow every other subdivision to request the same treatment for its roads." Really? A terrible fate... that the county would need to maintain roads that are used and paid for by county residents. I thought that was a large reason why we have county government... and taxes. Apparently not... we'd rather discuss the finer points of legal technicalities than to simply do the right thing because it's the right thing. Thanks for trying Ms. Dack. At least there's one who understands that public service sometimes requires one to read the spirit of the law, not necessarily the letter.

    -- Posted by Plain View on Tue, Jul 19, 2011, at 6:40 PM
  • Sounds to me like the county is asking Giorgione to pay for the same thing a second time. I'd be angry too. Karma, Rural? Really? What is with SOME of the people in this town and being so xenophobic and opposed to progress?

    -- Posted by speak-e-z on Tue, Jul 19, 2011, at 7:35 PM
  • Giorgione didn't pay for it the first time. He showed the County and City one set of plans and didn't build it to spec so he never built it right in the first place. Unfortunately the current homeowners are finding this out the hard way. Sorry, but Giorione should pay for the upgrades now because that's what he should have done then the County will maintain it. Why is this the County's fault? BUYER BEWARE!

    -- Posted by FNLYHOME on Wed, Jul 20, 2011, at 3:32 PM
  • Rural...you must check into facts before you make comments like above. Joe did not build the roads in the subdivision. A local surveyor and a local construction company built the roads. They were built to city code as required at time of zoning. He did have them built to city code, but the county requires a wider road than the city. The roads had to be inspected by the city building inspector before the roads were accepted and the plat signed for public use. The residents will pull together and make a plan to resolve the issues. The real focus should be on the behavior of the chair of the commissioners board throughout the whole process. Did you hear about him recommending to the local authorities to pull law enforcement from the subdivision? That actually happened before the petition was even thought about. Just think if something really bad would have happened at the subdivision in that period of time. I hope someone brings light to the rest of the community of his behavior and some of the comments that he said.

    -- Posted by homebuilder on Wed, Jul 20, 2011, at 6:13 PM
  • The meetings are public record. Anyone can listen to the tapes. Rural's comments are par for the course. Typical HUA stuff. Someone might offer the guy some oxygen . What history do you have with the subdivision anyway Rural? Sounds like there's something personal there.

    -- Posted by speak-e-z on Wed, Jul 20, 2011, at 7:25 PM
  • Joes just a sneaky developer off trying to backdoor the Redwillow taxpayers by a experience colorado developer who is obviously a expert at letting others pay for his developements costs whenever possible... completely legal but let all current lot owners and homeowners assess all lots the cost of what should have been done by Joe in first place but not redwillow co taxpayers like Dack seem to want to do?? Joe G. tried the cheapway to develope a subdivision and now home owners are stuck with his greed in the beginning for his ways ...sorry lot owners or homeowners in this subdivision you bought into Joes brick home sales pitch and roads as they were when you bought them... maybe you should persue the realestate company for costs of the road...or did they disclose it??

    -- Posted by Cornwhisperer on Wed, Jul 20, 2011, at 9:06 PM
  • So, someone in the know clarify... what exactly was the community petitioning for? My understanding was that the residents asked that the county maintain what is... meaning that road be graded occassionally so that they didn't have to fish a small child and their bicycle out of the pothole at the entrance and the snow be plowed so that the bus can get safely through in the winter. I don't think anyone asked for the roads to be rebuilt... that was the suggestion of the commissioners board. This seems to be snowballing into absurdity.

    -- Posted by Plain View on Wed, Jul 20, 2011, at 11:04 PM
  • Rural and Jlake are "in the know", ask them. Backdoor the taxpayers? I'd bet your yearly salary that Giorgione has brought more revenue for Red Willow county than most. Explain to me why it is we are against this guy again? Do we have other people actively building homes around the McCook area? I went ahead and typed in "Calabria" in the Gazette's search bar because I wanted to see what history I could find and it seems like this evil evil developer that tries to backdoor the taxpayers is one of the only people building anything around here:

    http://www.mccookgazette.com/story/1452474.html

    http://www.mccookgazette.com/story/1043343.html

    I think there's probably a reason why small communities die. Don't let that happen to McCook. Lets change the trend of thinking.

    -- Posted by speak-e-z on Thu, Jul 21, 2011, at 12:09 PM
  • The petition was to make the roads in the subdivision county roads. Therefore the residents in the subdivision could have the roads maintained and be patrolled regularly.

    -- Posted by homebuilder on Thu, Jul 21, 2011, at 3:25 PM
  • PlainView-you are exactly right. We wanted a blade once or twice a year, that was it. we wanted it written in the procedure that any improvements were up the the homeowners to fix, any paving or asphalt would be up to the homeowners. The procedure to make a public road into a county road is by petition. That is what we did. However, for some reason, our roads had have an extensive inspection by the roads superintendant done to them before the decision could be made. No other road that have ever been petitioned, had to go through that extensive inspection by the roads superintendant like the roads in the subdivision did.

    -- Posted by homebuilder on Thu, Jul 21, 2011, at 8:49 PM
  • I may be wrong, because I wasn't around here at the time, but several people have told me the homeowners had to pay for road improvements at the pearson addition.

    -- Posted by repairguy on Fri, Jul 22, 2011, at 2:25 AM
  • repairguy, you are correct. I spent a fair amount of time talking to an individual who not only lived there, but was on the Planning Commission, and spear-headed the effort to get something done about their roads. They made similar attempts to what I have requested in the Calabria Subdivision. They hired an attorney and formed a "Paving District". In doing so, they assessed or levied a tax against themselves to hire a contractor to bring the roads as they were up to "standard" and then pave them. The tax would be collected from each lot owner over the next 'X' years. As I am TOLD (this is just a verbal), those roads are now up to standard and the county is obligated to maintain. I don't know how those roads were platted or built.

    Allow me to point out the difference. My argument to the commissioners was that the roads in the subdivision were built correctly in the first place. It is because 11-12 years have gone by without maintenance that they are now "below standard". homebuilder is correct, Pietro Giorgione did not build the roads in the subdivision. He builds the homes, you can see that for yourself every single day. He hired local businesses to survey and stake the roads and then to build them. I have talked to those local businesses. They told me the roads were built to standard in 1999/2000. What reason do they have to lie about it? The problem we have is that the county themselves never "inspected" it and so they claim to have no proof that the roads were ever even built. I guess we can blame Joe for thinking he had circumnavigated all of the obstacles placed before him by the city and the indigenous people and finally appeased them, or we can blame him for trying to be sneaky and "back-dooring" the taxpayer by turning a quarter section of farm ground into a multi-million dollar, tax-generating machine.

    I challenge anyone reading this to go to the courthouse and read the city council minutes from 1999-2000 and to go to the Gazette and read newspaper articles regarding "Calabria". I have formed my opinions and I'd like you all to form yours based on the things that councilmen and residents said about the subdivision's inception. Speak-e-z is right, if the general concensus is that we are opposed to progress, we will stagnate and then atrophy. I moved back to raise a family here and do not want to be a part of that atrophy because of hatred.

    Respectfully,

    Adam J. Wolford

    -- Posted by Adam Wolford on Fri, Jul 22, 2011, at 7:59 AM
  • The County decision is appropriate. If the original developer had built the road to county/city standards when the subdivision was approved, and irrevocably dedicated the roadway to the county, and had the county accepted the dedication when the road was completed then yes, the County must maintain the road.

    If the residents currently want to form a road improvement district to bring the road up to government standards, at their expense, and working closely with the county which sub-sequentially accepts the dedication, then the county will need to maintain the road.

    The residents at this time have a hard choice, either build the road to county standards, or live with it as it is. Presently it does not appear the county has any responsibility for the existing road.

    -- Posted by FarmerJoe on Fri, Jul 22, 2011, at 3:44 PM
  • It appears, FarmerJoe, that what you say is how it stands. Thank you for your logical input.

    -- Posted by Adam Wolford on Fri, Jul 22, 2011, at 3:54 PM
  • Doesn't make it right.

    -- Posted by speak-e-z on Wed, Jul 27, 2011, at 10:08 AM
Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration: