Rezoning suit dismissed against Yukon City Council

Civil action was filed in August against City of Yukon, council

351
Yukon city attorney Roger Rinehart

By Conrad Dudderar
Staff Writer

A lawsuit stemming from the Yukon City Council’s denial of a property rezoning request on State Highway 66 has been partially dismissed.

Attorneys for Williams Family Investments filed a “dismissal without prejudice” on Nov. 18 in Canadian County District Court.

The plaintiff has dismissed “all its claims” asserted in the civil action against the defendant Yukon City Council “without prejudice against refiling of the same,” according to the document signed by attorney Stacy S. Ramdas of the Rosell Law Group.

The case is still pending against the City of Yukon, but not the Yukon City Council.

“This was a victory for the city, in that we got the council dismissed (from the lawsuit),” Yukon city attorney Roger Rinehart said.

In civil cases dismissed without prejudice, the plaintiff may be able to correct any errors or defects and then bring the action again.

Attorneys for plaintiff Williams Family Investments LLC filed the suit Aug. 11 in Canadian County District Court against two defendants – the City of Yukon and Yukon City Council.

City attorney Rinehart in October filed a petition to dismiss the suit against the city council for “insufficiency of service of process” and “lack of capacity of a party to be sued.”

A hearing had been set Nov. 19 before District Judge Paul Hesse – but the case against the city council was dismissed the previous day, court documents indicate.

“There’s still some pending motions that may get reset after the first of the year,” Rinehart said. “As far as the city council being a named party, they have been dismissed.”

The civil action was filed by attorneys Armando J. Rosell and Ramdas on behalf of manager Tyler Williams of Williams Family Investments.

Yukon City Council members in July unanimously denied Williams Family Investments’ appeal of a planning commission recommendation to deny rezoning a 57.25-acre property for industrial use.

The applicant had sought the City of Yukon’s permission to rezone vacant land on the north side of SH-66 east of Cimarron Road from A (agriculture) to I-2 (heavy industrial).

“The city council’s decision to deny the appeal/application was arbitrary, unreasonable and capricious (and) bears no reasonable relation to the public health, safety, morals or general welfare,” according to the civil suit.

Advertisement

DIRT MINING, OILFIELD JUNKYARD

Yukon City Council members on July 20 voted 5-0 to reject Williams Family Investments’ rezoning appeal after hearing from neighbors concerned about large truck traffic and a proposed soil mining operation.

Several nearby property owners attended the council meeting to protest the application.

Among them was Jack D. McCurdy II, a lifelong Yukon resident and Canadian County district judge.

McCurdy told city council members at the public hearing that the applicant wanted the zoning change to allow a dirt-mining operation.

McCurdy warned about dust-filled nuisances, traffic hazards and road damage this would cause. He lives on the south side of SH-66 across from the subject property.

McCurdy even predicted the SH-66 site would ultimately become an “oilfield junkyard” once the dirt mining ended and the property was sold or leased “to the highest bidder.”

Williams Family Investments since October 2013 has owned the 57.25-acre property, which is between SH-66 and the Union Pacific Railroad and less than one-half mile from Interstate 40.