Land dispute has citizens concerned

By LYNN MONTGOMERY | East Texas Edition

November 13, 2003 -- The question of "Whose land is it really?" is being asked by over 1,000 people in the southern part of Upshur County, after one landowner tried to build a subdivision, and found out there was a "land vacancy."

This story actually began in the 1800s. It was in 1835, when a survey for 4,000-plus acres was completed for Joshua Woodfin, and another survey of the same amount was done for Henry King.

"At that time, they had nine months to present everything to the land office for a patent," began Ben Jarvis, attorney for landowner W.L. Dixon. "If everything wasn't turned in within that amount of time, the land became open and somebody could else could file for that land."

Woodfin withdrew his certificate and filed instead in Fannin County. Henry King had the land surveyed but didn't file for the patent.

This is where the story becomes a mystery.

It is said the King heirs found the survey, went to the land office wanting a patent, but couldn't get one because someone else had filed on the original King acreage. But, it was decided that the amount of the land originally surveyed could be taken somewhere else. Therefore, the 4,000-plus acres in the King survey were moved. But, the law states the move should not have happened unless a new survey was performed, which there is not record of, according to Jarvis.

Fast forward to the 1990s and the area known as King S-1-358. Dixon was trying to build a residential subdivision on the 700 acres he owns, when he found there wasn't a clear title on the land.

The lack of a clear title could mean the land within the whole King survey may be owned by the state of Texas.

Dixon filed for the vacancy to obtain clear title, but, according to Jarvis, "under state law, Dixon could only file on the entire area," which means the 4,000 plus acres. Remember he only owns 700 acres. The other acreage is owned by lots of landowners. The land is also used by several oil and gas companies.

The Texas Land Office will have to decide if a vacancy has happened. If it is found that it is a vacancy, many surveys could be changed. History could be in the making because the land in the survey affects land in the neighboring surveys.

"Mr. Dixon does not want other people's land, just his. He doesn't need or want the other land," Jarvis said.

The attorney blames the oil companies who lease some of the properties for much of the "dog-and-pony show that is playing out in the media" concerning this land-ownership issue.

"They (oil companies) are trying to get out of paying the state of Texas for the minerals, because the state owns the minerals. They would loose their lease on the minerals," Jarvis said.

Money from the sale of the minerals should belong to the Permanent School Fund, according to Jarvis.

Jarvis said his client is entitled to a finders fee between 1/32 and 1/16 of a percentage of the royalties if the application succeeds.

The people of East Mountain feel the matter should be dropped.

Many speak of heritage, of owning the land for generations and generations. If the vacancy is declared, these landowners won't hesitate to buy the land that they have been paying taxes on for decades. "My grandpa's grandpa lived on this land," said Charles Medlin.

"We are very disturbed right now," added 76-year-old Sybil Wilson. "So many are upset. It is beyond my comprehension that someone would come in and do this. I am putting things in the Lord's hands and the people in Austin."

She added that if the land, so rich in heritage and history, was declared vacant, there was going to come a judgment day; and she indicated it would be in the courtroom.

Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson, who set a tentative date of Dec. 15 for a hearing on the matter, said the dispute will be taken to district court, no matter what his ruling is.

Landowners have been given extra time to file a good claimant status form, which gives them the right of first refusal if a vacancy is declared. The filing fee ($150) for the form has also been waived by Patterson.

Another land vacancy has been found in Smith County involving around 900 acres.

For now it is a wait-and-see situation on how these cases will turn out.

For the people of East Mountain, many say they are trusting the land office will do what is right, and declare there is not a vacancy.