Appeals Court rules for Beech Mountain in three property-rights suits

The North Carolina Court of Appeals has issued three decisions favoring Beech Mountain in disputes with property owners over a 2024 town infrastructure project. Appellate judges overturned a trial judge’s rulings favoring the property owners.

“This dispute arises from the Town’s handling of a project to improve public infrastructure in a skiing community with seasonal renters, limiting the habitability of and landowners’ access to their properties for a six-month period,” Judge Jeff Carpenter explained Wednesday in Town of Beech Mountain v. Rigsbee.

“The Skiloft Community, a vacation destination for seasonal skiing, was developed before the establishment of the Town,” Carpenter explained. “Perched on an elevated slope, Skiloft properties are connected by a ‘single steep and winding road which dead ends … pos[ing] particular difficulties in maintenance and installation of infrastructure, due to the topography and density of the land.’ The Town serviced the water and sewer systems, while private companies provided electricity, phone, and internet services.”

“Because of its configuration, the Skiloft Community was facing ‘difficulty in snow removal, troubles in maintaining public utilities such as fire protection, crumbling asphalt, failing electrical service, and failing telephone and internet lines,’” the Appeals Court opinion continued.

“In 2023, instead of a piecemeal, protracted repair process, the Town decided to make all necessary infrastructure repairs and improvements during a six-month period outside of ski season,” Carpenter wrote. “The project included replacing aging water and sewer lines under the roadway, replacing aging electrical and communication lines under the roadway, improving storm water management within the roadway, and repaving two roads. The Town filed a memorandum of action stating its intent ‘to acquire by condemnation a temporary construction easement in over and through’ Defendant’s property.”

The town offered Skiloft property owners $1,000 each “as just compensation or risk being assessed for a portion of the project, which could cost up to $90,000,” Carpenter explained. Owners of all but three properties agreed with the town’s plan.

The project took place from April through September in 2024. Residents could access their properties only with help of Beech Mountain police. The neighborhood occasionally lost access to running water, sewer, and electricity.

Three lawsuits resulted from the project. Superior Court Judge Joseph Crosswhite ruled in 2025 that Beech Mountain had engaged in a taking. The case was set to head to a discussion of damages, but the town appealed Crosswhite’s decision.

Appellate judges reversed Crosswhite’s ruling.

“Under this particular set of facts, where the Town elected to proactively conduct necessary water and sewer line repairs and infrastructure improvements during the offseason in a manner that mitigated the disruption to affected residents, it lawfully exercised its police power,” Carpenter wrote.

“Here, the Town’s decision to temporarily interrupt water and sewer services did not constitute a compensable taking,” he added. “The Town had a duty to maintain the water and sewer lines in good working order for the health and safety of its residents and visitors. In fact, it may have been liable for damages had it not done so.”

“Moreover, the Town minimized disruptions posed by necessary repairs of the water and sewer lines to the extent possible by conducting the project over a six-month period during the off-season,” Carpenter wrote. “This interference was minimal compared to the disruption that might have occurred had the Town instituted a piecemeal construction plan, which would have taken longer, impacting the skiing season and beyond.”

“Thus, the Town’s selection of the six-month project, notwithstanding its downsides, was a reasonable and lawful exercise of its police powers,” the appellate opinion continued. “Indeed, the Town had good reason to conduct the repairs to the roads and utilities for the protection of the public, despite the temporary disruption to Defendant’s use and enjoyment of his property. By doing so efficiently and during the off-season, the Town minimized its interference with Defendant’s property rights to the extent possible.”

Judges April Wood and Michael Stading joined Carpenter’s decision in Town of Beech Mountain v. Rigsbee and companion cases Town of Beech Mountain v. Wonders and Town of Beech Mountain v. Goldstein.

“Appeals Court rules for Beech Mountain in three property-rights suits” was originally published on www.carolinajournal.com.