Battleship Rock on Table Rock Lake Missouri ... aka "Victory Springs"
Summary of 2022 Meeting Recordings
1. January 10, 2022 – Taney County Planning & Zoning (PnZ) Initial Meeting (Case #21022)
- Duration: ~1 hour 30 minutes (split into 6 sessions).
- Key Topics: Rezoning proposal; road access via Tall Tree Drive (narrow, steep gravel road through Stone County neighborhoods); traffic impacts; environmental concerns (water supply, endangered species); safety/fire access; compatibility with adjacent areas.
- Main Speakers:
- Developer representatives (including an attorney and traffic expert).
- Opposing residents from Grandview Acres, Williams Landing, and Lakeview Paradise Estates HOAs.
- Taney County Fire Chief Chris Berndt (opposed due to poor access).
- Arguments For: Developer presented a traffic memo (not a full study) claiming low impact; offered to share road improvement costs and potentially turn road over to Stone County; emphasized economic benefits and low density.
- Arguments Against: Road deemed unsafe for increased traffic/construction/emergency vehicles; no guaranteed improvements (Stone County refused maintenance); potential 20% drop in property values; ecological risks (e.g., aquifer strain, wildlife); strong opposition petitions (~50-60 letters, 100 signatures).
- Outcome: Postponed to February 14 for developer to provide more road plans; committee expressed doubts about road viability.
2. February 14, 2022 – Taney County PnZ Follow-Up Meeting ("Mulligan")
- Duration: ~1 hour 15 minutes (5 sessions).
- Key Topics: Developer drone visualization of road; comparisons to other resorts; property value impacts; alleged neighbor developments (accused of being defamatory).
- Main Speakers:
- Developer (Bradley Youngblood and attorney).
- Opposition residents and HOA counsel.
- Arguments For: Acknowledged Stone County road issues but focused on Taney County parcel; claimed similarities to existing developments; willingness to proceed.
- Arguments Against: False/misleading claims about neighbors; ongoing road dangers; illegal short-term rentals in some areas; broad HOA opposition.
- Outcome: Narrow recommendation to proceed to Commission (5-4 vote).
3. February 22, 2022 – Taney County Commission Rezoning Hearing
- Duration: Multiple sessions (full hearing).
- Key Topics: Final rezoning decision; road burden; nightly rental impacts; fire access; alternative access options.
- Main Speakers:
- Developers (Jeramie Worley, Bradley Youngblood, Tracey Lightfoot).
- Opposing residents from multiple HOAs.
- Taney County Fire Chief Chris Berndt (again opposed).
- Commissioners (Sheila Wyatt, Mike Scofield, Brandon Williams).
- Arguments For: Property seen as overpriced/undeveloped; nice homes planned; willingness to handle some road costs.
- Arguments Against: Poor access (Fire Chief highlighted risks); no Stone County support; threats to property values, quiet enjoyment, and safety; ecological concerns; potential lawsuit.
- Outcome: Rezoning approved 2-1 (Commissioners Scofield and Williams in favor; Wyatt opposed).
Lawsuit Outcomes Details
Lawsuit Outcomes Details: Battleship Rock / Victory Springs Development
The primary lawsuit related to the Battleship Rock (Victory Springs Resort) development was filed in 2022 by Battleship Rock Development LLC (the developers) against Stone County and 16 individual homeowners (from nearby HOA Lakeview Paradise Estates). The case is #22SN-CC00163 (filed in Stone County Circuit Court, as the road access dispute centered on Tall Tree Drive in Stone County).
Key Details:
- Cause of Action: The developers sued after homeowners installed a gate on Tall Tree Drive, a narrow gravel road that serves as the primary access to the Taney County property. The gate blocked the developers' use of the road for site visits and potential construction.
- Core Issue: Whether Tall Tree Drive was a public road that the developers could access without permission. Stone County maintained it was not obligated to maintain the road, and homeowners argued it was private.
- Judge's Ruling: Circuit Judge Alan Blankenship ruled that Tall Tree Drive is a public road accessible to anyone. This allowed the developers to use it, though Stone County is not required to maintain or improve it.
- Resolution: The case settled, and the appeal was dismissed. No further legal action on this matter has been reported as of late 2025.
- Outcome Impact: The ruling cleared a legal hurdle for the developers regarding access but did not resolve practical issues. Stone County has consistently refused to dedicate, maintain, or upgrade the road (confirmed in 2024 and Fall 2025 reports), leaving infrastructure concerns (e.g., safety for emergency vehicles, traffic on a steep/narrow gravel road) unresolved.
2022/Jan10 - Taney Co PnZ, ReZoning Initial Meeting
Session A - Call to order
Starts @ 6 min 20 seconds. Case #21022. Talks begin about road compatibility and other topics concerning Grandview Estates HOA & Lakeview Paradise Estates HOA in Stone County, of which Tall Tree Drive passes directly through. Meetings also comprised concerned citizens of Williams Landing HOA, The Boulders and The Provence communities, and other interested parties (Taney and Stone Co), in opposition to the "Victory Springs Resort on Table Rock Lake", previously referred to as the Battleship Rock Development.
Interestingly, the Taney County Fire Chief and Emergency Services Manager, Chris Berndt, was actively present and in opposition at the PnZ meetings [concerning the access and thus permitting issues] (see NewsLeader Article response from the Fire Chief). Mr. Berndt was also active during litigation over the next several years, maintaining his position .
Developer and "Mike" opening comments ... Mike never states his full name for the audio record and only introduced by Developer as Mike. We are making assumptions here, but Mike could be an attorney... not sure.
Full meeting (Session A to F) : 1hr 30 min
Session B - Developer continues
Developer - "you can see from my slides, I took measurements and average width of road is 23 feet"... See Traffic Study Report.
@02:18: Developer- "Mikes going to present a traffic study..." [to try and show that it wouldn't matter if zoned R1 or NR1; traffic flow and volume no different]
@03:30: Developer - "At this point I'll go ahead and turn it over to Mike, he will speak to the traffic study..."
@03:40: Mike (an attorney?) - " I didn't do a traffic study, per se... I did a memorandum, I used ITE" [traffic engineering handbook] . "I would say fairly inconsequential the level of traffic for that resort".
* Of note: a legitimate traffic study was completed by Grandview Estates and presented . The Developers showed up with notes they pulled from a text book of engineering.
@ 06:25 - Committee member - " So it is your intent to build that entire road to your development [from highway, through both subdivisions] ?
Mike to Developer - " Do you have any intent in widening this [entire road]? "
Developer - " I don't know if we could widen it as a private citizen or developer"; "this is why we invited folks over for cake and coffee" [the intent in this conversation is noting that Developers were leaning on the current home owners in the two subdivisions to assist them in the widening of the road, financially ].
The PnZ committee members are questioning the validity, up front, that the roads are insufficient and not wide enough... This was one of the first topics of the meeting that most of the committee members saw as a major pitfall .
Committee member @ minute 9... making the direct point he knows that section of road and states he sees there being a traffic flow issue and hard to navigate. "I looked at this parcel of property myself a long time ago and this [the road] is what talked me out of doing it then". Developer - "Right... sure... I realize there will be significant cost there. My goal [today] was to show you our willingness to participate in improvements [to the road]. Umm, we really don't have any other access to the property... it's got be there or nothing."
Committee member - " I was just sitting here thinking about 60 homes... could you imagine the amount of construction traffic."
@11:30 - Developer - "There has been some rumors of that road [extension of Tall Tree Drive as a private driveway to a property owner new home construction in Lakeview Paradise Estates] being put in by the gentleman that owns it to put in more vacation rentals there, so it seems like there is already something happening there..."
"Somebody has got to come along and pony up." - Developer
* Updated, for the record, everything developer just stated @11:30 was/is unfounded and not well researched as none of his statements of "fact" to the committee was correct, and blanketly naming family names associated with such activity that was/ is false (as it pertains to developing new STRs on 6 plats on new road cut in). In fact, to their chagrin, Stone Co Commission later in the same year disallowed any new vacation rentals in R1 subdivisions, not allowing for new provisional permits. It's essentially illegal now to have an STR unless already grandfathered.
Session C - Developer vs Committee members, debate continues
Committee member - "Stone County does not maintain that road?" Developer - "Not at this time"
* Updated, over 2 years later from this interaction, Stone County, a named defendant in a suit brought by the developers, to include defendants within the Lakeview Paradise Estates HOA, Stone Co (paraphrased) will not be providing any road support / improvement / maintenance on Tall Tree Drive...ever.
Committee member - "Where I'm going is, I'd need to see some guaranteed road improvements before I could support this"; retort by Developer... "I'd be willing to do whatever to help support your decision" ... eventually given a Mulligan and able to quickly pull together some road numbers within 30 days, in order to tell the committee what they need to hear. Great "due diligence" and preparation. In his own words, he has "never developed" anything like this (scroll down to listen to Session F @ 04:45).
Attention needs brought to Slideshow below, "Compatibility Adjacency Study" , in particular Page 4 .
Another committee member notes that they would need to expect community push back since Stone Co doesn't maintain the road, but the community does pay private money to maintain the road. * Flash forward, Developers brought suit against one of the communities (Lakeview Paradise Estates in July 2022) for the very prescient "community pushback" that Taney Co Commissioners referred.
Committee member - "Do you plan on turning the road over to the [Stone] county ?" Developer - "That would be one of the goals, for longevity, snow plowing ... we planned on working with the neighbors to share some cost, but that is looking like not an option based on some of the feedback..."
@06:26 - Committee member to ? Mike - "Have you driven that road ?"
Mike - "No I have not..."
*** Again, we are not clear "who" Mike actually is ... a road contractor or Developers attorney? They did not ID themselves for the audio file.
Committee member - "I have a hard time supporting 60 houses, nightly rentals or not, at the end of a one lane road... the roads been pretty chewed up... somebody has got to do the road... without the road totally [to specifications]... this doesn't make sense to me... in my experience the developer would with stand the cost of the road, because he's the one to stand to gain the benefits ... and you hope that at some point [Stone] county takes it over..."
@07:00 - committee member - "I understand what your saying, if its a nightly rental or regular homes...but, somebody has got to do the road, and to go in there and just start building homes, without that road being totally ready to handle that... this doesn't make sense to me." "Right now... you're just asking for rezoning...the developer would, in my experience, with stand the cost for the road..."
CRITICAL INTERACTION BETWEEN COMMITTEE AND DEVELOPER AND COUSEL:
@ 8 min 25 seconds: discussion between Attorney? Mike & committee member regarding "offsite improvements" [ie; road improvements] about "rezoning with conditions" stipulations. (8min 48 sec)... "is it not what you would do, to place the condition [of presenting detailed road plans to Stone Co] as a condition of rezoning ?"
Committee member - "makes sense to me".
*It sounds like an understanding by Taney County PnZ by and between developer / attorney?, was openly discussed and agreed to as a condition to rezone from Agriculture to commercial, that developer FIRST bring Tall Tree Drive into Stone County road specifications [before any development of the commercial parcel] . This is an interpretation of the words as spoken. We are witnessing a real time negotiation and verbal understanding of how to proceed [should Taney Co Commission move to allow rezoning from A1 to NC1].
@ 10min; committee member line of questioning about taking more time to [do due diligence] and Developer states that "no we are currently under contract" ; would require a grace period extension with seller; committee member off distance, but with volume up, you can hear him respond/ comment, " to improve that road from your property all the way to the highway is going to take a lot of [muffled]".
Developer - states "we may not need to improve it all the way to the highway... it's wide enough"; it's essentially just a gravel road up to Grandview Estates (from their property) and that there would not need to be any improvements to road width within Grandview Estates.
The facts remain established and were presented to Taney County in the Traffic and Road Condition Study
Another committee member chimes in @ 10:35, setting more "conditions of rezoning" off site improvements, discussing that developer should be expected to post a road bond in Stone County to "insure that the road gets paved"...
Developer - "And let's say Stone County didn't want to take it over... I don't think anyone would buy a $700,000 home with a road that's a little cantankerous "
@14 minutes, new committee member: "So let's switch gears a little bit, we are talking about the road, the road, the road... let's talk about the re zoning itself... we beat the road to death".
Committee chair ... "Let's move on and hear what the people that live there have to say about this" (Continues below @ Session D)
Session D - Community opposition speakers
Quip made by one of the committee members; "I didn't say road, did I?" (chuckles from the gallery) [a retort to the brow beating PnZ chair about not talking about the Stone Co road conditions]: "Let's keep it down, we are not stupid, we can understand what it is , we don't have to be told a dozen times, and ... we'll try to make an intelligent decision"
Residents of Grandview Acres leading off... pointing out all the key opposition points:
#1: M.S. of Grandview Acres: "we've submitted 50-60 letters in opposition as well as 100 signatures on petitions opposing rezoning, many of these people are in this room" ; highlights of opposing points in those letters starts at 1 min 30 sec marker.
"Road dangers, road maintenance challenges, water, well and ecological considerations, trespassing / safety concerns, wildlife disruption..."
#2: C.B. of Grandview Acres: " we've seen lots of changes over the years but one thing is constant, our roads are dangerous" . "You see it with those nightly rentals already [Lakeview Paradise Estates]." Arundel, maintained by Stone County, is 18 ft wide, I measured it. We have accidents [due to steep roads]. Our roads are narrow. Equipment does have to be off loaded in Grandview Estates in order to get back to Paradise Estates. These roads are dangerous for us; you can't fix this. We live on a mountain.
#3: C.L. of Grandview Acres: "We've meet with our county commissioner Hank Smythe on many occasions and Stone Co will not help or maintain [Post Oak / Tall Tree]. They are not taking over any roads. I'm a civil engineer, I've been doing this 35 years. We've done a traffic study. It's going to be a nightmare. We have to yell at people all the time to slow down. "During construction, it will be like living on a quarry road".
#4: K.H. of Grandview Acres: ( continues in Session E below)
#5: D.E. of Grandview Acres: (continues in Session E below) - "I'm also speaking for John Holdermann who owns the 80 acres across the line".
"I didn't say road, did I?" [retort to the brow beating PnZ chairman about not talking about the Stone Co roads again]
#6: A.S. of Williams Landing: (continues in Session E below) - water usage is concern on the current community aquifer supply; fire control and sufficient water supply for fire sprinklers that will be required in these properties; active issues with Taney Co fire services not understanding they have fire response required out there, thinking Stone Co should be responding
#7: T.S. of Grandview Acres: (continues in Session E below) - "we can talk about all the this that and other; there is no way this won't affect our properties". "Like putting an interstate through a school zone." "It's got to be the right place at the right time."
Developer follow up to community member complaints - "I sure picked a bad day to give up drinking. I of course never meant to upset the neighborhood. Never in my life has my integrity been questioned and I won't let it be questioned tonight". "I've put a piece of property under contract... sounds like the roads are dangerous regardless of whether or not we buy it or not. I would suggest the neighborhood try and fix it." (harrumph in audience).
Session E - Hank Smythe of Stone Co Commission says he won't take on the road
Grandview Estates community members continue and explain a conversation from Stone Co commissioner Hank Smythe , pledges that Stone Co will NOT help out in any capacity with the road improvements (and that is how it ended up in 2024, after a more than 2 year legal battle in Stone County Missouri ).
"That road is one way in and one way out. Who will maintain those roads? It's literally on the side of a mountain"
"That is why those dozers are in their, fixing wash outs in Lakeview Paradise Estates" from all the rain.
@ 01:38 -- Grandview makes the compelling note that "imagine you own a piece of property, your dream home " and this comes along and threatens it. "I've worked all my life to have this dream retirement home"; if I have to sell, no one is going to want to buy my house will all this traffic going by my house every day
THEN the Taney Co PnZ committee chair, after some compelling statements, adds ( @min 4:26)... Folks, we get it... the Stone County roads are bad. "We don't need to hear anymore about how bad the roads are. Unless you have something else to add, we don't need to hear about the roads", he says.
(THE TANEY COUNTY PNZ DIDN'T WANT TO HEAR THE ISSUES AND SHUT DOWN THE MOST IMPORTANT VIEWS FROM AREA RESIDENTS ON THE ROAD CONDITIONS AND SAFETY ) .
Session F - "I'm the Expert"
@ 05:26... "if we are going to have to be responsible for the entirety of the road improvements with no help from the neighborhoods and we have to reduce density of the homes, umm, it may not become viable." (with a verbal nod of agreement to this statement from the committee chair). "I understand the careful balance between quiet enjoyment and a persons right to do what they want to do with the property; it's just a matter of economics, ."
Taney Co PnZ chair.. @ min 0130, "What are your feelings about this [to board members], anything you want to discuss amongst ourselves ? anyone want to make a motion, one way or the other?"
One of the board members -- "Can I say road?" [part and parcel to the tone of the evening]
Responses from other committee members... "I need to see something more on the road, some kind of plan. I don't know how you can do that, but luckily the burden is not on me... I need to see a bone fide no kidding plan to see this this and this... I can't support it; that's where I'm at." -- this argument against allowed for the 3rd option to allow for the Mulligan Shot.
Developer, states @ 04:45 ... "THIS IS MY FIRST ATTEMPT AT A DEVELOPMENT LIKE THIS".
@ 05:26... "if we are going to have to be responsible for the entirety of the road improvements with no help from the neighborhoods, and we have to reduce density of the homes, umm, it may not become viable." (with a verbal nod of agreement to this statement from the committee chair). "I understand the careful balance between quiet enjoyment and a persons right to do what they want to do with the property; it's just a matter of economics, we will have to look at that."
Gets to a point at the end of this session where there is a back and forth and many committee members do question the validity of this project and especially the density of 60+ homes.
APPLICATION MOVED TO POSTPONEMENT TO MEETING NEXT MONTH , FEB 14, 2022. This gave Developer, who was not prepared at this meeting, to regroup and come back .
Can Building Permits Actually Be Issued ??
"There will be additional traffic... we have agreed to address the road..." ~ Worley, Feb 2022
To date (Fall 2026), nothing has been done about Tall Tree Drive, and it's been several years since re zoning occurred. It is a public road now, thanks to the efforts of the developers in bringing the law suit against their neighbors, something they were looking forward to obtaining. The side affect of the suit? Stone Co Road Department will have nothing to do with maintaining it... ever. This is very unfortunate for the developers.
Now, in order to obtain the COMMERICAL building permits from Taney County, being their property is ZONED COMMERCIAL, the 10 ft wide gravel road that is impassable to traffic must be widened (double current width) and graded, maybe a few bridges built in some ravines . Ouch.
An August 2026 press release by GritDaily, essentially "scripted" by the main developer, makes bold and erroneous statements . We have asked the two communities in question and no open line of communications have been obtained with anyone. Just not true according to our queries.
All of the bloviating online aside, the issue remains: the road width and treacherous road grades must be brought to "commercial code" for this project, and on their own dime, as it appears the subdivisions affected want no part in paying for this.
Hear it in their own words ( 15 min, Session J, Taney Co Re Zone Commission Meeting; Feb 2022 )
Listen to Session O and Session P from the Final Commission Meeting, as it highlights the developers commitment with Taney Co to improve Tall Tree Rd in order to satisfy their obligations in rezoning the 20 acres to Commercial Status, NR-1.
"We Are Greatly Concerned..." ~ Fire Chief
"Should be 20 feet wide, under 7% grade... We are greatly concerned" ~ Chief Berndt, Taney County
This Audio File L, starting at time marker 3:12 to 7:04, really says it all... 2 of the 3 commissioners even had concerns as verbalized in this exchange.
REVIEW ROAD STUDY showing road grades exceeding 23% !
Hear it in their own words ( Session L, Taney Co Re Zone Commission Meeting; Feb 2022 - Fire Chief Chris Berndt of Taney Co -- starts at 3:12 and goes to 7:04 )
2022/Feb 14 - Taney Co PnZ, "Mulligan"
Session A - Call to order / Developer has a redo
This is the follow up PnZ meeting, second attempt at explaining, given to Developer, after he was unsuccessful in making his initial case and not getting good feed back from more than a majority of committee members.
Meeting starts at marker 03:11. Committee postponed Jan meeting "to allow the representative to gather more information..." - as stated @ 03:29 marker.
At 05:00 the committee speaker makes clear that the monkey is not on their back. He states "I want to be clear that what we are doing today is not to approve or deny the application as presented, but to approve or deny that it goes before the commission for review". "Its only a recommendation, for or against".
Mulligan shot starts @ 05:29 marker.
" We got down there with a drone to help everybody better visualize " .
"Stone County does not maintain any portion of that road".
***After Developer finishes speaking, @13:00 , the committee person directing the flow of the meeting states that they reached out to both Taney County attorney and Stone County PnZ, "we have no authority, zero, in reference to what is being discussed about the road".
"Our decision will be purely placed on the parcel of property located within Taney County".
So, Taney Co PnZ Committee chair effectively removes any further discussion about the road, yet again, making it clear they are just going to be recommending moving this on to recommendation for the Commissioners regarding the parcel sizes for his development.
Session B - Developer(s) continue to speak
Developer Youngblood speaks in Session B...
He references the sold White River BnB off Taney County Rd / Stone Co Rd called Ozark Hollow Rd, a public county road that does not go through any subdivisions inside of Stone County (excepting Williams Landing which is in Taney Co).
He is putting forth misleading / disinformation to the committee that White River (now called Glass Haus Weddings) is accessed through "subdivisions"; that is the implication of his monologue before the committee.
It's absolutely false, but he's trying to say "we'll , this is already being or has been done before".
He refers to "resorts" that you have to drive through properties to get to on Ozark Hollow Rd (interestingly enough the road was originally named Happy Hollow Resort Rd, go figure. This is in Taney Co, not Stone Co. Details matter.
Well, he is talking about Happy Hollow Resort, having been there since the lake was started in the 1950s. Williams landing was developed after this and thus you have him correctly noting, if you want to go to Happy Hollow Resort (a grandfathered resort) you must drive through a subdivision to get there.
SLANDER ALERT @ 56 secs : Mr. Bradley Youngblood, one of the realtor/developers is speaking in this public forum, what is clearly a slanderous statement against our neighbors in LPE, the Patterson's, impacting their reputation amongst their neighbors and own community in LPE .
@ 00:56 sec - Youngblood - "most of the properties on Tall Tree are owned by the Patterson's ... I've got a fairly reliable source, I'm not gonna say that it's a 100%, but the reason for the cut in road back there is to get back to the parcels to put more vacation rentals in, um, because they are owned by the Patterson's as well so I don't see them as having 20 residential homes back there to um basically rent long term or even sell, um they are in the business for vacation rentals and we want to come in and do our part... "
These statements are proven to date to be blatantly false statements, he even admits that it's hearsay yet repeats it in this public, on record forum anyway.
Repeating a defamatory statement—even if you heard it from someone else—generally makes one liable under the republication rule. Unbelievably reckless and has the overt appearance they are using this false information to sway the commission in their decision making process.
Attorney for the developer(s) speaks @ 0350 . Let the record show that this particular attorney will not be heard from again in future legal or court matters regarding the road. He probably hit the ejector button after this meeting (opinion only / satire ).
Opposition speakers begins @ 05:40 .
Discussion of difference between "arterial roads" vs. "collector roads"
Grandview resident states, "Mark Ferguson, a well known expert in housing values states that you can expect a 20% DECREASE in property values of your house when [ you go from a quiet street to a busy road ]"
Continues over to Session C, D and E
Session C - Opposition views continue
Grandview counsel speaks @07:25; stating that Stone County Commission stated to him that the parties involved "may need to have a law suit"... very foretelling as a suit did ensue in mid July 2022.
Session D - Offends the Gallery of 100s of residents !
@09:00, this Developer erroneously continues with line of falsehoods stating, like he knows, that there are neighbors that have "built a road to more plats specifically to develop into 5 or 6 more vacation homes".
As of Fall 2025, this has never occurred as no prima facia evidence of any online advertised listings, nor can it or will it be the case, as it would be illegal since Stone County Commission passed an Amendment to halt any more vacation rentals as of August 2022. Again, false statements made by Developers to garner favor and try and support their goals of getting commission on their side.
@ 10min (10:00) "we are not putting high rise condos or dancing girls... just homes...and nice ones... nicer than anyone has seen out there". (the hundreds in attendance openly harrumph loudly )
... "I didn't mean to offend... I realize that was in poor taste". Out of control.
Session E - Continues and then the vote to recommend, passes narrowly
@ 00:23; Developer continues to discuss with committee and states in response to a person in attendance regarding his up hill battle about the road ; "sounds like there is going to be quite a lot of opposition"
@08:40; committee member PnZ seems to be reiterating, yet again (we are just following the guidelines)
@10:50; "He deserves an answer, pitch forks aside..."
@11:00; Motion made to recommend moving them to next phase for 3 county commissioners to decide; passes 5/4 . Second attempt to present a cleaner presentation and still 45% of the committee don't see it.
2022/Feb 22 - Taney Co Commission ReZone
Session J - Call to order / Commission ReZoning starts
Developer (Jeramie Worley) opening comments @ 02:00
@03:00 - "overpriced property... extremely high price to be honest... Mr. Youngblood brought it to my attention... we noticed it is fairly rocky but we decided [to go through with it]"
@5:50 - providing "proprietary" data to commissioners, stating @ 06:35 "I just wanted to do my research to make sure I'm factual in my presentation" .
*Note that Mr. Worley is/was (at the time, anyway) a board member? and/or newly appointed CEO of Vrolio.com (the site is now seemingly offline ). If this is where these developers are getting this "proprietary information", this seems to be a clear "conflict of interest" in this particular instance ? Legitimate question.
@11:45 - Developer: "land sat there on the market with no one interested for months and no one wanted it... [someone chimes in quickly that it was on the market for "one year"]... long pause from Worley. "Nobody wanted it and nobody saw the value of it"
@12:10 - continues : "It's true what they say... that nightly rentals do come and destroy certain areas... and there is bad stuff... "
Session K - Grandview residents comments
Q&A between Commissioner and Worley continues from Session J:
@00:05 - Worley - "There is a person down there that owns that [newly cut in road] named I think Patterson. I can't speak to his intent, I can speak to what I've heard, but I'd rather not since I don't know it to be factual. But there is development going on down there."
Important Sidebar... Worley realizes the mistake Youngblood made in the Feb 14 P&Z (2nd) meeting (the do over meeting it's being called). Per Session B @ 56 seconds, Youngblood seems to slander the Patterson's.
Beginning of community member comments:
K.H. comments - resident of Grandview Acres
Session L - Taney Co Fire Chief , Against Development
Chris Berndt, Western Taney Co Fire Chief, goes on record as to why this development is a bad idea; 2 of the 3 commissioners didn't listen to their fire chief/ head of county EMS; "we are greatly concerned about the access to that property.. or lack there of"
Chris Berndt is retired as of Nov 2025; Chief Jim Furgerson is now in charge of taking over for Berndt.
Session M - Grandview / Williams Landing residents comment
M.S. comments; discussion of Change.org petition and why created
T.S. comments, also from Grandview Acres
A.S. of Williams Landing, comments
Session O - Brad Youngblood / Jeramie Worley Waffle on Road Commitments
00:56 -- " what happens if Indian Ridge occurs again.."
01:24 -- "what happens if it fails...and he goes bankrupt... I've never seen a business plan" ~ Grandview resident
2:26 --- (Brad Youngblood / Developer): "property been listed for almost a year before it draw any interest for me" [yes, this is the quoted syntax and grammar; buckle up , its rough ]
4:32 -- "the whole argument for the last two PnZ meetings was "ROAD"... we had to come back with some kind of bid..."
"...we hired Mike Stalzer to do a road preliminary engineer plan and it took it directly to Flat Creek Excavation and they went out there and give us a bid on the property [only LPE subdivision roads, not Grandview roads]. This not just shooting from the hips" ~ Brad Youngblood
"this was a road bid which is what Mike Stalzer had designed... I keep hearing about "we not seen nothing yet" but it was presented at PnZ when we done it"
5:12-- "I keep hearing about safety concerns. well is the road so unsafe that they don't need to be back there? I mean, come on now." [he is referring to those that live and reside on that road, lord]
5:28 -- " I get there's going to be increased traffic but we are willing to take on the burden of the road to make sure that that is addressed" ~ Brad Youngblood / Developer
continued... "we just want to make sure we have good access... we don't want some shifty make shift road to get back to our $800,000 properties, don't make sense."
6:05 -- "so, we've got a plan in place [for road improvement] you know, we already said we are going to cover it in our budgets to help maintain that road."
6:13 "I'm not here to strong arm people or to bully people..." [ask some of us in Grandview Estates, just saying]
6:58 "This is going to be a carefully planned community" [hasn't held true]
Session P - "I don't think we should be responsible for the road" ~ Worley
Commissioner Sheila Wyatt and a male commissioner (?name) questions...
01:15 -- "Mr. Youngblood, this may not be a fair question, so if you don't want to answer it.. as far as that road, what do you see ? Do you see a paved 2 lane road ? This is what I'm hearing is the main concern."
01:40 -- " Like I said, like I said, that's been the concern from day one [commissioner: " and I would assume that's been a concern of yours as well ?"]
Jeramie Worley / Developer , verbally jumps in off mic from side lines...
01:50 --- "we tried to address this in a neighborly way [with coffee and cakes]"
"we didn't know what access we had"
02:47 -- "We are still willing to commit to improving that road which is why we wanted to widen it to a double lane road... we went to our banker and made sure there was enough budget to do that , umm. .. so that was what our hope was to address those concerns." ~ Mr. Worley
Rebuttal from Grandview Estates: "The bid that was submitted was for gravel only". Mr. Worley states "correct" . Commissioner shuts down this discussion.
03:26 -- Mr. Youngblood jumps back in... "Basically what we've asked is $1M for that road from the bank, $500K just to rough it in. That's not the chip n seal we are proposing to put in there and so we've got $1M budgeted for that road." [the bid remember is just for Lakeview Paradise Estates' portion of Tall Tree Road]
04:40 -- "Again, I don't think we should be responsible for the entire road..." ~ Jeramie Worley
[flash forward, the road is a public road, Stone County Roads Department on record in court will never maintain it, so... it IS there's to fully develop and maintain; and they are required to widen the road at a minimum, in order to maintain regulations for a commercially zoned property]
K.H. for Grandview Acres speaks again in rebuttal
Sheila Wyatt asks Developer about whether they intend on finishing entire road, from highway to development; no real answer given
Session Q- Final Decisions and Vote
Sheila Wyatt continues discussion with Developer
Prescient comment by Sheila... "Opinion from the attorney from Stone Co is that it may have to be determined by the circuit court and a circuit court lawsuit... by a circuit court judge... he could see where some parts were dedicated and others were not". And drumroll ... that is exactly what happened.
Motion carries 2/1 to rezone . Sheila Wyatt, District 2 commissioner, was the only dissenting vote of the three commissioners (Mike Scofield & Brandon Williams voting FOR rezoning). Even the Taney County Fire Chief was not in favor. And he was quoted in the Springfield News Leader reiterating as much, over 2 years later.