Developers of 10 county subdivisions may face misdemeanor charges and penalties if they do not respond to legal complaints the Warren County Board of Supervisors plans to submit next week in regard to requirements of the county subdivision ordinance.

Letters were initially sent to developers of 25 subdivisions in June with today as a deadline to reply. Of the 25, 14 responded and are making progress to come into compliance, County Engineer John McKee told the supervisors Thursday. Three were disputing the supervisors’ claims, while no written response was received on behalf of 8.

The county subdivision ordinance was enacted in 2004, and is the lone set of rules addressing what must happen when an owner subdivides land to be sold in lots. It was enacted as a reaction to persistent problems with private developers not building or maintaining roads and drainage systems and buyers suffering losses or expecting repairs and maintenance at public expense.

Under the ordinance, subdivision builders must submit a preliminary plan that broadly defines the area under development, including names, widths and distances between roads. County engineers present the plan for approval by the supervisors, and thereafter a construction plan must be submitted showing drainage and elevations.

Board Attorney Paul Winfield called the ordinance “generic” and “as simple as can be.” He recommended drafting a notice alerting subdivision developers not in compliance of the county’s intent to take them to county court if the supervisors concerns are not addressed within 10 business days. The board will likely take up the issue during Monday’s regular meeting.

“We have folks who know better, but simply want to ignore the ordinance and do whatever they want,” said Winfield.

Developers found to be in violation of the subdivision ordinance could be subject to fines up to $500 per day, per violation.

“This is not a time to back up. If we’re not going to enforce this we may as well throw all the ordinances in the garbage,” said Board President Richard George.

The ordinance is a component of pending litigation against the county by the Issaquena and Warren County Land Company. In a federal lawsuit the owners of the tract seek millions in damages and allege supervisors, Winfield and others sought to use enforcement of the subdivision ordinance and the prohibition against construction in known flood areas as a tool to favor owners of a neighboring tract. In his response to the suit, George said the county was enforcing the requirements equally.

The list reviewed Thursday showed no written response received from developers of:

Boy Scout Road Subdivision, off Boy Scout Road.

Brandi Lane Subdivision, Parts 1 and 2, off Oak Ridge Road.

Camden Place Subdivision, off Oak Ridge Road.

Haley’s Point Estates, off Haley’s Point Road.

Lee Hills Subdivision, off Memory Lane.

Openwood Acres Subdivision, off Oak Ridge Road.

Rabbit Run Subdivision, off Dogwood Lake Road.

The Trace Subdivision, Parts 1 and 2, off Fisher Ferry Road.

The owners of the following subdivisions are disputing the supervisors’ noncompliance claims:

Holly Ridge Subdivision, off U.S. 80.

Powell Subdivision, off U.S. 61.

The Grove Subdivision, off China Grove Road .

The owners of the following subdivisions are taking actions to address the supervisors’ noncompliance claims:

Amberleaf Subdivision, off U.S. 80.

Anneville Subdivision, off Old Highway 27.

Choctaw Boundary Subdivision, off Bovina Cutoff Road.

East Village Subdivision, off Lee Road.

Fairways Subdivision, Parts 11 and 12, off Oak Ridge Road.

Forest Cove Subdivision, Part 3, near Lake Forest.

Fonsylvania Road Development, off Fonsylvania Road.

Lealand Point Subdivision, off Lee Road.

Littlewoods Subdivision, Parts 2 and 3, off Lee Road.

Mill Creek Subdivision, off Lee Road.

Pennebaker Subdivision, off Freetown Road.

Stonegate Subdivision, Parts 1-4, off Oak Ridge Road.

Tucker Crossing Subdivision, off Tucker Road.

Twin Creeks Subdivision, off Lee Road.