The local band of Ohlone natives(forget the name of the group) tried suing a few years ago, but there aren't enough of that individual band remaining to exert their tribal rights(whatever's left of them!...).
A common situation with many California First American groups. <IMG> http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/archive/2005/July/07/local/images/07dlot.jpg The Seaside Co., which bought this parking-lot land in 1915, has been fighting city efforts to take at least a piece of it since 1997. (Dan Coyro / Sentinel) <...>
This piece of the riverbank, just before the rivermouth to the Monterey Bay is below the "traditional high water mark", and according to Federal law (at least at the time the land was sold(given really)), belongs to the local band of Ohlone. Indeed, the whole beach flats area is below that mark.
But I won't "go" there.
Travus T. Hipp talked up the Kelo decision the other day. As a parting shot, he said (as an old sailor): "Stand by for a ram...". http://www.furl.net/item.jsp?id=3711032
It didn't take long.
July 7, 2005 Seaside Co. sues city of Santa Cruz in fight over land By SHANNA McCORD Sentinel staff writer
SANTA CRUZ - Controversy over a Boardwalk parking lot next to the San Lorenzo River resurfaced this week when a lawsuit was launched against the city.
City officials maintain that part of the parking lot at the end of Beach Street belongs to the public, and they won't give up the decades-old legal fight.
The long and winding debate over who owns the 4-acre spot began during the Gold Rush era. The latest move is a suit filed Wednesday by the Seaside Co., owner of the Boardwalk, seeking "to reaffirm once and for all our ownership of this land," company officials said.
The Seaside Co. bought the parking-lot site from a private owner in 1915, and has since paid taxes on it and assumed liability. The company's ownership was validated in a 1933 county Superior Court decision. "We firmly believe we own this land free and clear," said Kris Reyes, Seaside Co. spokesman.
Fast forward more than 60 years to 1997, when the city was forming its Beach Area/South of Laurel Plan. During that process, a Beach Flats resident alleged that the federal government inappropriately deeded the land to private ownership more than 100 years ago in 1867.
Therefore, resident Phil Baer said then, the Boardwalk parking lot was really public property and should be given back to the government.
The State Lands Commission in Sacramento took up Baer's case and has tried to take a portion of the site from the Seaside Co.
The Seaside Co. is also suing the commission.
"Maps have indicated clearly that the area in question cannot be alienated or sold or disposed of from the public trust," Baer said Wednesday.
In 1998, the Seaside Co., city officials and the State Lands Commission struck a deal that would have given 1.2 acres to the city. The remaining three acres would remain under private ownership.
That deal, reached in October 1998, was rescinded two months later when three new members were elected to the City Council, including current Councilman Tim Fitzmaurice. A council majority decided they would rather try to negotiate a better deal for more than 1.2 acres.
"I was a new council member and it was my job to look after the public interest," Fitzmaurice said Wednesday. "My position is we needed to protect the public's interest. We had no other goal than that. I hope we can move past this thing. Brinkmanship doesn't benefit anyone."
Mayor Mike Rotkin, a council member in 1998 who voted against rescinding the agreement, said he believes "at least some part of the parking lot is public land."
Rotkin hopes the court finds the city should control part of the 4-acre plot. Possibly, he said, the cash-starved city could lease it back to the Seaside Co. and share in some of the parking lot profits.
"I still think we own some of this," Rotkin said. "There is a belief of the title company that they can win the whole ball of wax, and there was belief by some City Council members that they could win the whole ball of wax. Neither side is going to win the whole ball of wax. This is a case that cries out for a settlement."
Seven years have passed since the council reneged on its agreement with the Seaside Co. Since then, talks have been ongoing but neither the city, state nor Seaside Co. have agreed on a new deal or agreed who is the rightful owner.
The Seaside Co. said it has been pressured by its title insurance company to sue the city and state to lift the "clouded title dispute." Litigation is a last resort and not meant to be "an antagonistic act," the Boardwalk owner said.
Seaside Co.'s title company could be forced to pay a settlement if the court sides with the government, making the title defective.
"We need to put this behind us," Seaside spokesman Reyes said. "We see the lawsuit as the last avenue available to us."
A land-use attorney from San Francisco hired by the city in 1999 determined part of the land rightfully belongs to the Seaside Co.
How much has been debated. City Attorney John Barisone said he'll fight for the city's portion.
"We've always taken the position that a portion of the parking lot should end up in the public land trust," Barisone said Wednesday.
If the court decides the Seaside Co. owns the entire site, "case over," Rotkin said, though he believes the city will be sued regardless of the outcome. "Citizens who think the whole thing is public land" would sue the city, Rotkin said.
Contact Shanna McCord at smccord at santacruzsentinel.com.
You can find this story online at: http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/archive/2005/July/07/local/stories/02local.htm
=30=
