I live in an unincorporated area in California, General law County of Ventura. The Board of Supervisors approved the dedication of property
to maintain the public right of ways to include roads, sidewalks and parkway trees in 1961. It receives gas taxes yearly earmarked for this repair,
so we pay the government to maintain this dedicated property. On 23 Dec. 2006, they created an Ordinance, transferring all government duties, responsibilities and liabilities on the public right of ways they approved in a dedication, to the adjacent property owner. California Constitution is subverted. They claim we owe fee and title to the middle of the street. Our property map dimensions show that our property starts 6" before the public sidewalk, clearly, based on dimensions, we don't own public property. Ca Streets and Highways Code 941a and 1806 (1955 and 1957) and Miller and Starr state that in a housing tracts, the County or City that approved the dedication is legal responsible to maintain the public right of way. County has countered with 1911 Improvement Act SHC 5600-5630. Upon my investigation, this was only for a business in a town, never ruled for housing tracts not created till 1945. There were no taxes collected in 1911 for a business in a town to repair the public sidewalk in front of their establishment. So the Municipality posted a bond, was paid back by Business Owners in Towns. SHC 22060 require the Board of Supervisors to maintain the public parkway trees. Their own Ordinance 2041, states that they own everything planted on the parkway, where the tree roots have destroyed their own sidewalks. Jones vs Deeter 1986, requires a Municipality to maintain the parkway trees, including their roots, that have cracked and lifted the public sidewalks. County has written letters to adjacent property owners, claiming we own the public sidewalk. How can we own title and fee when their own Ordinance states they own this property? How can we own property when the dimensions dont go to the middle of the street, only go out 6" before the public sidewalk. How can an easement be placed on the right of ways property when we private property owners dont own a public street, parkway or sidewalk? We pay taxes for government to maintain government property. All court decisions in California dont allow any General law County/City to transfer its own duties to adjacent property owners, while they are collecting gas taxes for this maintenance. Please advise.
Jim Frame, post: 402199, member: 10 wrote: See But It's Your Sidewalk! for a synopsis of the legal issues.
I had an opportunity to read this opinion in 2014, had a chat with the Government Attorney. He represents the government, that is a governments view, from the town of Sacramento, has noting to do with housing tracts sidewalks. He is not correct with his analysis, since the 1911 Improvement Act, Streets and Highways Code 5600-5630 was written for a business in a town, not residential properties, not created in California till 1945. Please read the current lawsuit of Willits vs City of Los Angeles 2010. This is a Charter City in California, where the Judge found LA liable for 1.4B (ADA Non compliance), to replace public residential sidewalks and parkway trees in housing tracts. They are repairing the public right of ways properties as we speak. The Judge did not use 1911 Improvement Act Streets and Highways code 5600-5630 as LA legal argument. It does not apply to housing tracts, 941a and 1806 apply. In our case, the parkway trees are owned by the County (by Ordinance), therefore their damage roots, causing the sidewalks to be defective is the Counties. Jones vs Deeter makes it clear that the property owner is not responsible for parkway tree root damages. That was in Long Beach, a Charter City, different than a General law County, that must follow current SHC 941a and 1806, not 5600-5630. This is quite an interesting case, going to court this month.
