|
| Author |
Message |
Bzzzzzt
Member
|
# Posted: 31 Dec 2011 05:55pm
Reply
I saw this in the local Hot Springs, AR newspaper at this link:
http://www.hotsr.com/news/localnews/2011/12/30/backyard-at-heart-of-hs-couple-s-lawsu it-74.php
These people really have a problem and I thought others might like to know what the government does to the little guy.
I am going to copy and paste it here because you have to sign up to see the whole story (it's free) and that might annoy some.
Begin copy/paste:
A Hot Springs couple is suing the U.S. Department of the Interior in federal court here to keep part of its backyard from being taken into Hot Springs National Park.
James H. Williams III and Juliann Elizabeth Williams have filed a civil lawsuit in U.S District Court in Hot Springs under the federal Quiet Title Act, seeking to prevent a .04-acre slice of their property at 130 Forest Hills Trail from becoming part of the national park.
Hot Springs attorney Janie Evins represents the couple in the case that is set for trial in March.
"Plaintiffs bring this suit seeking quiet title to certain real property, which they claim that they and their predecessors in interest adversely possessed without interruption since 1947," Evins stated in pre-trial disclosure information filed in the case.
Evins stated that the Williamses "own all of Lot 13 and part of Lot 12, Block 193 of the Hot Springs Reservation, which is situated on the south side of North Border Street (platted but never built). The plaintiffs assert that the subject property, which is claimed by the National Park Service to be located on the north side of North Border Street, has been continuously and openly held by the plaintiffs and their predecessors in interest as part of the yard of Rocky Roost, the house situated at 130 Forest Hills Trail since its construction in 1947."
Juliann Williams told The Sentinel-Record that the couple has offered to "swap" other property they own to the National Park Service in exchange for the sliver of their backyard upon which they have built a potting shed dubbed The Opera House.
"It's been a really weird thing for us to feel like we're in a fight with the park," she said. "It's just not in our nature. I finally just decided that it would work out because it should. It's so important to Rocky Roost as far as being part of the yard."
Evins said the proposed land swap "would more than make up for them losing this small 10 feet of space." She said The Opera House "lies right in the middle of what the National Park Service is saying is their property."
Rocky Roost has been featured in "Country Home Country Gardens" magazine and in a book titled, "Grace From the Garden."
In her pre-trial disclosure statement, Evins said HSNP Superintendent Josie Fernandez notified the couple "sometime during the late spring or summer of 2007 that she needed to meet with them regarding the property, which is the subject of this litigation."
She said that in the subsequent meeting, "Superintendent Fernandez explained that a boundary line survey would be commissioned to determine the exact location of North Border Street" in view of the NPS' purchase of other property on the northern side of the un-built street.
"Superintendent Fernandez further explained to the plaintiffs that the acquisition program through which the National Park Service had acquired many properties along Park Avenue in the 1970s had been based upon a scientific theory, which was indicated by Superintendent Fernandez to have since been discredited or nullified, that the acquisition program would preserve the watershed which sourced the water flowing through the hot springs of Hot Springs National Park," Evins said.
"Superintendent Fernandez indicated to plaintiffs that the whole reason for the acquisition program had been proven in error and that the lands which were now under her supervision were not needed for the purposes of the National Park Service."
The lawsuit further contends that "Superintendent Fernandez subsequently ordered plaintiffs to remove what she determined to be encroachments on National Park Service lands."
Additionally, Fernandez "related her family's history of having lands taken by Fidel Castro during the Cuban revolution and informed plaintiffs that if it was determined by the boundary line survey that any encroachments existed she would have government bulldozers raze the encroachments and that there was nothing which could be done to prevent her from taking this action."
Williams said that when she and her husband left the meeting, she told her husband that Fernandez "doesn't care about the park, she just cares about winning."
Fernandez declined to comment at length on the case, referring The Sentinel-Record to the U.S. Attorney's Office in Fort Smith.
"This has been going on for a long time and what they have filed is allegations," she said.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Debbie Groom said "generally, we do not comment on the facts in on-going litigation."
"We have filed various pleadings in the case and we refer you to those for our factual basis for the defense of the park service."
According to the litigation, the 2007 settlement conference was "largely unsuccessful due to the defendant's claims that only an act of Congress or the expenditure of funds for environmental and feasibility studies could rectify this matter."
Evins said the couple could pursue an act of Congress "to save the very small yard which is here in controversy."
"That avenue will be pursued to obviate the necessity to remove the structure which is claimed to encroach upon park lands by the NPS," Evins said. "Clearly, one of the difficulties which has been encountered with the facts involved is that the roads platted were never built and certain roads have been vacated."
Evins was referring to North Border Street and Emma Jean Road, which was to have been constructed nearby.
In order to exhaust their remedies under the Administrative Procedures Act, Evins stated that the couple in March 2008 formally issued a request to then-National Park Service Director Mary A. Bomar and Ernie Quintana, then regional director of the Midwest Region of the National Park Service, for due process regarding Fernandez' order to remove "what Superintendent Fernandez had incorrectly determined to be encroachments on National Park Service land."
According to Evins, Quintana subsequently notified the couple that he "fully supported the determination of Josie Fernandez."
Quintana subsequently "granted a period of time for plaintiffs to remove such encroachments, and prior to or on the expiration of that period of time, the instant litigation was filed in order to prevent defendant from bulldozing plaintiffs' valuable improvements," Evins stated.
Evins said the .04 acres "is one of the most beautiful pieces of property I've ever seen" and that "there is really no reason" for the National Park Service to take the land.
End copy/paste.
|
|
Martian
Member
|
# Posted: 31 Dec 2011 06:19pm
Reply
Interesting. If this was two individuals, it'd be so easy to work out. Unfortunately, with the government, there isn't the freedom to reach an easy settlement. Unfortunately, if the survey is right, then it is just a matter of law to be decided. I'm not sure, but I think it takes an Act of Congress to transfer ownership of any part of a national park. This prevents some unscrupulous individual from selling them off. I think the Park Superintendent is telling them the only thing she legally can tell them. She did say the park doesn't need the land; so I think she has laid the groundwork for the local US congressman and senator to introduce a bill giving title of the land to the residents. They should be in contact with their representatives. After all, that's what we pay them for; to be go-betweens when there's a problem with government paperwork.
|
|
chefjas
|
# Posted: 11 Jan 2012 12:25am
Reply
Ha ha ha. I hope the Williams kick their butt. I know Mrs. Williams from a long time ago. They have caught a tiger by the tail!
|
|
foursons
|
# Posted: 24 Jul 2012 01:04pm
Reply
Wow the government is spending so much money on this to take what amounts to a pc of land that is less than 1500 sq ft and has been appraised for $200.00. We have homeless people, people needing jobs, people on food stamps...I bet at least 1/2 a million has been spent in tax dollars on legal fees and whatever else Ms. Jose Fernandez has deemmed necessary to win this battle. She also publicly slandered and defamed the Williams by calling them "Rednecks with a Stick". I don't know about the rest of you but doesn't it seem like there would have been a better use for our hard earned dollars?!
|
|
Julie Williams
|
# Posted: 24 Jul 2012 01:16pm
Reply
I would like my friends, neighbors, and complete strangers for the huge outpouring of support, in our struggle to save our home. We believe that the Government never had a claim to our land. It has been ardous, however, it still makes me proud to be an American. We have made a stand, and many stand with us. Thankyou......
Julie and Jim Williams.
|
|
Sustainusfarm
Member
|
# Posted: 24 Jul 2012 01:39pm
Reply
Quoting: foursons there would have been a better use for our hard earned dollars?!
Ditto on all of that! That Fernandez should be fired for wasting all the time and money on this!
|
|
MJW
Member
|
# Posted: 24 Jul 2012 02:55pm
Reply
Quoting: Sustainusfarm That Fernandez should be fired for wasting all the time and money on this!
If big government has shown us anything it is that they have no qualms at all about wasting OUR money.
|
|
sparky1
Member
|
# Posted: 24 Jul 2012 07:38pm
Reply
bet-ya they have paid property tax on it all these years too.
|
|
|
OwenChristensen
Member
|
# Posted: 24 Jul 2012 07:49pm
Reply
Well here in Duluth there's one good thing for the city after the flooding. A big influx of money from building permits.
Isn't that nice, no one has flood insurance and the city gets more tax.
Owen
|
|
johng
Member
|
# Posted: 24 Jul 2012 09:08pm
Reply
Quoting: Julie Williams We believe that the Government never had a claim to our land.
You go girl!
My parents had a small lot ( is that an oxymoron?) at the end of Holly street that the government acquired during the first watershed buy up in the mid 70's.
|
|
grover
Member
|
# Posted: 30 Jul 2012 05:53pm
Reply
Maybe someone should post the representatives email address so we can support the Williams.
|
|
|
