Sounds like adverse possession to me and the city is SOL, but government is the greediest, most corrupt and murderous force on Earth, so good luck with that.
Local lawyers are gonna get rich on this stuff...it is a type of eminent domain...for a stupid trail...
Or is the a HOA wanting to seize some interior space for “common areas”?
It happens all the time. Its why we pay for Title Insurance on property transfers.
Usual click-bait headline which is totally misleading. They built beyond their property line boundary. But I guess the article would sound less exciting if it said, "Residents told to remove structures from land which they don't own".
Sounds to me like these folks butted up against land they didnt own and thought nothing would ever become of it. They expanded their yards/lot into this area and never thought about the usage changing.
Well usage did change and the owners (city) now say get your sheds and fence and all else out’s here!
Oh well
I think homeowners encroached on unimproved public land. Happens a lot. Now, the city wants to develop it. In Oregon, that would just invite tent communities to spring up.
Imagine a grandmother, living alone on a fix income, long after her husband has past. She is incapable of making a living and relies on prior investments and social security to make ends meet. She doesn't have children in schools. Those days have past some 50 plus years ago. But she in essence rents her property from the school district.
Further more, imagine the same grandmother that is at the whims of the township, borough or city that dictates that she must do unexpected things to her property that has never been done. This can comes as changes in ordinance and other mandates. A common one on the rural fringes of suburbia is connecting to municipal water and sewage, when essentially free water and septic as been used for years. Not only is there a cost to connect, but an ongoing fee to be paid that increases the expenses of living in that property. The expense is in the thousands of dollars when granny is living on a fixed income predicated on foreseen expenses from years ago.
I find it much more humane to respect property rights. That includes the ability to own your property and never have to pay for it again. That includes the ability to continue to do the things that have worked for decades without further expense. The same principles apply to all property, real or not.
Bet the property tax won’t be reduced.
So, if like other cities and states, if a homeowner has maintained a public or private owned property for so many years, they can rightly claim that property as theirs, otherwise, the city is right in saying that they have exceeded their rightful property boundary.
This is Sacramento, so I don't know what their rules are with regards to this situation.
State laws pertaining to such determine if they could keep the land, and usually a time frame establishes that the original owner has lost the use of the land. This may or may not transfer with the sale of the grabber's property though.
Imagine being cheated out of your hard-earned property, losing your mind, and killing the shyt outta the leftists who orchestrated the theft.
...and then enjoying some ice cream.
A small number of states have property laws such that an owner can actually loose title to a property if they do not defend it from incursion. IIRC, two states in this category are (or were) Colorado and Texas.
For example, a neighbor builds a fence that is several feet on your side of the property line. If the owner does not evict the fence from the trespass then the owner can legally loose title to the strip of land.
Another situation I read on involved a homeowner that had several acres of undeveloped raw land towards the back of the parcel. A neighbor (husband and wife lawyers) conspired to acquire title to the undeveloped land by establishing some hiking paths through the undeveloped land. I forgot the details but the plan unraveled during court proceedings and the lawyer-neighbors failed in acquiring title.
Sadly, you never own your land. We don’t have allodial titles in the USA as property taxes are indeed Constitutional but some folks have made and argument they aren’t. But property ownership used to be required to vote. No longer the case. The guy down on the corner asking for money to eat when he never tries to get a job has as much weight in his vote as those who pays thousands a year in property taxes. As I keep stating, the Republic is loooooonngggg dead. I hope to see it restored one day.
https://foundationfortruthinlaw.org/property-taxes.html
At my age...gun’s would be involved
Welcome to the Homeless of Commiefornia!
They’re going to take your place!
Cuz you’re a member of the white race!