No More ‘Shaded Parcels,’ Says Humboldt County

Press release from Humboldt County:

Humboldt CountyThe Humboldt County Board of Supervisors today agreed to settle a lawsuit filed in April 2012 by Humboldt Coalition for Property Rights regarding the county’s practice of “shading” parcels. The settlement will allow the county to avoid the time and expenses associated with trial, and instead focus on providing services to Humboldt County residents.

In September 2011, in an attempt to resolve the shaded parcel issue, the Planning Division sent letters to individuals who owned parcels of land where the legal status of that parcel was uncertain. These parcels were “shaded” in parcel-map books or otherwise noted in county records to indicate that a parcel’s compliance with the Subdivision Map Act is unknown. This lawsuit was filed in the spring of the following year.

According to the settlement, the county:
• has ceased its former practice of “shading” parcels and will not perform this practice in the future;
• will finish reviewing the parcels that received “shaded” parcel letters in September 2011, and will notify parcel owners whether it determined their parcel to be lawful;
• will, after reviewing the parcels for compliance, maintain a publically available list of parcels for which the county is unable to resolve its compliance status;
• will notify owners and carry out appropriate action when it acquires knowledge that property has been divided in violation of the Map Act.

The settlement also agrees that neither party needs to admit liability on this issue. The issue of who bears responsibility for attorneys’ fees will be submitted to the court for resolution.


One comment

  • It is nice to see a governmental entity that is stopping a decades long practice of using police powers (regulatory powers) to extinguish property rights acknowledging and ending something that should have never happened. (Once a parcel is created, it always exists.) Are there going to be consequences for the millions of dollars wrongly spent by the County on what a voter believes should be considered a frivolous lawsuit by the staff that made the recommendations to move forward when the money could have been used to pave roads, pay down the retirement liabilities of the County (ironically created by the county accountants failure to provide accurate and reasonable 9th grade algebraic mathematical calculations to the Board of Supervisors), or pay for police services to end the tyranny of the failure to stop the petty theft crime waves created by trimigrants?

    Not continuing pattern of expanding the use of police powers such as the State of California using the pretext of the new water application process to create “test cases” with the justification of the expansion of bureaucrats rights based on bad facts of “pot politics.” This voter’s core values of where he/she wants their tax dollars spent are placed on living in a town where they don’t have to worry about their cell phone disappearing from their unlocked car because monies for cops walking the streets is spent on the politics of justifying the actions of bureaucrats. While posting this anonymous letter to the editor, this voter hopes that they do not have to worry about being retaliated against for engaging in public debate about what they believe is the wrong or unconstitutional direction of government, whether their opinions/interpretation of the acts of local government in conformity of the Constitution is right or off.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *