Regarding the vacation petition highlighted in the September 14 paper, it is intended to partner with an agreement being negotiated with the County to clarify disputed right-of-ways. If accomplished, a portion of our historic driveway would become a county right-of-way, and join a currently isolated one mile deeded county right-of-way. From there, the public would have the same access they have currently.

Only one adjoining property, whose owner has her own unimproved permitted access and approach to Highway 78, is affected. This party is the only private landowner authorized by the county to develop a “county road” (at her own risk) to her residence. At the same time, one commissioner stating that “of course, we (the County) would not be liable.” Her driveway now runs through our property. Liability, and use of our pasture, is our concern in wanting to move her and her “guest/client” traffic to the western boundary of our property.

Another non-adjacent landowner is applying his notorious rants of intimidation to try and force access where he has refused an offer of a Maintenance and Use Agreement in the past. That driveway (built by my father in 1953) is different than the proposed legal to be vacated. We have continued a tradition of allowing permissive access as late as 2010. But, because of his actions, and those of his linage, the offer of a Maintenance and Use Agreement is no longer available to them without consideration.

The same party also refused the offer of an easement by the previous owner of the adjoining property mentioned above. Since their property adjoins Anderson Valley Road, they have access to a public road. Their preference is to use roads I and my family has paid many thousands of dollars to build. A letter of protest from his long time friend (and fellow ranter) is unfounded but follows the theme of a libelous performance staged in December, 2006.

On a larger issue, we have been forced to file this petition for vacation to clear a cloud on the title created by the County. At some point in time somebody has to stand up and say that Private Property Rights still means something around here. There have been to many irregularities to mention in this space. There are proper ways to get access. It is not appropriate nor legal for any government to simply say, we want to allow person X to have access, so …….

My family and I have always tried to operate within the law, with moral and ethical judgments, and paid dearly for it. You may not feel like you have a dog in this continuous fight for equitable justice. I agree. And, others will probably feel the same when your turn comes.

Barbara Cannady

Princeton