With regard to Mayor Miller’s 6.11.2018 comment which is partially quoted below, we offer the following:
It is our position that easements are a designated portion of a street, and that they, along with alleys were reserved as real property unto The Town of Fromberg during the initial platting process, i.e., no deeds. Wikipedia defines an easement to be: “a non-possessory right to use and/or enter onto the real property of another without possessing it…” It would seem building a structure on an easement would be construed as “intent to possess”.
Wikipedia further defines: “A right-of-way (ROW) ( easement of way) is a right to make a way over a piece of land, usually to and from another piece of land. A right of way is a type of easement granted or reserved over the land for transportation purposes, this can be for a highway, public footpath, rail transport, canal, as well as electrical transmission lines, oil and gas pipelines.[1] A right-of-way can be used to build a bike trail. A right-of-way is reserved for the purposes of maintenance or expansion of existing services with the right-of-way. In the case of an easement, it may revert to its original owners if the facility is abandoned.”
Easements provide safe ingress and egress to private property via streets and alleys. They allow emergency vehicles and maintenance equipment adequate space in which to safely operate. Easements are crucial to transportation safety.
As governmental agencies, cities and towns don’t pay taxes due to redundancy.
Mayor Miller commented: “The statement of some, that he was building on city property was, as far the information received from realtors and from my own property deed, is misinformation. The city does not have a deed to or pay taxes on that easement. The property owner owns and pays taxes on it and maintains it, the Town has been granted an easement for future utilities, etc.”
Mrs Miller has spun this issue every which way she can!!! From telling the council and making several calls to residents to tell them the McKenzie property measures 70×100. While the plat map to the Clerk and Recorders Office have proven that the property measures 50×140. So, now herr new tactic is: “it’s an easement and he owns it”. What flipping box of CrackerJacks did our mayor open and pull her mal-functioning brain out of???? If it’s fine for Mckenzie then there is absolutely not a problem with 3rd Avenue!!!! If there is a problem with 3rd Avenue the town could be facing an astronomical discrimination lawsuit! By these standards, if we all own the easements, why does the zoning code book stipulate set backs from the property line? Why do we have a zoning committee?? We should all have the same privilege as McKenzie and build out on the easement!!! Not to grant the residence the same right you have bestowed to another is discriminatory and morally wrong.
I think it is high time someone staples the mayors mouth shut. In order of prevention of stupidity from randomly flowing from her trap!
Have to get a heavy duty INDUSTRIAL size stapler. An ordinary stapler would never do. Perhaps a trip to Lowes?
Great however, I was wondering if you could write a litte more on this subject? I’d be very thankful if you could elaborate a little bit more. Bless you!
In the first place, I did not “call” any one of the residents in that neighborhood and let them know that the property was 70′ x 100′ !! What I said was, that MY deed states that I own the property to the street on both sides of my fence-line. I maintain it, pay taxes on it, but have granted an easement to the town. If the town decides to put in utilities they can do that, but it would be up to me to fix the mess left, replant grass seed and etc. (this according to my real estate agent) An easement, as stated by the administrator of this site is granted to the town for the purposes stated, but, they do not maintain it, own it or pay taxes on it. Which is not to say they don’t have rights to add utilities or a bike path, driveway and etc. on that area
Restated: “It is our position that easements are a designated portion of a street, and that they, along with alleys were reserved as real property unto The Town of Fromberg during the initial platting process, i.e., no deeds.” The previous information was confirmed with the Carbon County Clerk and Recorders Office, in Red Lodge, Montana. We ask that you provide a copy “YOUR” deed along with a statement from your real estate agent, confirming your supposition; as we have never seen a deed stipulating those specific conditions. The straight forward legal description of your property is: “FROMBERG ORIGINAL TOWNSITE, S20, T05 S, R23 E, FROMBERG OP LT 7 LESS THE N 5′ & ALL LT 8 BLK 3”. A total of 13,090 square feet. Photo documentation available upon request. A quick search via the Carbon County Clerk and Recorder’s office, would supply all the particulars of “YOUR” deed. Facts, unlike supposition are irrefutable.
Humor me Mrs Miller, produce that deed with said easements!!! If you did not call residents to inform them the property was 70×100 you might want to do a little fact check. March meeting where a young lady played a message from her phone!!! Does this jog a memory??? There was also a gentleman who said he received a call stating the party informed him property measured 70×100. He produced contradictory evidence at that same meeting!!! I called that gentleman later and he identified you as the caller. FYI cell phones are a useful resource for documentation. The same meeting where the council was questioning where your documentation came from that said the property 70×100. While two others produced documentation showing property measures 50×140. May meeting a young man asked if you ever found out the measurements of the McKenzie property and you informed him Tammy Taylor had. In past meetings the only time Tammy Taylor has brought up measurements on this property was February special meeting when she informed you the lot measured 50×140. I also called her to see if she ever brought documentation. She said she had not and the reason she knew the property was 50×140 was due to is a recent survey of her own property, After reviewing the March council meeting I’ve come to the conclusion the council had left it to the Mayor in March meeting to get this information as people brought documentation countering the Mayors. My best guess is the Mayor didn’t bother as this would mean an admission of deceit. Once again it continues!!!!