4 ms·

BTW, do you know (or does anyone know) the specific history of this particular parcel? The closest thing I could find was a wikipedia bit on Spanish and Mexica

by geebee 12y ago

BTW, do you know (or does anyone know) the specific history of this particular parcel? The closest thing I could find was a wikipedia bit on Spanish and Mexican land grants... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ranchos_of_California http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ranchos_of_California various articles refer to the "original owner" who filed a claim on the land (upheld by the US courts in the mid 1800s), but I can't find anything more than that... "The judge cited the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which settled the Mexican-American War and required that the U.S. recognize Mexican land grants in cases where a claim had been filed. The original owner of the land fronting Martin's Beach had indeed filed a claim, which was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1859, 14 years before California drafted its first constitution." One issue I don't understand here is why the parcel is exempt from the public easement required through the California state constitution... it makes sense that the treaty required the US to recognize existing land ownership, but it seems strange that it exempt from constitution where it comes to use. For instance, permits would still be required to build on it, land use law is still in effect, right? I'll try to dig up the opinion and read it some time. If anyone has some interesting links, please post them.

tzs 12y ago
From what I can see looking at the treaty, and looking at the Supreme Court case, it seems to me that you are right. I do not see how either of them prohibit what California wants to do, provided that California is not singling out Mexicans. It's also not clear to me from the treaty if it even applies to people who were not Mexicans at the time the treaty was enacted. Note: I have not extensively researched this. I googled for the text of the treaty, and then did some searching within it to try to find the parts relevant to property rights. I also googled for the Supreme Court case and read the decision (which was short and not very informative by today's standards). In other words, I could be completely off on this.
dmckeon 12y ago
It appears to be this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rancho_Ca%C3%B1ada_de_Verde_y_Arroyo_de_la_Purisima https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rancho_Ca%C3%B1ada_de_Verde_y_... There are some other clues on this .tiff (fair warning, it bogged down my Shotwell viewer and swap space): http://gis.co.sanmateo.ca.us/pwraster/RSMvol018/18-RSM-PG017-RANCHO%20CANADA%20DE%20VERDE%20Y%20ARROYO%20DE%20LA%20PURISIMA.TIF http://gis.co.sanmateo.ca.us/pwraster/RSMvol018/18-RSM-PG017... Martin is on that map, and the annotations speak to the legal process of the time.

by geebee 12y ago

tzs 12y ago

From what I can see looking at the treaty, and looking at the Supreme Court case, it seems to me that you are right. I do not see how either of them prohibit what California wants to do, provided that California is not singling out Mexicans. It's also not clear to me from the treaty if it even applies to people who were not Mexicans at the time the treaty was enacted. Note: I have not extensively researched this. I googled for the text of the treaty, and then did some searching within it to try to find the parts relevant to property rights. I also googled for the Supreme Court case and read the decision (which was short and not very informative by today's standards). In other words, I could be completely off on this.

dmckeon 12y ago

It appears to be this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rancho_Ca%C3%B1ada_de_Verde_y_Arroyo_de_la_Purisima https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rancho_Ca%C3%B1ada_de_Verde_y_... There are some other clues on this .tiff (fair warning, it bogged down my Shotwell viewer and swap space): http://gis.co.sanmateo.ca.us/pwraster/RSMvol018/18-RSM-PG017-RANCHO%20CANADA%20DE%20VERDE%20Y%20ARROYO%20DE%20LA%20PURISIMA.TIF http://gis.co.sanmateo.ca.us/pwraster/RSMvol018/18-RSM-PG017... Martin is on that map, and the annotations speak to the legal process of the time.