Designating a portion of someone’s property “waste” does not entitle the county to declare that property theirs — it still belongs to the property owner. Just saying something does not make it so!
Grand County Attorney Andrew Fitzgerald maintains that the “waste” areas were set aside with the idea that San Miguel could be extended at some point in the future. Another road to nowhere?
There is some discrepancy as to when the “waste” designation actually occurred, as well. The county maintains their piece of property is landlocked and the State of Utah does not like to allow that. Does that obligate a neighboring property to grant access?
While I am in favor of safe and accessible bike trails, I do not believe the Master Trail Plan gives government the right to bully property from its residents to accomplish that goal.
In our meeting with Mr. Fitzgerald he stated that various surveys of Grand Vu Subdivision leave a bit of “gray” area in regard to property lines. Wouldn’t the county be better served to unequivocally establish those property lines before assuming they can install a trail (the necessity of which, I might add, is dubious at best)?
My father, Paul Shuey, Sr., was a man who was proud of his country and government. He bought and paid for his property and paid his taxes. Grand County and city of Moab, you should be ashamed of yourselves.
—Monica Shuey Skowbo