File #: 14-0525    Version: 1
Type: decision Status: Passed
File created: 5/21/2014 In control: City Council
Agenda date: 6/10/2014 Final action: 6/10/2014
Title: Approval of Stephens Quiet Title Action Regarding an Unopened Street (2103 Beacon Street)
Attachments: 1. Stephens Stipulated Judgment, 2. Stephens Complaint, 3. MRSC article re street vacations, 4. Vicinity map, 5. Site map
Title
Approval of Stephens Quiet Title Action Regarding an Unopened Street (2103 Beacon Street)

Recommended Action
Committee Recommendation:
Not referred to a committee.

City Manager Recommendation:
Move to authorize the City Attorney and/or his designee to enter into a stipulated judgment with regard to Stephens v. City of Olympia, Thurston County Superior Court cause number 14-2-00754-7.

Report
Issue:
The City of Olympia was named as a defendant in a quiet title action in Stephens v. City of Olympia, Thurston County Superior Court cause number 14-2-00754-7.

Staff Contact:
Darren Nienaber, Deputy City Attorney, 360.753.8044

Presenter(s):
None - Consent calendar item

Background and Analysis:
The City of Olympia was named and served as a defendant in a quiet title action in Stephens v. City of Olympia, Thurston County Superior Court cause number 14-2-00754-7. The complaint alleges that certain City right-of-way was vacated by operation of state law and that the City has no claim to it. Based on a reasonably diligent review of the pertinent records, the City's Legal and Public Works Departments agree with the allegations in the complaint. The City has no legal claim to the "right-of-way" because the right-of-way does not exist. City Council action is considered necessary because, under OMC 3.16.020(B), the Council retains most decision making authority over real estate. The land in question is graphically depicted on the two maps, Vicinity Map and the Site Map. The maps are intended to be submitted for illustrative purposes rather than for legal purposes.

Two laws enacted by the legislature vacated certain County rights-of-way that were dedicated prior to 1904 and unopened for a five-year period. See MRSC article, attached. The purpose of the law is unclear. Some theorize that the legislature was trying to clear up the numerous paper plats that were being filed all around the state at that time. Although the righ...

Click here for full text