- NEWS
- Marine killed by deputy called disciplined, religious 12 minutes ago
- Police look for victims in coach sex case 1 hour & 58 minutes ago
- Deputy suspected of sexual acts with inmate 7 minutes ago
- Two popular Mexican restaurants expanding 30 minutes ago
- SPORTS
- Lin-sanity: NBA fans crazy for Jeremy Lin 57 minutes ago
- The ultimate Angels quiz 27 minutes ago
- OCVarsity Hot Shots: Thursday’s games in pictures
- SI Swimsuit Issue cover unveiling Monday 1 hour & 16 minutes ago
- BUSINESS
- Contract workers get help from government 3 hours & 29 minutes ago
- OC to get $1.1B in foreclosure deal 21 minutes ago
- What news may jolt real estate markets? 2 minutes ago
- Disney expansion to create 2,300 jobs 2 hours & 31 minutes ago
- ENTERTAINMENT
- LIFE
- 10 great last-minute Valentine gift ideas 35 minutes ago
- 10 romantic drinks for Valentine’s Day 3 hours & 44 minutes ago
- Art Crawl in Anaheim and 50% off Muzeo 2 hours & 55 minutes ago
- Celebrity kisses spread Valentine wishes
- TRAVEL
- OPINION
County: Anaheim developer built “party house” on archaeological site
August 21st, 2009, 6:00 am · 61 Comments · posted by Pat Brennan, science, environment editor
An Anaheim developer is fighting a legal challenge from Orange County parks officials for building a “party house,” walkways, a pond and other structures on top of a centuries-old Native American site at the edge of a county regional park. 
Kang-Shen Chen and his wife, retired Cal State Fullerton professor Shu-Jen Chen, also are accused of constructing at least one outbuilding within the boundaries of Santiago Oaks Regional Park, and illegally modifying a nearby hiking trail and fire road with a bulldozer.
“I have photos of a pool table here, couches, chairs — kind of an outside party room,” Harry Huggins, asset manager for OC Parks, said on a recent visit to the site.
“This is an illegal alteration of a streambed. It’s a sacred Indian site. We should not be doing that. It’s just not the right thing to do. When we found this, we were aghast.”
Kang-Shen Chen says he’s made “improvements” to the property and taken steps to preserve its archaeology. He said he has done nothing wrong.
“I did not destroy,” Chen said. “I put structures above the artifacts. We just preserved (them).”
But the changes Chen made to the site, which county parks officials say are extensive, have landed him in court. Orange County officials sued Chen in 2007 and will return next week to Orange County Superior court to continue a trial of the case.
Tribal leader outrage
Chen’s modifiications to the site have outraged members of Orange County’s Juaneno tribe.
“He’s done more damage than good out there,” said David Belardes, a member of the Juaneno Band of Mission Indians who has visited the property. “Basically, he’s desecrated the site. He’s desecrated sacred springs and diverted water courses.”
The case began after the 2007 Windy Ridge fire swept through the area, stripping it of dense vegetation and exposing the alterations to the property.
Orange County park rangers took notice, and parks officials confronted Chen.
The resulting court fight pits Chen’s claims of private property rights against county laws meant to safeguard Native American archaeological sites from damage, and to provide access to the sites to scientists and the public — even when they are found on private land.
A natural spring, a peaceful grotto
The site in dispute covers about a quarter of an acre. A natural spring there still flows between sandstone boulders, carving out a channel filled with ferns and other plants. Native Americans, most likely members of the Juaneno tribe, used the site to process acorns; they left evidence in the form of circular holes in boulders at one end of the site, where the acorns were pounded into mash.
The holes are now buried under a layer of sand covered by bricks, the floor of what Huggins called a “party house” — but which Chen, a Taoist, says was used mainly for religious reasons and occasionally for entertaining.
Use of the site by Native Americans predates European colonization of the area, county experts say, though just how far back its use by native tribes goes remains unknown.
County officials want the property restored to its unaltered condition, but fear some changes might be too drastic to repair. For example, Chen appears to have driven posts into part of one boulder to create a fence, possibly destabilizing the rock face.
They say that when Chen purchased the property, in 1987, it came with a “conservation easement,” also called a resource preservation easement, for the part that includes the archaeological site.
Such easements are among the county’s most restrictive, Huggins said, forbidding any alterations to the site, and requiring the property owner to provide access to academic investigators, scientists and even to public tour groups led by county officials.
Chen, a developer who builds projects in Riverside County, says the language of the easement is unclear. He said that when he began to build his home on the property, in 1990, the site was covered with junk: old couches, a washing machine, old motorcyles and other trash.
“I moved out 32 truckloads of the debris,” Chen said. “Large trucks.”
He also says he was first accused of improperly altering the site in 1991, but believed he had resolved the matter to the satisfaction of county officials at the time.
While he did build the small outdoor house over the rocks bearing the acorn-grinding holes, he said he did not harm the rock or the holes, which are still preserved beneath.
“We put sand over it,” Chen said. “Removable brick and sand. This is a very common preservation method.”
On their recent visit, Huggins and other county officials pointed to a variety of changes Chen had made inside the archaeological site. As the stream channel emerges from under the floor of the former backyard structure — Chen removed the roof a year ago, he said, in an effort to cooperate with county demands – it meanders between large boulders that are covered with planters, and walkways with concrete poured to fill in gaps.
Fireplace built on rocks
A barbecue and fireplace obscures a portion of the rock face; Chen also trucked in sand to cover a broad area of the rocks and make it level with other parts of the property and, he says, to protect the site.
Just below the fireplace — which Chen said was built by Native Americans whose names he does not know — the stream drops into a rock grotto, where Chen constructed a pond. The pond is in a peaceful, shaded spot and is filled with lily pads.
But Huggins said damming the natural stream to create the pond not only is an illegal alteration of an archaeological site, but violates state laws restricting alterations to streams and other waterways. Chen said he received clearance from county and state officials to create the pond.
Chen also built a structure that he called an “outpost” inside the boundary of Santiago Oaks Regional Park, which borders his land. Huggins and other county officials say it included improper plumbing and a septic system, but Chen says the outpost had neither: it was simply a place to keep watch for intruders on his property, he said.
Last, Chen is accused of using a bulldozer to scrape soil from a slope within county property a short distance below his land, using the dirt to fill in a dip in the roadway. Both the construction job and the drainage system Chen installed — a 4-inch section of plastic PVC pipe — were improper, Huggins said.
Chen said he altered the road after a fire official told him large fire trucks could not pass through the area, although county officials say they doubt the story.
“If fire attacked here, I’m the first one here,” Chen said. “I just decided to do something tentative to get the fire engine through there.”
He said he expected county officials to complete the work properly.
“We spent a lot of money preserving this place,” Chen said. “They never said, ‘Thanks,’ to us.”
Latest posts:
Reader Comments
Comments are encouraged, but you must follow our User Agreement.- Keep it civil and stay on topic.
- No profanity, vulgarity, racial slurs or personal attacks.
- People who harass others or joke about tragedies will be blocked.
61 Comments
-
ADVERTISEMENT
-
-
-
-
16th annual People’s Choice
From your favorite restaurants and shops to the best day spa in town, here are your choices for the number one places to eat, shop and play in O.C.
Browse the 2009 Best of Orange County winners-
ADVERTISEMENT
Another arrogant developer that thinks money trumps the law. I fail to see how pouring concrete equates to “preserving the site”.
The arrogance of Mr. Chen is unbelievable. To claim that he is “improving” this historical cultural resource by concreting over natural watercourses, constructing buildings over artifacts, etc., is absolutely ridiculous. To justify his actions, Chen has claimed in court that he hauled away 32 truckloads of trash on the property when he first bought it. Chen has offered no proof of this and aerial and ground photos taken of the site before he built prove that he is making up this story to gather sympathy from the Judge. Even if there had been trash on the site, “So What!!!” This doesn’t give Chen the right to destroy the historical resources for which he had a written contract with the County NOT to disturb or alter.
Govt wants to control everything….Let him build….
Yes let them build on the side of Half Dome in Yosemite too, don’t see what the big deal is about that landmark either.
If the government sold half dome to a private party, then I have no problem with them building on it.
It seems the property belongs to the developer and not the people who are trying to preserve this site. If that’s the case, perhaps they should band together and purchase the site from the developer. You can’t tell people what to do with their land if what they’re doing is within legal limits.
That’s really not the point. The “developer” is not fighting the Parks service on that issue, but rather is denying that he defaced or changed anything. He says he tried to preserve the site. Tried to preserve it? I don’t think building a gaming area, a fireplace and pond, and regrading a hillside, while hauling away huge loads of the original soil, are in the realm of endeavoring to preserve a sacred (to the Indians) site.
If you read the article carefully, the land has a very restrictive easement on that portion of the property and that the current owner is aware of the easement. There are lots of things people are allowed and not allowed to do with their property – there is no excuse to say you didn’t know what is not allowed because it’s all in the contract. It appears that the particular landowner in this case is rather wealthy, so he could afford an attorney to explain the original purchase contract.
Additionally, the property ower is a developer. He KNEW what was right and wrong.
The guy sounds like an arrogant tool.
Did you not read the article???? It said that he purchase the property with very restrictive easements and he was breaking the law developing this land. Yes you can tell people what to do with their land. It is called easements. The only way around it is by obtaining a permit. And that goes for any property. If he couldn’t comply with the terms and conditions of a property, then maybe he should have looked elsewhere and not bought this proerty.
agree Hunter. But today’s society has lost sight of that. Private property has turned into community property.
The point here is that protective legal easements exist on that part of the property prohibiting any alteration of the archaeological and natural site. It is not simply a matter of the land owner doing what he wants to in this area of land. It was spelled out in writing what the restrictions were and Mr. Chen apparently chose to ignore those restrictions and interpret them “creatively” or dismiss them altogether. The land needs to be restored and all his illegal structures and damaging “improvements” must be torn down.
If the land was so sacred it never should have been sold.
Another case of government wanting the money, then when someone cries about it they blame everyone else.
Also, if this area was so sacred to this indian tribe- how come nobody noticed the alterations made until there was a fire exposing the area? The indians did not discover the alterations, county rangers did.
Maybe they are planning on building a tax free gaming facility here….. Hey, then we wont have to drive to San Diego to gamble.
I agree. I’ll bet this land is every bit as sacred to the current owner, as it was to the Indians thousands of years ago (who, by the way, are all dead).
If there aren’t human remains on the property, and if he owns it, then he is and should be entitled to do whatever he wishes. He worked hard enough to earn the money to buy it, let him enjoy what’s rightfully his.
i guess no one cares this was a Native American site, things we should preserve, but we can care less about our land, animals, our earth, i shouldn’t be surprised!
They (the indians) didnt care about this ‘site’, so why should we? It was a dump before Mr. Chen started to build/ improve the land.
They didnt visit the site as the article says they had a right to do. So why the fuss??
Because it is something for someone to complain about… I smell a lawsuit!
Bulldozer !
Common sense tells me to never buy property with any kind of easement that could prevent me from altering the property to satisfy my needs. The couple of Yorba Linda that keep installing gates across a public trail is a prime example.
I woudn’t buy a house near railroad tracks as well. Trains use horns at crossings and to buy a home near one and then complain about the noise is ridiculous.
Chen seems to have taken advantage of the situation but with some concern as to how it would be perceived by authorities. Both sides need to find some common ground (pardon the pun) and Indian people need to get over themselves a little as well. yes, your ancestors lived on this land at one time but they only mashed acorns and bathed in the stream. The entire county was like that at one time and you can’t stop progress.
Chen cleaned up and “reclaimed” property that was in its its “unaltered, natural state” all right.
Hardly. Abandoned is a more accurate description. A veritable dump, a junkyard covered with “old couches, a washing machine, old motorcyles and other trash.” Where were the American Indian sympathizers and state bureaucrats when the site no one in government knew was there needed cleaning up?
Yes, he is a developer. And, as such, he knew what had to be done and how to go about it.
It is Chen’s property. Did the state buy it and not tell anyone, or is the state maintaining it and paying the property taxes on it? Didn’t think so.
Leave the guy alone.
Right ON!!!!!
so that gives him a right to destroy something that he knew he should have preserved? is it not worth preserving?
yep. and nope.
Did he have permits to build and alter this area?
Why can’t the county just leave people alone. It’s on his property, big deal. He’s hurt no one. Sacred stream, what a crock! Don’t they have better things to do with their time.? The governmenst intrusion on private property ownership is ridiculous. Why do they think they have any right to tell someone what they can do with their private property. As long as it doesn’t cause a saftety hazard or damage surrounding properties the government should stay out of it. It’s time to re establish private property ownership rights!
Just the government pushing its way into this mans property and life. If you own the land it should be your land. Do what you want with it! I know if I owned it I would go out and urinate on the “sacred” land every night
o that’s a great attitude!…Why preserve anything! Why don’t we just live in our own urine! Loser
Make them tear it down. No free ride. No free pass!
The easement is legally binding. Chen is no better than the family that gated the horse trail. They both altered an easement without proper consent.
We want government to protect us from danger, but we don’t want to follow the rules.
Had Chen truly been interested in preserving the land, he would have permits and plans approved by all parties involved. He has nothing, and, as such, is as responsible for destroying the area as are those who set fires.
This is all about being above the law: ‘self-will run riot’.
I typically side with property rights and think the government can be too restrictive. I also think that retro active restrictions are unfair.
In this case, this developer was fully aware of the easement restrictions. The price he paid refelcted the value of the property including the restrictions. Others might have paid more if they had full access to all the land as this developer has done.
In addition, the audacity of this liar and cheat to build personal structures on public park land to guard his property is outrageous!
This is a good example where our government should step in to protect the public interests. This arrogant developer should be held accountable for all the damage and costs plus penalties. If the penalty is not greater than the crime then others will do the same.
Stealing pubilic land for personal use should be a crime. Being a developer should eliminate any excuse for not knowing about an easement and public property use.
this chen guy’s property is a mess and in complete shambles. get him out of here.
Let this man build what he wants, nobody cares about this “sacred land” otherwise they would have noticed a long time ago that buildings were built on it. This is such a BS easement.
This is criminal behavior against the people of Orange County! This ungrateful immigrant (if he is legal, he probably wasn’t initially) cares less for the laws of the United States and probably would abscond back to China if prosecuted. He should be prosecuted! Steal land from the people of Orange County, destroying ancient artifacts. A Native American curse on him wouldn’t be a bad idea. Does anyone know and good Shamans?
All of this fuss for some holes in some rocks that may or may not have been used to grind acorns a hundred or so years ago? Its not like Chen has King Tut’s tomb on his property. Cut the guy some slack. I say “Party On, Chen!”
If it was a scared site I dont feel that they should have been allowed to build on it at all
EXACTLY!!!! The land NEVER should have been sold.
It seems that the and is owned by Chen but the park officials consider the land to be part of the park. It seems like a bad deal for Chen. The park should purchase the land from Chen since they have such strong opiions about what should be done with the land.
No, that isn’t what the article said at all. Chen purchased the land with an existing easement for historical preservation. So he owns the land and in taking ownership of the land agreed to preserve the historical site.
He then reneged on that agreement and illegally built structures there (i.e. without permits or building inspectors).
In addition to that, he also built structures on public property (i.e. in the Park itself) on land he does not own.
For both of these things there should be a major fine as the minimum punishment. I would not be surprised if the County decides to seize the land and sell it to someone who is able to restore the site and live up to their contractual agreements.
If the County, or any group, or individual wanted to control the property, they should have purchased the property in 1987. Property rights are not just a ‘claim’ they are rights that trump other concerns short of violating other property rights. Property rights are vested in the individual, not the State. If the County, or any group, or individual wants to exercise those property rights today, they should purchase the property. Case closed! Next.
“Native Americans predates European colonization of the area”
I guess that sentence throws and wrench in the Mexicans theory that this is their land.
You know what is going to happen right? The county and other jurisdictions are going to find that Chen is in the wrong, they will then order him to restore the propert to it’s original state. Chen will then file bankruptcy and move away, the county will then step in and do the restoration using our tax money. It is costing us thousands of dollars in legal expenses to fight Chen, where do you think that money comes from?
Just another of many reasons this country is broke.
Typical developer mentality. Anything justifies building.
He preserved the site by changing it, buldozing it, and building on it.
Yeah, right.
And we’re going to preserve his freedom and rights by putting him in jail.
Give ‘em hell Harry. These people who know what’s going on are playing dumb now?
Give ‘em hell Harry
I agree with sickntired and cmon. Additionally, one issue that hasn’t been raised — while Chen purchased the property subject to the easement, I wonder why, if the indian tribes consider the property subject to the easement sacred, if they really want this property preserved, why they don’t purchase the subject property themselves and thereby ensure that, as an archaeological site, it would be permanently preserved (oh, yeah, because they don’t want to spend the money and want the county/state to do it for them). Seems to me this would be the most logical solution.
Carnivore…………
The reason is that it is cheaper for the Tribe to piss and moan about it and let the county spend our tax dollars fighting it out with the land owner.
OC Park officials want him to remove the structures off his land so they can one day provide tours of the area? I thought private property meant something. The County should have never sold the land in the first place, but he’s not doing anything illegal.
I did not see in the article or comments who platted the land, but at the time that was done, there should have been better surveying and simply not including the land in any lots that were platted.
Also if there was no law or input by the native american tribes they should take up the gripes with the original landowner who subdivided it, not with the purchaser.
and anyone who buys property should read all the deed restrictions and covenants and run screaming from ones which include crap like this. also mello roos, etc. but that’s a different article.
Many of the comments here have assumed that this developer owns this land. He actually encroached on county parkland that was adjacent to his property. That’s like your neighbor deciding that he should extend his property beyond his property line onto yours. So he can protect it.
Please! Wake up! This land was not his to build upon!
I live in the area and I know that County is out to get Chen! Mr. Chen has preserved the so call ” Historical ” site. I ‘ve seen it and he respects nature. The water hole is not for his use but for wild aniamls. ( the pond) Why was this not mention? I live in the area and he does not have ” Parties”. The so call historical preservation is just a stone where corn was make into grain. A rock! Notice how HARRY HUGGINS is an A@@ he wants to have tours and scholars, in reality there is nothing worth seeing. The roads that Mr. Chen bulit was for the fire trucks so they can have assesses when it’s wild fires season. We had very bad fires and thanks to the road and firefights our homes were saved! Chen saved money for the country. He spent his own money for the road! People use to use the area next to his home for dump site and dump trash, old furniture, Tv’s next to his home ( the Park) Mr, Chen used his own money to clean and take all the trash to the dump site. Truck loads!! Where is the thanks? Harry Higgins is out to get Mr. Chen because Chen was hassled last year by the County! We have many hikers & bikers in this area and trash is always left near the road, Mr. C hen hires people clean it up. Where is the Thanks for the Road , removal of all the trash? He used his own money and never asked for anything in return. When you report a story get the facts!
I live in the area and I know that County is out to get Chen! Mr. Chen has preserved the so call ” Historical ” site. I ‘ve seen it and he respects nature. The water hole is not for his use but for wild aniamls. ( the pond) Why was this not mention? I live in the area and he does not have ” Parties”. The so call historical preservation is just a stone where corn was make into grain. A rock! Notice how HARRY HUGGINS is an A@@ he wants to have tours and scholars, in reality there is nothing worth seeing. The roads that Mr. Chen bulit was for the fire trucks so they can have assesses when it’s wild fires season. We had very bad fires and thanks to the road and firefighters our homes were saved! Chen saved money for the country. He spent his own money for the road! People use to use the area next to his home as a dump site and dump trash, old furniture, Tv’s next to his home ( the Park area ) Mr, Chen used his own money to clean and take all the trash to the dump site. Truck loads!! It’s nice and clean so that all you nature lovers and hikers can enjoy a nice envoriment. Where is the thanks? Harry Higgins is out to get Mr. Chen because Chen was hassled last year by the County! We have many hikers & bikers in this area and trash is always left near the road, Mr. Chen hires people to clean it up. Where is the Thanks for the Road , removal of all the trash? He used his own money and never asked for anything in return. When you report a story get the facts from both parties!
That is his obligation, under the easement restrictions. He owns the land and is responsible for maintenance, as screwy as that may sound, but he cannot alter the nature of the land. That is why buyers get good deals on these types of prperties. He may even receive a tax break. All he had to do was contact the city and apply for a barrier variance. And the dumping, well he and his neighbors should have worked with the P.D. to catch violators. There were many choices but he made the wrong ones. I don’t buy the “protecting the property” bit by building the h!!l out of it. He broke the law for pete’s sake.
A lot of commentators here may not realize that but for easements their access to beaches would be hindered. Also if they wanted to put in a pool they would have to provide footage access all the way around their property where that pool would be installed. And there are instances where they might not want their view blocked by a second or third story remodel addition next to their property, wherein they could protest a variance for view easement restriction. It just depends on where you interests are at the time.
In this case, the restrictions of the easement, once set in place, “run with the land” and are binding on all future owners of the property (in other words, the restrictions are perpetual). The restrictions are spelled out in a legal document that is recorded in the local land records and the easement becomes a part of the chain of title for the property.
Protection is achieved primarily by separating the right to subdivide and build on the land from the other rights of ownership. The landowner who gives up these
“development rights” continues to privately own and manage the land and may receive significant state and federal tax advantages for the conservation easement
On the other hand,a conservation easement may be taken by eminent domain (and thereby extinguished) when the public value of the proposed project exceeds that of the conservation interest being protected by the easement.
Mr. Chen trespassed onto Santiago Oaks Regional Park
and that is a crime, and the degree of damage should be born by him.
What bothers me more is that this area of the U.S. doesn’t seem remotely interested in preserving historic sites, if it isn’t a “hot spot” for entertainment or recreation.
Everywhere else people are very mindful of the traditions of history. Mr. Chen could care less, as I am sure he has no thought or respect for this country’s history or traditions. What he did was a slap in our laws’ face and anyone should be mad about that. If he wants to reject the rules then too tough for him.
I’m sure a lot of artifacts were LOST when he used MANY TRUCKLOADS to move dirt. What a shame. How come this site was not protected to begin with? We keep losing important historical sites to builders…. I would’ve liked to have seen this place, so close to home.
Please contact me, I am more than happy to show you the site
Unfortunately Pat Brennan’s article has done a real disservice in confusing people not familiar with real estate development and property law on this issue.
The property was never owned by the County prior to Mr. Chen’s development.
In fact, the County is only trying to enforce its easement rights – rights that protect the intrinsic value of the property in perpetuity.
Mr. Chen agreed to the restrictions on the easement area when he originally got approval to do his development, as a condition of that development. Those restrictions were meant to preserve what was there before development occurred.
At the time of development approvals, Mr. Chen made no mention of any trash or debris that needed removal in order to restore the site. It’s now, more than 20 years later that he is saying the site had some trash. Does he have any proof for his claims?
The bottom line here is that we either live up to our word, or we don’t. And if we don’t in cases where there are legally binding contracts, like easements, then courts get to decide what things like “no disturbance of the property” means.
We’ll see what the judge does.
“THEY WILL FIND A WAY TO GET IT”
Harry Huggins, Asset Manager, OC Parks at Orange County Government, April 2007
Lack of historical background information the reader and the general public could be misled by Register’s 8/21/09 front page article of “On Sacred Ground”:
1. Following 1984 Easement terms County’s jurisdiction is limited as follows:
• No removal of native and/or exotic vegetation or rock outcroppings shall be performed in natural area within the resources preservation area.
• No constriction of water course or interruption of water flow is permitted.
• No removal of alternation of cultural resources is permitted.
• Academic and/or scientific researches as well as guided public tours shall be permitted as deemed appropriate by the Director, Orange County Environment Management Agency.
2. Owner’s property right is only restricted by the said easement terms in which no word of “sacred land”, “tribe’s preference”, “conservation”, or “preservation” was mentioned; except the said easement terms owner allows exercise all their property right within the legal system.
3. O.C.’s police oversight power is also restricted by the said easement terms. It is not allowed to be extended based upon official’s personal understanding by using the broader definition of “preservation” or “conservation”.
4. The totally damaged site was caused by the 1984-1987 illegal dumping as O.C. neglected its police oversight duty following 1984 easement as described above.
5. In 1987 Chen inherited the totally destroyed site, but in good faith made his best effort to repair the damages caused by O.C.’s negligence who promised to restore the site in the future, in 1990/1991.
6. O.C. recognized Chen’s landscaping right in 1992 and also compromised with Chen’s 1990/1991 improvements on the easement site and in the safety zone on park land along county service road. All disputes stopped.
7. No violation notice was received by Chen from 1992 to march 2007 for the said improvements.
8. The on site stream which passes through from neighbor’s property is always flowing since 1987 as the easement requires. No constriction of the said water course is on the easement site.
9. The 1990 discovered dripping spring was not mentioned in the 1984 easement. For preserving the tiny dripping, a pond collecting varied dripping from a weit rock overhang was formed in 1990 and was accepted by county and state officers during the 1992 compromise. No complaint or violation notice was sent to owner from 1992 to 2007. Huggin’s accusation of alternation of stream and waterway is a baseless misrepresentation.
10. After March 2007 Windy Ridge fire, Chen refused to give up the easement site ownership to O.C. Huggins threatened: “They will find a way to get it.” Thereafter, a team of O.C. officers started conspiracy against Chen for the said purpose and engaged into a series of misconducts.
11. O.C. selected Chen as scapegoat for covering up its negligence in maintaining the fire road during the 2007 fire and its negligence in performing its police oversight duty of the 1984 easement.
12. O.C. misled the reader by follows:
a. Produced a map without showing the existing water course which was mentioned in 1984 easement.
b. Concealment of the 1984-1987 dumping which totally destroyed the site.
c. Concealment of the fact that O.C.’s negligence caused the said 1984 – 1987 dumping.
d. Concealment of the 1992 settlement compromised informaiton.
e. Concealment of the facts that O.C. didn’t spent one penny to carry out its 1984 easement duty, but spent over $200,000 or more at cost of O.C. tax payers for cover-up for carrying-out a series of misconducts since March 2007.
” Sandra” before you make a comment find out the facts. No artifacts were lost unless you consider an old sofa, tv, arm chair and trash as ARTIFACTS! All that trash was left on the side of Mr. Chen’s house near the trail entrance, ( empty lot that is now nice and clean). I am sure Anaheim City has records of the rented dumpsters he used) What Mr. Chen is talking about is the empty lot next to his home. it was an eye sore with junk people use to get rid of old furniture by using that area as a dump. He used his own money to clean up the area ” Yes, truck loads of trash next to his home” so that the entrance to the hiking, bike trail can be decent and not an eye sore for the neigborhood! He did not ask for help or complain to the City. The only artifact is a stone the Indian’s used to make grain and this stone happens to be in his back yard. He protects the stone and did cover it. No harm was done to this ROCK. It’s his command of English as a second language that did not come across with clear facts. Know the facts and person before you jump to conclusions & decisions reached by reasoning with true facts.
Why not have an Indian tribe claim the ” artifact ” and display it in an Indian casino
so that people can look at the artifact. You would have more viewers!
End of story!
Thanks to the Parks Service for protecting the easement containing cultural Native American artifacts. In a time of budget shortfall, it’s unfortunate, but necessary, to allocate resources to prevent developers, like Chen, from ignoring purchasing agreements. This easement and the cultural heritage it contains belongs to all of us and should be protected.
How many civilizations have built over top each other? Look at the Holy Land, city upon city. What makes it different for Mr. Chen? He did preserve the site by keeping the elements from washing away more soil and basically sealed it for another 5000 years. In doing so he is keeping the nose of the government and scholars out of his yard who decide at their own whim in the name of research to just walk right in. Wake up people, its private property, and he should live within his free rights to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. Maybe I should come over to your house and make you tear out those nice new flowers you planted because I don’t like the color.
We are still here!!!!!!!! Mr Chen.