My Knowledge of Maricopa County Planning, Property Boundaries, and the History of This Land

Your Honor,

I want this Court to understand that I am not unfamiliar with planning, development, or the responsibilities involved in obtaining governmental approval.

In the early 2000s, I was well-known as Krista Romero, Shimmer. During my employment with Nicholas Holmes, I regularly worked with plans submitted for approval through Maricopa County and municipal jurisdictions.

I have firsthand professional experience with the procedures involved in submitting plans, obtaining approvals, and working within the requirements of local planning and development authorities.

I understand the difference between a property boundary, a roadway, an easement, and an approved development plan.

I also understand that private property owners do not become Maricopa County simply because they wish to develop their land.

These properties have a history that predates the plaintiffs’ subdivision. My understanding is that the original 2.5-acre parcels were distributed through a historical lottery process associated with wartime circumstances. I ask that the original patent, survey, and land records be considered in establishing their history and boundaries.

I have heard suggestions that a land grab is occurring in this neighborhood.

I am not attempting to grab anyone’s land. I am defending the land we lawfully own, its established boundaries, and our existing property rights.

The plaintiffs’ characterization of this dispute does not change the location of a recorded boundary or establish a roadway right.

I have worked within the planning and approval process. I know that a developer must account for property boundaries and demonstrate lawful access. A developer cannot simply assume that another owner’s land is available to complete a plan.

When the northern owners divided their property, they were responsible for addressing the lawful access needs of the parcels they created.

The historical roadway along our northern boundary does not automatically become their subdivision roadway, nor does our maintenance of that roadway establish an unlimited right to use our land.

I ask this Court to distinguish the historical property rights from the assumptions arising out of subsequent development.

This is not a land grab. This is a request for the law to recognize the difference between what a person owns, what a person has a lawful right to use, and what a person merely wants.

I respectfully ask this Court to examine the original land records, the recorded boundaries, the lawful scope of any easement, and the development history before determining the rights of the parties.

I have not come before this Court to redraw my neighbors’ property lines.

I have come to ask that they stop attempting to redraw mine.

The square measures what is true. The level calls for equal treatment. The plumb line demands integrity. And the law must determine where every boundary and every right properly stands.

Thank you, Your Honor.