Mad River Union-Letters to the Editor May 23, 2018

A property rights problem


When I heard Steve Madrone explain how he favors property rights, I felt compelled to point out how his past actions are contrary to the “property rights” claims he currently is making in his run for Fifth District supervisor.

First and foremost, most of us know Steve Madrone by the other name he has been using for decades which is “Sungnome Madrone.” The only thing Madrone favors about “property rights” is that he favors ignoring your property rights or taking them away.

Case in point: A man named Mike Moss owned 94 acres of land near the highway on Fox Farm Road in Trinidad. Mike’s land was also near where Madrone lived. Mike was 60 years old and was planning his retirement so Mike proposed dividing his 94 acres into four parcels as part of his retirement.

All the homes around Mike’s property were on small parcels of 1-5 acres, including that of Sungnome (Steve) Madrone’s. Madrone approached the agents Mike was using and informed them that if Mike did not hire him (Madrone) to assist with Mike’s project that he (Madrone) would see that the project would never happen.

Well, Madrone wasn’t hired because nobody believed Madrone had the skills to do the job and because Mike would not be extorted by Madrone’s claims that he could stop Mike from his four way parcel split. In response not being hired by Mike, Madrone started to trespass on Mikes property to interfere with the work being done by Mike’s agents that had been hired to divide the 94-acre parcel into four parcels.

In court documents regarding the injunction issued against Sungnome “Steve” Madrone, it states that after Madrone was enjoined from trespassing on Mike’s property, Madrone intentionally sought to evade the court order by sending his (Madrone’s) minor son onto the property. Poor Mike again had to threaten to go to court to stop the harassment of the workers on his property.

Madrone’s lack of respect for everyone else’s property rights was made clear by what Madrone did to Mike to stop this simple four-way lot split. Madrone and his friends filed lawsuits and other actions, simply to delay the approval of this project and to drum up the costs for this parcel split assuming Mike would just give up.

Madrone and his friends held up this four-way parcel split for 19 years. Not only was Mike deprived of what he needed for his retirement, the frivolous court actions almost sent Mike to the poor house.

After numerous courts rebuked Madrone and his friends, Mike was able to proceed with his four-way lot split because nothing that Madrone and his friends were claiming about the lot split was true and the claims were only made to cause delay and drum up costs so Mike would give up. Poor Mike was 80 years old by the time this four-way lot split was approved due to Madrone’s contempt for Mike’s property rights.

These are not the actions of a person who claims to support property rights, unless Madrone’s so called support of “property rights” means that Madrone doesn’t recognize that a person has property rights, and that everyone else’s rights are subservient to what Madrone wants.

I have knowledge of all of this because I was the realtor for this property when it was listed for sale. Although this was many years ago, I feel it is important information about his actions and how they are different than what Sungnome “Steve” Madrone states is his so called current position.

Tina Christensen