SC Eminent Domain Case

[DRZinn]

The government can't steal your property and give it to Wal Mart, because that wouldn't be for public use.

Know who the biggest single beneficiary of eminent domain land is? Costco. "Public use" has been expanded, as has "interstate commerce," and twisted to mean anything they want it to mean.

Eminent domain was made possible by the Founding Fathers, not some latterday evil bureaucrat. If you don't like it, ammend the constitution.

So was the regulation of interstate commerce. But that doesn't make the abuse of suck privileges any better. Look, no-one here has said (at least not yet) that they should have "eminent domain" powers in some cases. The problem is how they've redefined "public use."

There are plenty of ways to avoid becoming an eminent domain taking, and a prudent proprietor will take that into account before selecting a location.

"You should have thought about that before opening youir business, and selected a bit of land that a developer wouldn't want later." :banghead:

 

[BAB]

This is one of Neal Boortz's big issues. He has gotten very discouraged about the current case before the SC. He read an article a day or two ago which contained comments by various justices during the opening of the case, and they were not pretty, not encouraging at all. One of their main concerns was having to overturn all the precedents that have been set, blah, blah, blah, and so on. No guts to stand up for the Constitution and what's right. Neal thinks the property owners will lose...I'm suspecting the same. Legislators will be of no help either, Republican or Democrat. There are some that I'm sure care, but not nearly enough. I don't know, folks. I don't know what we're going to do. I try to be optimistic, but it's damn hard when you watch stuff like this happening. I just don't know.

 

[what42]

Legislators will be of no help either, Republican or Democrat.

What can they do? The 5th amendment of the Constitution clearly states 'public use'. It does not say 'public benefit'. If the courts won't stand by this very clear limit to government power then we're screwed as they won't hold by any limit to the government passed in congress. The Constitution is supposed to be the ultimate trump card. It was designed to limit our government so they would not trample on our rights. Unfortunately our court system has failed in it's duty to the citizenry and allowed the government to surpass the limits set forth in our Constitution.

 

[Sindawe]

The soap box is not having an influence in protecting our property rights.

The ballot box will be negated by this failing of the jury box.

What does that leave us with?

Note to society: Next time we form a new .gov someplace, make sure ED is NOT one of its granted powers.

 

[USAFNoDAk]

One of the talk radio folks was talking about this case yesterday and brought up a marvelous point. If the SC bails on these property owners, the Constitution is in for a far deeper assault. That being on freedom of religion. What happens when a govt. entity comes in to force a church, which pays no taxes, to relocate, in favor of a private business or a private developer, which will help fill the ever growing coffers of govt. and it's spending habits?

I know of a gas station/auto repair shop in my city that was ED'd out of their location so that a Sr. high rise could be put up. That was certainly not a public good in the true sense of the word. They did offer the owner a pretty fair price for his land, but he didn't want to sell. He had a great location and lots of neighborhood business/clients. They forced him out anyway. This was not a govt. run Sr. Highrise project, although it probably receives funding indirectly through some form of govt. payments to the elderly.

There was also the case in Minnesota where a city govt. took over a car dealership in a very key location and gave the land to Best Buy to build their galactic headquarters. The car dealership lost their case as well.

This is getting quite disturbing. If the land is being ED'd for use DIRECTLY as a needed public venture, such as a road, highway, right of way, railroad etc., that's one thing. To take land from one private entity by force, even with compensation, and give it to another private entity with the idea that the extra tax revenues are a public good, is piracy of the worst kind. Maybe our politicians should start flying the Jolly Roger, right below the Stars and Stripes, at our Federal/State/Local buildings.

 

[Otherguy Overby]

Already happened...

What happens when a govt. entity comes in to force a church, which pays no taxes, to relocate, in favor of a private business or a private developer, which will help fill the ever growing coffers of govt. and it's spending habits?

Cypres, CA is/was doing this to a Church sitting on prime real estate. I've not kept up with the case, but it was for, guess who?... Costco.
http://www.rluipa.com/media/TBF052802.html

The car dealership you mentioned was Wally McCarthy Olds. It had about a ziillion penant shaped single color flags hanging above the fence surrounding the lot. They might have been red, white and blue.

Most people just don't realize how important this issue is.

IOW, you buy a house, work for 30 years to pay it off so you can afford to retire on a limited income. So the state decides to take it to improve tax revenue? For a fair appraised value? Not in the big city, Grasshopper.

People aren't paying attention because they aren't coming for their property, just someone elses, at present.

Gunnies aren't concerned because they aren't coming for their guns, at present...

Property ownership is the American dream.

If the PTBs want to take the "Dream" away, and our best future personal financial security, they better do a better job of getting rid of our guns, first.

 

[2nd Amendment]

OK, I feel less than well today so I may be a little slipshod in how I write this...

I made some calls yesterday and today, asking questions of appraisers in this general area. First off what I found is there are no Commercial/Industrial appraisers in a rural area like this. Second, as someone else posted already, there are rules and regs for residential appraisers. Third, local governments use local appraisers and often have a "pet" appraiser(NOT my word!). Habitually these entities, like their Big Gooberment brother, then go for a low-ball figure, claiming to the victim that that's it and that's all there is. 70% plus take the first offer because they don't know any better.

A couple appraisers wouldn't talk to me. A couple said they had done some ED work in the past, one said he wouldn't do that crap regardless of pay and several just flat talked my ear off.

WHat I came away with(and I have a lot more to research now that I have actually learned enough to know what to ask) is that there is indeed a huge discrepency between the way things are supposed to be and the way things are. Also, Headless, appraisers are just folks, good bad and ugly, and not consistently honorable knights in shining armor. But regardless, the government at various levels, especially apparently in more rural areas, can get an appraisal along the lines of what it wants but that doesn't even matter. The bully tactic of sending a check for an arbitrary sum and telling the land owner to take it or else generally works. And if the land owner accepts it then there's no harm and no faoul...right?

Check out the Paragon Foundation for more info about this and many other land-rights related subjects.

Oops, their addy(I said I wasn't firing on all 8 cylinders today):

http://www.paragonfoundation.org/