Supreme Court rules on condemnation

[Anthony]

Now this is an interesting ruling. Typically, municipalities have used condemnation for public works like roads. Now they will be able to condemn land/homes for private uses such as shopping malls and office parks.

WASHINGTON -- A divided Supreme Court ruled Thursday that local governments may seize people's homes and businesses against their will for private development in a decision anxiously awaited in communities where economic growth often is at war with individual property rights.


Entire article is here:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/23/AR2005062300783_pf.html

 

[Brian Austin]

We had a case like this in AZ, where a long time business was being forced out by the city (can't remember which one) for "urban renewal" reasons. The business owner won but it wasn't pretty. I'd be willing to bet that the city will be looking at that property again after this...

Frankly, I think it sucks. Especially when the same cities are giving HUGE tax breaks to bring businesses INTO town. Can't have it both ways, kids.

 

[Dave Siciliano]

Large condemnation in Arlington, Texas for the new Cowboys Stadium (football facility). It's going right in the middle of an older, middle to lower income neighborhood. Is this pushing what condemnation powers are for? It's one thing for critical city infrastructure; quite another to bring in a football stadium.

Best,

Dave
Baron 322KS

 

[wsuffa]

This is one I don't think I'm in favor of.

There was a town in Connecticut that essentially condemned an entire neighborhood because a developer wanted to put in a new mixed-use development. Town saw tax $$$ and decided to go forward.

Using this for something that is clearly a public utility is OK. When it benefits a small group of commecial interests at the expense of citizens or other small businesses, I think it's a bad thing.

Let's say Honda comes to town and says "We want to build where those lower income houses are, please condemn them for our use". Let's also say that the city council/mayor has been elected by the high income folks on the east side. Is it right for the council to approve the condemnation?

Or Dave's stadium example (am I the only one who thinks that the sports teams should finance the stadiums as they are the big $$$ beneficiaries?)

There is so much potential for abuse....

 

[inav8r]

There is so much potential for abuse....

And that's exactly what scares me. If you read the dissenting opinion that's what Justice O'Conner feels as well. It is my opinion that the (low to bottom income) people who this is going to mostly effect don't have the representation to overcome the greedy and powerful... And people are going to suffer from it.

 

[Ed Guthrie]

There is so much potential for abuse....

Follow the money.

Right after my family moved to a small town in eastern Washington my father started a political jousting match with a local developer. We had just moved to the small town from San Diego. San Diego councilman are elected by district, so, in a way of speaking, the councilman representing your district was "your councilman". The developer once quipped to my father, "You probably don't even know who your councilman is." When my father admitted his ignorance, the developer said, "Well, I know who my councilman is."

Only later did my father discover that our small town elected all 7 councilman at large...

 

[corjulo]

This is one I don't think I'm in favor of.

There was a town in Connecticut that essentially condemned an entire neighborhood because a developer wanted to put in a new mixed-use development. Town saw tax $$$ and decided to go forward.

Using this for something that is clearly a public utility is OK. When it benefits a small group of commecial interests at the expense of citizens or other small businesses, I think it's a bad thing.

Let's say Honda comes to town and says "We want to build where those lower income houses are, please condemn them for our use". Let's also say that the city council/mayor has been elected by the high income folks on the east side. Is it right for the council to approve the condemnation?

Or Dave's stadium example (am I the only one who thinks that the sports teams should finance the stadiums as they are the big $$$ beneficiaries?)

There is so much potential for abuse....

The Connecticut town was New London and this is exactly the case that was ruled on today. This is truly a scary ruling. Well connected developers just got the go ahead to destroy entire neighborhoods.

 

[gismo]

Now this is an interesting ruling. Typically, municipalities have used condemnation for public works like roads. Now they will be able to condemn land/homes for private uses such as shopping malls and office parks.

It's already happening here. One Mpls suburb condemned several homes and at least two thriving businesses to pave the way for Best Buy's new corporate HQ. One of the businesses (a large car dealer) sued but lost. The prevailing argument is that the condemnation was for the public good (more taxes from BB vs the prior owners).

Personally I think that's nuts. If you follow the concept all the way, anyone could get your city to take your home if they promised to increase it's value and hence taxes.

I do suspect that the Supreme Court's decision is correct given the current law/constitution so the only remedy may be new legislation or (less likely yet) a constitutional amendment.

When someone comes along and wants to develop my 5 acres on the lake I might just have to figure a way to poison the deal.

 

[gibbons]

This is just wrong. I'm not generally in favor of condemnation even for "public good", but condemnation of private property to pad a developer's pocket? Wrong, wrong, wrong.

 

[Brian Austin]

Looking back in history, this is the kind of abuse that starts revolutions. Tread lightly, oh wise elected official.

 

[Dave Siciliano]

When someone comes along and wants to develop my 5 acres on the lake I might just have to figure a way to poison the deal.[/QUOTE]

Hey Lance:

Maybe you could put an endangered species on that land: pilot with a multi-engine recip might qualify

Best,

Dave

 

[wsuffa]

When someone comes along and wants to develop my 5 acres on the lake I might just have to figure a way to poison the deal.

Hey Lance:

Maybe you could put an endangered species on that land: pilot with a multi-engine recip might qualify

Best,

Dave

Don't some places allow you to move endangered species to new habitats? It works for wetlands....

 

[Richard]

Don't some places allow you to move endangered species to new habitats? It works for wetlands....

If the whole premise behind the endangered species debacle is human inteference is the problem, then how is it human intervention is okay?



Back in the '70s a local utilities service district was looking to condemn a large portion of a rancher's land. He thought he'd fix 'em; he dug his own 'wetlands'. The district changed it's mind so the rancher thought the wetlands was a good idea and left them in place.

A couple years later it turned out the rancher had bigger problems in the form of the ACE. The rancher was not allowed to simply fill in the wetlands, even though he had created them. Further, he could not use that land for his purposes. And because it was wetlands and there were deed restrictions he couldn't find a buyer for the land. After almost 2 decades he finally won grazing rights on land his family has owned for 5 generations.

Another, very recent story, is a group of enviro nazis were convicted of removing endangered plants and replanting them on land which is soon to be developed.

 

[Let'sgoflying!]

I know of people who would die fighting rather than be kicked off their land for any amount of $.
I wouldn't be surprised if it has already happened - bulldozers show up, then a standoff ensues, soon the SWAT team arrives..

 

[Ken Ibold]

I know of people who would die fighting rather than be kicked off their land for any amount of $.
I wouldn't be surprised if it has already happened - bulldozers show up, then a standoff ensues, soon the SWAT team arrives..

"Shane! Come back! Shane!"

 

[Dave Siciliano]

I know of people who would die fighting rather than be kicked off their land for any amount of $.
I wouldn't be surprised if it has already happened - bulldozers show up, then a standoff ensues, soon the SWAT team arrives..

============================================


Geesh guys!!! I meant Lance WAS the endangered species!! It was supposed to be funny.

Dave

 

[Dave Siciliano]

O.K. How 'bout a little refresher on this issue---our Gov'ment at work!!

"Landowners have recently become more aware of the fact that the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C.A. Section 1531 et. seq.) can have a profound impact on the value of their land. One reason for the delay in recognizing its importance is that since the initial act was passed, it has subsequently expanded by bureaucratic regulations. The 1973 Act was intended to protect endangered species on federal land and passed Congress by a vote of 92-0 in the Senate and 355-4 in the House. In spite of the overwhelming initial support, the Act quickly caused serious consternation when it threatened to shut down construction of the Tellico Dam in Tennessee to protect the snail darter. Since then the regulations have focused on controlling land usage, including private land, that may contain an endangered species' habitat, almost without regard to the actual presence of such species"

Where's Will Rogers when you need 'em

Keeping Current with Texas Real Estate MCA, 2004 edition, page 221.

How in the world does this country keep going with leadership like this? And why in the world to we elect people that do things like this to us?

Best,

Dave

 

[Anthony]

============================================


Geesh guys!!! I meant Lance WAS the endangered species!! It was supposed to be funny.

Dave. I got it. I work for a large real estate developer/corporate real estate management firm and I think this is wrong, wrong, wrong. I'm sending a letter to all my legislators. The basic premise that a new shopping mall or office complex is "for the public good" is perverted.

 

[Ken Ibold]

And why in the world to we elect people that do things like this to us?

Because we elect people based on their television commercials and yard signs.

 

[gismo]

Don't some places allow you to move endangered species to new habitats? It works for wetlands....

Maybe I could disguise one of my cats?

 

[pete177]

Happens all the time

I know of people who would die fighting rather than be kicked off their land for any amount of $.
I wouldn't be surprised if it has already happened - bulldozers show up, then a standoff ensues, soon the SWAT team arrives..

 

[fgcason]

They've been pulling that stunt around here for a good while now. Follow the money.

Looking back in history, this is the kind of abuse that starts revolutions.

True.

Tread lightly, oh wise elected official.

Why should they? They can make a big crater where you're standing from over the horizon if you're not a submissive citizen. Citizens don't have the firepower to do an actual takeover anymore.

 

[poadeleted3]

They've been pulling that stunt around here for a good while now. Follow the money.



True.



Why should they? They can make a big crater where you're standing from over the horizon if you're not a submissive citizen. Citizens don't have the firepower to do an actual takeover anymore.

And the North Vietnamese and Somalians didn't have the firepower to kick our butts out of their countries. No matter how many nukes they have, it's always possible to get to their kids.

 

[wsuffa]

============================================


Geesh guys!!! I meant Lance WAS the endangered species!! It was supposed to be funny.

Dave

I got that...

They'll just move him somewhere.... South Dakota, anyone?

 

[wsuffa]

Follow the money.

...the developer said, "Well, I know who my councilman is."

We recently had a big scandal down here that brought corruption charges against two city councilmen.

The FBI informant was sentenced today for his role....

From the news article...

"Peter Estevez, the informant who ushered federal investigators into the proverbial backroom of City Hall, was sentenced Wednesday at an unusual hearing where he was praised for exposing corruption more than he was condemned for his own swindling of the government.

Up until the last moment, U.S. District Judge Royal Furgeson seemed torn between punishing and rewarding the sly businessman who defrauded the city and, when he was caught, helped the FBI build a sensational bribery case against two city councilmen."
...
"Instead, federal prosecutors lauded Estevez as the linchpin in one of two bribery cases that, unveiled in 2002, spurred a round of reforms, including tighter caps on campaign contributions at City Hall.

A separate state case snared more elected officials and reached beyond the City Council into school and college districts, but the federal prosecution dramatically captured the haggling and payments on tape — thanks to Estevez. "
...
"As part of the plea bargain, the government dropped additional charges that Peter Estevez committed separate frauds while completing various real estate deals. "

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/crime/stories/MYSA062305.1A.cityhall_informant.37720967.html

Now, imagine a $100 million development is at stake....

 

[silver-eagle]

Let's bulldoze a whole neighborhood and throw up another Walmart. Afterall, displacing families who may have lived there for 100 years to line the pockets of Walmart, their stockholders, and city officials is all in the name of the public good. We'll add an additional 120 jobs and $100,000 a year in taxes.
A real good idea. Too bad we can't vote out 5 members of the supreme court.

 

[corjulo]

The supreme court ruling only applies to federal law. There is nothing that says a State Legislator can't step in and limit the power of a local municipalities. Given the public outrage over this ruling I would think both parties would be eager to propose something. In Connecticut there is already a bipartisan bill being pushed.

 

[tom clark]

this is complete bs. write your legislators!! nothing says a constitutional amendment can't be passed to limit this ruling. and nothing says you can't get something done locally to protect yourselves. imho, tc

 

[gkainz]

I got that...

They'll just move him somewhere.... South Dakota, anyone?

Hey!!! Watch it!
long-time South Dakota Resident ... until Uncle Sam's Canoe Club relocated me elsewhere...many elsewheres

 

[AdamZ]

Dave. I got it. I work for a large real estate developer/corporate real estate management firm and I think this is wrong, wrong, wrong. I'm sending a letter to all my legislators. The basic premise that a new shopping mall or office complex is "for the public good" is perverted.

Justice O'Connor is a great lady and her dissent was right on target! While I think the decision was a very bad one all may not be lost. States are free to place greater restrictions on governments ability to infringe on citizens rights than the Federal Government does. You should be addressing your letters not only to Federal Legislators but also you state legislators.

 

[pete177]

Conoe club?

Hey!!! Watch it!
long-time South Dakota Resident ... until Uncle Sam's Canoe Club relocated me elsewhere...many elsewheres

 

[poadeleted3]

Conoe club?

Navy.

 

[Silicon Rallye]

Now, this is more like it:

http://makeashorterlink.com/?X10E2195B

 

[Dave Siciliano]

Several state legislatures have put this on the list; In Texas, there is a rep sponsoring a Constitutional Amendment that would not allow condemnation for financial gain. Understand five state legislatures have this in their sites already.

Best,

Dave
Baron 322KS

 

[poadeleted3]

Several state legislatures have put this on the list; In Texas, there is a rep sponsoring a Constitutional Amendment that would not allow condemnation for financial gain. Understand five state legislatures have this in their sites already.

Best,

Dave
Baron 322KS

Hopefully, New Hampshire doesn't go this route until that dude finishes his new hotel where Justice Souter's house used to be