San Diego seeks to use eminent domain ruling to sieze 50 year old business for condos
 

I expect to hear more cases like this :mad:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,164548,00.html

sounds like what some of the college towns here are doing. They are either paying these small business a low ball amount to move out, or they end up just kicking them out and adding onto the the school property and space.

That's bad enough, but at least in that case they can try to argue the schools societal benefit. This case is clearly the abuse people have been afraid of about taking one private property and giving it to another private owner. :(

the constitution really grants the government such power to seize any private property. kinda unfair.

fucked up shit

i would let them do it and then burn down the place after they finish building it.

>;]

total bullshit this is going ot lead to some ruby ridge kind of shit

Unfortunately, maybe it should :helpme

I remember a long time ago, my aunt lived in Orlando, and Disney started buying all the property. She had a small lot, and they offered her 50k in 1974 I think it was. She took it of course. the funny thing is, that Disney had make 100k times that back.

You would think that people would do things the right way.

for "public" use. until the recent ruling that meant schools and parks only. now anyone with money can take your property as long as they build something larger that will create more property tax revenue. basicly, they'll steal your ocean front two story house and build a 5 story apartment building and pay you what their appraisers value your property to be.

i guess this would seem slightly reasonable if there was ANY reason to believe that the city planning commissions knew anything about what really was good for a neighborhood. usually they don't know jack.

this taking people's businesses and homes isn't new... my friend rick's parents were forced to sell their house to the city so the city could put in a freeway, and then they re-routed the freeway, so that now the house is still there, but someone else owns it.

why do it the right way when you can do it the cheap way and use the local police as muscle?

It has been going on in SD for years. My friends liquor store near Petco Park was taken by the government to make room for a hotel.

they do not kick anyone out without paying market value, you can appeal market value im pretty sure and get an arbitrator

thats true. you can fork over $800-1000+ for a private appraisal and then pay a lawyer to take those findings to the court to contest it.

As a business man. I think its fair. Have you seen those buildings, their ugly. We have to grow sometime. Would be nice if they could help them find a good place though. Its just life.

May Walmart end up with your property :thumbsup

Yep, definitely... That was a colossal fuckup (or sellout, depending on how you want to look at it) by the supreme court.

fucked up

I'm hoping it was just a fuckup and every state corrects it by passing their own legislation. :helpme

Another one in Florida

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/opi...news-editorial

:1orglaugh

Oops, that is 2 in Florida. One last month and another this month. The city says the Supreme Court gave them the power.

That's a hell of alot to wish for imho.... even if that hope were to come true, the federal govt has repeatedly shown an utter disregard for state-level legislation

Alabama's governor just signed legislation today and New Jersey, Mississippi and Ohio are 3 states I am aware of that have things in the works. Hopefully those will pass and other states will follow.

Isn't the role of gov't to protect private property? I'm sorry but US is going to hell in a handbasket fast.

The federal government is here to collect taxes and vote to send it's young to war.

its fucking scary