I think it's pretty dangerous to group everyone together like that. I certainly don't have that view.
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 12:59 PM, Patrick Leary <[email protected] > wrote: > I'd just say Americans often have a definition of "progress" not shared by > many in the world. Our definition is largely "perpetual growth." Another > name for that is cancer. > > On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 9:21 AM, Chuck McCown <[email protected]> wrote: > >> The widow almost certainly got above fair market value. But you can’t >> put a value on the intangible value of a family home. >> >> Again, the 5th amendment of the US constitution has it right in there. >> The good of the many overrides the good of the few. >> >> *From:* CBB - Jay Fuller <[email protected]> >> *Sent:* Monday, March 02, 2015 2:55 AM >> *To:* [email protected] >> *Subject:* [AFMUG] emminient domain >> >> >> and i live in a town that literally took a widow's property in order to >> build a new plant / factory several years ago. yes, it was horrible, and >> it was done by the local "economic development board' with the support of >> the county commissioners...but i failed to see how that was "for the public >> use". >> >> of course if the woman had agreed to the price.... : / >> >> horrible horrible story....but i'm sure that new plant / factory is >> employing quite a few people. >> >> >> http://www.cullmantimes.com/archives/eminent-domain-on-agenda/article_3c30de17-6ed1-5a3b-ac21-8d4b2f1f4b63.html >> >> >> http://www.cullmantimes.com/community/rally-critical-of-city-leaders-actions/article_56b67d35-360f-5c99-aa09-1a9aefdbd574.html >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> *From:* Trevor Bough <[email protected]> >> *To:* [email protected] >> *Sent:* Saturday, February 28, 2015 12:37 PM >> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] FCC Live Link >> >> >> The 5th Amendment just established just compensation for eminent domain. >> It leaves it to the states to define what "public use" is. And the >> landowner still always has the right to argue their point that it is not >> going to be used for public use. Luckily, I live in a state that puts the >> onus on the condemning authority to prove the taking is definitely needed >> for public use. >> >> On Feb 28, 2015 12:24 PM, "Chuck McCown" <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > The 5th amendment of the US constitution took that from you many years >> ago. >> > >> > From: Trevor Bough >> > Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2015 10:30 AM >> > To: [email protected] >> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] FCC Live Link >> > >> > >> > As a property owner, I find that idea completely terrifying. I should >> absolutely have the right to say what is or is not on my property. Working >> in the utility industry, I still find that idea completely terrifying. >> Electric utilities typically require at least 30' of dedicated ROW. Gas and >> water utilities typically require at least 20' of dedicated ROW. Would you >> like to be required to give up 70' of your front yard without any say? You >> still get to mow it and maintain it, but if the utility feels the shrub you >> planted will interfere with them operating their line, they have the right >> to come destroy it. I would love to have dedicated easements everywhere, >> but that is the reason there is dedicated public ROW everywhere. Honestly >> people would be much better off dedicating 20' to a utility easement when >> they record the legal description of their property. Virtually all >> utilities can fit into a single 20' easement, especially if several go >> aerial, they just don't like to. In my opinion, eminent domain should be a >> difficult process with a requirement on the condemning authority to prove >> need and history of good faith negotiations. Just my 2 cents (probably >> closer to $0.10 now). >> > >> > On Feb 28, 2015 10:48 AM, "Mike Hammett" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> Tangent... >> >> >> >> >> >> I understand property rights and all, but I'd like to see automatic >> approval for all ROW requests by qualified entities. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ----- >> >> Mike Hammett >> >> Intelligent Computing Solutions >> >> http://www.ics-il.com >> >> >> >> ________________________________ >> >> From: "Trevor Bough" <[email protected]> >> >> To: [email protected] >> >> Sent: Friday, February 27, 2015 6:56:45 PM >> >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] FCC Live Link >> >> >> >> Apparently Missourians fight to protect their property rights more >> vigorously because, here anyway, it is a lengthy and expensive process. >> Landowners in MO can also be awarded legal fees if the condemning authority >> drops or loses the case of eminent domain, so it is definitely not a, "This >> guy is being difficult, we'll show him." fix-all. >> http://watchdog.org/88546/missouri-landowners-win-in-eminent-domain-test-case/ >> Looks like it wasn't always the case here though. >> >> >> >> On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Chuck McCown <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> I have done it several times. In my cases it was pretty much the >> easy button. Just had to wait for the docket. >> >>> >> >>> From: Trevor Bough >> >>> Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 6:21 PM >> >>> To: [email protected] >> >>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] FCC Live Link >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> It's not quite that easy... You have to be authorized by the state to >> be able to use eminent domain and even then it is a very lengthy process >> (minimum of six months typically) and it has to be for "public use", which >> a utility can qualify as, but even after going to court for six months or >> more to prove that this is necessary for the public you are still at the >> mercy of the quart ruling that you are right and now have the luxury of >> paying the landowner for the access. It's not some magic automatic "Easy >> Button". >> >>> >> >>> On Feb 26, 2015 1:34 PM, "Chuck McCown" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>> If you need to cross property with your pole line or underground >> line, you can do so under the right of eminent domain. Landowner has no >> say so. You go to court, the judge bangs the gavel, and voila, instant >> ROW. However at that point in time the tables turn somewhat in the favor >> of the landowner as you have to compensate them for what you have taken. >> >>>> >> >>>> That that typically ends up at a place where it became a very >> expensive ROW... >> >>>> >> >>>> What you are talking about below is the establishment of a >> prescriptive ROW through your failure to defend your property. Another >> word for it is acquiescence or adverse possession. You can certainly lose >> your right to defend if you sit on your rights. So, yea, if they didn't >> have an easement or court order, cut down that pole. >> >>>> >> >>>> -----Original Message----- From: Adam Moffett >> >>>> Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 12:27 PM >> >>>> To: [email protected] >> >>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] FCC Live Link >> >>>> >> >>>> What eminent domain actions can a utility take? My "knowledge" on >> that >> >>>> topic is all hearsay. >> >>>> >> >>>> I heard of a landowner who saw a company putting a pole in an empty >> lot >> >>>> that he owned across the street from his house. He watched them set >> the >> >>>> pole and then after the workers left he went out with a chainsaw and >> cut >> >>>> it down because they never asked him if they could put the pole there >> >>>> (so the story went). In his point of view, if he let them put the >> pole >> >>>> there, they have permanent rights to access that spot on his property >> >>>> because of eminent domain. >> >>>> >> >>>>> You may even have the right of eminent domain now. >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > -- > Patrick Leary > Director BD, North America, Telrad > 727.501.3735 > [email protected] [this address is only for AFMUG] > [email protected] <[email protected]> [this is my corporate > address] >
