--- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In [email protected], Peter Sutphen > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > --- sparaig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > snip > > > > > > > > What do you think of the new Supreme Court ruling > > > that allows local governments to buy > > > out private landowners in order to allow some OTHER > > > private land owner to build a > > > business park?
Of course, that is not what the SC ruled. It upheld 100 years of precedent where eminent domain is used for "public purpose" -- in this case a redevelopment project to revitalize the econonomy of the town /area. > > > > A little scary. It's also happening here in Hollywood > > Florida where an owner will not sell four commercial > > properties to a developer who wants to put up a 19 > > story condo. The town is thinking of using "eminent > > domain" to force the sale. There's something very > > un-American and anti private property in this. > > > Greedy, driven by pure old greed. Similar thing here in Santa Clara > California with the city holding public meetings on 17 acres of open > space surplused by UC-Davis, overwhelming public consensus is to > keep it open space, but money has changed hands under several tables > and now the city council through the state legislature is trying to > change the law to develop lots of houses on it. This costs the > citizens money in terms of taxes paid vs services provided, but > provides political gain to council members, and $$$ benefit to > developers. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
