• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

States 5th right for taking your land

Cougar

New member
Joined
Jun 14, 2005
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
It will be interesting to see how the Supreme Court decision on the City of New London case will play out over the next couple of years.

Will their 'economic development plan' hold up in this emminent domain cas
 

swampkritter

Member
Joined
May 10, 2005
Messages
69
Reaction score
0
Location
Georgia
Personally, I think the Supreme Court was wrong on this issue. I also believe that state, county, and city governments will take advantage of
this ruling and truly rip off the average land owner.
 

Squawker

Professor
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
1,314
Reaction score
4
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
They have been doing that for years through property taxes, swampkritter. Just another way to put the screws to people who don't have the money to fight it.
 

swampkritter

Member
Joined
May 10, 2005
Messages
69
Reaction score
0
Location
Georgia
Squawker said:
They have been doing that for years through property taxes, swampkritter. Just another way to put the screws to people who don't have the money to fight it.
Property taxes are a little different. They are paid to the county government for upkeep on roads, schools and other things. In this case, they can now take your property and give it to a private developer for a mall or other commercial venture supposedly for the greater public good. This is wrong. Of course, inflated property taxes are wrong too.
 

Cougar

New member
Joined
Jun 14, 2005
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
Actually a mall might not stand up in court... however, the City is using parcels of the 90 acre plot to develop commercially (next to the new Pfizer plant I believe).

They are building parking lots, condos and a community center. Apparently, this was enough to hold up in the Supreme Court. I am not comfortable with the decision as well b/c of the future implications and possible abuse. However, the Court can not rule on future possiblities or speculation.

Basically, we are going to now see a lot of court cases similar to this one in the coming years. States and localities are going to try and put 'air tight' economic development plans together assuming each case is going straight to the High Court. One can only hope that each person is justly compensated.
 

swampkritter

Member
Joined
May 10, 2005
Messages
69
Reaction score
0
Location
Georgia
Cougar said:
Actually a mall might not stand up in court... however, the City is using parcels of the 90 acre plot to develop commercially (next to the new Pfizer plant I believe).

They are building parking lots, condos and a community center. Apparently, this was enough to hold up in the Supreme Court. I am not comfortable with the decision as well b/c of the future implications and possible abuse. However, the Court can not rule on future possiblities or speculation.

Basically, we are going to now see a lot of court cases similar to this one in the coming years. States and localities are going to try and put 'air tight' economic development plans together assuming each case is going straight to the High Court. One can only hope that each person is justly compensated.
All a city or county government has to do to reduce the amount of money they pay for a piece of property they steal is to declare it a blight on the community and condemn it. The value of the property drops dramatically and the local government buys it for next to nothing.
 

shuamort

Pundit-licious
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
7,297
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Saint Paul, MN
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Well, now is the time to put pressure on local politicians. Talk to the people in your city, county, burrough, state et al. Tell them that you want laws to prevent emminent domain from happening (unless under emergency).

The Supreme Court's ruling hands the power back to the local authorities.
 

shuamort

Pundit-licious
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
7,297
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Saint Paul, MN
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Just after I submitted that, I find an article that supports my position:
Home seizure ruling doesn't play in Texas
After decision, an amendment is quickly proposed to limit powers of eminent domain


Hours after the court's 5-4 ruling came down, Rep. Frank Corte Jr., R-San Antonio, said he would seek "to defend the rights of property owners in Texas" by proposing a state constitutional amendment limiting local powers of eminent domain, or condemnation.

Houston Mayor Bill White and Harris County Judge Robert Eckels offered assurances that the city and county do not intend to condemn land for private development projects.

But officials in the beachfront town of Freeport, south of Houston, said they would move aggressively to condemn property owned by two seafood companies to clear the way for an $8 million private marina.
 

Squawker

Professor
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
1,314
Reaction score
4
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I sent letters off to everyone I could think of. We have a morning talk show that I am able to listen to and I was amazed by the stories of cases where this has been happening right along. Now that the Superior Court gives it legitimacy, the abuse will be even worse.
 
Top Bottom