Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: SeekAndFind
The only thing unclear about this decision is whether the decision against "taking without compensation" prohibits the States from engaging in the same unconstitutional behavior; the State of California or rathers its army of petty tyrants, for decades now has fraudulently caused the zoning for land they covet to be changed to reduce its value before "purchasing" it (for the public good, of course"

That it precisely why the takings clause is in the Constitution, to prevent that sort of abuse!

Poor California, they might see a rash of claims for past unconstitutional crimes.
As I recall, just in the last few days, a family was cheated out of the use of their oyster farm (Marin County, California) using this ploy (or the lame environmental or "global warming excuse," after being in business for several generations.

Time to talk to the Pacific Legal Foundation.

13 posted on 12/04/2012 6:08:14 PM PST by publius911 (Formerly Publius 6961, formerly jennsdad)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: publius911

the State of California or rathers its army of petty tyrants, for decades now has fraudulently caused the zoning for land they covet to be changed to reduce its value before “purchasing” it (for the public good, of course””””

Such actions are called a ‘regulatory taking’, and Nevada County, California, tried such in the early 2000’s. They wanted to ‘inventory’ every square inch of everyone’s private property to look for ‘endangered species’ so they could tell you how YOU could use YOUR land and to what extent. They could have prevented me from using any of the pastures for my horses- both in part or in full.

I and others fought it all day until I made the statement ‘This is a regulatory taking’, we were getting no traction at the county supervisors meetings.

When I made that statement, all 5 of the supervisors turned pasty white. I explained in simple terms what ‘regulatory taking’ was to the audience on the open mic, which forced my comments to be part of the official record.

Then I told the angry supervisors that IF they were so darned bent on changing the traditional long term uses of my property—they could just write me a check for $350,000 within the next hour and I would be off the property—furniture-horses-trailers-vehicles-hay-bag and baggage within 10 days.

They were still pasty white, but they stayed silent.

I then told them that if they were not going to purchase my property for the above named price, they could stay the hell off my property for any and all reasons. Especially since they were planning ‘inventories’ of birds-bushes-bugs-everything on my 5 acres in a stealth manner—no notice. ANYONE could be on my prop0erty without my permission and I didn’t want that.

I knew that I had horses which would come running up to anyone looking for carrots and that such stampede would cause some elderly greenie to have a heart attack in my pasture. When I asked who would be responsible for such consequences, I was told I would have to pay for such a problem. That really got my dandruff up and the audience wasn’t happy, either.

They wanted to sneak onto my property without notice & then hold me responsible for any damage that happened to them. I wasn’t having it. They could own the property first, then they could inventory to their heart’s content.

We got ‘Nevada Heritage 2020’ rolled back, but it ended up in part of the Sierra Council 7 county regulations.

I could have happily shot all 5 of those supervisors, since they were also declaring THEIR property as EXEMPT from this inventory.


31 posted on 12/05/2012 9:19:55 AM PST by ridesthemiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson