http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=31566
Posted on 04/01/2004 5:33:23 AM PST by AAABEST
Jesse Hardy's fight to keep his 160 acres in the Southern Golden Gate Estates will return to Tallahassee, Apr. 13, for a final hearing before the Florida Cabinet.
"It's possible the Cabinet could defer it again, but we're confident they will approve eminent domain," says Kathalyn Gaither, land acquisition public information officer for the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP).
Located in what is called the "Hole in the Donut," the property is part of the state's 55,000-acre buy-out to restore natural water flows to the Southern Golden Gate Estates (SGGE), once slated for development.
Hardy has owned the property for 28 years. He is the last of thousands of individual property owners whose land was targeted for the Picayune Strand State Forest. What began as a willing seller program turned into condemnation when the project was tied to the $100 million Everglades water restoration project in the late 1990s.
If the state condemns Hardy's land, it will be the first time in Florida history that a homesteaded property has been taken for environmental purposes.
Gaither says if Hardy does not take the $1.5 million offer that's on the table, the selling price will go back to the state's original offer of $909,158 if the Cabinet and Governor approve eminent domain.
The 67-year-old Florida native says he doesn't care - the property is not for sale at any price. A disabled Navy SEAL who has never lived an easy life, he says he's not interested in a condo on the beach or living in an urban setting.
"It's my home and it means more to me than the money. If it (condemnation) was for something useful to the public health and well-being, like a school, a fire station, or a hospital, I would move with no problem," he says.
Although he is skeptical of the success of portions of the rehydration plan, Hardy maintains he supports the project. He says his land is not necessary to the restoration project and he will not be adversely affected by it.
"I'm not against any of the environmentalists' work to rehydrate the Southern Golden Gate Estates," he says. "I'm all for it. I just want to keep my home."
Gaither says Hardy's land is necessary to the project.
"The South Florida Water Management District has conducted modeling that shows that even if there is no flooding on his property, there will be no roads and there will be demolition all around him, posing safety concerns," she says.
Hardy, who once sold real estate for Golden Gate Estates' developer Gulf American Corporation (GAC), homesteaded his rustic property in 1976. With the exception of an excavation pond underway, the property looks very much the same today as it did 28 years ago.
Using propane and a gas-powered generator, he lives in a tiny wood frame home with a friend he took in and her handicapped eight-year-old son.
"Living here is what has kept me going," he says. "It's my home. I'm too old to go anywhere else."
Hardy continues to hold out. One year ago, the governor and Cabinet were asked to initiate condemnation proceedings on his property. Instead, they instructed DEP land acquisition agents to continue to try to negotiate a deal.
Hardy and Gaither both agree that no progress has been made over the past year.
"If I let them get away with it, and they take my home for environmental reasons, then every homeowner in the state of Florida will be in jeopardy," he says. "There's nothing to restore on my land - nothing but pine and Sabal palm. It's my home - it's just that simple - and I won't give it up. I will fight to the very end. I will spend every nickel I've got and can get to fight this."
Hardy will not be attending the hearing in Tallahassee, but will be represented by his attorney. He says it is too emotional of an issue for him. He is also undergoing cancer treatment after having been diagnosed with the disease in November.
He is hopeful area residents will show their support by writing letters asking the governor not to grant the DEP eminent domain and allow him to keep his land.
Estates resident Cindy Kemp, founding member of the Property Rights Action Committee (PRAC), says the group fully backs Hardy. The group created and is distributing brochures on his plight and is promoting his cause through a song, "The Ballad of Jesse Hardy," written by a friend of Hardy and sung by Estates resident Bill Lhota.
"It's not right what they're doing to Jesse," she says. "We're hoping residents will understand how this ultimately affects them and their Constitutional rights."
Hardy hired an engineer to complete a study that shows the elevation of his property at 12 feet. At that height, he says his property will never be affected by the restoration project and he doesn't understand why the state is insisting on buying him out.
Nearly three years ago, Collier County gave Hardy the go-ahead to build the first of four proposed 20-acre ponds to create a fish farm, which he would like to one day open to the public for recreational fishing.
Several environmental groups including the Florida Wildlife Federation and the Collier County Audubon Society opposed the concept, but agreed to support the construction of one 20-acre pond. Any future excavation will have to be re-approved by the county this spring.
In that time, Hardy says he has dug about seven of the 20 acres of the pond. He has also completed and stocked a smaller pond, which he uses to gauge water quality and predator issues. Fill from excavation of the ponds has been purchased by the county for road building.
Hardy says his dream is to one day open his piece of paradise up to the public to fish the ponds and enjoy what he has loved for 27 years.
DEP officials say that dream is unlikely. Gaither says once eminent domain is approved, it will take six months to a year to find Hardy a place to live.
"I've already got a place to live," Hardy says. "They can look all they want - they'll never find another place like this. It's my home and there's no other place like it."
To contact the Governor email jeb.bush@myflorida.com, call 850-488-4441 or fax 850-487-0801.
Perhaps you think an argument is similar to a street brawl.
No apology is forthcoming.
I see. You have an agenda.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=31566
Words of wisdom from the Ol' Professor
Arguing from the bias of one's imagination does not an argument make.
I see. I cannot defend myself, according to you. See my post 102 and see who the rude idiot is.
Most of us are going to believe it is his property... he can should be allowed to stay or set the price he wants for his own property.
Do you really consider this AAA reply to my non-opiniated post to be prodding back to the point????
You know nothing. Nothing about the area and apparantly nothing about real estate in general. Seemingly nothing about American ideals or the Golden Rule either. Land in some parts of Golden Gate Estates is going for over 30,000 dollars per acre. The only reason this particular area is de-valued is because the GRABBERS and their enablers(ie those like yourself) have been attempting to make it worthless for decades.
This started as an innocent program to buy some parcels for "conservation" purposes only from "willing sellers". It's turned into an agenda/power driven Cuban style land grab.
You advocate Jesse be moved to another part of the state (because he's in the way) as if he's some damned cow? Pathetic.
I have to ask, why are you people so interested in this eviroscam being sucessful? What's your agenda? One of you isn't even from Florida.
I knew the Greenie "Republican" lackies would show up.
Always be suspicious of those that come to FR with an agenda.
Of course you would agree that she is not a flaming liar. You have an agenda and the truth be d@mned
Been here long cin?
Me??? Here is the AAA post that started the verbal assault. All I have been doing is defending myself from this flaming liar! Go back and read the to/from posts for me and see for yourself.
Never mind, you have an agenda and the facts be d@amned.
AAA Response
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You know nothing. Nothing about the area and apparantly nothing about real estate in general. Seemingly nothing about American ideals or the Golden Rule either. Land in some parts of Golden Gate Estates is going for over 30,000 dollars per acre. The only reason this particular area is de-valued is because the GRABBERS and their enablers(ie those like yourself) have been attempting to make it worthless for decades.
This started as an innocent program to buy some parcels for "conservation" purposes only from "willing sellers". It's turned into an agenda/power driven Cuban style land grab.
You advocate Jesse be moved to another part of the state (because he's in the way) as if he's some damned cow? Pathetic.
I have to ask, why are you people so interested in this eviroscam being sucessful? What's your agenda? One of you isn't even from Florida.
I knew the Greenie "Republican" lackies would show up.
Longer than you have, tsetse.
What big truth is it that you think I am not seeing? That he could make a whole bunch of money from the sale of his property? What is it you think you have brought to the table here? My real issue with you is that you are being disruptive and that you are only here to hurl personal insults.
Except that you left out the part about "public use." Does what you term this "environmental project" qualify (at least philosophically) as "public use"? What definition of "public use" would one need to make it qualify?
The question is of particular interest because, according to the article, this "will be the first time in Florida history that a homesteaded property has been taken for environmental purposes." That suggests the dispute is an important fulcrum on which environmentalists (and eventually others) will leverage a broader notion of "public use." Conservatives of a certain temperament might be inclined to resist that.
What appears to be at issue here is more a resistance to a particular environmental project.
I just don't see it that way. If the article is to be believed, what is going on here is different -- the use of eminent domain to take someone's land not for a public purpose, but for the exclusive benefit of certain environmentalists who have an arbitrary taste for restoring land to what it was before humans got there, as opposed to using land for the way buyers and sellers might wish to use it. This does not seem to me to be a good example of the "public use" criterion.
In other words you, who have resorted to scurrilous and untrue ad hominem claims for which I am still awaiting your apology, are not presenting any arguments.
your statement that you believe the article omitted information to better support the state's action is without fact and therefore meritless.
I stated my opinion, and made sure to emphasize that it was my opinion. Your complaint is without meaning, and therefore meritless.
Now, back to the story. I started off by noting that a $1.5 million compensation is not really a "land grab." I then noted that this case appears to conform to the 5th Amendment requirement for just compensation when private property is taken for public use.
That clause, BTW, is an acknowledgement that the government may have valid reasons for taking private lands for public use. Note that the agreement of the landowner is not required in eminent domain cases (the exercise of eminent domain seems to assume that such agreement is not forthcoming). The Constitutional requirement is for "just compensation" when the land is, in fact, taken.
Mr. Hardy himself says he recognizes that eminent domain is justified in some cases, and he even listed a few examples. He apparently does not think this project is one of them, even if the state of Florida does. The state has to make a case that there is an overriding public interest in exercising eminent domain.
If we assume that they have made a legitimate case, would you still be against it in this instance? Or are you resolutely against all such exercises?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.