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

Skip to comments.

Freeport Uses Eminent Domain To Claim Private Property
click2Houston ^ | 7/21/04 | unkown

Posted on 07/22/2004 3:24:40 AM PDT by eastforker

Residents: Proposed Yacht Marina Will Not Help Community

POSTED: 10:05 am CDT July 21, 2004 UPDATED: 10:26 am CDT July 21, 2004

HOUSTON -- A Brazoria County coastal town has big plans to develop a marina to bring in money to the city, but the News2Houston Investigators reported Monday that some residents say all that money will go to the developer and not the community.

In Freeport, local government is forcing businesses to sell their land to build a private yacht marina, the station reported.

(Excerpt) Read more at click2houston.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: eminentdomain; illegaltakings; land; landsnatching; propertyrights; rico; rockridge
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-63 next last
For 50 years, loads of Texas gulf shrimp have been bagged and stacked at Western Seafood in Freeport, but if the city gets its way, the familiar look of the boardwalk will change.

"If this property is taken by eminent domain, then we're basically out of business," said Wright Gore, of Western Seafood.

The city of Freeport is trying to buy, or use its power of eminent domain to acquire part of Western Seafood's land, as well as another complex owned by Trico Seafood. The land will not be for a new road or building but instead it will go toward a privately owned yacht marina -- a deal that comes with a $6 million loan from the city. Freeport leaders hope it's the key to bringing new visitors and business to town.

"We feel that we're going to benefit every person who lives in the city of Freeport," Freeport City Councilman Jim Phillips said. "We feel like we're going to benefit the people we hope to attract to the city of Freeport."

The Gore family has owned itsproperty for half a century, and said it is a sweetheart deal for the developer, not residents.

"In this case, it's taking private property and handing it over to another private property owner. In this case, it's our next-door neighbor," Gore said.

But Mayor Jim Barnett argues using eminent domain for a private business is justified because the proposed marina will benefit the public good, not just the developer.

"This is a recognized practice, encouraged by the state of Texas for the benefit of all," Barnett said.

The practice of eminent domain is common across the country.

In five years, a newly released report by the Institute for Justice documented more than 10,000 examples of local and state governments taking land for everything from casinos to condos.

In one Texas case, a street full of homes was condemned to expand a parking lot for a shopping mall.

"When government steps in and says we have an opinion about your property and says we're going to trump your use of it to give it to another person in the private sector, that's clearly morally flawed," said Barry Klein, head of the Houston Property Rights Association.

But South Texas College of Law professor Paul McGreal said the Supreme Court has ruled that the term "public good" gives local governments a lot of latitude when dropping the hammer of eminent domain.

"The only way I see it becoming likely to have challenges is if there is some sort of public backlash -- if the public sees this as an abuse of government, overreaching," McGreal said.

In Freeport, the Gores are counting on that public backlash.

"We're taking a stand to fight for our property rights and the property rights of lots of other Freeport residents," Gore said.

Both Western Seafood and Trico Seafood have filed a federal lawsuit against the city of Freeport and the Freeport Economic Development Corp. to stop the land acquisition.

A Galveston federal judge has heard the case and has yet to make a ruling.

On The Net:

1 posted on 07/22/2004 3:24:41 AM PDT by eastforker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: eastforker

Tell me, please - where is the land of the free, and the home of the brave? I seem to have misplaced it.


2 posted on 07/22/2004 3:27:39 AM PDT by neutrino (Hermes: God of trade and thieves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eastforker
Its a clear abuse of eminent domain. Private property can only be acquired by the government for a public use, e.g a road, a dam, a public hospital, or something that has a public benefit. It cannot seize property to further a private interest. Here's to hoping Freeport's local government gets bitch-slapped down big time.
3 posted on 07/22/2004 3:29:19 AM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eastforker; humblegunner; Eaker; MeekOneGOP

A case of government taking private property from citizens and giving it to another citizen for profit. Meek how bout a Texas ping?


4 posted on 07/22/2004 3:30:23 AM PDT by eastforker (Maybe you understand what you think I said, but I am not sure what I said is what I meant_John Kerry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

It is abuse but according to the article it is not the first time this has happened either.


5 posted on 07/22/2004 3:32:04 AM PDT by eastforker (Maybe you understand what you think I said, but I am not sure what I said is what I meant_John Kerry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: eastforker; farmfriend; editor-surveyor; A. Pole; sauropod

Guys, "Public {and annointed} Private Partnership" strikes again. "Sustainable Developement" for "The State". Peace and love, George.


6 posted on 07/22/2004 3:59:28 AM PDT by George Frm Br00klyn Park (FREEDOM!!!!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eastforker

Bump for day crew.


7 posted on 07/22/2004 3:59:38 AM PDT by eastforker (Maybe you understand what you think I said, but I am not sure what I said is what I meant_John Kerry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: eastforker
Private developments should be able to stand on their own legs if it is a valid idea, ie; make a return for the investment with out public funds.
The battle cry of every local Chamber of Commerce is "Economic Development" and they want to use governments powers to make their nest nicer.

Small town Chamber of Commerces will cry Economic Development if it means someone can open a hot dog cart.
8 posted on 07/22/2004 4:00:02 AM PDT by hadaclueonce (shoot low, they are riding Shetlands.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eastforker

This is much barbra streisand.


9 posted on 07/22/2004 4:03:51 AM PDT by Jonx6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eastforker
An interim step that might alleviate some of this abuse is to alter the statutes so that the owner from which the property is taken has the option to receive compensation for his property in the amount of the property's appraised value after it has been developed (at the original owner's option).

It isn't a total solution, but it might raise the bar a bit against governments using eminent domain reflexively.
10 posted on 07/22/2004 4:04:27 AM PDT by babyface00
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
It cannot seize property to further a private interest.

It can, it has, and it will continue to.

The courts favor the government in these disputes. They are on the same team. That fat pension has to be paid for one way or another.

11 posted on 07/22/2004 4:07:14 AM PDT by Glenn (The two keys to character: 1) Learn how to keep a secret. 2) ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Glenn

Y'all have fun with this, I gotta go to work.


12 posted on 07/22/2004 4:10:55 AM PDT by eastforker (Maybe you understand what you think I said, but I am not sure what I said is what I meant_John Kerry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: eastforker

They've been trying to do this for at least ten years that I know of. Five to ten miles away in Klute and Lake Jackson they are building Malls and new neighborhoods and half of downtown Freeport is boarded up since the oil bust of the eighties.


13 posted on 07/22/2004 4:13:00 AM PDT by El Laton Caliente
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
Its a clear abuse of eminent domain. Private property can only be acquired by the government for a public use...

I took it the marina was going to be a city, i.e., public facility. Am I wrong? At least the city has to buy them out with eminent doman.

A far worse situation IMHO is when the EPA says you can't build such and such here because we have to protect the "bugeyed cockroaches" or something. Then the owners are SOL with the property; they can't develop it and they can't sell it because no one would want land that can't be developed. It should be considered seizure and the owner compensated under the ??? Amendment but it doesn't happen that way.

14 posted on 07/22/2004 5:06:02 AM PDT by libertylover (The Constitution is a road-map to liberty. Let's start following it again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: esoteric

More out-of-control city governments...


15 posted on 07/22/2004 5:35:21 AM PDT by TaxRelief (Keep your kids safe; keep W in the White House.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: eastforker
"This is a recognized practice, encouraged by the state of Texas for the benefit of all,"

And one we've got to put an end to!

16 posted on 07/22/2004 7:00:20 AM PDT by Redbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neutrino
Tell me, please - where is the land of the free, and the home of the brave? I seem to have misplaced it.

It doesn't matter...we're at war now. Keep quiet and step back in line.

17 posted on 07/22/2004 7:02:59 AM PDT by BureaucratusMaximus ("We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good" - Hillary Clinton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: eastforker

Stories like this make me physically ill. I'd be a small bit better with it if they had to pay the owner 50 times the fair market value of the land.


18 posted on 07/22/2004 7:03:01 AM PDT by 1Old Pro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: babyface00
It isn't a total solution, but it might raise the bar a bit against governments using eminent domain reflexively.

I like your idea. Here's more.....give owner appraised value of property after development or 50 times the curerent appraised value whichever is greater.

19 posted on 07/22/2004 7:04:38 AM PDT by 1Old Pro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: eastforker

BTTT


20 posted on 07/22/2004 7:05:56 AM PDT by I got the rope
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-63 next last

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.

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