Freestar Media: "Lost Liberty Hotel" proposed on Justice Souter's land

Freestar Media ^ | Monday, June 27, 2005 | Logan Darrow Clements

[Smile-n-Win]

Weare, New Hampshire (PRWEB) Could a hotel be built on the land owned by Supreme Court Justice David H. Souter? A new ruling by the Supreme Court which was supported by Justice Souter himself itself might allow it. A private developer is seeking to use this very law to build a hotel on Souter's land.

Justice Souter's vote in the "Kelo vs. City of New London" decision allows city governments to take land from one private owner and give it to another if the government will generate greater tax revenue or other economic benefits when the land is developed by the new owner.

On Monday June 27, Logan Darrow Clements, faxed a request to Chip Meany the code enforcement officer of the Towne of Weare, New Hampshire seeking to start the application process to build a hotel on 34 Cilley Hill Road. This is the present location of Mr. Souter's home.

Clements, CEO of Freestar Media, LLC, points out that the City of Weare will certainly gain greater tax revenue and economic benefits with a hotel on 34 Cilley Hill Road than allowing Mr. Souter to own the land.

The proposed development, called "The Lost Liberty Hotel" will feature the "Just Desserts Café" and include a museum, open to the public, featuring a permanent exhibit on the loss of freedom in America. Instead of a Gideon's Bible each guest will receive a free copy of Ayn Rand's novel "Atlas Shrugged."

Clements indicated that the hotel must be built on this particular piece of land because it is a unique site being the home of someone largely responsible for destroying property rights for all Americans.

"This is not a prank" said Clements, "The Towne of Weare has five people on the Board of Selectmen. If three of them vote to use the power of eminent domain to take this land from Mr. Souter we can begin our hotel development."

Clements' plan is to raise investment capital from wealthy pro-liberty investors and draw up architectural plans. These plans would then be used to raise investment capital for the project. Clements hopes that regular customers of the hotel might include supporters of the Institute For Justice and participants in the Free State Project among others.

[Fierce Allegiance]

I appreciate the reply, and hope that you are now emailing Logan Clements

Done.

[yooling]

I don't have much, but if this is for real I'll send what I can. There needs to be a ping list on this one. If there is one I want to be on it, please.

[lowbridge]

bump

[yooling]

It would be even better if the development was something like a mall that could actually made money.

I think that a privately owned museum would be nice. A profitable enterprise would only encourage more land grabs.

[Old Professer]

Has anyone heard of an instance where a politician or a developer ever loosing their property/home to emanate domain?

Once again, we have proof that no spell checker is a match for a dedicated malaprop.

[Saundra Duffy]

LOL! Send in the bulldozers!!

[myself6]

If they do this, I will take my family to vacation there EVERY YEAR!

[nutmeg]

Thank you for starting this thread! I was about to post this article, but got sidetracked on this thread: July 5th Protest Rally in New London,CT to support Kelo plaintiffs

I heard Logan Darrow Clements in a very short interview this morning on WTIC radio (Hartford, CT). Here's the fax he sent to the Town of Weare, NH:

Monday, June 27, 2005

Mr. Chip Meany
Code Enforcement Officer
Town of Weare, New Hampshire
Fax 603-529-4554

Dear Mr. Meany,

I am proposing to build a hotel at 34 Cilley Hill Road in the Town of Weare. I would like to know the process your town has for allowing such a development.

Although this property is owned by an individual, David H. Souter, a recent Supreme Court decision, "Kelo vs. City of New London" clears the way for this land to be taken by the Government of Weare through eminent domain and given to my LLC for the purposes of building a hotel. The justification for such an eminent domain action is that our hotel will better serve the public interest as it will bring in economic development and higher tax revenue to Weare.

As I understand it your town has five people serving on the Board of Selectmen. Therefore, since it will require only three people to vote in favor of the use of eminent domain I am quite confident that this hotel development is a viable project. I am currently seeking investors and hotel plans from an architect. Please let me know the proper steps to follow to proceed in accordance with the law in your town.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Logan Darrow Clements Freestar Media, LLC

[nutmeg]

I heard Logan Darrow Clements in a very short interview with Ray Dunaway and Diane Smith this morning on WTIC radio. Here's the fax he sent to the Town of Weare, NH:

Monday, June 27, 2005

Mr. Chip Meany
Code Enforcement Officer
Town of Weare, New Hampshire
Fax 603-529-4554

Dear Mr. Meany,

I am proposing to build a hotel at 34 Cilley Hill Road in the Town of Weare. I would like to know the process your town has for allowing such a development.

Although this property is owned by an individual, David H. Souter, a recent Supreme Court decision, "Kelo vs. City of New London" clears the way for this land to be taken by the Government of Weare through eminent domain and given to my LLC for the purposes of building a hotel. The justification for such an eminent domain action is that our hotel will better serve the public interest as it will bring in economic development and higher tax revenue to Weare.

As I understand it your town has five people serving on the Board of Selectmen. Therefore, since it will require only three people to vote in favor of the use of eminent domain I am quite confident that this hotel development is a viable project. I am currently seeking investors and hotel plans from an architect. Please let me know the proper steps to follow to proceed in accordance with the law in your town.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Logan Darrow Clements Freestar Media, LLC

[nutmeg]

ping! (Also see #89)

Please FReepmail me if you want on or off my ‘miscellaneous’ ping list.

[nutmeg]

ping! (also see #89)

[snowsislander]

Where do I send a donation?

If you would like to discuss such a venture, although I didn't post it, I believe that post #69 has a contact address. I don't have any association with Freestar, or with anyone on posting on this subject, and I am not recommending that anyone should invest in such a venture.

Let me put on my caution cap for everyone. I am sure that I am preaching to the choir, but:

1. I recommend before sending money to anyone on the Internet that you carefully check their bonafides.
2. When it comes to any type of investment (Internet or any other type), I strongly recommend that if you are not widely conversant with that type of transaction that you talk with a trusted counselor who is an expert in the area, such as a lawyer or stock broker that you know well. Also, any reading that you can do on the category of investment you are interested in and the laws surrounding it puts you miles ahead.
3. If you want to send a personally inconsequential amount of money to anyone as a donation (and not as an investment), I still recommend that you use a safe method such as a postal money order. I do not recommend ever sending unknown individuals checks or using a credit card to send unknown individuals money.

[snowsislander]

There needs to be a ping list on this one. If there is one I want to be on it, please.

Yes, if there is a ping list, I would like to also be included on it.

[nutmeg]

ping!

[dead]

"This is not a prank" said Clements, "The Towne of Weare has five people on the Board of Selectmen. If three of them vote to use the power of eminent domain to take this land from Mr. Souter we can begin our hotel development."

You're my hero, dude. Seriously.

[nutmeg]

HA! Rush talking about this now...

[blam]

"why not eminent domain martha's vinyard?"

I think the Indians have dibbs on this..

BTW, Rush is covering this article as I type. LOL.

[cartoonistx]

Souter will appeal...

Hopefully his case will reach the SC again, where he, as plaintiff, would have to recuse himself. The case would then be decided by a different majority and, God willing, be OVERTURNED IN SOUTER'S FAVOR! How's that for wishful thinking?

[nutmeg]

I heard Clements on WTIC radio (Hartford, CT) this morning... very short interview. He sounded dead serious about this.

[NautiNurse]

This is delicious!