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

Skip to comments.

HALF MOON BAY: $36.8 million award for undevelopable land 'devastating to city'
San Francisco Chronicle ^ | 11/30/7 | John Coté

Posted on 11/30/2007 7:51:33 AM PST by SmithL

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-91 next last
The Eco-Nazis should have to pay for the damage they do. It's a shame for the taxpayers, but they did get the government that they elected.
1 posted on 11/30/2007 7:51:34 AM PST by SmithL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SmithL
No sympathy for the taxpayers here. They made their own choice to live in Sham Fascistco.
2 posted on 11/30/2007 7:56:53 AM PST by TXnMA ("Allah": Satan's current alias...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
This ruling is a direct result of Del Monte Dunes v. City of Monterey. It's high time. This is going to help give economic worth to natural habitat, open space, etc.
3 posted on 11/30/2007 7:57:17 AM PST by Carry_Okie (Duncan Hunter for President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TXnMA

The taxpayers are in Half Moon Bay.

The paper is in San Francisco.


4 posted on 11/30/2007 7:59:46 AM PST by SmithL (I don't do Barf Alerts, you're old enough to read and decide for yourself)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
I agree. The city should pay the damages since it prevented the owner from making full use of his own land.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

5 posted on 11/30/2007 8:01:09 AM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

googlemapping this shows the site is about a mile from the shore, on the other side of a major highway, along what looks like a hillside. coastal wetland? i don’t think so!


6 posted on 11/30/2007 8:03:17 AM PST by NativeNewYorker (Freepin' Jew Boy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

You shouldn’t try to steal sometihng you can’t afford to buy. The good news is that with 83 more houses and tax payers, perhaps they can afford to pay to buy the land of the next developer.


7 posted on 11/30/2007 8:04:31 AM PST by JLS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

The left hates consequences.

Hopefully the developer will get his money or forclose on the whole city.


8 posted on 11/30/2007 8:07:53 AM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
Sweet! Good the guy had the money to defend himself against the tyrants. Most people can not.
9 posted on 11/30/2007 8:07:53 AM PST by Leisler (RNC, RINO National Committee. Always was, always will be.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
But Walker disagreed that it had always been wetlands, at one point calling the city's expert witnesses "uninformed" and their opinions on topography and drainage "baseless."

That had to hurt.

10 posted on 11/30/2007 8:09:08 AM PST by martin_fierro (< |:)~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

Bump!


11 posted on 11/30/2007 8:09:49 AM PST by Enterprise (Those who "betray us" also "Betray U.S." They're called DEMOCRATS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Saundra Duffy

Ping!


12 posted on 11/30/2007 8:10:57 AM PST by Enterprise (Those who "betray us" also "Betray U.S." They're called DEMOCRATS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
The council now has the unenviable task of dealing with an enormous fiscal problem not of its making, the SF Chronic noted sympathetically.
13 posted on 11/30/2007 8:11:49 AM PST by martin_fierro (< |:)~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie

Actually puttting economic value on wetlands, etc. is a good thing and helps some of the smarter environmental groups like the nature conservancy.


14 posted on 11/30/2007 8:13:03 AM PST by HotTubDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
Half Moon Bay

Soon to become Keenan Bay.

15 posted on 11/30/2007 8:15:08 AM PST by Loyal Buckeye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
HALF MOON BAY: $36.8 million award for undevelopable land 'devastating to city'

Good. I wonder if anyone was worried before when the developer got a financial screwing by the turds in the city government turning his property into a "wetland".

16 posted on 11/30/2007 8:22:14 AM PST by from occupied ga (Your most dangerous enemy is your own government, Benito Guilinni a short man in search of a balcony)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: from occupied ga
I'd be curious to know how they came up with this value for the land. It seems a little odd that the court would render a $38.6 million judgement for a piece of property that was originally purchased for $1 million.

I'm sure this case isn't over, either . . . the city may just decide to grant the approval in lieu of paying the $38.6 million.

17 posted on 11/30/2007 8:26:56 AM PST by Alberta's Child (I'm out on the outskirts of nowhere . . . with ghosts on my trail, chasing me there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

That is a sweet verdict. I had my own land essentially stolen from me by the city of Port Townsend, Washington. I KNOW the pain of eminent domain.

My stupid liberal friends had no sympathy. Even after my story they still proudly voted no on California Prop 90, eminent domain reform.

It’s very hard to remain friends with these folks and it’s hard to understand how they can be so blind to the suffering it causes the innocent. But they believe it is decisions like these (on the behalf of “evil” developers) that will destroy small towns and cities, etc.

My belief is that it will only take a few such cases until cities that can ill-afford to steal land will simply stop doing it.

Then their belief is that “wetlands” and pristine areas will all be destroyed by development.

And so it goes...


18 posted on 11/30/2007 8:27:32 AM PST by agooga (Struggling every day to be worthy of their sacrifice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

Probably the value of 86 residences on the land.


19 posted on 11/30/2007 8:32:12 AM PST by cinives (On some planets what I do is considered normal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: NativeNewYorker

Courtesy of Google Earth.

20 posted on 11/30/2007 8:33:00 AM PST by raybbr (You think it's bad now - wait till the anchor babies start to vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-91 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