Posted on 01/25/2016 1:11:46 PM PST by huldah1776
In 1994 a New Jersey state agency known as the Casino Reinvestment Development Authority (CRDA) tried to seize the home of an elderly widow named Vera Coking, who lived just off of Atlantic City's famous beachfront boardwalk. In place of Coking's modest residence, state officials envisioned a new limousine parking lot for the neighboring Trump Plaza, the high-rise hotel and casino owned and operated by real estate tycoon Donald Trump.
Thankfully, this preposterous attempt to wield eminent domain on Trump's behalf was struck down in court. "What has occurred here is analogous to giving Trump a blank check with respect to future development on the property for casino hotel purposes," declared the Superior Court of New Jersey in a sharp ruling against the CRDA. Coking remained in her home.
Flash forward two decades, and the CRDA is back to its old dirty tricks. Today the Superior Court of New Jersey is hearing arguments in the case of Casino Reinvestment Development Authority v. Birnbaum. Once again, the state agency is trying to use eminent domain on behalf of a politically connected Atlantic City casino.
(Excerpt) Read more at reason.com ...
It doesn’t matter if his offer was extraordinary. The property was her property, and if she didn’t want to sell it to him, he should not have gotten his cronies on the CRDA to try to force her out. Period.
Blight...I can hear Trump say that about the homes around the Scotland golf course who also won their right to stay. How many redneck or country people will have their homes taken from them for the sake of the nation (Trumps 10-star tacky taste)?
I can see him wanting to send the FBI to all the places that “American Pickers” went to and use eminent domain to redistribute their wealth for when his kids and grandkids are in business. “It’s a joke!” Remember? Don’t shoot anybody.
Funny how the Casinos were supposed to bring Atlantic City out of that “blight.” Didn’t happen.
No way would I tell my mother to pass up $1.8 mil. And remember, she moved of the pig sty and her son put it on the market for 5 mil but wound up selling it at auction for approx. $500,000 and everyone netted “0”.
Excellent...thanks! Will read in a bit. It’s like reading the 1,000+ responses after a debate. :)
Yup, she would have made a lot of money if she had sold. From a purely financial standpoint, refusing to sell was a stupid, irrational decision.
But the great thing about property rights is that property owners get to make stupid and irrational decisions about their property. And they should not be forced out of their property because a developer has cronies in government.
The Trump group actually offered her $1.8 million????
They had pictures of the inside someplace...it was a sty. There were no roomies in there.
I wonder how many times this is going to be reposted??
Trump has the same views on this topic as Chris Christie. Maybe they’ve been taking lessons on good governance from the Communist Party of China.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/11/politics/chris-christie-eminent-domain-new-jersey/
The success of the project reflects on Gov. Chris Christie, who supported a set of tax incentives to encourage the Revel’s investors not to give up on construction in 2011.
Christie has not spoken about Birnbaum’s fight with the state, but when asked whether he believed eminent domain could be justified to take property from one private owner and give it to another private owner, he suggested the practice was justified depending on the facts of the case.
“It depends upon the circumstances. That is what eminent domain is all about, that’s why we have the ability for people to go to court and work through that,” Christie said during a recent visit to New Hampshire, where he is building support for a possible future presidential campaign. “I can’t give a generalized answer on that. A generalized answer is just sophomoric and I won’t give one.”
“I wonder how many times this is going to be reposted??”
Daily, until the Trump Inauguration.
The way the narrative goes, everybody blames Trump, but her problems started years before when gambling was first introduced. She was offered $1 million the mid 70's. She refused Bob Guccione, so he started his building around it and subsequently ran out of money. The unfinished steel framework stood for years until Trump bought it and had it demolished. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vera_Coking
In the 1970s, Penthouse magazine publisher Bob Guccione offered Coking $1 million for her property in order to build the Penthouse Boardwalk Hotel and Casino. She declined the offer, and Guccione started construction of the hotel-casino in 1978 around the Coking house, but ran out of money in 1980 and construction stopped. The steel framework structure was finally torn down in 1993.
http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/communities/atlantic-city_pleasantville_brigantine/vera-coking-s-a-c-home-sells-for-plus-commission/article_b158b06a-18e6-11e4-a333-0019bb2963f4.html
The winning bidder, whose name was not disclosed, took the home for $530,000 plus the 10 percent auction commission.
The dilapidated 29-room boardinghouse has been vacant since 2011, when it was first listed for $5 million. It is assessed at $580,100.
Who cares? Everything you say is true--she was, financially speaking, stupid to turn down his offer, and ended up selling the house for much less than he offered. But none of that gave Trump any right to use his government cronies to take her property and give it to him. (Also, it's worth noting that when Trump and the CRDA tried to use eminent domain to take the house, the compensation would have been much less than Trump's original offer - somewhere around 250K).
I’m sorry, was Donald a minor and not responsible for his actions in 1994?
She lived there. Home is where you hang your hat.
The Donald is only responsible for his actions, statements and political positions starting June 15, 2015.
I think you're projecting your obsession with money on her. Freedom includes the right to be let alone. I don't know how old you are, but I can tell you, from personal experience, that the elderly do not like to move. Too many memories, the comfort of the familiar and so on. So why did she mention ever greater amounts of money? Perhaps she was afraid that if she said it wasn't a matter of money, and she just wanted to stay put, they'd try to have her committed to the asylum, since everyone *knows* it's always about the money.
Not everyone wants to drastically change his surroundings in exchange for large numbers of digits in his bank account. She obviously had enough for food and shelter, and the reality is that as people get older, they stop obsessing about material wealth. Because you can't take it with you, and their children are fully-grown and can fend for themselves.
We’re just trying to help Trump get ahead of this before Hillary brings it up. It’s for his own good, dontcha know?
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.