Family to lose home by eminent domain for Costco store

Boortz online ^ | September 12, 2003 | Neal Boortz

[tdadams]

YOU FOLKS HAD BETTER BE PAYING ATTENTION TO THIS

I'm going to revisit the eminent domain issue again for a few minutes here so that I can share with you an incredible display of arrogance from an elected official.

As you know, I've been talking about a situation in Alabaster, Alabama where the city council of this community of 24,000 is trying to seize the property of about ten homeowners so that a shopping center featuring a Wal-Mart can be built there. The politicians say that it is perfectly OK to condemn and seize this property for a privately owned shopping center because, after all, the shopping center will generate more tax money than these private homes do.

We are seeing the evolution of a new standard for government seizure of private property. Its very simple. If some politician decides that your property would generate more tax revenue for government if it was owned by someone else, the politician can seize that property from you and turn it over to the government-preferred owner.

For our example of obscene government arrogance we turn our attention to Duncanville, Texas. Duncanville calls itself "A warm community of friends," and "A wonderful place to raise a family." Well, Duncanville may be a wonderful place to raise your family, just so long as some politician doesn't decide that the city could get more tax revenue if your home were to become a Costco.

Deborah Hodge has been living in her Duncanville home for 13 years. The Hodge property has a four bedroom house, a bar, pasture and swimming pool. It has been a family gathering place for over a decade. Just like the city motto says, "A wonderful place to raise your family."

A few months ago the city told Deborah to sell her property. They didn't ask her if she wanted to sell. They told her that she would sell. She would either sell, or they would just take it. The city, you see, wants a Costco store to be built on her land. The Costco would, after all, generate a lot more tax revenue than her little house and barn. So ... Duncanville is using its right of eminent domain to seize the property.

Now ... listen to this. These are the words of Duncanville city manager Kent Cagle. This is what Kent Cagle thinks about private property rights in America. Cagle told the Dallas Morning News "They don't have the option to say no to us. We have made it clear we want that property. The only thing that will be settled in court is how much we have to pay for it."

There is no freedom without property rights. What is it going to take to get Americans upset about this latest craze in local government revenue raising. You just identify the properties that could produce more taxes, seize those properties, and turn them over to developers.

[dagar]

bow

[JavaTheHutt]

With all due respect, I can't believe this.

OK. Believe what you want. But before you make up your mind completely, perhaps you should read the article at the link below. It's quite lengthy, but if you look at the sections I've quoted below, you'll get the general idea. These people were evicted, their homes were bulldozed, and the legal battle is still ongoing.

It's ok. You can say it. Go ahead. It'll make you feel better. Just say, "I apologize. I was wrong."

Homeowners suing Hurst in mall seizure

HURST, Texas (AP) - Richland Park East's final days as a neighborhood were strange days indeed. Luretta Laue spent them shooing away salvagers. Phyllis Duval dug up her day lilies and tended to her dying husband. Bulldozers trolled deserted streets; at night, looters with metal detectors scavenged by the glow of miracle-mile neon.

Then there were the guys from the Water Department who were forcing their way into 1253 West Cheryl Ave. to rip out a meter when Doris Lopez appeared from within. ``Hey,'' she told them. ``I still live here.''

But by and by, a problem surfaced. Ten problems, actually. Problems with names. People who refused buyout offers - who didn't believe that Orange Juliuses should replace living rooms, that bed and bath should yield to Bed, Bath and Beyond.

They sued. A state judge agreed in May to allow the demolitions, and the residents appealed. After eight months of legal maneuverings, their appeal is pending.

Only one problem: The homes were demolished as scheduled in May and June.

``But clearly this is a highly developed regional area,'' he says. ``I'm not saying people should or shouldn't want to live there, but the commercial development and traffic is a fact. (And) part of this is the good of the many outweigh the good of the few.''

``This is my house,'' says Phyllis Duval. Then she eyes the mud and divots at her feet and rethinks. ``This,'' she amends, ``is where my house was.''

The 10 holdouts say they'll fight on - against Hurst, against Simon DeBartolo, against the idea that this could happen. For them, it is a sad, symbolic resistance - and one that may well happen again elsewhere.

[Timesink]

See post 69 for a classic example of a newspaper journalist blatantly twisting a story to fit her own political agenda.

This is the Mainstream Media Shenanigans ping list. Please freepmail me to be added or dropped.
Please note this is a medium- to high-volume list.
Please feel free to ping me if you come across a thread you would think worthy of this ping list. I can't catch them all!

[LisaAnne]

Apparently there is another side to this story y'all might want to check out.

[Peach]

Thanks for that ping to post #69; very interesting facts in there that I had not heard.

[HurkinMcGurkin]

Lets see, there are nearly five dozen paragraphs, and only two or three even mention the "buyouts" and none go into any detail about what the courts had decided. Nice try.

[auboy]

Thank you for sharing Mr. Cagle's response (post #69).

My apologies to Mr. Cagle. I would like to substitute the "reporter" for duty as the example. It appears that the Jayson Blair "model" is alive and well, and in a town near all of us.

[Sloth]

You are a thoroughly disgusting fascist.

[Sloth]

I'd be curious as to how many people against eminent domain believe that the government has the legitimate power to do any of the above.

FWIW, I don't.

[Hostage]

Thanks for presenting the other side.

Mr. Cagle seems to think that condemning property is warranted because the road will be widened to within 12 feet of the Hodge home.

Then Mr. Cagle states that Mrs. Hodge is playing a game, that she wants more money for her property.

My first impression is that it is Mrs. Hodge's decision whether she wants to stay on her property given its nearness to a 4-lane road and given its future landlocked description to surrounding development.

If Mr. Cagle had said that the land would be used for National Guard Training or a Homeland Security Satellite Ground Tracking Station, then yes, the Government has the right to propose that her property be condemned.

But Mr. Cagle is saying that Mrs. Hodge is in the pathway of commercial development. If Mrs. Hodge has the fortitude and support to take this all the way through the courst, she will win. A good attorney might accept her case on contingency, thinking that the eventual sale value would be higher. It would send a strong message to the Mr. Cagle's of this world.

[Walkingfeather]

Well I looked through this thread and didnt see anyone mention the HUGE costco case from Cypress California where a church had collected a bunch of propertys in a run down part of town and then was going to open a church center. As soon as the deal was done they tried to ID the property so costco could build. Well the court didnt see it that way. Costco lost, the city got sued ( and lost) and I believe the city council was recalled. I thought Costco would have learned I guess not.

[montag813]

You are a thoroughly disgusting fascist.

Is that an insult, or a compliment, coming from a "Sloth"?

Seriously though, you replied to my first post and skipped the vibrant discussion which followed. Perhaps you ought to read all my posts before you make such blanket statements.

[Hostage]

Although the remark appears as extended hyperbole, the poster is technically correct. Your commment is fascist, meaning dictatorial.

Mr.Cagle will be hard pressed in court to argue that Mrs. Hidge's property is condemned because it impedes commercial development.

Personally I hope he gets his balls handed to him.

[montag813]

Although the remark appears as extended hyperbole, the poster is technically correct. Your commment is fascist, meaning dictatorial.

Nonsense. How is "eminent domain", if legally applied, considered "fascist"? If her local elected body indeed decided this in accordnace with applicable laws and standards, I don't see how it is unlawful. How do you respond to the millions of residences moved or destroyed for the Federal highway or railroad systems? Was that "fascist" too?

My other remark was strictly a monetary one, in that I would gladly take 200% of my home's worth in a bubble market. With interest rates this cheap she could buy another home at record low rates and buy a 2nd home to rent and provide income...a built-in retirement account.

[Sloth]

How is "eminent domain", if legally applied, considered "fascist"?

It's NOT legally applied, that's the point. Eminent domain can ONLY be used for public use (e.g., bridges, highways, water treatment plants, etc.). It is authorized by the Fifth amendment: "...nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." There is no provision for seizure for *private* use, nor should there be.

[Sloth]

Seriously though, you replied to my first post and skipped the vibrant discussion which followed. Perhaps you ought to read all my posts before you make such blanket statements.

As a matter of fact, I read the entire thread before posting. Subsequent statements merely confirmed my impressions of your first post.

[demsux]

As stupid as it sounds, if anybody is worried about their land being taken for something like this, your best defense is to document the wildlife there, have some biologists do a few surveys and write-ups about the part it plays in the local ecosystem, and get the enviros on your side. Had a friend do something like this (bugged the hell out of him to do it) and it worked, amazing the "rights" that a certain type of bird has, while we humans don't.

Outstanding approach...that'll scare the hell out of most developers.

A few strategically placed "arrow heads" will bring this thing to an immediate halt.

[auboy]

1. I am not involved in the exchanges between montag813 and Sloth on this particular thread.

2. Mrs. Hidge can do whatever she wants to do with HER property, as far as I'm concerned, and live with her decision.

3. I do not live in Duncanville, Texas, so I really don't know squat about the situation, or who is being honest and who is lying.

4. My initial reaction was to jump to conclusions after reading the article, and blast Mr. Cagle. I should know by now that every dispute has two sides, and it is unwise to choose sides before hearing from both parties.

5. I should also know that many "reporters" have missed their calling, and should be writing strictly fiction since they have a hard time getting their facts straight.

[Hostage]

You answered your own question. The Federal Highway is in the government interest. Commercial development is in commercial interest.

Your argument is fascist meaning dictatorial as it pertains to justifying the means to an end.

The monetary argument is not yours to decide. You are dictating your personal view to Mrs. Hodge.

[Protagoras]

I'm sure they wish that they hadn't been so greedy.

People who want to keep their own property = greedy.

The bizarro world of "conservatism" on FreeRepublic reveals itself again.