Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here
Posted on 06/27/2005 9:07:38 AM PDT by WayneLusvardi
The Coming Revenge of the "New Londoners"
Could a little known telecom class action case point the way to justice for homeowners caught up in confiscatory redevelopment projects?
"A man's home is...somebody else's piggybank." -- Glenn Reynolds
Perhaps it is appropriate that the name of the City in the recent U.S. Supreme Court eminent domain case is New London, Connecticut. Over 200 years ago in "Old London" and in the Old World of Europe all land was owned by the "sovereign." The sovereign ruler leased his land only to land barons. There was no such thing as private property.
However, by 1215 England's King John was forced to sign the Magna Carta which restricted his ability to reclaim land. By the American Revolution in 1776 citizens in the "New London" of America decided "the people" were sovereign. In 1789 the U.S. Constitution provided for just compensation for governmental takings of land for public uses. On June 23, 2005, in the case of Kelo vs. New London, the U.S. Supreme Court found no reason to limit the existing definition of public use which included seizing property by eminent domain to turn it over to private developers for profit making redevelopment projects (http://www.ij.org/private_property/connecticut/).
The Supreme Court decision underscores the mostly accurate perception in the mind of the public that the courts are on the side of big government and big corporations, and only secondarily the small homeowner or landowner (http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=8357). Based on this writers experience in working on the governmental side of eminent domain for 20-years, my guess is that this case will be indelible in the memory of the public who will seek political retribution at the first visible opportunity that arises.
But could homeowners ultimately find justice despite this adverse high court ruling? Perhaps a little known class action court case could point the way for property owners to form land syndicates that would preempt condemnation actions by local governments for redevelopment projects and make them unnecessary.
In 2001, a class action settlement was finalized with more than 50,000 landowners in 16 states and Thorougbred Technology and Communications ("T-Cubed"), the telecom subsidiary of Norfolk Southern Corporation, owner of one of the four largest railroads in the nation (see: http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1022862310259).
The Thoroughbred Telecom case involved the purchase of easements from landowners holding ownership rights underlying Norfolk Southern's railroad corridors to allow installation of fiber optic wire conduits. The presiding federal court approved the formation of an aggrieved class because it was ruled that Thoroughbred Communications was not a communications company but a real estate land assembler. The court further ruled that the railroad only held easements restricted to railroad purposes. As such, it did not have the powers of eminent domain to condemn easements for fiber optic cables within its own railroad corridors.
Members of the class action received upfront compensation of $6,000 to $30,000 per linear mile plus 7.5% per year or more of the revenue obtained by T-Cubed from selling additional conduits. This allowed a large class of landowners for the first time to participate in the profits of a semi-public project. (see: http://news.com.com/2100-1033-258333.html?legacy=cnet)
Homeowners may now see the handwriting on the wall so to speak that they will be unable to successfully challenge a public resolution for necessity to take their properties for the public purpose of private redevelopment. As a result they may now be more willing to voluntarily form a land syndicate to pre-assemble the land, sell their homes to an intermediary land assembler and syndicator, and in return receive a percentage of the rent from a long-term lease of the land for a new commercial development.
Unlike the T-Cubed case, the formation of a land syndicate would not even require approval of a court. However, such syndicates may need to go to court to enter a legal challenge to the resolution of public necessity sought by local redevelopment agencies. Now that the U.S. Supreme Court has made it fruitless to fight city hall in property takings for redevelopment projects, the typical "holdout problem" to land assemblage may be less of an impediment.
Should land syndicates emerge, it wouldn't be too long before other public takings would also gravitate away from the coercive eminent domain model and toward a more voluntary syndicate and annuity compensation model. This is precisely what happened during the national build-out of the fiber optic network across the U.S. during the telecom bubble of 1999-2002. The telecom industry devised a compensation system based on a flat unit price per linear mile or linear foot to purchase easement rights from landowners. Because they were able to commodify the compensation the typical "hold-out" problem found in eminent domain was surmounted (see Wayne Lusvardi and Charles B. Warren, "What Price an Easement? Setting Market Value in Fiber Optic Corridors," Public Utilities Fortnightly, July 1, 2001).
In 1513 the Italian political adviser Niccolo Machiavelli cautioned princes that:
"Still, a prince should make himself feared in such a way that, even if he gets no love, he gets no hate either; .and this will be the result if only the prince will keep his hands off the property of his subjects or citizens.but above all, he should not confiscate people's property, because men are quicker to forget the death of a father than the loss of a patrimony."
The formation of land syndicates would be politically irresistible by local politicians desiring to stay in office. It is probably too late for the homeowners in New London to form a syndicate and get justice in their situation. But it may be that entrepreneurial New Londoners, like the "New Londoners" of the past American Revolution, will emerge across the country in reaction to the recent Supreme Court ruling.
Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here
IMHO, I think that the developer that wants the land should purchase for each displaced family, a home in New London with a value of a minimum of 2.2 million dollars, in excellent new or almost new condition. I think that each family should be given two brand new vehicles OF THIER CHOICE as well, and eligible for trade-in every 2 years. I think that the city exercising the law of emenent domain should have to forgive property taxes on the properties and vehicles for the rest of the lives of the residents, as well as all residents of the city that were displaced during the event, eg: adult children regardless of age when the property was acquired. All other municipal taxes such as water and sewer use for each displaced family and thier adult offspring should be paid by the private firm or corporation now occupying the family's original land in question. The city and the corporation should be responsible for hiring a reputable moving company to pack, move, unpack, and help the residents settle into their new homes. The city, in the interest of ensuring that the new homes are kept up to city standards, should be responsible for maintaining the gardens, pool(s), recreational facilities on the grounds of the homes, as well as the driveway and any cosmetic improvements that need to be done to the home to keep it well away from the "blight status" that got the first home torn down. Making all of that part of the package would have leveled the playing field just a little for all of us poor folks that don't want to give up our humble homes for a Regency and a Kohl's.
I haven't read ANYTHING speaking out against this in the paper, and I LIVE IN CONNECTICUT!!!!
Or they could just shoot the bastards.
Interesting that New London, CT is ground zero for two white hot political issues...eminent domain and base closures.
BTT!!!!!!
And just who are you proposing be shot?
About 80% of the politicians and judges.
So you are advocating the murder of hundreds of thousands of people. And which Tyrant gets to decide who Dies?
And all this rather than people just doing their civic duty and VOTING? Brilliant just brilliant.
Parts of Wikipedia are CONSTANTLY re-written and guarded by Socialists, Communists and nihilists, especially from the Peoples' Republic of Berkeley. Visit Wikipedia at your peril.
Your screen name says it all. It looks that there is absolutely nothing in your book worth fighting and dying for. Our founding fathers fought a war over far less tyranny than what is imposed on us daily.
Since when is the wholesale murder of hundreds of thousands people because you don't like their opinions something "worth fighting and dying for"? Our founding fathers did NOT take the law into their own hands in such a manner or have such thoughts.
And they did not fight a war over the actions of their OWN representative government but because they had NO representation. "We should KILL them because we don't agree" was NOT one of their slogans.
I don't believe in taking the EASY way out to avoid the far more difficult process of CONVINCING fellow citizens that our ideas are right. Such nonsense is spouted by the immature.
Posts, articles, quotes, and links on the SCOTUS land grab:
http://www.neoperspectives.com/scotuspropertythieving.htm
sounds good bump
Your numbers are way too low!
Does anyone besides me “see” the paradox (planned coincidence?) about how the legal industry’s access to due process processes and its access of the police power of the state were COMPLETELY corrupted by TWO of the Supreme Court’s decisions this past week?
First, there is the eminent domain and private property decision where due process and property rights were determined to be whatever municipalities and counties and their access to the local courts say they want it to be. The police power of the state is (already) now in place to be more forcefully used to exercise and ensure the new power given by the Supreme Court.
Now, the state/the legal industry must turn the New Londoners INTO CRIMINALS in order to remove them from “their” property since they say they are not moving anyway. In essence, the Supreme Court decision here is nothing more than a rubber stamp on the already existing, “broken,” and systemically irreparable legal system, its organic relation to counties and municipalities, and their necessary “war” against the REAL people.
Second, there is the refusal to hold the police power of the state responsible for failure to enforce restraining orders. “The Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that police cannot be sued for how they enforce restraining orders, ending a lawsuit by a Colorado woman who claimed police did not do enough to prevent her estranged husband from killing her three young daughters.”
What is the point in any longer paying for and seeking the filing of restraining orders?
What is the incentive, now, for property owners to pay property taxes if they can lose their property, and become labeled as criminals by the (legal industry “puppet”) police power of the state, anyway?
The legal industry and its glove-puppet Supreme Court is purposely putting the citizenry our country in a serious bind, with nowhere to turn. NO political leaders locally or nationally are speaking-out about the contradictions. (A county commissioner’s or municipal council-member's life career COULD be built on rejecting these decisions as a permanent political, philosophical, and MORAL position.)
That is why my veteran wife, who now feels she risked her life on United States democratic principals that no longer functionally exist, and I are flying our flag upside down, and are urging others to do the same for July 4.
Awaken the people whatever way you can! “It’s the legal industry, stupid.” Expose and end black collar crime NOW, or prepare for its imperial rule. . . .
Hdrabon
Monroe, NC
"Don't piss down my back and tell me its raining." The Outlaw Josey Wales
Does anyone besides me “see” the paradox (planned coincidence?) about how the legal industry’s access to due process processes and its access of the police power of the state were COMPLETELY corrupted by TWO of the Supreme Court’s decisions this past week?
First, there is the eminent domain and private property decision where due process and property rights were determined to be whatever municipalities and counties and their access to the local courts say they want it to be. The police power of the state is (already) now in place to be more forcefully used to exercise and ensure the new power given by the Supreme Court.
Now, the state/the legal industry must turn the New Londoners INTO CRIMINALS in order to remove them from “their” property since they say they are not moving anyway. In essence, the Supreme Court decision here is nothing more than a rubber stamp on the already existing, “broken,” and systemically irreparable legal system, its organic relation to counties and municipalities, and their necessary “war” against the REAL people.
Second, there is the refusal to hold the police power of the state responsible for failure to enforce restraining orders. “The Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that police cannot be sued for how they enforce restraining orders, ending a lawsuit by a Colorado woman who claimed police did not do enough to prevent her estranged husband from killing her three young daughters.”
What is the point in any longer paying for and seeking the filing of restraining orders?
What is the incentive, now, for property owners to pay property taxes if they can lose their property, and become labeled as criminals by the (legal industry “puppet”) police power of the state, anyway?
The legal industry and its glove-puppet Supreme Court is purposely putting the citizenry our country in a serious bind, with nowhere to turn. NO political leaders locally or nationally are speaking-out about the contradictions. (A county commissioner’s or municipal council-member's life career COULD be built on rejecting these decisions as a permanent political, philosophical, and MORAL position.)
That is why my veteran wife, who now feels she risked her life on United States democratic principals that no longer functionally exist, and I are flying our flag upside down, and are urging others to do the same for July 4.
Awaken the people whatever way you can! “It’s the legal industry, stupid.” Expose and end black collar crime NOW, or prepare for its imperial rule. . . .
Hdrabon
Monroe, NC
I love this http://www.freestarmedia.com/hotellostliberty2.html I think we need to do this to all 5 of those that decided against property rights.
Is there anything but RINOS and liberals left?
I dont follow news and I was wondering how many conservative members of both houses have used the soapbox to condem the SC ruling.
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.