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

To: tpaine
I work for a water company. We have easements. If we need to repair or upgrade a water main, and it requires working in an easement, we are entirely within our rights to do just that. All our easements are recorded in the landowner's deeds. And any repairs or upgrades are in the public's interest. This guy just lost it!
5 posted on 01/27/2007 1:53:12 PM PST by Dr. Bogus Pachysandra ("Don't touch that thing")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Dr. Bogus Pachysandra

When the property was taken doesn't make the taking any more just.


33 posted on 01/27/2007 2:11:29 PM PST by Old Professer (The critic writes with rapier pen, dips it twice, and writes again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Dr. Bogus Pachysandra
I guess it isn't clear to me, from the wording in the article, whether they were putting a new line in an existing easement or served him notice they were taking a new easement for the new line.
45 posted on 01/27/2007 2:21:33 PM PST by Kay Ludlow (Free market, but cautious about what I support with my dollars)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Dr. Bogus Pachysandra

But that's not what happened here. The city wasn't satisfied with the easement they had and wanted another one - better, larger, longer - whatever.

Normally when somebody wants an easement, they PAY the landowner for it, if he agrees to grant one.

If I had a small easement to use part of your road for ingress and egress to my property, and I decided I needed to expand that so I could drive directly to an outbuilding I planned to put at the back of my property, I would have to come to you and ask for the easement. You would then say "Yes", "No", "Hell no", or "Okay, but pay me $x,000.00 for the easement." We would then lay out the length, width and what the usage of the easement would be, reduce it to a legal description, you grant it to me, I pay you, and I go record the easement.

The city didn't do that. They were warned to get off his property. He shouldn't have shot them, but they pushed him over the edge. The real tragedy is that it was just city workmen sent to do a job, including the deputy, who were shot instead of the city managers who made the decision.

The man who did the shooting worked at a battery recycling plant. He obviously couldn't afford to fight the city machine with lawyers, so he used the means afforded by the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights. The real tragedy is that he shot himself. There's a good chance the jury would either nullify his actions or certainly give great weight to the mitigating factors. If I was on the jury, I would. My argument with him would be that he shot the wrong people.

Maybe next time the city decides to steal access to someone's property they'll think twice and do it the right way - negotiate and PAY for it!


55 posted on 01/27/2007 2:28:26 PM PST by Jezebelle (Our tax dollars are paying the ACLU to sue the Christ out of us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Dr. Bogus Pachysandra
All our easements are recorded in the landowner's deeds. And any repairs or upgrades are in the public's interest. This guy just lost it!

I think you missed this part:

Residents say officials grew dissatisfied with their existing easement, and announced they were going to excavate a new sewer line across the landowner's property.

97 posted on 01/27/2007 3:00:20 PM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Dr. Bogus Pachysandra

From what's written here, this doesn't sound like a simple matter of repairing or upgrading the existing easement. This sounds like someone in public works was determined to show the land owner who's got the biggest d*** in the county. Unfortunately, "Mr. Johnson" got a bunch of other people killed. They got in this guy's face and, as you say, he lost it; a very avoidable conclusion.


118 posted on 01/27/2007 3:22:48 PM PST by Redcloak ("Shooting makes me feel better!" -Aeryn Sun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Dr. Bogus Pachysandra
the guy surely lost it, but you seem to miss the key phrase in here:

"Residents say officials grew dissatisfied with their existing easement, and announced they were going to excavate a new sewer line across the landowner's property."

you have rights outside your easement ?

try and effect a repair on an easement without going outside the easment.
121 posted on 01/27/2007 3:23:53 PM PST by stylin19a
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Dr. Bogus Pachysandra

i believe there was to be a change in the easement, but it doesn't elaborate... i owned land with a power line easement... which allowed power line employees access... they broke into my shed and stole 400 bucks worth of tools... from then on i demanded to be notified of their access or i would put up a fence... they called...

i believe he was pushed...

teeman


168 posted on 01/27/2007 5:17:24 PM PST by teeman8r
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Dr. Bogus Pachysandra
My own experiences with government reinforce my belief that most governments in this nation treat people as though they exist to make life convenient for the officials. I expect that the local planning board never even tried to talk to this guy, they just resolved what they wanted to do and did it. This does not mitigate Watson's actions. Shooting at people who are doing their job to install a water line is sick. Shooting at council members who voted to install it is also sick.

The path we've travelled finally landed us in the briar patch. Governments abused their power to take land by process, payment, and purpose. People abused the courts by holding up needed projects with frivolous lawsuits to can extort the system. Corrupt officials and citizens used the power of eminent domain for personal enrichment.

Now how do we fix it? I could tell you how to amend the US Constitution to mitigate the damage done by rogue courts, but I haven't got even a guess how to force governments to treat people with respect and pay them approprately for their land.

381 posted on 01/28/2007 3:32:36 AM PST by sig226 (See my profile for the democrat culture of corruption list.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Dr. Bogus Pachysandra
Maybe I missed something here but the article seems to indicate that they were installing a NEW line in a NEW route. If so how can they just serve you today and start tomorrow. There must be some legal challenges and a process available (it is possible the guy ignored the process and then lost it when they took it). Has this country gone so far downhill that you can condemn a guys property with ANY due process?
396 posted on 01/28/2007 7:51:30 AM PST by mad_as_he$$ (So many geeks so few circuses.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Dr. Bogus Pachysandra
I get the distinct feelong we are not getting the whole story, here.

The 'guy' worked nights. He got off work at 5 AM. The city crew showed up at 7 AM.

God only knows how many 'negotiations' were attempted while the man would normally have been sleeping.

Anyone else here have more than a passing familliarity with sleep deprivation?

What is not being said is what would be dug up, either, but the bottom line is that despite the warning, the city folks just went ahead and moved in. He only did what he said he would.

I wonder what, if any concessions were made to try to work with the guy?

397 posted on 01/28/2007 7:56:44 AM PST by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

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