Posted on 12/07/2002 5:39:00 AM PST by sauropod
This could be an excellent FReeper project to correct a huge injustice in the making.
My country has so changed from what it used to be. Soulless old men run it now. Look at this result!
'Pod
"Legitimate purpose"? How does that compare with "compelling interest," may I ask?
Has the law changed that much?
The State thinks that all property ultimately belongs to them and they let us own it on suffrage. 'Pod
"People have a right to own property," she said. "They're stripping away the Constitution."
After Longhi issued his ruling, Dan Swarbrick yelled, "You soulless old man. You're stealing a family's home. This is not over."
Clara Halper said the only good thing she sees coming out of the whole proceeding is that a strong property rights movement is growing across the country and in New Jersey.
"We are joining to protect and preserve what our forefathers fought for -- the American Dream. This is not what the authors of the Constitution envisioned," she said.
When the Stamp Act, Quartering Act, etc., were issued by the British government, I'm sure it seemed a dark time for the American colonists. However, in the final analysis these tyrannical dictates were beneficial, because they moved a great number of people off the fence and on to the side of the Revolution.
The result was ultimately our Free Republic.
We can only hope that this is the case here.
????? That's the legitimate purpose? Condemn a farm and replace it with "open space"??????
Acts like these are occurring across our land. 'Pod
They just come and take it.
I have to say that the usual course of events in cases like these is for the State to offer pennies on the dollar.
At least here, they are not insulting the farmowner with a ridiculous compensation offer. 'Pod
If you have no land available for a desperately needed new school, for example, and the only available acreage of any size is a chunk of farmland, THAT might be considered a "compelling interest."
But the fact is, from what I can see here (and I'm not familiar at all with this situation outside of what 'Pod has posted), it looks like the city of Piscataway is in the grip of Eco-freaks who all of a sudden, living on the East Coast, realized that there are a lot of people around and they think they need "nature." So they used this pretext that these people MIGHT sell to a developer as an excuse to condemn the land.
In the first place, it was only hearsay. In the second place, even if a developer DID buy the land to develop homes, the city has every right to expect the developer to come up with a plan to provide infrastructure and services to the development, so this is a red herring as well.
Cities in MY experience LIKE to have developed areas. Developed land pays higher tax rates, and economy of means leads to lower costs for services per capita.
The Lefties are lying through their teeth about this whole thing. That's my take on it. Here's hoping justice can be done on appeal.
These people are being made to suffer the consequences of bad planning on the part of Piscataway.
I bet the imaginary 100 lots could sell for $20,000 each.
The application died in August when the Halpers rejected an offer of slightly more than $3 million for the development rights for their farm, and the township restarted the condemnation.
Wahler said then and again yesterday that he did not understand why the Halpers rejected the offer since they could have kept the farm in perpetuity or, if they later decided to sell, could do so for market value to someone else who wanted to operate the farm.
In this case, I do not know what the complaint actually is. They could have kept their property, done whatever they wanted, except develop it commercially, and have received $3 million to boot.
I beleive that they should have been able to develop the land, if they wished, in this case it is not what they said they planned to do.
I don't think they should loose their land even now, but it seems they had a good deal going if they really only wanted to keep the land.
What do you think?
(Still agree their property rights have definitely been violated.)
Hank
Yeah. I understand your point. Huge difference there.
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.