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

Skip to comments.

Family to lose home by eminent domain for Costco store
Boortz online ^ | September 12, 2003 | Neal Boortz

Posted on 09/12/2003 8:56:23 AM PDT by tdadams

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220221-238 next last
To: auboy
Your initial reaction to blast Cagle was the correct one. If you look at his response, none of it has a firm legal basis making it all the more silly to see him advise Mrs. Hodge to seek counsel.

For all we know Cagle may have had that 4-lane road placed in front of Mrs. Hodge to squeeze her decision.

As you can infer from my position I don't take kindly to government employees that think they are a law unto themselves. I have had numerous experiences where I have reprimanded city staff for construing policy as law. Policy is not law, and many government underlings have difficulty separating the two.

The bottomline is that cavalier government employees get their jurisdictions into unnecessary trouble and legal expense over matters that can be solved in one closed door meeting. In case you haven't noticed, most government employees and their legal departments are not the brightest bulbs in the cabinet. They are frequently wasteful and insensitive to the public.

As I said, I hope the court hands Mr. Cagle's balls to him. He needs to be dressed down, possibly fired.
201 posted on 09/16/2003 11:35:43 AM PDT by Hostage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 198 | View Replies]

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

What the hell is the "government interest"? You think that means it's in your interest? Talk about "fascist"! Sheesh. Governments always use eminent domain proclaiming how commerce will be improved and their projects will serve the public interest. But governments are notorious for working against the public interest with highway projects. New York is a prime example, where tens of thousands of homes and businesses were destroyed to make room for Robert Moses' Cross Bronx Expressway, which is a parking lot 24/7 and destroyed one of the most vibrant, commerically viable areas of New York, all with "eminent domain". Is this not "fascist"? I see the government as another business entity competing with commerical enterprises, with nearly always bad effect. Why can't a community or city decide to use the law for commerical reasons if they feel it will economically benefit them more than a highway or light rail system? Your Fifth Amendment article routed through the 14th (to the States) would allow "due process" to include monetary compensation.

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

You name-calling is infantile. Eminent domain is all about a means to an end. And is no less fascistic than commerical uses, IF LEGAL (and I am not saying that in this particular case that it is). I am not arguing the merits of this case, but regarding government vs. commercial rights using eminent domain.

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

Who the hell is "dictating"? Take a freakin lax. I said "I would"...my personal opinion. If she wants to blow a 200% balloon on her appraised housing price, that's her own issue.

202 posted on 09/16/2003 11:44:01 AM PDT by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies]

To: Hostage
I have had numerous experiences where I have reprimanded city staff for construing policy as law. Policy is not law, and many government underlings have difficulty separating the two.

Especially when they see $$$$ signs dancing in their heads.

The bottomline is that cavalier government employees get their jurisdictions into unnecessary trouble and legal expense over matters that can be solved in one closed door meeting.

Wasting time,money, and goodwill.

In your experience, do these government employees lack proper training and understanding, or have they let their perception of power go to their heads?

203 posted on 09/16/2003 12:11:41 PM PDT by auboy (France… the world's leading exporter of arrogance - Democrats… their #1 customer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: auboy
Power goes to the head. It is human nature. Our entire system of government is designed to stem the flow of power to the tryrannic side of human nature.

In the aggregate sense, government employees always lack training and understanding because there is no contrasting alternative to their rule other than a competing private sector, unless the private sector has enlisted their support in which case the private sector is no longer competing, rather is complicit.

When a court limits the power of government over competing interests in the private sector, the employees of government become better trained and sensitive as a result. The problem is that the court is often a large and wasteful expense to accomplish this type of training and education. Compounding the problem is that the government does not pay for this legal training and education.

204 posted on 09/16/2003 12:25:32 PM PDT by Hostage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies]

To: tdadams
bookmarked to read later...
205 posted on 09/16/2003 12:26:30 PM PDT by Freedom2specul8 (Please pray for our troops.... http://anyservicemember.navy.mil/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: montag813
You said it was her own issue if she, how did you say it, "wants to blow a 200% balloon on her appraised housing price"?

So it's her own issue? I agree. Welcome to America.
206 posted on 09/16/2003 12:27:27 PM PDT by Hostage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

To: still lurking

Still Lurking smiles upon the city council and applauds its firmness in liquidating kulak obstructionism.

207 posted on 09/16/2003 12:30:57 PM PDT by steve-b
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: 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.

No kidding. Did you forget the part in my earlier post where I said it was still being fought in the courts? Did you not understand the big words in the article where it described the former homeowners continuing battle, even after the bulldozers had demolished their homes? You state that there isn't anything in the article about what the courts had decided. Let me refresh your memory. The article states, "After eight months of legal maneuverings, their appeal is pending."

Your lack of reading comprehension ability is a dead give away that you're another victim of public education. I understand now why you're having such a difficult time grasping the concept here.

208 posted on 09/16/2003 12:32:55 PM PDT by JavaTheHutt ( Gun Control - The difference between Lexington Green and Tiennimen Square.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: JavaTheHutt
No kidding. Did you forget the part in my earlier post where I said it was still being fought in the courts? Did you not understand the big words in the article where it described the former homeowners continuing battle, even after the bulldozers had demolished their homes?

The article you linked was from 1998, five years ago. It isn't still being fought in court. I did a google search and could find not one article about this since 1998 or 1999. Odd, isn't it? Maybe you should read the dates on things you post before you keep acting like its recent. I actually wasted a good bit of time reading the entire article and seeking out other ones.

What I originally said, that you keep ignoring, is that what you are posting and linking do not say anything about the legal issues surrounding the Hurst Economic Development Corp. and the laws that allow the local government to use eminent domain. Nor do they mention anything about the court ordered offers. You just keep saying people were kicked out of their homes without compensation when there is no evidence that anything like that occurred.

Your lack of reading comprehension ability is a dead give away that you're another victim of public education. I understand now why you're having such a difficult time grasping the concept here.

Funny stuff. Is the 9:00 act completely different from the 7:00 show?

209 posted on 09/16/2003 12:39:50 PM PDT by HurkinMcGurkin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies]

To: montag813
Perhaps you ought to read all my posts before you make such blanket statements.

One does not need to read the entire text of Mein Kampf to recognize it as the product of a warped and evil mind.

210 posted on 09/16/2003 1:00:01 PM PDT by steve-b
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: montag813
How is "eminent domain", if legally applied

Eminent domain cannot, by definition, be "legally applied" to seize property from one person and give it to another. Only "public use" (e.g. essential government infrastructure such as fortifications and post roads) is eligible.

211 posted on 09/16/2003 1:02:15 PM PDT by steve-b
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

To: auboy
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.

Nothing in Cagle's attempt to wriggle out of the obloquy that has deservedly falled upon his head addresses the issue, which is that he is attempting to abuse the concept of "eminent domain" (which, as a matter of Constitutional law, is limited to "public use") for private gain.

212 posted on 09/16/2003 1:04:32 PM PDT by steve-b
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 198 | View Replies]

To: steve-b
Refuseniks must be made into an example for the others.
213 posted on 09/16/2003 1:05:45 PM PDT by Liberal Classic (Quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 207 | View Replies]

To: montag813
Why can't a community or city decide to use the law for commerical reasons if they feel it will economically benefit them

Just give up and accept that when people call you "fascist", it is simply a statement of fact, like calling Michael Jordan "tall" or Jerome Nadler "fat".

214 posted on 09/16/2003 1:06:52 PM PDT by steve-b
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

To: tdadams
It sounds like the Texas Range Wars all over again. The Cattle/Rail Barons vs. the Farmers.

-PJ

215 posted on 09/16/2003 1:07:53 PM PDT by Political Junkie Too (It's not safe yet to vote Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: steve-b
How interesting it is that you attack me for questioning her sincerity. If she does not want to sell her property then do not entertain any offer; say no and mean it. Defend yourself against any aggresive entitiy with vigor. Don't cry foul because you screwed up.
216 posted on 09/16/2003 1:47:08 PM PDT by still lurking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 207 | View Replies]

To: steve-b
Just give up and accept that when people call you "fascist", it is simply a statement of fact, like calling Michael Jordan "tall" or Jerome Nadler "fat".

ROTFL!

However we may not have Wadler to pick on much longer, I heard he had that stomach procedure that Al Roker got.

217 posted on 09/16/2003 1:52:17 PM PDT by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies]

To: Protagoras
People who want to keep their own property = greedy.

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

Nothing surprises me after the support for the "No Child Left Behind" stuff (i.e. another federal mandate that is unfunded and gets involved in state and local affairs).

218 posted on 09/16/2003 1:53:13 PM PDT by af_vet_rr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: steve-b
One does not need to read the entire text of Mein Kampf to recognize it as the product of a warped and evil mind.

I think a Rhesus Monkey could come up with a more intelligent response.

219 posted on 09/16/2003 1:54:52 PM PDT by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 210 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too
It sounds like the Texas Range Wars all over again. The Cattle/Rail Barons vs. the Farmers.

Yep. Comes down to money. The commercial entities have it, the local government wants it. Those who would stand between the two will soon have their land taken.

I wonder how many here would truly stand up for themselves, if it was their land, perhaps land that their ancestors settled. I hear this "I would sell out in a heartbeat for 200%" line and I think "what if it was land that had been in your family for generations, and they wanted to build a Wal-Mart or a strip mall over it".

My family has land that we would never ever sell. It was paid for by our ancestors in blood, sweat, and tears (cliche? perhaps, but true).

220 posted on 09/16/2003 2:01:26 PM PDT by af_vet_rr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 215 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220221-238 next last

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.

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