Say Anything Blog

This is a major problem in North Dakota, and it’s not just isolated to Burleigh County.  There seems to be an understanding among the political powers that be in this state which has them all thinking that the state should control all economic and community development.

Heh, this is hardly a problem unique to ND.

You guys are just late getting into the game. Be grateful for that.

Mr. Peterson claims “eminent domain is used sparingly.” Yet the Institute for Justice, which represented the property owners in Kelo v. New London, found 10,000 cases in which condemnation was used or threatened for the benefit of private developers during a five-year period. The true number is probably much higher, as the study relied on newspaper articles and recorded cases, reflecting a fraction of such land grabs.

In practice, that is all it takes to seize people’s homes and businesses: the unilateral judgment of politicians that society would be better served if the property were in different hands.

I wrote about that on my blog a long time ago when I was still actively blogging. You can read it HERE.

Let’s not forget about the case in Cincinnati, Ohio either:

Joy and Carl Gamble say they just want to retire peacefully in the dream home where they’ve lived for more than 35 years. But the Cincinnati suburb of Norwood has other plans for the property.

Using its power of eminent domain, the city wants to take a neighborhood that it considers to be deteriorating and boost its fortunes by allowing a $125 million development of offices and shops.
…….
“It is our home, what’s ours is ours, and it should be that way,” Joy Norwood told a rally Wednesday morning before the hearing. “It was a home worth fighting home, and we do want it back.”
…….
The city and a private developer contend that Norwood had the right to acquire the property. They also argue that eminent domain applied not because the area is “blighted,” but because it is “deteriorating.”
…….
“When the municipalities and the people that have lots of money decide they want what you have, you don’t own it,” Gamble said. “You bought it, you paid for it, you kept the taxes up, you kept the appearance up, but it wasn’t yours.”

And more on it here:

The city of Norwood is trying to use eminent domain to seize remaining properties for a developer who wants to build a $125 million project of offices, shops and restaurants.

The city says the tax revenue will boost the its economic fortunes. Homeowners Carl and Joy Gamble say the city abused its authority to seize property by declaring the neighborhood **deteriorating**, a less severe condition than blighted. (Emphasis mine)
………..
“Does it make any difference that it appears that the private developer was the one that started this ball rolling?” she said.

Read more HERE.

Now I posted above to give you a background on what the Kelo decision has brought about.

Let’s now take a look at the final outcome of what happened in Kelo....

Remember Kelo?

Force out the home owners so the city of Kelo can give the land to a developer for more taxes for the city of Kelo….

Well it sits barren and looks to be that way for a LONG time.

The Kelo decision, the forcing of home owners out of thier homes…for nothing.

The Supreme Court’s majority, in their June 2005 Kelo ruling, declared that “public use” as stated in the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution really means “public purpose” — that is, instead of the government being able to take land through eminent domain only for the purpose of building a public structure or creating a public service (road, bridge, school, park, etc.), the government can take land for any reason it believes a worthy one. In the case of New London, the city believed that demolishing occupied, functioning houses that had stood for over 100 years and developing “something else” that would garner the city more tax revenues was a worthy public purpose.

What has been done with the property since then?

Why, that is a very good question….

Next month marks the third anniversary of the controversial U.S. Supreme Court decision that allowed the city of New London to use the power of eminent domain. But, not much progress has been made in Fort Trumbull, leaving some wondering whether the homeowners were forced out for nothing.

This is from an older article, at the time I wrote about this portion it was 06/04/08.

I disagree with the part that says, NOT MUCH has happened - in actuality, NOTHING has happened to the land.

The Corcoran Jennison company has lost its exclusive right to develop nearly the entire northern half of the Fort Trumbull peninsula, officials from the New London Development Corp. said in an interview Friday with the editorial board of The Day.

They couldn’t come up with the financing - so the whole development went bust.

Dozens of destroyed homes and surely more than $200 million later, including costs and lost property taxes to the city, there’s nothing.

Article Courtesy of Newsbusters

The way I see it, is that the greed of the city of Kelo had for an increase in taxes coming from a major development / complex that would far surpass the taxes being received by the homeowners, has come back to bite them.

They decided to be greedy, forced the homeowners out of thier homes, and the development of the land has gone bust, so instead of an increase in taxes coming from the properties, they now have NOTHING.

Sickening.

What’s wrong with respecting peoples freedom (which property rights are an important component of)?

What’s going to happen to US industry when the global warming extremists like John McCain double the price of electricity?  I would think all these factories will close and set up in countries where they aren’t scared of technology.

Anybody who is the least bit concerned with property rights in the US, especially after the terrible Kelo decision, needs to read this speech by former California Supreme Court Justice and current federal appellate court judge, Janice Rogers Brown, entitled ”Fifty Ways to Lose Your Freedom.”

In it, this daughter of an Alabama sharecropper gives what may be the most robust and inspired defense of personal property rights ever written.

“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

Am I missing something? Kelo vs. New London was the land/home owner Kelo vs. the City of New London. Secondly: the home owner would and must be paid fair market value for the property as part of the condemnation procedure.  They cannot just “take” it. The contention in this proceeding is often, “what is the property worth?” Fair market value?
I served on P nd Z Commissions in Iowa and Minnesota,both communities in growth stages, land use plans are not easy things to create, nor are they easy to get approved by the public--hearings, etc. Are such plans good?  Bad? These are things that can be fairly judged in hind-sight.

1) The people didn’t want to sell.  They shouldn’t have to move because a developer has their eye on the property.

2) Fair market value is a tenuous concept.  Often it means the people get far less for the land than it would be worth.

For example home prices have been shooting up.  Many people and probably Kelo were given the “fair market” value from years before they moved out.  How is that fair.

The founders very specifically considered the matter and only ok’d it for a government use.  The fascist liberals in the Elsupremo court rewrote the constitution and said when they meant use it really was a benefit.

Well frankly that means anytime the city wants your property you have to pack up.

That’s not right.  That’s not legal.

What’s going to happen to US industry when the global warming extremists like John McCain double the price of electricity?  I would think all these factories will close and set up in countries where they aren’t scared of technology.