Alabaster Property Seizure.

KK

Lifer
Jan 2, 2001
15,903
4
81
This was taken from Boortz.com:
Draw the line in Alabaster
Wednesday, August 21, 2003

Freedom means little without property rights. What good is your freedom to use your talents and your willingness to work hard to acquire wealth if your rights to that wealth can be denied at the whim of a few politicians?

After the fall of Soviet Union much was made of their attempt to create economic liberty for the victims of communism. All attempts to create a free, market-based economy in Russia met with only limited success, however, until laws were instituted to insure the property rights of ordinary citizens.

Our law recognizes that that there are times when government must use its police power to seize the property of private citizens. Although the right to eminent domain is not specifically recognized in the U.S. Constitution. In 1879 the Supreme Court, in the case of Boom Co. v. Patterson, (98 U.S. 403) said that eminent domain "appertains to every independent government. It requires no constitutional recognition; it is an attribute of sovereignty." The Fifth Amendment contains the words "'nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." This is a recognition of the government's right to take private property, and a stipulation that it must be taken for "public use."

OK .. sorry for the legal lesson, now let me tell you what is going on in Alabaster, Alabama. I've been talking about this for two days on my show. Many of you, however, don't hear my show ... so I've decided to donate a good part of today's Nealz Nuze to this situation. What you read should horrify you. You just need to know that this sort of government assault on property rights is not confined to Alabaster, Alabama. It is going on virtually everywhere in this country.

Alabaster is a community of about 24,000 people. Interstate 65 runs through Alabaster. A private developer named Colonial Properties Trust wants to build a shopping center anchored by a Wal-Mart on one of the corners of the I-65 intersection. The trouble is that Colonial doesn't own all of the land they need. A few private land owners have refused to sell their property to Colonial. That, my friends, should be the end of the story. If one private individual wants to own a certain piece of property, but the legal owner of that piece of property doesn't want to sell it, the private property rights of the owner of the real estate should be recognized, and the person trying to buy the property should back off.

Well, that's not the way it's working in Alabaster. Colonial, you see, has some friends in powerful places ... politicians on the Alabaster city council. Colonial has decided to use that one unique government asset, the right to use force, to accomplish something that it cannot accomplish on its own. Colonial is asking the City of Alabaster to use force to seize the property under eminent domain and then sell that property to them, to Colonial, so that plans for the shopping center can proceed.

The politicians of Alabaster, Alabama are only too eager to cooperate.

Next week the City of Alabaster will file the condemnation proceedings in the Shelby County, Alabama courts. The City of Alabaster will try to seize the land under the principle of eminent domain. But wait! Aren't governments supposed to use eminent domain to seize private property only when that property is needed for a public use? How can these politicians take that property away from its owners and then sell it to a private company to build a privately owned shopping center?

Here's what the Alabaster politicians are saying. They claim that they simply cannot collect enough property taxes in their town of 24,000 to pay for all of the government they believe the citizens of Alabaster need. They need some sales taxes. Trouble is, there aren't enough businesses around town to generate the amount of sales taxes these politicians want. The answer? Hey! Let's get a shopping center in town. A shopping center will generate thousands of dollars in sales taxes, and we'll have all that money to spend! What a concept!

So, Alabaster's "public use" excuse is that the current owners of the land simply don't pay enough taxes. The land needs to be seized and turned over to someone who will generate some more tax payments. Those additional taxes can then be spent on the public. There's your "public use."

You do realize, don't you, that this very same excuse can be used by any government entity anywhere in the United States that wants to increase its tax revenues? Let's say that you're sitting fat and happy in a home that has been in your family for generations. You're sitting on about five acres in a prime location near a major city. A local developer wants your property to build a subdivision of cluster-mansions. You don't want to sell. The developer goes to the county commission and tells them that if he had that property he could build at least 15 homes there worth about $600,000 each. The developer correctly points out to the politician that the county could collect thousands of dollars in additional property taxes if he could just get his hands on that land and build those homes. A few weeks passes and one day you get a letter from the county attorney telling you that your property is going to be seized by the county. Their only excuse is that they can get more tax dollars if your five acres had 15 homes than they can with your 60 year-old farmhouse. The "public use?" More tax revenues.

If governments can abuse the concept of eminent domain in this manner then your private property rights are virtually non-existent. You own your home only so long as the local politicians tolerate that ownership. Let some developer come along with a better idea, and you can kiss your dirt goodbye.

What are the citizens of Alabaster saying about the rights of the property owners? Let's check in with Councilman Tommy Ryals. Ryals, who works in the environmental compliance department of Alabama Power, thinks that these property owners are just being greedy. He says "Sometimes the good of the many has to outweigh the greed of the few." Sound familiar? Wasn't it Hillary Clinton who said "We must stop thinking of the individual and start thinking about what is best for society." Private property rights? The rights of the individual? Hey, these are all to be set aside for the good of the collective. I wonder if Tommy Ryals and Hillary Clinton have ever met. I wonder if Mr. Ryals would tell us that the individual has the obligation to make sacrifices for the community, for his fellow man. If so, he wouldn't be the first person to express that belief. Adolf Hitler said the same thing back in 1933.

Yes, I'm invoking some pretty ugly names here in the defense of the property rights of these Alabaster landowners. That's because I'm passionate about the right to property and to the idea that one of the prime directives to government is to protect those property rights, not to destroy them for the economic gain of another. Property rights are the absolute foundation of economic liberty, and property rights are under assault by Colonial and the politicians of Alabaster, Alabama.

Not an isolated case:

This attack on private property isn't only happening in Alabaster, Alabama. Abuse of eminent domain is happening across the country. The City of Jacksonville Beach in Florida is engaged in a wholesale onslaught against a group of private property owners. Their crime is that they haven't developed their property to the pleasure of the local politicians. Multiple properties are set to be seized and turned over to developers friendlier to the dreams and schemes of city leaders..

In New York City the revered New York Times recently used the police power of government to seize an entire block of city property. This block, which contained a number of small family owned business, will now be used for the new New York Times building.

Several groups have been started to fight the abuse of eminent domain by government. One such group is the Castle Coalition which has a document titled "The Top 10 Abuses of Eminent Domain." Here is a synopsis of those top 10 cases:
Removing an entire neighborhood and the condemnation of homes for a privately owned and operated office park and other, unspecified uses to complement a nearby Pfizer facility in New London, Connecticut.


Approving the condemnation of more than 1,700 buildings and the dislocation of more than 5,000 residents for private commercial and industrial development in Riviera Beach, Florida.


A government agency collecting a $56,500 bounty for condemning land in East St. Louis, Illinois, to give to a neighboring racetrack for parking.


Replacing a less-expensive car dealership with a BMW dealership in Merriam, Kansas.


Condemning a building in Boston just to help the owner break his leases so that the property could be used for a new luxury hotel.


Seizing the homes of elderly homeowners in Mississippi and forcing them and their extended families to move in order to transfer the land to Nissan for a new, privately owned car manufacturing plant, despite the fact that the land is not even needed for the project.


Taking the building of an elderly widow for casino parking in Las Vegas, claiming it was blighted but without ever even looking at the building.


Improperly denying building permits to a church in New Cassel, New York, then condemning the property for private retail as soon as it looked like the church would begin construction.


Condemning 83 homes for a new Chrysler plant in Toledo, Ohio, that was supposed to bring jobs but ended up employing less than half the projected number because it is fully automated.


Forcing two families (along with their neighbors) to move for a private mall expansion in Hurst, Texas, while spouses were dying of cancer.
You can get the details of all of those eminent domain abuses at the Castle Coalition website: http://www.castlecoalition.org/

Cliff notes for the busy person: People don't want to give up THEIR land so the government can put in a shopping complex that will generate more tax dollars. Should the government be allow to do this crap.

CBS report on similar cases courtesy of dahunan.
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
KK,

All of the Governments in the U.S. (Federal, Sate and local) are adopting this new "old" line of thinking. The model is that everything is only temporary (perpetual rent) and exists for the highest bidder, there is no such thing as ownership or rights of any kind.
 

MovingTarget

Diamond Member
Jun 22, 2003
9,002
115
106
Its going on everywhere here in Alabama from what I've seen directly. I'm sure its going on all over. Its sad, especially since the people who's land gets siezed usually get shafted. They have to take whatever the government wants to give them, despite any equity they have built up in the place for years, even decades. Besides, a shopping mall is a private venture, not a public one. It should not fall under eminent domain.
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: MovingTarget
Its going on everywhere here in Alabama from what I've seen directly. I'm sure its going on all over. Its sad, especially since the people who's land gets siezed usually get shafted. They have to take whatever the government wants to give them, despite any equity they have built up in the place for years, even decades. Besides, a shopping mall is a private venture, not a public one. It should not fall under eminent domain.

This is another item to add to the growing reasons a CivilWar or Revolution will occur in this Country.

No longer a matter of if, but when and that when is nearing sooner and sooner.


 

rahvin

Elite Member
Oct 10, 1999
8,475
1
0
Redevolopment agencies are a supported use of eminent domain and have been for decades. Government has the right and obligation to use the power of eminent domain to rehabilitate blighted areas and encourage development.

Its going on everywhere here in Alabama from what I've seen directly. I'm sure its going on all over. Its sad, especially since the people who's land gets siezed usually get shafted. They have to take whatever the government wants to give them, despite any equity they have built up in the place for years, even decades. Besides, a shopping mall is a private venture, not a public one. It should not fall under eminent domain.

Complete and utter ignorant garbage. Property owners are paid FULL AND FAIR MARKET VALUE FOR THE PROPERTY. The first offer for the property is the appraised value conducted by a approved appraiser whose value can be contested by an appraisal paid for by the property owner. If a dispute in price occurs the case goes to court and a judge decides what the property is worth using both the home owners and government agencies appraisals (he can also order an appraisal of his own).

I really hate when people are TOTALLY ignorant of the eminent domain purchase process and what the rights of property owners are and bother to post the above garbage. It's funny, in some states (florida) the government has to hire a lawyer for the property owner to negotiate the price.
 

Bleep

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
3,972
0
0
I really hate when people are TOTALLY ignorant of the eminent domain purchase process and what the rights of property owners are and bother to post the above garbage. It's funny, in some states (florida) the government has to hire a lawyer for the property owner to negotiate the price.
You are really the ignorant one here. When a piece of land is taken and the price paid is $500.00 because some bearucrat states that the value of the land is the 500 bucks and then sells it the next day to a corporation for $3000.00 did the value go up simply because it had a different owner?
This happened in a small town in centeral Nebraska just about 6 years ago so a large beef packing plant could have more parking.

Bleep
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: rahvin
Redevolopment agencies are a supported use of eminent domain and have been for decades. Government has the right and obligation to use the power of eminent domain to rehabilitate blighted areas and encourage development.

Its going on everywhere here in Alabama from what I've seen directly. I'm sure its going on all over. Its sad, especially since the people who's land gets siezed usually get shafted. They have to take whatever the government wants to give them, despite any equity they have built up in the place for years, even decades. Besides, a shopping mall is a private venture, not a public one. It should not fall under eminent domain.

Complete and utter ignorant garbage. Property owners are paid FULL AND FAIR MARKET VALUE FOR THE PROPERTY. The first offer for the property is the appraised value conducted by a approved appraiser whose value can be contested by an appraisal paid for by the property owner. If a dispute in price occurs the case goes to court and a judge decides what the property is worth using both the home owners and government agencies appraisals (he can also order an appraisal of his own).

I really hate when people are TOTALLY ignorant of the eminent domain purchase process and what the rights of property owners are and bother to post the above garbage. It's funny, in some states (florida) the government has to hire a lawyer for the property owner to negotiate the price.

You have got to be kidding, have you read any of the examples, most of them are not blighted property situations, that may have been the case before but the new trend is clearly criminal unless of course you adhere the principles of Hitler that is it is all for Reicht.

 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,783
6,341
126
The weakest part of the arguement is the tangent which drags Hillary into it, but other than that I gotta say that this is not right! The politicians can make the appeal to the landowners, but to confiscate for Public Use then sell to a Private concern is just another sign of how corrupted Public Officials have become. Powe to the People!
 

MovingTarget

Diamond Member
Jun 22, 2003
9,002
115
106
Originally posted by: Bleep
I really hate when people are TOTALLY ignorant of the eminent domain purchase process and what the rights of property owners are and bother to post the above garbage. It's funny, in some states (florida) the government has to hire a lawyer for the property owner to negotiate the price.
You are really the ignorant one here. When a piece of land is taken and the price paid is $500.00 because some bearucrat states that the value of the land is the 500 bucks and then sells it the next day to a corporation for $3000.00 did the value go up simply because it had a different owner?
This happened in a small town in centeral Nebraska just about 6 years ago so a large beef packing plant could have more parking.

Bleep

Wasnt quite expecting to get flamed on this one, rahvin. Its one thing to disagree with me and try to prove me wrong through logic, but to claim i'm ignorant and that my post is garbage is going a little too far. Anyway, I have seen what is happening in Alabaster regarding this, and all over Alabama. If the government appraiser says your property is worth xxx, when it is really worth xxx + y, you really dont have a leg to stand on unless you have a really good lawyer. Most people do not, so they get stuck with what they are given. They cant even buy a similar house in a similar neighborhood, even though they got the "fair market value" for the property. Usually, they get somewhere near the ballpark, but it is for the most part undervalued. Also, there are many people I know up there that have lived in those areas their whole lives. They have put their own sweat into building up equity in their home, only to have it all taken away to build a walmart. I'm not even talking about delapidated/blighted properties either, but good, decent neighborhoods and properties here. Dont get me wrong here, I'm all for Eminent domain rights, should the government want to build a road, school, government office, power plant, library, etc. These are all public ventures. But a Walmart? I dont think so. Eminent domain is a good thing for this country, but it is often abused.
 

KK

Lifer
Jan 2, 2001
15,903
4
81
Originally posted by: rahvin
Redevolopment agencies are a supported use of eminent domain and have been for decades. Government has the right and obligation to use the power of eminent domain to rehabilitate blighted areas and encourage development.

Its going on everywhere here in Alabama from what I've seen directly. I'm sure its going on all over. Its sad, especially since the people who's land gets siezed usually get shafted. They have to take whatever the government wants to give them, despite any equity they have built up in the place for years, even decades. Besides, a shopping mall is a private venture, not a public one. It should not fall under eminent domain.

Complete and utter ignorant garbage. Property owners are paid FULL AND FAIR MARKET VALUE FOR THE PROPERTY. The first offer for the property is the appraised value conducted by a approved appraiser whose value can be contested by an appraisal paid for by the property owner. If a dispute in price occurs the case goes to court and a judge decides what the property is worth using both the home owners and government agencies appraisals (he can also order an appraisal of his own).

I really hate when people are TOTALLY ignorant of the eminent domain purchase process and what the rights of property owners are and bother to post the above garbage. It's funny, in some states (florida) the government has to hire a lawyer for the property owner to negotiate the price.

So you'd be fine with it if the government decide they wanted your land. More power to you.

I believe in this case that the property holders if forced to sell should share in the profits that any company makes by taking their land. I'm sure that type of compensation would not create the environment that wally world or any of business would want.

KK
 

Flyermax2k3

Diamond Member
Mar 1, 2003
3,204
0
0
I find it utterly disgusting that the government can do this (especially under these circumstances) and the people whose land is being taken away can do absolutely nothing about it. Any government that infringes upon its citizens rights is a corrupt one and should be dealt with.

-my 2 cents
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
8-21-2003 Draw the line in Alabaster

Here is the Boortz.com page.

There is a list of other Eminent Outrages taking place in the U.S. there.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Removing an entire neighborhood and the condemnation of homes for a privately owned and operated office park and other, unspecified uses to complement a nearby Pfizer facility in New London, Connecticut.

Approving the condemnation of more than 1,700 buildings and the dislocation of more than 5,000 residents for private commercial and industrial development in Riviera Beach, Florida.

A government agency collecting a $56,500 bounty for condemning land in East St. Louis, Illinois, to give to a neighboring racetrack for parking.

Replacing a less-expensive car dealership with a BMW dealership in Merriam, Kansas.

Condemning a building in Boston just to help the owner break his leases so that the property could be used for a new luxury hotel.

Seizing the homes of elderly homeowners in Mississippi and forcing them and their extended families to move in order to transfer the land to Nissan for a new, privately owned car manufacturing plant, despite the fact that the land is not even needed for the project.

Taking the building of an elderly widow for casino parking in Las Vegas, claiming it was blighted but without ever even looking at the building.

Improperly denying building permits to a church in New Cassel, New York, then condemning the property for private retail as soon as it looked like the church would begin construction.

Condemning 83 homes for a new Chrysler plant in Toledo, Ohio, that was supposed to bring jobs but ended up employing less than half the projected number because it is fully automated.

Forcing two families (along with their neighbors) to move for a private mall expansion in Hurst, Texas, while spouses were dying of cancer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everyone just pack up and leave your houses, they all belong to Corporations now.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
Un******believeable is right. rahvin you need help. We understand perfectly well how it *works* it's just plain wrong though.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Yup - it sucks. Been happening for a long time too:(

A few years back (up in WI) they were widening a highway to 4 lanes and all the farmers and such had to sell the land so they could build the highway. They got jack squat for thier property unless the house had to be moved/destroyed. Ofcourse they bitched and moaned about it, but in the end the ones that settled first - made out the best money wise. It kinda sucks for some of them though because thier 40s or 80s are no 36s and 72s :p

The only thing I think some people are forgetting is that we don't actually "own" the land - we just rent it from the gov't anyway. If we truely owned the land we wouldn't have to keep paying for it after the mortgage was paid;) This doesn't make it right though for the gov't to just take it away. Like I've been sayind - we need LESS gov't involvement in our lives - and this practice needs to be stopped, or atleast reviewed to prevent these gross violations of ownership rights.

CkG
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,744
6,761
126
Freedom means little without property rights. What good is your freedom to use your talents and your willingness to work hard to acquire wealth if your rights to that wealth can be denied at the whim of a few politicians?
----------------------------
What a joke. What you own is what you take with you when you die.

Take what is given, give what can't be taken. A saying
 

dahunan

Lifer
Jan 10, 2002
18,191
3
0
Originally posted by: rahvin
Redevolopment agencies are a supported use of eminent domain and have been for decades. Government has the right and obligation to use the power of eminent domain to rehabilitate blighted areas and encourage development.

Its going on everywhere here in Alabama from what I've seen directly. I'm sure its going on all over. Its sad, especially since the people who's land gets siezed usually get shafted. They have to take whatever the government wants to give them, despite any equity they have built up in the place for years, even decades. Besides, a shopping mall is a private venture, not a public one. It should not fall under eminent domain.

Complete and utter ignorant garbage. Property owners are paid FULL AND FAIR MARKET VALUE FOR THE PROPERTY. The first offer for the property is the appraised value conducted by a approved appraiser whose value can be contested by an appraisal paid for by the property owner. If a dispute in price occurs the case goes to court and a judge decides what the property is worth using both the home owners and government agencies appraisals (he can also order an appraisal of his own).

I really hate when people are TOTALLY ignorant of the eminent domain purchase process and what the rights of property owners are and bother to post the above garbage. It's funny, in some states (florida) the government has to hire a lawyer for the property owner to negotiate the price.


I just woke but will talk all the trash I want to you a little later.. you make me sick... can't wait until you and your ELDERLY WIFE are FORCED to move and you DIE EARLY due to the emotional stress and pain!

MARKET VALUE ???????????


THEY DON'T WANT TO SELL IT...... SO WHO FVCKING DETERMINES THE PRICE
 

dahunan

Lifer
Jan 10, 2002
18,191
3
0
I just figured it out... rahvin.. ARE U Jewish? Please answer this. This eminent domain sort of sounds like the way the Israelis treat the Palestinians?
******************************************************************************************


I cannot believe that nobody has brought up 60 minutes 9/28/03
Two cases on their that were so lame and disgusting
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/09/26/60minutes/main575343.shtml
"For them to come in and tell me how much my property's worth and for me to get out because they're bringing in somebody else when I own the land is unfounded to me.?
shop owner Randy Bailey
 

burnedout

Diamond Member
Oct 12, 1999
6,249
2
0
Yeah, this sort of thing is just all ate up. Unfortunately, it has been going on for years now.

I believe in this case that the property holders if forced to sell should share in the profits that any company makes by taking their land. I'm sure that type of compensation would not create the environment that wally world or any of business would want.

Excellent idea.

My in-laws are dealing with the reverse situation in their neighborhood where they've lived for 50 years. Seems the 'neighborhood' council wants to tear down a small, clean, thriving shopping plaza that has also been in the community for 50 years in order to make room for underprivileged housing. The owner of the plaza, whose father built the business, has retained a lawyer. Should be interesting. Additionally, the head of the neighborhood council sure hates it when I refer to him as a fvckin' communist, but oh well.
 

rahvin

Elite Member
Oct 10, 1999
8,475
1
0
Originally posted by: dahunan
I just woke but will talk all the trash I want to you a little later.. you make me sick... can't wait until you and your ELDERLY WIFE are FORCED to move and you DIE EARLY due to the emotional stress and pain!

MARKET VALUE ???????????


THEY DON'T WANT TO SELL IT...... SO WHO FVCKING DETERMINES THE PRICE

Your post would have more impact if you said "think of the children", although I guess you are doing the best you can by saying "think of the old people". When you have grown up and understand politics, the need for eminent domain and the process by which it works you can come back and post something meaningfull. I'm not holding my breath.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Yup - it sucks. Been happening for a long time too:(

A few years back (up in WI) they were widening a highway to 4 lanes and all the farmers and such had to sell the land so they could build the highway. They got jack squat for thier property unless the house had to be moved/destroyed. Ofcourse they bitched and moaned about it, but in the end the ones that settled first - made out the best money wise. It kinda sucks for some of them though because thier 40s or 80s are no 36s and 72s :p

The only thing I think some people are forgetting is that we don't actually "own" the land - we just rent it from the gov't anyway. If we truely owned the land we wouldn't have to keep paying for it after the mortgage was paid;) This doesn't make it right though for the gov't to just take it away. Like I've been sayind - we need LESS gov't involvement in our lives - and this practice needs to be stopped, or atleast reviewed to prevent these gross violations of ownership rights.

CkG

Talking with my dad once (he's big into paying zero taxes) he indicated there are a few counties in USA which no property taxes are levied. I think in NC and a couple other southern states. Of course they are everywhere if you create jobs. And usually the land is free too.