According to the article at the local news, they are compensating her, but she didn’t want to sell in the first place.
They do, but if you are making money off of that property every year you are SOL on that future income.
If you make income off that property for 10 years then sell the property for fair market value, you get both.
I always thought the property owner ,at least,had to be compensated fair market value....Good Lord man. Stop thinking!!
“I always thought the property owner ,at least,had to be compensated fair market value. “
Fair market value depends on the zoning. The government authorities control the zoning, they control the eminent domain.
A developer hops into bed with government, shows how the one level lot only generates x income, and y property tax. He explains how government takes it from the owner, rezones it for a 10 story parking structure, raises the value and the property taxes, and of course skims some corruption money for all concerned.
In my town of about 200,000 there are several higher density projects. Combos of retail and residential.
This zoning combo has long been a wet dream for the city planners; property taxes from residential and sales tax from retail.
All aimed first at government retiree pensions.
If you asked resident voters if they wanted higher density, they’d say “no, leave it as it is.” So they don’t ask voters, plain and simple.
Most voters are too busy to consider that government is busy full time, on their dime, plotting more and more revenue to government, or their retirements.