Posted on 08/15/2012 2:29:08 PM PDT by matt04
he Urban League of Springfield has sued the city, saying when the city took it’s land and building by eminent domain the payment was “grossly unfair, totally inadequate, and does not reflect the fair market value” of the property.
City Solicitor Edward M. Pikula said he has not seen the suit filed in Hampden Superior Court late last month and cannot comment.
The city took the 756 State St. property by eminent domain in September 2009 and opened the Mason Square branch of the city library there in April 2011.
That location had been a full service library until 2003, when the Urban League purchased it from the Springfield Library and Museums Association.
The Urban League protested the eminent domain action and threatened legal action when it had to leave the building.
The league moved into space at 1 Federal St.
The private, nonprofit Springfield Library Foundation provided the funding needed by the city to purchase the Urban League site for $802,500, which was based on an appraisal under the eminent domain process.
The suit doesn’t ask for a specific amount of money but demands a jury trial where a jury would decide on the “amount of full and just compensation” due the Urban League because of the city’s actions.
(Excerpt) Read more at masslive.com ...
A library branch is not a very good reason.
I hope the Urban League wins this one, big-time.
Do you realize that the Urban League is a radical socialist org? - They are in cahoots with the APA.
I used to have to kiss the UL’s ass when I managed a company in Springfield. I cannot come out and call them thieves and intimidators in the vein of Jesse and Al...but that is pretty close.
And the Library is run by fools.
They deserve each other.
It doesn’t matter.,
RIGHT is RIGHT.
The paper needs an editor.
Yes, I'm aware of that. But it doesn't matter in this case. Everyone's property rights need to be respected. The use of eminent domain is out of control in many places.
There are no conditions under which the Urban Laegue could be ‘right.’
They are a parasitic body that is indirectly supported by tax money extorted from the cities. They are like a “united nations” of cities. their very existence is unconstitutional and situationally unlawful.
P.S.
It’s truly ironic that a conservative would invoke “property rights” for a quasi-governmental body that exists specifically to destroy property rights.
Does Rod Serling write your copy?
LOL!
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.