Skip to comments.Woman's fight against City of Seattle will continue, even in death
Posted on 04/19/2014 9:29:52 AM PDT by Baynative
A property rights fight near Seattle's waterfront will continue, despite the death of the property owner.
Late last year, the Seattle City Council voted to used its powers of eminent domain to take the parking lot owned by a 103-year-old Spokane woman named Myrtle Woldson.
The city asked her to sell. She refused. So the city council simply voted to condemn the property and take it.
(Excerpt) Read more at mynorthwest.com ...
It [the city] was planning to use the 130-car parking lot as a parking lot. It just wanted the revenue from the lot for the city's bottom line. The city continues to need a lot of parking on the waterfront during the construction of the much-delayed tunnel project.
What makes this more disgusting than most government greed that we see is that they only wanted her parking lot to use as a parking lot. It had no civic advantage; they just wanted her income.
State fascism in full bloom...
The government is simply stealing her property—the way it’s done in banana republics.
It's not even debatable.
Here’s the wiki article on the Northern Pacific Railroad. No mention of a Woldson. Was there another NP railroad?
More than likely, Woldson is her married name...
It is not necessarily ‘government’ that is corrupt. Our Constitution is ‘government’ as seen through the minds of some very astute and world wise men. It is the men and women that are supposed to do the right actions to carry out government that are the cause of bad even evil government. These persons could very well be one’s next door neighbor just like the jackboots of any ilk at any level that would take from citizens long held practices for cattle grazing. I have no respect for such people.
Mildly entertained by some of the liberals who live in a sea of denial on the comment form that is attached to the article. Most can see that this is just plain evil, some try to lay blame on previous administrations - even though it was the current one which is moving forward with eminent domain proceedings.
In any event, this woman’s estate ownership over the property is only a matter of time before it is taken in one method or another. That viaduct is coming down, the property values are increasing, and someone will be building a multi-million dollar parking structure with public funds (and private ownership) in the not so distant future, so this parking lot will be taken and converted into something that doesn’t compete.
This is way off topic but seems curious to me.
I googled her name and found this:
Myrtle Woldson, Spokane philanthropist, dies at 104
Woldson is best known as the daughter of Martin Woldson, who owned Northern Pacific Railway
Well, aren't we almost a banana republic now?
I would leave out the word “almost.”
Well, I certainly considered leaving it out, and I should have.
If you want to find out the first year Chevrolet offered a passenger car equipped with four speed manual transmission, it will probably give you facts in evidence.
But if you want info on anything that can be tilted in favor of government, liberal theology, global warming, socialism or racism, you might as well call and ask Juan Williams or Chris Matthews.
The question of whether her father “owned” the NP is non-political.
The Council wants to extend N.E. 4th Street to the east.
Currently, 4th runs right by Bellevue City Hall, but dead ends just to the east of I-405, at N.E. 116th Ave.
The Council wants to extend 4th out to 120th Ave or 124th Ave, I can't recall which one.
They need to take a big chunk of Best Buy’s showroom, which is just north of the Bellevue Home Depot.
According to the Council, every time a settlement is reached, Best Buy and the private property owner demand more money.
According to the Council, enough is enough, and they are heading to court.
That Best Buy case, at least, is closer to being within the actual purpose of eminent domain statutes. There’s an actual public purpose intended for the land— putting in a road.
But cases like this parking lot, and the Kelo case— they push the concept to an absurd extreme. And like Scalia observed in Kelo, if the only “public” purpose forces it from one private owner to another, merely to improve the tax base, then there’s not really any such thing as private property anymore. The government can —always— find a richer tenant.
Eminent domain was meant to apply to public necessities such as hospitals (high on the list), schools (lesser a priority), and airports. It was not meant to be tool for housekeeping, legacy building and just plain political fun.