Family to lose home by eminent domain for Costco store

Boortz online ^ | September 12, 2003 | Neal Boortz

[tdadams]

YOU FOLKS HAD BETTER BE PAYING ATTENTION TO THIS

I'm going to revisit the eminent domain issue again for a few minutes here so that I can share with you an incredible display of arrogance from an elected official.

As you know, I've been talking about a situation in Alabaster, Alabama where the city council of this community of 24,000 is trying to seize the property of about ten homeowners so that a shopping center featuring a Wal-Mart can be built there. The politicians say that it is perfectly OK to condemn and seize this property for a privately owned shopping center because, after all, the shopping center will generate more tax money than these private homes do.

We are seeing the evolution of a new standard for government seizure of private property. Its very simple. If some politician decides that your property would generate more tax revenue for government if it was owned by someone else, the politician can seize that property from you and turn it over to the government-preferred owner.

For our example of obscene government arrogance we turn our attention to Duncanville, Texas. Duncanville calls itself "A warm community of friends," and "A wonderful place to raise a family." Well, Duncanville may be a wonderful place to raise your family, just so long as some politician doesn't decide that the city could get more tax revenue if your home were to become a Costco.

Deborah Hodge has been living in her Duncanville home for 13 years. The Hodge property has a four bedroom house, a bar, pasture and swimming pool. It has been a family gathering place for over a decade. Just like the city motto says, "A wonderful place to raise your family."

A few months ago the city told Deborah to sell her property. They didn't ask her if she wanted to sell. They told her that she would sell. She would either sell, or they would just take it. The city, you see, wants a Costco store to be built on her land. The Costco would, after all, generate a lot more tax revenue than her little house and barn. So ... Duncanville is using its right of eminent domain to seize the property.

Now ... listen to this. These are the words of Duncanville city manager Kent Cagle. This is what Kent Cagle thinks about private property rights in America. Cagle told the Dallas Morning News "They don't have the option to say no to us. We have made it clear we want that property. The only thing that will be settled in court is how much we have to pay for it."

There is no freedom without property rights. What is it going to take to get Americans upset about this latest craze in local government revenue raising. You just identify the properties that could produce more taxes, seize those properties, and turn them over to developers.

[blackdog]

One small sticking point here too......Just who is the city supposed to represent? She, the woman resident who actively participates in her community or Costco, a national retailer of consumer goods?

A pre-emptive suggestion to you folks out there....Attend every single zoning hearing in your community. This stuff can be spotted in the bud before problems show up on the branch. When was this woman's land zoned commercial? Retail Commercial? Mixed Use? Was her land zoned that way when she bought it? If so, she's an idiot.

[HurkinMcGurkin]

Is the government going to force the developers and new owners of this mall to share part of the rents they will collect on this property?

I'd suggest a property owner and their consultant take this stance in the eminent domain hearing. A jury might buy it. I sure do.

I honestly can't see how a court could rule in favor of the city in the first place and allow eminent domain, though.

[smiley]

They are doing the same thing in Beech Grove, Indiana. A WalMart store wants to locate in Beech Grove and residents don't want it because it's too close to their homes.....the argument is still ongoing....but we all know what's going to happen...

[Blood of Tyrants]

It just may be that not all people are motivated by greed. Perhaps thay just didn't want to sell at ANY price.

[fella]

Aint it great what a campaign contribution or two can buy? And their so cheap.

[Just another Joe]

the size of the offer is not relevent to this conversation.

Bingo!
If I don't want to sell to the government, that will then turn around and sell it to someone else, I shouldn't have to.

Eminent Domain was originally set up for highways, right of ways, railroads, sewer systems, etc. It wasn't to be so that the government could take your property, even for a fair price, and give it, or sell it, to someone else, whether it be an individual or a company.

[dirtboy]

I read an article in the Dallas News yesterday. The city offered her almost $700,000 for a home valued at $400,000. The homeowner claims that the offer was not made. The offer now is $223,000. I'm sure they wish that they hadn't been so greedy.

So what? If I don't want to sell, I shouldn't be forced to sell just because the government can make more taxes off my property. That is hardly the compelling interest upon which eminent domain was initially based.

[LibertyAndJusticeForAll]

If public hearings don't change the outcome, there is not much an ordinary American can do. Property rights are fundamental, but it can get messy.
Decades ago, in Los Angeles, before the construction of the Harbor Fwy, my great-aunt's property was the only one on a block not purchased by the government. This left her property immediately next to the freeway. She would have been far better off had they purchased the entire block, and not left her house, the only one remaining. Besides the loss in property value, it became unsafe.

[pgyanke]

That's a different issue to the one at hand. Now, if Walmart is planning to plow their homes under to build the store...

[still lurking]

I have touched a sore spot. If she considered the offer to sell an opportunity to cash out, then she blew the negotiations, I don't consider that cause to take up arms. Maybe hire an attorney to defend yourself. Regardless of the transaction, a governmental body will win if your not wise in your responses.

[BJungNan]

For a highway, for a power line or sewer project, for any sort of public works, okay. But so some private individual can come in and make profit off your land, no way! This is wrong.

The public has a right to expect public works projects. They should not expect an individual to suffer loss of property simply because they do not want to drive a little farther to another store.

The U.S. is lost.

[Orange1998]

The city offered her almost $700,000 for a home valued at $400,000.

Yeah Right! Don't believe everything you read. On this one it's best to read between the lines.

[HurkinMcGurkin]

A pre-emptive suggestion to you folks out there....Attend every single zoning hearing in your community. This stuff can be spotted in the bud before problems show up on the branch.

Yep, but that's just "too much trouble" for some people.

When was this woman's land zoned commercial? Retail Commercial? Mixed Use? Was her land zoned that way when she bought it? If so, she's an idiot.

Good questions. I don't know the specific law in Alabama, but typically zoning changes are only done at the request of the property owner. I can't go request to have somebody's zoning changed without their knowledge. The city may, depending on the local laws, re-zone entire areas for more intensive use, because that rasies value(they typically can't "down-zone" property in most cases). Or, in this case, the town may have very loose zoning, as it is that way in small communities.

[MEGoody]

"I believe her beef was not eminent domain. She wanted a cut of the Costco pie. Her outrage appeared when she realized she lost the larger offer."

Maybe, but that does not give the city the right to take her property. If she wants to sell for billions and for ten bucks, it IS her property.

[pgyanke]

You're still ruffling feathers.

It's not about the offers, it's about the coersion! If there's a contract, then she is only attempting to renegotiate. No contract, no offer, no sale. Anything else is theft--by the government or anyone else.

[retrokitten]

I wish my house was a Costco store. It almost is anyway.

Mine, too. I'm only missing the pharmacy, one hour photo, and those little old ladies handing out samples.

[af_vet_rr]

For a highway, for a power line or sewer project, for any sort of public works, okay. But so some private individual can come in and make profit off your land, no way! This is wrong.

These kinds of things are going on all over the place. Nobody gives a **** until it happens to them.

It's not just your local governments either.

This is why property rights and ownership mean less and less.

As stupid as it sounds, if anybody is worried about their land being taken for something like this, your best defense is to document the wildlife there, have some biologists do a few surveys and write-ups about the part it plays in the local ecosystem, and get the enviros on your side. Had a friend do something like this (bugged the hell out of him to do it) and it worked, amazing the "rights" that a certain type of bird has, while we humans don't.

[coloradan]

"They don't have the option to say no to us. We have made it clear we want that property. The only thing that will be settled in court is how much we have to pay for it."

"Your daughters don't have the option to say no to us. We have made it clear we will use them as underage sex slaves. The only thing that will be settled in court is how much we have to pay for each time one of us has sex with them."

[Orangedog]

Eminent Domain was originally set up for highways, right of ways, railroads, sewer systems, etc. It wasn't to be so that the government could take your property, even for a fair price, and give it, or sell it, to someone else, whether it be an individual or a company.

This is just a step or two away from getting completely out of control (as if they aren't alreasy). Imagine what will happen when the government decides that the apartment complexes that accept section 8 vouchers are either too few or not in nice enough neighborhoods. Whats stopping them from forcing the sale of newer apartment buidings near well priced single family homes to companies that WILL play the governments game. The possibilities for abuse are almost endless.

[still lurking]

If she is serious about saving her property, get an attorney well versed in property rights. She is representing herself and is stunned that the city doesn't have her best interest at heart. I know she had right of refusal, but be smart and defend yourself.