Eminent Domain..this is crazy

[dmc]

In Hunter we have a power that controls all and stops development in it's tracks...

It's called the DEP... We sold our soul to the devil that is NYC... They put new sewers in to protect their water and now if you live near the creek or are starting construction... You gotta go through them... And they are really strict!

 

[SkiDog]

In Hunter we have a power that controls all and stops development in it's tracks...

It's called the DEP... We sold our soul to the devil that is NYC... They put new sewers in to protect their water and now if you live near the creek or are starting construction... You gotta go through them... And they are really strict!

I agree that I doubt it will ever happen to me (or you for that matter), but the fact that is COULD is the real issue here IMO...

And strict or not...noone is above certian lobbying powers. Money makes the world go round.

M

 

[dmc]

And strict or not...noone is above certian lobbying powers. Money makes the world go round.

M

True - true....

I just think in a small town it's easier to control your own destiny without the lobbyists stomping all over the place...
The big "lobby" group here in Hunter is the Slutsky family - the owners of Hunter.. they do amazing things by political manuvering...

Can you tell I dig this small town thing?

 

[madman]

HA! HA! HA! It cant happen here!!!! It can now happen anywhere. This was not a question of blight, the city admitted that from the start.It all started with a large company who wants to build a hotel and shopping ,to go along with a new research building for Pfizer. This is a ruling that would make Stalin and Marx proud

 

[SkiDog]

HA! HA! HA! It cant happen here!!!! It can now happen anywhere. This was not a question of blight, the city admitted that from the start.It all started with a large company who wants to build a hotel and shopping ,to go along with a new research building for Pfizer. This is a ruling that would make Stalin and Marx proud

Thats my point tooo its crazy.....

Wow and you should see what pfizer is doing to their headquaters location which is right near me...Wow..talk about building some new facilities..thankfully in this particular instance they owned all the land already and there were no private residences.

I still would love to know how they are assured there will be economic growth, and/or how many "jobs" will be created..or sustained for that matter..someone else mentioned it earlier..look at Atlantic City..off boardwalk...DUMP..but all the same things were promised when they decided to "rebuild".

Man how can we fix the issues that continue to plague this beautiful place we live?

M

 

[ctenidae]

A couple of gallons of gasoline, a book of matches. No problem.

(could go in the movie wuotes thread, too)

 

[Stephen]

How bad is the situation in New London? I didn't think that it was a matter of eliminating urban blight in that case.

The problem that I have is that this decision just gives businesses free reign to take land if they can sufficiently "influence" a local government that it's "the right thing to do."

dmc, I hope that you are right and, in reality, there will be no more New London situations. I just wished that the Supreme Court didn't open the door on this one...

Thats the thing.. I really don't know how bad the New London area is... So I can't comment.

It is a scarey path.... Remember - "The road to hell is paved with good intention"

I don't trust the government to be that well-intentioned. That was the problem with the Patriot Act. It works as long as the government can be trusted not to abuse it.

I'd rather not give them the chance. There are people talking in NH now about legistlating so that the gov'ts can't do this.


-Stephen

 

[dmc]

There are people talking in NH now about legistlating so that the gov'ts can't do this.

I love NH...
Great skiing... Great - Dont F with me attitude!

 

[ctenidae]

Go Texas!

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/front/3239023

Never thought I'd ever, ever say that.

 

[riverc0il]

I am surprised at the outrage coming from the people who support the democratic party both on this board and elsewhere. This is exactly the position of the democratic nominated judge's party.

the concept of blindly supporting one of the two major parties on every issue just because you agree with them on most doesn't fly with me. i believe people should hold parties accountable on each individual ruling or legislation and not blindly agree just for the sake of solidarity. nothing could be more dangerous to a democracy than an entire nation going along with a single point of view or political stance because a party dictated what is the appropriate view to it's constituency. if we don't agree with the party we voted for, it's important we let them know that.

that is actually the democrats biggest problem right now... they certainly aren't lining up with repub voters on issues and are moving more towards the middle than most dems are comfortable, thus they are trimming down on both sides and are being squeezed out. looking forward to the next election in which hopefully the party will start listening to the voters and get out of the identity crisis it currently faces.

 

[Stephen]

My brother is as far left as I am right.

We see dead eye-to-eye on this issue.

-Stephen

 

[riverc0il]

My brother is as far left as I am right.

We see dead eye-to-eye on this issue.

-Stephen

there are few things more sacred in america than the right to own property. i can't see many people agreeing with this issue. emminent domain has certainly pushed our country further when used for important public projects such as the interstate system which is one of the biggest reasons for our current economic state, but to force the sale of private homes to private owned or publically held companies is antithesis to so many american values it is behold belief any judge could rule in favor of it, let alone five supreme court judges of any political pursuassion.

 

[SkiDog]

oops

 

[SkiDog]

but to force the sale of private homes to private owned or publically held companies is antithesis to so many american values it is behold belief any judge could rule in favor of it, let alone five supreme court judges of any political pursuassion.

Its beacuse it'll NEVER be their houses...EVER....so why should they care?...most of them are probably on a board or going to be on a board of some of these major corporations that will want to take mine and your houses...

M

 

[Stephen]

One of the things I've now come to realize is that the Supreme Court found that the states hold the responsibility for their domain. Thus, according to CT state law, this is "legal".

That is why this needs to be addressed with the respective state governments as opposed to the federal government.

Not saying that they were right, just trying to understand where they were coming from.

-Stephen

 

[ctenidae]

To be fair to SCOTUS, their ruling, as is the case most of the time, is very narrow in particular, but could be broadly applied. In this case, with that set of governing laws, this is the decision. The majority opinion did state that states are free to enact legislation to close the loophole, and sort of makes a case that it's important for them to do so. Texas, New Hampshire, and Connecticut are doing it, and if I'm not mistaken, Delaware, Arkansas, and Ohio already have. More will.

Also, Supreme Court Justices don't, as a rule, sit on the boards of any corporation. Talk about a conflict of interest...

 

[SkiDog]

One of the things I've now come to realize is that the Supreme Court found that the states hold the responsibility for their domain. Thus, according to CT state law, this is "legal".

That is why this needs to be addressed with the respective state governments as opposed to the federal government.

Not saying that they were right, just trying to understand where they were coming from.

-Stephen

I had no doubt that this was a decision made on a case by case basis and that each individual state would decide on letting someone use eminent domain for private corp use, but for sure it doesnt matter at what "level" its still totally WRONG...

I can't say it enough....I BOUGHT MY PROPERTY...how is it not mine? The govt isnt trying to come take my car...I "buy" it the same way I would any land...whats the difference? Oh...they can't make any money off my car...that MUST be it.

M

P.S. this is not a partisan issue...this crosses all boundries political and otherwise.

 

[SkiDog]

Talk about a conflict of interest...

Yeah i know, but what happens when they retire? Oh and just because they don't officially "sit" on any board doenst mean they can't have HUGE influence.

M

 

[ctenidae]

Most Justices die shortly after retiring. In fact, teh only reason they retire is because they're about to die. The beauty of a lifetime appointment...
Their influence from the bench is far far greater than anything they, or anyone, could exert from a boardroom. No comparison.

The more I look at it, the harder time I'm having deciding what I think. On the one hand, the majority opinion strictly adheres to the law, as written, and provides some strong impetus to get teh laws changed. That's a good thing. On teh other, the dissent falls more in line iwht my thinking, though I think it attempts to too strongly assert the Court's opinion that determinations of public use are for the judiciary. I like the idea of those decisions not being in the hands of politicians, but I don't liek the idea of them being in the hands of people who are not accountable.

Arrgh...I'm so confused!!!

Here's a link to the opinions, should you be interested- they are actually quite interesting:

http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/....supremecourtus.gov/opinions/04pdf/04-108.pdf

O'Connor's dissent starts on page 27, Thomas' follows

 

[JimG.]

In Hunter we have a power that controls all and stops development in it's tracks...

It's called the DEP... We sold our soul to the devil that is NYC... They put new sewers in to protect their water and now if you live near the creek or are starting construction... You gotta go through them... And they are really strict!

I'm similarly protected...Fishkill Creek runs through my property and it's a protected Hudson river watershed. In fact, I'm sitting pretty because it isn't part of the NYC watershed, so the DEP isn't as concerned with it as they are with the reservoir system watersheds like the Scoharie up by you. All they worry about is that it stays clean and they can stock it with trout every year.

The zoning in that area does not allow any commercial development on the river. However, this decision still irks me alot and I hope that NY considers legislation to limit what it might do.