Thoughts on eminent domain

[Nigerius Rex]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eminent_domain

Eminent domain (United States), compulsory purchase (United Kingdom, New Zealand, Ireland), resumption/compulsory acquisition (Australia), or expropriation (South Africa and Canada) is an action of the state to seize a citizen's private property, expropriate property, or seize a citizen's rights in property with due monetary compensation, but without the owner's consent. The property is taken either for government use or by delegation to third parties who will devote it to public or civic use or, in some cases, economic development. The most common uses of property taken by eminent domain are for public utilities, highways, and railroads[citation needed], however, it may also be taken for reasons of public safety, such as in the case of Centralia, Pennsylvania. Some jurisdictions require that the government body offer to purchase the property before resorting to the use of eminent domain.

Basically the state can decide that if your land stands in the way of something that is economically or communally prosperous, they can forcibly remove you and fairly compensate you.

The problems I see with this is that it has been consistently horribly abused and the definition of what is economically prosperous and a benefit to the community is up in the air. Also that unless you have the credibility and resources to fight it, you will likely be forced out of your home.

From reason:
https://reason.com/archives/2004/03/01/confessions-of-a-welfare-queen/4

Occasionally, politicians are so eager to help their rich friends that they’ll take your home to do it. The legal doctrine of "eminent domain" (which means "superior ownership") allows government officials to take possession of your property if they decide they need it for the greater good. Traditionally this meant building highways, bridges, and parks, and eminent domain was used only in unusual situations.

But today government officials use eminent domain to help private companies -- Kmart, Home Depot, baseball teams, shopping malls. Hurst, Texas, condemned 127 homes that stood in the way of a developer’s plan to expand a mall. Toledo, Ohio, got a $28.8 million HUD loan to forcibly relocate the owners of 83 perfectly nice homes that were condemned to make way for a Jeep factory. A county in Kansas condemned property belonging to 150 families to make way for NASCAR’s Kansas International Speedway.

Examples:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_London

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vera_Coking

What do you think about eminent domain, and is it right, and justified?

[orcus116]

Nope. It's a fairly archaic practice that screams incompetence. I've worked with people who were old chief engineers on the Big Dig in Boston and they used to joke about how fucked up the process is, like they'll snatch an entire parcel of land just to turn it into a small field with one standpipe coming up out of the ground.

[chknptpie]

I've had to deal with this on a very odd level.

Last year I was purchasing a house. I had already put in my offer, it was accepted, just all the rest had to be finalized. A lady from ADOT (Arizona Department of Transportation) left a note on my door about discussing the widening of the freeway near the apartment and how it would affect me. I was moving out in 4 months, I didn't think it mattered, so I ignored her. She persisted and finally we had a meeting. The freeway widening was going to be demolishing my apartment building in October. She said that I was eligible for relocation fees and rent equivalent reimbursement. I told her that I was already in the process of purchasing a house and was on a month to month lease. I didn't think I really qualified, as we were moving out in July. She insisted, I refused, she continued to insist, I asked if it was going to be taxed, she said no, and I said GREAT! A few months later I received ~$1700 for moving expenses - which we didn't need because we did the move ourselves with the help of friends and family. I also received ~$1700 in compensation for the difference in what we were paying and what we would pay at a similar apartment for the next 12 months. I really didn't understand how or why I was getting this money, but I did. Almost a year later, the lady calls me and says, oh yeah I forgot that you get reimbursed for your home inspection. Send me the receipt and we'll get you that money too.

tl;dr Apartment building was going to be demolished, I was moving out. Got lots of money I didn't deserve.

So I'm not sure its really an eminent domain story, as ADOT was in negotiations with the owners of the property. Also, the destruction/construction was supposed to start last October, it just started last month. Lots of red tape and contract issues apparently.

[El Barto]

You're damn lucky.  Most of the time down here you just get a notice in the mail that says GTFO.  Normally,  the apartment community is nice enough to just stop renewing leases a year in advance, so you rarely get this sprung on you, but it does still happen.


As for imminent domain,  I'm generally not a fan of it,  but I also see plenty of instances of people holding a whole city hostage just to be a dick.  There's always one eccentric old coot who will refuse to move at any price.   Honestly,  just seems like one of the many instances where there's really no consistently good option. 

[Nigerius Rex]

Unless the property is a matter of life or death (which as far as I know has never been the case) and they acquired it legally like with Vera, what right do some bean counters in the capitol or an intensely corrupt group like caltrans, or any other third party government partner have to tell someone not to be a dick? America is supposed to encourage being a dick for no reason other than you pay taxes, feel like it, not look out for the greater good and make sure the state has places to put new projects or projects for their buddies.

[Scheavo]

America is supposed to encourage being a dick for no reason other than you pay taxes, feel like it, not look out for the greater good and make sure the state has places to put new projects or projects for their buddies.

Um... you should really read the founders some time.

[Nigerius Rex]

America is supposed to encourage being a dick for no reason other than you pay taxes, feel like it, not look out for the greater good and make sure the state has places to put new projects or projects for their buddies.

Um... you should really read the founders some time.

See, Scheavo understands the principal perfectly.

[Dr. DTVT]

It's only a problem when other options are available.  A factory can be built almost anywhere, and I've been to Toledo before.  There is PLENTY of land outside of Toledo for a factory.  Same with malls/retail.  Roads/highways are different though.  In my hometown they used eminent domain to buy some houses and put a highway through there, and honestly I can't imagine trying to get around parts of town without the bypass.  I don't think it should be stricken from the records, but a more specific and limiting definition would be nice.

[William Wallace]

America is supposed to encourage being a dick for no reason other than you pay taxes, feel like it, not look out for the greater good and make sure the state has places to put new projects or projects for their buddies.

Um... you should really read the founders some time.

See, Scheavo understands the principal perfectly.

[El Barto]

Personally,  I prefer the old school approach.  Don't want to take 10 times what your home is worth?  Fine.  Enjoy your house,  dumbass.  The offer will be 1/10th market value next week.

Massachussetts: Architect Austin Spriggs refused to move and denied an offer of $18 million. He rather wanted to open a pizza shop in this house. Now some years after he finally decided to move but is struggling to find interested buyers.

[Perpetual Change]

Odd. Those are Chinese characters in the second picture. I didn't think it was possible to hold-out there!

[Scheavo]

America is supposed to encourage being a dick for no reason other than you pay taxes, feel like it, not look out for the greater good and make sure the state has places to put new projects or projects for their buddies.

Um... you should really read the founders some time.

See, Scheavo understands the principal perfectly.

The Founders constantly talked about the greater good, and how government is there for the greater good. It's just false to say that America is "supposed" to encourage greedy, selfish behavior.

[orcus116]

We're also talking about a group of guys who bought human beings and forced them to work for nothing.

[Scheavo]

Their reasoning there, as flawed as it is, was also for the "greater good."

I'm not saying you aren't free to be a dick, but that doesn't mean you're supposed to be a dick.

[El Barto]

Odd. Those are Chinese characters in the second picture. I didn't think it was possible to hold-out there!

I believe the first two were both Hong Kong.  Just nifty pictures, but it does happen here as well.  There are plenty of dipshits who'd prefer to live in their own house in the middle of a mall parking lot. 

[Nigerius Rex]

America is supposed to encourage being a dick for no reason other than you pay taxes, feel like it, not look out for the greater good and make sure the state has places to put new projects or projects for their buddies.

Um... you should really read the founders some time.

See, Scheavo understands the principal perfectly.

The Founders constantly talked about the greater good, and how government is there for the greater good. It's just false to say that America is "supposed" to encourage greedy, selfish behavior.

As you know, looking out for numero uno is one of the core principals of free market capitalism along with property rights. Side effects of those practices are what brings competition and happiness. So to me, not leaving your home for whatever reason you choose is not greedy or selfish behavior. Its protecting land that you aquired legally and If anything it shows the federal government is greedy for so readily evicting you in favor of something usually nonessential.

[Scheavo]

Fifth amendment to the constitution:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation

Funny, how at the end of mentioning their strong position on property rights, they specifically mention the power of the government to taken private land for public use, so long as it compensates the owners.

If you want to lambast our government, and corrupt government, by all means do so. I'm right there with you.

[Nigerius Rex]

Just because you are compensated for something doesn't really change the fact that you didn't want to sell and were forcibly removed. Sentimental value, laziness, stubbornness, happiness, disability, and comfort are all perfect legal reason as to why someone justly compensated wouldn't want and shouldn't have to move. Also, the original meaning was that land could be seized for public use as in quartering soldiers and their equipment, whereas now through or ridiculous legal system the meaning has been tortured to really mean "having any public benefit regardless of scope and scale to the government or its affiliates" which means increasing tax revenue by x for x and creating x jobs for x. And we all know how beneficial that talk is. 

https://www.independent.org/pdf/tir/tir_12_03_04_benson.pdf

James Madison, who wrote the Fifth Amendment, hoped to restrict the takings
that had been made in the colonies under British rule and in the new states after the
revolution because he wished to make individual property rights more secure, but he
did not go as far as Jefferson would have liked, perhaps as a compromise to garner
sufficient support for the Constitution

Property rights and protection from governmental abuse was one of the key points of the 5th amendment.

Also, I used California as a reference because I live here so keep in mind each state may have different guidelines, but I found some really startling things about eminent domain.

The process is longer and complicated and requires significant emotional investment:
https://www.eminentdomainlaw.net/procedures.html

However, even where a successful challenge to the right to take is made, the court has the authority under some circumstances to allow the government to correct any procedural mistakes and proceed with the taking. Moreover, even if the action is dismissed outright, the government agency may start the process all over again; prevailing on the right to take challenge does not preclude the government from acquiring the property for all time.

Where a property owner raises a right to take challenge, but is not successful, the property owner will not be liable for the government's costs.

The entire process is full of shitty clauses like the above. Unlike many other government processes, this one needs to be scrapped and reworked from the base.

[Scheavo]

Ya know, just because I disagree with part of what you're saying, doesn't mean I disagree with everything you're saying.

If you want to lambast our government, and corrupt government, by all means do so. I'm right there with you.

Unlike you, I'm not making a universal claim. I'm not saying eminent domain is bad, I'm not saying eminent domain is good. In some cases, it's justified. In many other, especially in our government, I'm sure it's corrupt, and should be dealt with and stopped. I objected to your claim that you're encouraged to be a dick in America, that you're not supposed to care about the greater good, which is just false.

The world isn't black and white.

[Nigerius Rex]

In the other thread about salt I said there may have been more to the picture and chose to take the most logical and responsible route which was no legislation until we have concrete evidence (which we don't). And now, I am claiming there is nothing inherently wrong with forcibly moving someone when there is a genuine need like in time of war or as an example, a hospital. But proposed economic benefit and highways do not fit into this category and because of the intense abuse, there is no need for the program it in current form.

You love claiming I am black and white, but in your world the government solution is always entirely necessary even if it has crippling sustainability, logistical, and moral problems. The corporations who don't have government backing with eminent domain find a way to build around land owners who hold out. We are talking about huge, huge projects where some offers are in the double digit millions for crappy homes. With all the corruption and physical and emotional harm and stress, what benefit could it provide that is so entirely necessary that it justifies itself? Its like with the death penalty, its not ok if even one innocent person gets wrongly executed, so why is this any different when some good may come from a lot of harm?

Which viewpoint is more black and white? 

[Scheavo]

Except you didn't just describe my viewpoint; in fact if you look at my entire ideology (and not just a snippet of it, like you like to do), I rarely hold that government is the solution. Since I'm not white, I must be black, eh?

[Nigerius Rex]

Alright well the way I am feeling is that you just did the exact same thing you accused me of, which makes me unhappy.

You're not attacking arguments or providing evidence, you are just saying things (Eminent domain is good) and attacking my philosophy (you are black and white), neither approach is relevant to this thread.

[rumborak]

Eminent domain isn't "good" (because ideally we would like it to never happen) but it is a necessary evil at times. Sometimes there's just plain dickheads who want to give the middle finger to the world by not selling whatever property they own. And by that holding a huge number of people hostage essentially.

rumborak

[orcus116]

Should they really feel bad for being forced into such a position, though? If they're sitting put one day and suddenly forced to make a decision like that, "holding other people hostage" seems a bit extreme and unfair.

[Scheavo]

You're not attacking arguments or providing evidence, you are just saying things (Eminent domain is good) and attacking my philosophy (you are black and white), neither approach is relevant to this thread.

No, I'm attacking how you describe and respond to me. I think we're actually pretty much in agreement, but becuase I favor government involvement slightly more than you, you always assume I'm attacking you from some extreme position that I don't hold. I objected to your encouragement of being a dick becuase you can be a dick, and how American society was founded upon the greater good and not what's good for an individual or private entities, and you assume that this now means I support the government taking your land for any reason whatsoever. I stated my opposition to the government we have, and how corrupt it is, and you still ignore this and bring up examples of our government to try and convince me of how wrong I am.

It's completely impossible to actually have a discussion with you, becuase if I'm not your friend, I must be your enemy.

[rumborak]

Should they really feel bad for being forced into such a position, though? If they're sitting put one day and suddenly forced to make a decision like that, "holding other people hostage" seems a bit extreme and unfair.

No, i agree, and in the end they would have every right to give the middle finger to the world if they wanted to. Reality however is also that things need to get done sometimes.

I think the much better discussion to have is not whether ED is valid or not overall, but where they point is when it gets abused. That's what you want to avoid. Not everything needs to be a discussion about principles.

rumborak

[Nigerius Rex]

You're not attacking arguments or providing evidence, you are just saying things (Eminent domain is good) and attacking my philosophy (you are black and white), neither approach is relevant to this thread.

No, I'm attacking how you describe and respond to me. I think we're actually pretty much in agreement, but becuase I favor government involvement slightly more than you, you always assume I'm attacking you from some extreme position that I don't hold. I objected to your encouragement of being a dick becuase you can be a dick, and how American society was founded upon the greater good and not what's good for an individual or private entities, and you assume that this now means I support the government taking your land for any reason whatsoever. I stated my opposition to the government we have, and how corrupt it is, and you still ignore this and bring up examples of our government to try and convince me of how wrong I am.

It's completely impossible to actually have a discussion with you, becuase if I'm not your friend, I must be your enemy.

I just re-read my posts in this thread. I never ever mentioned you or your basal philosophy in any of my posts. This entire derailment started with you saying "Unlike you, I abcdefghi".

[yeshaberto]

Time to move on!

[rumborak]

Fo' shizzle.

[Nigerius Rex]

my nizzle

[slycordinator]

Even though it didn't pass, I loved how there was an initiative put in-place to have Justice Souter's house removed and replaced by the "Lost Liberty Hotel", using as precedence the court case where he had affirmed that a local government could condemn private property to give it to a private developer and claim that the private development would count as "public use" for eminent domain purposes due to it bringing more money than the original owner's house...

[Scheavo]

Up here in Montana, there was a controversy this last election seasons because the Republicans in power overturned a voter-passed initiative to stop allowing private companies to use eminent domain in certain instances. I think it's (mostly) used for power lines and other utilities, but once you start getting private companies directly involved, it seems to me you start crossing some lines. (the worse line is Republicans overruling voter opinion).