# eminent domain for a better community



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

Eminent Domain, for me, is one of those things that is needed but abused it can be horrible``

Let me offer two examples

City X is putting in sewer lines and in order to do that they need to be able to get from a to b to c to d etc........ If Mr. Jones refuses to allow the city to use his land for the sewer line - it could well force the town to go a different route costing millions more or one provide the service to 1/3 of the town... In this case it works

City Y decides that if they take land from folks and give it to developers it will bring in more money and taxes into the city... in this case it SUCKS and I would say it is wrong-when a city determines winners and losers in a real estate game it is going above and beyond.

FOR ME eminent domain must truly be for the betterment of the community as a whole and not just to better the city itself - does that make sense


----------



## Slippy (Nov 14, 2013)

Your question makes sense but where the whole idea goes wrong...is WHO gets to make the decisions? 

I've posted about the town that we lived in back in the 90's. 

It was Mayberry RFD for all intents and purposes when we moved there. The Mayor and City Council members ran on platforms of "NO GROWTH' and it made the voters happy. Those that lived there were like minded and enjoyed the small town mentality. 

One election the incumbents ran on the same "No Growth" platforms and won their seats again. HOWEVER this time they were all in cahoots with a major developer to open up some huge new housing developments that included multi-family and a host of retail commercial. The mayor and council members owned the land that the developers were looking at buying and through their power, rammed the whole thing thru and got wealthy. Emminent domain played a huge role in the growth and I'm still surprised no one got shot or murdered at a council meeting, things got so heated. 

We and other like minded people sold and moved on and now this town is a crime ridden major suburb of Atlanta. 

Elections have consequences and we elected these liars and they turned on the community. Shame on us.


----------



## Therussianbear (Dec 22, 2012)

I have seen it happen in my small crime infested cow town,someone with lots of money wants to build a shopping center where you'rs and other older homes are located. 
Next thing you know you and all the rest are informed of an offer to buy all the homes. Sell now because were taking the property regardless as to what you do.

They even allowed a builder to put a large group of new homes in an area,that the city knew that the state was planing to build a eight lane highway right through their homes. And it happened.


----------



## ARDon (Feb 27, 2015)

I went with that on my old home. They serve you papers telling me the property was allocated for a new road since so & so years. They only where taking a piece that was 250ft long 10ft deep. But I was going to loose a fence & and out building. 1st they said their only paying 6,000. Nope we said, they mention they have unlimited source of legal, I told them so what. Many of my neighbors on the road took their 1st offer, we were the last to hold out. We finally got what we were wanting, "fair market value" which was 23,000. and change. My neighbors were T'ed off and felt they were ripped off. Did we ever see the money personally, nope, it was applied to the principal of the loan. I got what I was asking for "fair market value" & in exchange my credit rating went up too. 
The State of California Cal Trans tried to bully us in fear by telling you, you have no recourse and you have to settle on the value they offer. What they dont tell you is you can settle for fair market value. Many are intimidated by the state identity or whom you dealing with......they want you to fear them, so they can get the property for less of the fair market value. I do not fear easliy, anything is possible long as you do your homework, which the wife & I done. My neighbor feared them and caved in, all of them on the same side of the road they we taking property. You see, everytime they sent a person over to see us, to offer an new proposal on the piece they need, they were alittle more stern & unfriendly and continuously mention "we have an unlimited source of legal". But Sally & I looked at this was a strategy their playing to intimidate us. The key is NOT to cave in........


----------



## Camel923 (Aug 13, 2014)

Another example of how those in power abuse it in hand with judiciary that does what it wants because it is not answerable to anyone.


----------



## Therussianbear (Dec 22, 2012)

ARDon said:


> I went with that on my old home. They serve you papers telling me the property was allocated for a new road since so & so years. They only where taking a piece that was 250ft long 10ft deep. But I was going to loose a fence & and out building. 1st they said their only paying 6,000. Nope we said, they mention they have unlimited source of legal, I told them so what. Many of my neighbors on the road took their 1st offer, we were the last to hold out. We finally got what we were wanting, "fair market value" which was 23,000. and change. My neighbors were T'ed off and felt they were ripped off. Did we ever see the money personally, nope, it was applied to the principal of the loan. I got what I was asking for "fair market value" & in exchange my credit rating went up too.
> The State of California Cal Trans tried to bully us in fear by telling you, you have no recourse and you have to settle on the value they offer. What they dont tell you is you can settle for fair market value. Many are intimidated by the state identity or whom you dealing with......they want you to fear them, so they can get the property for less of the fair market value. I do not fear easliy, anything is possible long as you do your homework, which the wife & I done. My neighbor feared them and caved in, all of them on the same side of the road they we taking property. You see, everytime they sent a person over to see us, to offer an new proposal on the piece they need, they were alittle more stern & unfriendly and continuously mention "we have an unlimited source of legal". But Sally & I looked at this was a strategy their playing to intimidate us. The key is NOT to cave in........


I was working in Burbank California in 1966 some of the the homes along Glenoaks Blvd. got notice from the city of Burbank that the zoning was being changed from single housing to multi-type housing meaning apartments and condo's they were given offers to sell and many did sell. One owner refused to sell,they just built three story building on both sides of their home. I was just renting but most of the people were older owners who had lived their since the 50s. I don't feel today that these things can't happen,I understand they can and do happen.


----------



## Tennessee (Feb 1, 2014)

The whole purpose of Eminent Domain is a means for the government to take personal property. I guess it all depends on which side of the fence your standing weather you got a good deal or not. But if were my home they were taking then I don’t think I would give a crap how good it was for the community.

Homie don’t play that. :spank:


----------



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

Tennessee said:


> The whole purpose of Eminent Domain is a means for the government to take personal property. I guess it all depends on which side of the fence your standing weather you got a good deal or not. But if were my home they were taking then I don't think I would give a crap how good it was for the community.
> 
> Homie don't play that. :spank:


understand that. Here is a issue that happens here...

gas well is drilled and they need to get the gas to market.. they lease land and right of ways but one family refuses to allow it on their land... well without a right of way under the land the gas goes no where... now the land is not taken but the courts will issue a ruling and determine a fair amount and allow the pipe line to go in


----------



## ekim (Dec 28, 2012)

Maine-Marine said:


> understand that. Here is a issue that happens here...
> 
> gas well is drilled and they need to get the gas to market.. they lease land and right of ways but one family refuses to allow it on their land... well without a right of way under the land the gas goes no where... now the land is not taken but the courts will issue a ruling and determine a fair amount and allow the pipe line to go in


IMO, NO, let the gas company go around, same with sewers or water lines for the city. But that also means that said home owner may not get city sewer or water to his home, but it should be his choice alone, screw the government and big business.


----------



## dwight55 (Nov 9, 2012)

Tennessee said:


> The whole purpose of Eminent Domain is a means for the government to take personal property. I guess it all depends on which side of the fence your standing weather you got a good deal or not. But if were my home they were taking then I don't think I would give a crap how good it was for the community.
> 
> Homie don't play that. :spank:


I'm with you Tennessee, . . . and I suppose I could be coaxed into selling my 10 acres, . . . but it wouldn't be for a pittance.

And if they decided to come get it anyway, . . .

I'll guarantee that someone will review that decision, . . . and it won't be a good review.

May God bless,
Dwight


----------



## Ripon (Dec 22, 2012)

Like a firearm eminent domain is often used for the public good. Like a firearm when its used poorly and misused we all hear about it.

In California, just an example, there is a HUGE tax break to a property owner if a community threatens eminent domain. Just the "resolution to condemn" by a city council
gets an individual a free pass on a good deal of capital gains' taxes. Even if there is no intent to "condemn." I recall the first time I was asked to vote for such a resolution
I thought - no way - but then a smart person (the owner of the land who was having the city buy his property) asked me to please do it so he wouldn't have to pay 
capital gains on the sum he was getting.

We have all seen abuses of the eminent domain process. I'll go back to guns, we all see abuses of firearms in the news routinely, but how many stories do we see in the 
news when a gun saved a life, when a gun made a family feel safe because they were protected, and just like the gun - eminent domain is used often for the communities
needs. As I said in the other thread if you live in a community, if you buy products, if you use public services of any kind - its supported by the ability of the community
to take property when its needed.



Maine-Marine said:


> Eminent Domain, for me, is one of those things that is needed but abused it can be horrible``
> 
> Let me offer two examples
> 
> ...


----------



## Ripon (Dec 22, 2012)

Being that the community I served on the city council for was in California I heard of many abuses by Cal - Trans. I know for a fact, as a city, we never let someone know their property could be taken as a first presentation. In every case we had someone knock on their door, sit in their living room, explain what we needed, why we needed it, and asked if we could buy it.

The one I feared the most was a 40-50 year old company that had located next to the highway, and their facilities were now in the way of a needed freeway exchange. There was no way to re route the freeway (six lanes), and going without the exchange put people at risk daily. I expected "HELL" from the owners, and was one of the two who went to sit down and talk with them about it. The whole process took about 5 days. We, the City, agreed to give them 2x the amount of space, a new building, and to make sure it was all properly permitted and in place before they had to leave. DONE - they were happy, city has a new freeway interchange and not one person has been killed there since.

I'd suggest that anyone who thinks its wrong for a city / government to "take" someone's property really think about where they belong in society.



ARDon said:


> I went with that on my old home. They serve you papers telling me the property was allocated for a new road since so & so years. They only where taking a piece that was 250ft long 10ft deep. But I was going to loose a fence & and out building. 1st they said their only paying 6,000. Nope we said, they mention they have unlimited source of legal, I told them so what. Many of my neighbors on the road took their 1st offer, we were the last to hold out. We finally got what we were wanting, "fair market value" which was 23,000. and change. My neighbors were T'ed off and felt they were ripped off. Did we ever see the money personally, nope, it was applied to the principal of the loan. I got what I was asking for "fair market value" & in exchange my credit rating went up too.
> The State of California Cal Trans tried to bully us in fear by telling you, you have no recourse and you have to settle on the value they offer. What they dont tell you is you can settle for fair market value. Many are intimidated by the state identity or whom you dealing with......they want you to fear them, so they can get the property for less of the fair market value. I do not fear easliy, anything is possible long as you do your homework, which the wife & I done. My neighbor feared them and caved in, all of them on the same side of the road they we taking property. You see, everytime they sent a person over to see us, to offer an new proposal on the piece they need, they were alittle more stern & unfriendly and continuously mention "we have an unlimited source of legal". But Sally & I looked at this was a strategy their playing to intimidate us. The key is NOT to cave in........


----------



## Tennessee (Feb 1, 2014)

dwight55 said:


> I'm with you Tennessee, . . . and I suppose I could be coaxed into selling my 10 acres, . . . but it wouldn't be for a pittance.
> 
> And if they decided to come get it anyway, . . .
> 
> ...


Tell them they better bring "Oprah" money.


----------



## tango (Apr 12, 2013)

Was it in Vermont that a former supreme court justice allowed a condo developer to take homes to build condos, for the greater good?
Yea that works!


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

It is abused most of the time. Also each state has it's own laws on how it works In 2003 I lost 2.5 acres to the state for an unnecessary road project. I was paid a very low price for the land. 1/3 of what they had valued it for taxes on it. 
Nothing you can do about either.


----------



## ARDon (Feb 27, 2015)

its like I said what I & the wife and my old neighbors went threw was intimidation, they will bully you to make believe you have NO choice in the matter.Why would they say "we have unlimited means of legal?" My neighbors were offered below market value and Cal Trans flexed their muscle to bestow fear into these people.They all coward down and took the 1st offer. Now like I said I do not scare easy and I called them down. That is why they kept sending 5 different assessors each time their were more unfriendly until Ray came & we settled on a fair market value. They will take it..............


----------



## 1skrewsloose (Jun 3, 2013)

Can we say, "kickbacks", nooo, that would never happen in America!!!??! We're upstanding, honest folks, especially the gov people!


----------



## 1skrewsloose (Jun 3, 2013)

It's been said before, but, there is no need or reason for taxpayers to be strong armed by the gov. They work for us, not the other way around! mho. How......never mind, needed it to be posted in another forum. Sometimes I get on a roll.


----------



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

Yes the government works for us.. but a few of you prove why we need eminent domain. The government is us /we the people.

in the case of a sewer system - refusing the city to put a pipeline through your property could well mean that 1/2 the town did not get sewer - which means folks still would have septic - which means pumping crap into the ground where it could seep into ground water and wells.

without eminent domain we never would have had the road system we have today, railroad, electric lines, sewer, water.... and the list goes on. Yes it is abused (sometimes) and I am not defending that - I am defending the 99.9% where it has been used to better AMERICANS

so before you run to put on your big boys panties with the superman logo on the ass and tell us how you would STAND UP to the "GOVERNMENT" and get ALL YOU CAN from WE THE PEOPLE..remember the Courts have ruled many times against you


----------



## ARDon (Feb 27, 2015)

I'm not saying we should be against eminent domain, its how they go about it is my problem.......& experience


----------



## Ripon (Dec 22, 2012)

As it goes with government in general. We get caught up in its faults which are plenty while drinking its water, flushing our toilets, using the power and communications grid.



ARDon said:


> I'm not saying we should be against eminent domain, its how they go about it is my problem.......& experience


----------



## Doc Holliday (Dec 22, 2012)

If they want anything I own they better show up with "Oprah money" like 10X what the property is worth.. If they try to just take it there will be a fight and people will not like the outcome. I would defend my property from the government just like I would from any other criminal trying to take it.

Now, If you want my land cause its in the way or you need to put something through it then put me up in a nice cabin on 1000 acres in Idaho or Montana and we will call it even..


----------



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

Doc Holliday said:


> If they want anything I own they better show up with "Oprah money" like 10X what the property is worth.. If they try to just take it there will be a fight and people will not like the outcome. I would defend my property from the government just like I would from any other criminal trying to take it.
> 
> Now, If you want my land cause its in the way or you need to put something through it then put me up in a nice cabin on 1000 acres in Idaho or Montana and we will call it even..


you will get "FAIR Compensation".

If you want to fight it..you will be dead or in jail..and the government will still end up putting the sewer lines through your land...

And if you are so against it..please stop driving on the highways, disconnect from the electric grid, and if you are on a sewer line..stop using it

everybody is friggin john wayne on the internet...


----------



## Charles Martel (Mar 10, 2014)

Maine-Marine said:


> Yes the government works for us.. but a few of you prove why we need eminent domain. The government is us /we the people.
> 
> in the case of a sewer system - refusing the city to put a pipeline through your property could well mean that 1/2 the town did not get sewer - which means folks still would have septic - which means pumping crap into the ground where it could seep into ground water and wells.
> 
> ...


Eminent Domain is something that should be used very, very rarely, and only out of absolute necessity by any community. It should never be used to confiscate land or property for gain or for profit, and it should never, ever be used as a political instrument or weapon. There needs to be much clearer/fairer rules governing the use of eminent domain. It is abused far too often.


----------



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

Charles Martel said:


> Eminent Domain is something that should be used very, very rarely, and only out of absolute necessity by any community. It should never be used to confiscate land or property for gain or for profit, and it should never, ever be used as a political instrument or weapon. There needs to be much clearer/fairer rules governing the use of eminent domain. It is abused far too often.


what he said


----------



## Charles Martel (Mar 10, 2014)

Doc Holliday said:


> ...Now, If you want my land cause its in the way or you need to put something through it then put me up in a nice cabin on 1000 acres in Idaho or Montana and we will call it even..


This is precisely how I feel. If my community were to truly "need" my property, I believe I should be given more than just "fair market value" for it. I should be compensated for my personal sacrifice for the greater good (to say nothing of the inconvenience and cost associated with relocation, etc). I should get more out of the deal than just "fair market value" and a handshake for playing along. I should get a little extra for taking one for the team...for having my right to be secure in my property infringed upon by others.


----------



## ekim (Dec 28, 2012)

All this BS about how the government is helping people is at the cost of the people with no recourse. All those rail road lines that are now gone or never to be used again, the thousands of miles of roads that all seem to go to the same place, those terrific sanitation plants that still end up pumping the toxic waste either into the ground, a river or some lake, the so called "pure" water that isn't quite as pure as we think and the water and sewer systems that are all out of date and failing and there never seems to be enough money to keep them up to date and operating properly all the while the cost always go up. And least we forget how much graft that the politicians get to push this BS on the American tax payer AT the tax payers expense. Some here really need to stop the BS and admit they like big government and are part of it.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

Charles Martel said:


> Eminent Domain is something that should be used very, very rarely, and only out of absolute necessity by any community. It should never be used to confiscate land or property for gain or for profit, and it should never, ever be used as a political instrument or weapon. There needs to be much clearer/fairer rules governing the use of eminent domain. It is abused far too often.


Unlike that town in Connecticut (New London?) that took peoples property thru eminent domain to build a Walmart. They claimed it was beneficial because of the jobs created and the increased tax base.
One woman would not give in, and fought the action to the point of bankruptcy. She lost her property and all her money. Walmart ended up building somewhere else.


----------



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

ekim said:


> All this BS about how the government is helping people is at the cost of the people with no recourse. All those rail road lines that are now gone or never to be used again, the thousands of miles of roads that all seem to go to the same place, those terrific sanitation plants that still end up pumping the toxic waste either into the ground, a river or some lake, the so called "pure" water that isn't quite as pure as we think and the water and sewer systems that are all out of date and failing and there never seems to be enough money to keep them up to date and operating properly all the while the cost always go up. And least we forget how much graft that the politicians get to push this BS on the American tax payer AT the tax payers expense. Some here really need to stop the BS and admit they like big government and are part of it.


eminent domain was written into the constitution.


----------



## Ralph Rotten (Jun 25, 2014)

I am in total agreement with Main Marine. There are times that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one.

But in the last few years we have seen that abused--in fact one case went all the way to the highest courts over city founders dislocating a whole neighborhood so they could sell the land (and a great discount) to Walmart. Unbelievably the courts sided against the homeowners. They were poor, so who gives a crap about their ghetto homes, they shoulda taken the deal...right? Wrong. This is exactly why we have the 4th ammendment. Taking that land from those people violates the second greatest document the history of mankind. It is patently wrong and borders on a sin.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

Maine-Marine said:


> you will get "FAIR Compensation".
> 
> If you want to fight it..you will be dead or in jail..and the government will still end up putting the sewer lines through your land...
> 
> ...


 No you do not always get fair compensation depends where you are and why they are taking it. I got 1/3 of what they were taxing me on it. And you can not win in a stacked hearing.
Plus when they rule against you as they always do you pay all the states cost .


----------



## PaulS (Mar 11, 2013)

The premise upon which eminent domaine is based is that the comunity needs outweigh the right to own land.
The government can't own land and the don't "own" land. They can hold it for use by the entire population but they don't "OWN" it.
Individuals have a right to land ownership - they must purchase or earn it in some way but once owned it is their right to keep it.
The government has taken the power to take land from the owner in two ways:
Taxes and eminent domain. Taxes are a legal means to remove ownership of property - that is why states can't tax federally "owned" land (court decision). 
with eminate domain the government is supposed to pay for the land (but not any improvements) so that the person can replace the land that he owns. The confiscation of land must constitute a benifit for the community - not the government.

At the base level both real property taxes and eminent domain are both constitutionally in conflict.

If the government needs to run a pipe through your property they use a "right of way" which removes complete use of your land only to the extent of the passage boundaries. 

I would suggest removing the power of eminent domain and real property taxation from the government.
When I lived in Seattle I paid property taxes, water, sewage, garbage, electric and fuel oil fees. If I am paying for the services then what it the property tax for?
It was supposed to pay for fire and police and education but it went into the general fund which pays for a lot of other stuff that I didn't use. As a matter of fact I never used the fire or police in that city so what was I paying for?


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

Smitty901 said:


> No you do not always get fair compensation depends where you are and why they are taking it. I got 1/3 of what they were taxing me on it. And you can not win in a stacked hearing.
> Plus when they rule against you as they always do you pay all the states cost .


I personally know of a family who fought the state of Florida to get fair value for the property he lost to the building of a highway. He felt the price was lowballed. It seems that the first offer is always the highest, and if you fight the appraised value plummets.
The citizen who refuses to bow down WILL be punished.


----------



## Ripon (Dec 22, 2012)

And our experience was the opposite.

If a resident decided they couldn't accept the City's offer we hired an appraiser to generate a value. We encouraged the owner to do the same, and we offered (as a city) to show them ours even if they didn't want to show us theirs. The one time I remember a "biggest" argument was a farmer who was going to lose three rows of trees. We had to dig there to place a water line, storm drain line and sewage line. Once we were done with those lines he could choose to replant new trees if he wanted - we didn't care - our lines would be "that' deep. His trees were 5 years old I think, and he wanted compensation valued at 15 years of future earnings for the trees. We offered 6 years earnings since he could replace the trees and be back to normal in 6 years time. He knew we'd have to hire lawyers, go to court, and spend a lot of money on the "process" and so he compromised to 12 years of earnings on the trees. We finally settled at 10. Neither side was happy, but no judge ever had to hear the case we simply negotiated until we found common ground - that is how it should work.

PaulS you may have never used police or fire services, and I can't recall ever using them myself but they were there for you. They can't just be paid when you call them. You have to pay for them to exist to be there for you when needed - hopefully never. Property taxes is the "norm" by which we pay for those things. I'm a dual income no kids person, hate paying for rug rats education, but someone paid property taxes for mine when I went to public schools so I have to pay them for those going now. We simply don't have another means by which to do it. No one likes taxes, but everyone expects service.



rice paddy daddy said:


> I personally know of a family who fought the state of Florida to get fair value for the property he lost to the building of a highway. He felt the price was lowballed. It seems that the first offer is always the highest, and if you fight the appraised value plummets.
> The citizen who refuses to bow down WILL be punished.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

rice paddy daddy said:


> I personally know of a family who fought the state of Florida to get fair value for the property he lost to the building of a highway. He felt the price was lowballed. It seems that the first offer is always the highest, and if you fight the appraised value plummets.
> The citizen who refuses to bow down WILL be punished.


 Depends on state law. here you must go to court in Dane county you will lose . Then you pay all court cost even the states share.


----------



## Doc Holliday (Dec 22, 2012)

Maine-Marine said:


> you will get "FAIR Compensation".
> 
> If you want to fight it..you will be dead or in jail..and the government will still end up putting the sewer lines through your land...
> 
> ...


I use all these things because I moved into an area that already had these things and I pay for them, If I was out in the middle of no where and the city moved into MY neighborhood, thats what I was talking about..

Oh and I never say anything on the internet that I wouldnt say to someones face.. I would rather be dead standing up to a tyrannical government then be one of the lemmings that lay down their principles and dignity just because someone with more power came by and tried to take what was mine.

I had a long post but decided to delete it because it isnt worth getting into it because someone thinks I cant and wont back up what I say... think what you want, it doesnt bother me at all

Update: Oh and Im not as you say "Friggen John Wayne on the internet" He was my grandma Morrison's first cousin so I guess that makes me Friggen John Wayne's 3rd cousin..... :violent:


----------



## Ralph Rotten (Jun 25, 2014)

Philadelphia Wants To Use Eminent Domain To Turn An Artist's Studio Into A Parking Lot And Supermarket - Forbes

So is it okay to use eminent domain to take your land so some business can profit by building a grocery store? Sure the community gets a shopping center, but I smell BS everytime I see one of these articles.


----------



## jimb1972 (Nov 12, 2012)

I am against eminent domain being used for anything other than public uses, roads, hospitals, sewer, universities, and other things for the common good. It should not be used to increase the tax base.


----------



## Ralph Rotten (Jun 25, 2014)

Agreed!


----------



## Ripon (Dec 22, 2012)

I agree totally. If the need for the land is private the private party should buy it and the seller not forced too. While you can find abuses where it's happened and happening they are still rare. Fact is most uses are for infastructure, water lines, power grid, sewer lines, and roads.



jimb1972 said:


> I am against eminent domain being used for anything other than public uses, roads, hospitals, sewer, universities, and other things for the common good. It should not be used to increase the tax base.


----------



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

Smitty901 said:


> No you do not always get fair compensation depends


that is why I did the " " thing ... air quotes... "FAIR Compensation" the government views it as "Fair"... " " "Understand"

"I" was not saying it was "FAIR" ..."REALLY"


----------



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

jimb1972 said:


> I am against eminent domain being used for anything other than public uses, roads, hospitals, sewer, universities, and other things for the common good. It should not be used to increase the tax base.


the issue is you just left it open... "and other things for the common good" is increasing the tax base COMMON GOOD

I would rule out universities... if a university needs land let em pay..hospital.. unless it is in middle of nowhere alabama or maine,,,where the closest hospital is 4 hours away


----------



## PaulS (Mar 11, 2013)

To correct eminent domain the law should read: compensation that will replace the property and improvements of the land owner in like land under like conditions.

If the state needs that land bad enough to use eminent domain then they should have to pay for it to the satisfaction of the owner.


----------



## Ralph Rotten (Jun 25, 2014)

So here is another angle to look at: What if the neighborhood is a complete slum, but the locals mostly own their homes, and the city is trying to implement urban renewal on the area by creating better housing. Do you feel it is okay to use eminent domain to take the land (and lowball it to a private company to build apartments or affordable housing?)

I ask this because one of the problems encountered in housing developments is that owners want to be paid the price for land with a house on it but the developers intend to tear down the house and really just want the land underneath (and they will nly offer land price, not house+land).


----------



## Diver (Nov 22, 2014)

Ralph Rotten said:


> So here is another angle to look at: What if the neighborhood is a complete slum, but the locals mostly own their homes, and the city is trying to implement urban renewal on the area by creating better housing. Do you feel it is okay to use eminent domain to take the land (and lowball it to a private company to build apartments or affordable housing?)
> 
> I ask this because one of the problems encountered in housing developments is that owners want to be paid the price for land with a house on it but the developers intend to tear down the house and really just want the land underneath (and they will nly offer land price, not house+land).


That is actually a pretty common scenario. The whole point of eminent domain is to make the person being moved whole, so yes you have to pay him enough to accomplish that.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

Maine-Marine said:


> that is why I did the " " thing ... air quotes... "FAIR Compensation" the government views it as "Fair"... " " "Understand"
> 
> "I" was not saying it was "FAIR" ..."REALLY"


 Here is how it works in Wisconsin. They want to widen or change a road but it will mess with so called wet land. The law requires they replace that wet land. So they take 2.5 acres of your land that is not wet land to make it wet land. They have taxed that 2.5 acres at a value of $5000 and acre for some time. But now because it has been reclassified as wetland they offer you $1500. If you appeal you go to a hearing with a bunch of Tree huggers that don't even believe you have a right to own land in the first place you lose. Then you go to a Court in Dane county with the same ideas you will lose. Then you are required to pay all of the States court cost.
Wisconsin law says a willing seller and a willing buyer. However they skip the willing seller part. If the State wants it you are a will seller at any price.


----------

