The widow almost certainly got above fair market value. But you can’t put a value on the intangible value of a family home.
Again, the 5th amendment of the US constitution has it right in there. The good of the many overrides the good of the few. From: CBB - Jay Fuller Sent: Monday, March 02, 2015 2:55 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: [AFMUG] emminient domain and i live in a town that literally took a widow's property in order to build a new plant / factory several years ago. yes, it was horrible, and it was done by the local "economic development board' with the support of the county commissioners...but i failed to see how that was "for the public use". of course if the woman had agreed to the price.... : / horrible horrible story....but i'm sure that new plant / factory is employing quite a few people. http://www.cullmantimes.com/archives/eminent-domain-on-agenda/article_3c30de17-6ed1-5a3b-ac21-8d4b2f1f4b63.html http://www.cullmantimes.com/community/rally-critical-of-city-leaders-actions/article_56b67d35-360f-5c99-aa09-1a9aefdbd574.html ----- Original Message ----- From: Trevor Bough To: af@afmug.com Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2015 12:37 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] FCC Live Link The 5th Amendment just established just compensation for eminent domain. It leaves it to the states to define what "public use" is. And the landowner still always has the right to argue their point that it is not going to be used for public use. Luckily, I live in a state that puts the onus on the condemning authority to prove the taking is definitely needed for public use. On Feb 28, 2015 12:24 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote: > > The 5th amendment of the US constitution took that from you many years ago. > > From: Trevor Bough > Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2015 10:30 AM > To: af@afmug.com > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] FCC Live Link > > > As a property owner, I find that idea completely terrifying. I should absolutely have the right to say what is or is not on my property. Working in the utility industry, I still find that idea completely terrifying. Electric utilities typically require at least 30' of dedicated ROW. Gas and water utilities typically require at least 20' of dedicated ROW. Would you like to be required to give up 70' of your front yard without any say? You still get to mow it and maintain it, but if the utility feels the shrub you planted will interfere with them operating their line, they have the right to come destroy it. I would love to have dedicated easements everywhere, but that is the reason there is dedicated public ROW everywhere. Honestly people would be much better off dedicating 20' to a utility easement when they record the legal description of their property. Virtually all utilities can fit into a single 20' easement, especially if several go aerial, they just don't like to. In my opinion, eminent domain should be a difficult process with a requirement on the condemning authority to prove need and history of good faith negotiations. Just my 2 cents (probably closer to $0.10 now). > > On Feb 28, 2015 10:48 AM, "Mike Hammett" <af...@ics-il.net> wrote: >> >> Tangent... >> >> >> I understand property rights and all, but I'd like to see automatic approval for all ROW requests by qualified entities. >> >> >> >> ----- >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutions >> http://www.ics-il.com >> >> ________________________________ >> From: "Trevor Bough" <trevorbo...@gmail.com> >> To: af@afmug.com >> Sent: Friday, February 27, 2015 6:56:45 PM >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] FCC Live Link >> >> Apparently Missourians fight to protect their property rights more vigorously because, here anyway, it is a lengthy and expensive process. Landowners in MO can also be awarded legal fees if the condemning authority drops or loses the case of eminent domain, so it is definitely not a, "This guy is being difficult, we'll show him." fix-all. http://watchdog.org/88546/missouri-landowners-win-in-eminent-domain-test-case/ Looks like it wasn't always the case here though. >> >> On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Chuck McCown <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote: >>> >>> I have done it several times. In my cases it was pretty much the easy button. Just had to wait for the docket. >>> >>> From: Trevor Bough >>> Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 6:21 PM >>> To: af@afmug.com >>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] FCC Live Link >>> >>> >>> It's not quite that easy... You have to be authorized by the state to be able to use eminent domain and even then it is a very lengthy process (minimum of six months typically) and it has to be for "public use", which a utility can qualify as, but even after going to court for six months or more to prove that this is necessary for the public you are still at the mercy of the quart ruling that you are right and now have the luxury of paying the landowner for the access. It's not some magic automatic "Easy Button". >>> >>> On Feb 26, 2015 1:34 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> If you need to cross property with your pole line or underground line, you can do so under the right of eminent domain. Landowner has no say so. You go to court, the judge bangs the gavel, and voila, instant ROW. However at that point in time the tables turn somewhat in the favor of the landowner as you have to compensate them for what you have taken. >>>> >>>> That that typically ends up at a place where it became a very expensive ROW... >>>> >>>> What you are talking about below is the establishment of a prescriptive ROW through your failure to defend your property. Another word for it is acquiescence or adverse possession. You can certainly lose your right to defend if you sit on your rights. So, yea, if they didn't have an easement or court order, cut down that pole. >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- From: Adam Moffett >>>> Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 12:27 PM >>>> To: af@afmug.com >>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] FCC Live Link >>>> >>>> What eminent domain actions can a utility take? My "knowledge" on that >>>> topic is all hearsay. >>>> >>>> I heard of a landowner who saw a company putting a pole in an empty lot >>>> that he owned across the street from his house. He watched them set the >>>> pole and then after the workers left he went out with a chainsaw and cut >>>> it down because they never asked him if they could put the pole there >>>> (so the story went). In his point of view, if he let them put the pole >>>> there, they have permanent rights to access that spot on his property >>>> because of eminent domain. >>>> >>>>> You may even have the right of eminent domain now. >>>> >>>> >> >>
