The Drone Strike thing has an interesting twist in Season 3 of House
of Cards.
Won’t ruin it because well it just came out and probably not many
people spent the weekend binge watching it like I did… but what
President Underwood tells someone who has his legs blown off by a
drone strike and his family killed is interesting for sure.
***************************************************************************
Daniel White - Managing Director
SAF North America LLC
Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590
daniel.wh...@saftehnika.com <mailto:daniel.wh...@saftehnika.com>
Skype: danieldwhite
Social: LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/danielwhite84>
__
***************************************************************************
*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Chuck McCown
*Sent:* Monday, March 2, 2015 11:25 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] emminient domain
If a factory gets built that employees 500 people in a depressed
region, that is arguably better for the many.
Just like a drone strike that kills an ISIS head dude but also kills
innocents.
*From:*Glen Waldrop <mailto:gwl...@cngwireless.net>
*Sent:*Monday, March 02, 2015 11:14 AM
*To:*af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
*Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] emminient domain
I disagree.
Lets just say they took the family home that 4 or 5 generations come
to every holiday. How is that better for the many?
It is only better because you count the ones you see and ignore the
ones you don’t.
Not everything in this world is about money. My family is why I make
money, not the other way around.
*From:*Chuck McCown <mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>
*Sent:*Monday, March 02, 2015 8:21 AM
*To:*af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
*Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] emminient domain
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 <mailto:par...@cyberbroadband.net>
*Sent:*Monday, March 02, 2015 2:55 AM
*To:*af@afmug.com <mailto: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 <mailto:trevorbo...@gmail.com>
*To:*af@afmug.com <mailto: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
<mailto: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 <mailto: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
<mailto: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
<mailto:trevorbo...@gmail.com>>
>> To: af@afmug.com <mailto: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
<mailto: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 <mailto: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
<mailto: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 <mailto: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.
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
