I'd just say Americans often have a definition of "progress" not shared by many in the world. Our definition is largely "perpetual growth." Another name for that is cancer.
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 9:21 AM, Chuck McCown <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote: > 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 <par...@cyberbroadband.net> > *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 <trevorbo...@gmail.com> > *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. > >>>> > >>>> > >> > >> > > -- Patrick Leary Director BD, North America, Telrad 727.501.3735 patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG] patrick.le...@telrad.com <patrick.le...@telrad.com> [this is my corporate address]
