I agree there is no difference in properties. I hate to see a business that a person put everything into only to then loose it to development. Couldn't a councilman propose this and not include the waterfront since that has already been given the ok?
----- Original Message ---- From: dfsavgny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 11:20:53 AM Subject: [AsburyPark] Re: Belmar - Eminent Domain --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED] ups.com, Allan Peterson <nnjallans1@ ...> wrote: > > Why hasn't a councilman from Asbury done this? > I assume because it could cover properties that are already slated to be acquired under the WRA and subject the city to a suit (as repeatedly threatened) from Partners. Of course it could be done for properties outside however, that would threaten the Springwood plan. Personally, I don't know why there is a distinction between owner-occupied homes and any other property. The government either has the right to take property for a certain purpose or it doesn't. Property rights are property rights no matter what type of property or how its occupied. It smacks of pandering to voters and is inconsistent in principle. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Never Miss an Email Stay connected with Yahoo! Mail on your mobile. Get started! http://mobile.yahoo.com/services?promote=mail
