Happened in Sacramento, CA. Eminent domain used to take over property which
was then sold to a consortium which put up a hospital. Good of the community
right? Except that everyone made a bunch of money, except the people who
lost their livelihoods.

Or so I hear.

Mike

On 8/6/10 5:15 PM, "Dave Mcneely" <mcneely4@COX.NET> wrote:

> the case that Loren referred to was in Rhode Island, I think.  A local
> community took a number of properties through eminent domain and turned them
> over to a developer for a mall or something of that nature.  The justification
> given was that the properties better served the needs of the community that
> way, because the project would contribute to the economic well being of the
> community.  Eminent domain had previously been for public works only, such as
> a new road or school.  Plaintiffs contended this traditional use was legal,
> but that transfer of the property to a private party for its use was not.
>
> The case went to U.S. Supreme Court, and the local government won, the court
> ruling that "public good" justified the taking.
>
> 'Twas guite controversial, lots of negative publicity all over the country.
> There has not been another case of a local government doing this, and I doubt
> that any public officials who followed the practice would survive in office.
> But it did happen, and the court did go along with it.
>
> But, the situation is quite different from the police barging in and taking
> over out of the blue, throwing people out and confiscating their personal
> property as was reported to us for the case in Mexico.  Freedom to own
> property may have been abridged in the New England case, but not to the extent
> that we are being told is the case in Mexico.  But -- what is ownership of
> property?  As Don said, sometimes people believe they own property, but they
> don't.  That is even true in the U.S. sometimes.  That's why banks require
> title insurance in order to make a property loan.
>
> It is true even with vehicles (personal property rather than real property).
>
> Dmc
>
> ---- Frank Condelli <RAlanen@AOL.COM> wrote:
>> In a message dated 06/08/2010 7:16:04 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
>> starwagen@gmail.com writes:
>>
>>         Well, that SUCKS big  time.  I was unaware of that >small< detail
>> as I guess many others  are !
>>
>>>>>>> As a matter of fact we in the US are now  subject to exactly that kind
>> of shenanigan!!  Just a couple of years ago  the US Supreme Court ruled
>> that local bureaucrats can confiscate any piece of  property they want  at
>> any
>> time they want if it's for the economic good'  of the community and then
>> give it to anyone they choose.  See the ruling  regarding Eminent
>> Domain.<<<<<
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Frank  Condelli
>> Almonte, Ontario, Canada
>> '87 Westy & Lionel Trains (_Collection for sale_
>> (http://frankcondelli.com/trainsal.htm) )
>> _Frank Condelli &  Associates_ (http://frankcondelli.com/busindex.html)  -
>> Vanagon/Vanagon Westfalia Service in the Ottawa Valley
>> _Vanagon Stainless Steel Exhaust  Systems_
>> (http://frankcondelli.com/exhaust.htm)
>> _BusFusion_ (http://www.busfusion.com/)  a VW Camper  camping event,
>> Almonte, ON, June 10 ~ 13,  2010
>
> --
> David McNeely