....[url=http://www.newser.com/story/176481/seattle-seizing-103-year-olds-parking-lot.html]a parking lot that they own.[/url]
A little background first. There is a principle and practice in play that is known as "eminent domain". The idea is that the government (local, state, federal) which allegedly has the "best interests of the public and the people at heart" is empowered to (on rare occasions) take property from private owners who otherwise refuse to sell their property, and then when the property is owned by the government, improve or change the use of the land in order to benefit the population.
But in this case, they're seizing a privately owned parking lot (which is being used for public parking for a fee) and are intending to use it as a city-owned parking lot (open to the public, for fee-based parking). In other words, no change in the use of the property, except that the ownership and income from the property goes from a private owner, into the hands of the city.
Which based on my understanding of the purpose of eminent domain, is a fraudulent exercise of the power, a clear abuse, and little more than theft.
WTG Seattle.
-
yhbbh
-
o rly?
-
"best interests of the public and the people at heart" "improve or change the use of the land in order to benefit the population." Don't agree with what they did but according to this, it was legal. They changed the use of it to the benefit of the population by removing the profit margin on it. Also, I think that if you buy a -blam!-ing parking space to charge people to park there, you should go -blam!- yourself. That is in absolutely no way helping the world or positively contributing to the economy.
-
Seriously, that's pretty low. I hope that woman fights back and wins.
-
And this is why I like living out in the boonies.
-
Seen worse
-
I would have understood had it been a very common area, where they would have made it [i]free[/i] parking. But with a fee? lolwut
-
-
hvtvv
-
-
Free parking though.
-
Can she fight back legally over this?
-
ITT: Suburban kids not used to corruption. This is nothing compared to what mine does.
-
After Kelo, it's pretty much a free-for-all on eminent domain. As long as it's for a public purpose, it's all good. - Der
-
First a parking lot. THEN THE WORLD.
-
-
Erm..... nothing seems wrong on my end. That sounds like your complaining about a government to re-nationalize a business just on a smaller scale.
-
Edited by Spinager: 11/1/2013 4:52:05 PMCity's a DIIIICK!
-
Let's hope someone can take this to court. Seriously, that's an asinine abuse of power.
-
Edited by Progo: 11/1/2013 4:34:31 PMI heard about this last week, it's pretty bizarre, except they did offer the owner 22 mil for it... However I notice your link doesn't mention that.
-
They want to replace parking lost when they tear down that other thing by not building more parking lots but by taking one that already is used?
-
Wouldn't it have been easier to just work out a deal with the owner for a government discount of some kind?
-
Edited by SonOfTheShire: 11/1/2013 4:27:38 PMI guess they're a little strapped for cash. Do you think they'll get away with this? I mean, do they just get to say "yoink" and take the land, or is there some sort of process they have to go through?
-
No reply to a Ninja? Wtf Flood?