Thankfully, even though the Democrats tried to push for it (it was on their "sample ballot") Virginians voted to restrict the State's ability to use eminent domain solely for not-for-profit public good and removal of nuisance. Virginia no longer has the ability to claim eminent domain to raise tax bases, promote business, or any other private sector claim. The libertarian imp inside me is really happy about this, and glad that the overwhelming majority of Virginians are smart enough not to vote the party line just because they're handed a "sample ballot". (something like 85% for amending the constitution to prevent private sector influence on eminent domain) linky if you're interested, and an interesting wiki to boot
Why do you consider it a good thing to use the power of the government to force homeowners/landowners to sell if they don't want too, simply to enrich some private venture? Highways/schools/hospitals/etc... I can understand, but just so some well-connected bozo can put up another mini-mall to enrich his own bank account? If you're truly a Libertarian, I'd think you'd be of the mind to tell the developer to suck it up and negotiate with the homeowner/landowner in good faith and come to an agreement without the need for government to butt into things that aren't it's business!
I don't and I'm glad they've restricted it so it can't be used for private ventures. Maybe I wasn't clear in my post - and to be honest the wording of the amendment might have confused people, but if it did it confused them into the choice I wanted them to make. I'm not a libertarian, I just agree with some of their principles.
Fuckin' A right. I voted in favor of this, because eminent domain boils my blood something fierce. It's too often simply theft.
Part of me says good for Virginia but another part of me says that this move will kill more than a few very large projects which will now get held up due to one stubburn hold out.
Wasn't it Judge Souter who was the Eminent Domain judge on the Supreme Court who Eminent Domained those folks in Connecticut out of their homes & land?
How does this new law view blighted properties? The most common use of eminent domain in Massachusetts for commercial re-use regards buildings that are in disrepair to the extent that they are dangerous and therefore condemned. How does Virginia treat such properties?
According to the text of the ballot measure, public nuisances (and property taken for use by privatized utilities) can be taken by eminent domain without restriction so long as the property is put to a public use, and that public use can include privatized primary use. The wording is a bit awkward and will need some clarification (what does it mean that a nuisance can be taken for private benefit so long as it's for a public use?), but the nuisance exception seems solid.
To be honest I'm not sure what defines a "public nuisance" in Virginia law, I would assume run-down or abandoned properties would fit based on my (albeit limited) understanding, especially if they could find evidence of vermin or the like on the property. Remember we Eminent Domained the fuck out of a bunch of hill-billies (literal!) in the Appalachian to make a few national parks and civil war memorials. Hell we Eminent Domained them because they were a public nuisance (which is interesting history if you look for it)...if you hike the Appalachian Trail through Virginia and wander a few hundred feet off the path there's a good chance you'll come across some abandoned house or church or even entire towns left to rust and rot because of Eminent Domain. This is actually a good step for us.
When they meet the shut-out's price, he will sell. If he won't sell, well, it's his f'n property. (As long as the gub'mint gets their yearly slice in taxes, of course.) Besides, when eminent domain doesn't work developers have a back-up plan. They simply buy the local city council and arrange for those stubborn hold outs to get taxed right off their land. Raise the rates high enough and people can't afford to pay.
Sometimes people just won't sell, for any price. Edith Macefield was a stubborn old woman who had no children or anyone else to give the money to, so just flat out refused any offer, even when all her neighbors sold. It dragged out for years, but no offer was ever accepted, even the final of over $1 Million. 2 years later she was dead, leaving the house to a construction worker who was nice to her. Now, not saying she should have been forced to sell, just saying that 'well then they should pay more' ignores the reality of the situation.
I'm curious here as to what the "reality of the situation" is? Does it actually matter that someone isn't motivated by money or even having a mall built around their house? I'm honestly confused by the point you're trying to make
I think he's saying you can't always just sweeten the deal to make the last holdout sell. I'm actually a bit surprised by what happened the picture. I think a lot of places this solution wouldn't be possible because the walling off of the housing three sides would somehow be construed as an illegal taking or zoning violation.
We had a case just like this in San Diego recently down in Little Italy. It was an old widow in her 80's who didn't want to give up her 1920's era 900 sq ft cottage in a part of town which has seen massive redevelopment with the old cottages (originally owned by Italian immigrant fisherman working in the tuna business) into giant multi story apartment complexes with ground floor retail space. Anyway, they indeed up building the Influx building around this old lady's home so you have a giant building completely surrounding an ancient 1920's era cottage. The funny thing is with in a few months of the project getting completed the lady died and the house was up for sale. :wishbone:
https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&...gl=us&ei=h9yfUIioHKXmiwKzqYHQBw&ved=0CLEBELYD I looked it up the compromise building was only five stories tall so it isn't exactly giant but it is much larger. Edit: For some reason it isn't showing the exact address which is 1911 India st.
Many cities have an example here or there of this. There is a single surviving tenement building in Boston's West End* Everything else was completely bulldozed in the 60s for urban renewal (a terrible idea) but this one survived. * Star Trek fun fact: Leanard Nimoy grew up in this neighborhood in just such a building.
