Eminent Domain and the Greyhound Bus Terminal
-
- Strip mall
- Posts: 201
- Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 11:50 am
Re: OFFICIAL: East Village downtown neighborhood
I think it's also fair to add that capitalism and democracy are not synonymous, nor are dictatorship and communism... Capitalism is not written into our constitution in the ways most people assume it is.
"Your stupid."
"My stupid what?"
"Y-o-u-r... y-o-u-apostrophe-r-e... they're as different as night and day. Don't you think that night and day are different? What's wrong with you?"
-Strong Bad
"My stupid what?"
"Y-o-u-r... y-o-u-apostrophe-r-e... they're as different as night and day. Don't you think that night and day are different? What's wrong with you?"
-Strong Bad
-
- Bryant Building
- Posts: 3528
- Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 10:54 am
- Location: UMKC Law
Re: OFFICIAL: East Village downtown neighborhood
It's simply not extortion. The legal definition of extortion is "[t]he use, or the express or implicit threat of the use, of violence or other criminal means to cause harm to person, reputation, or property as a means to obtain property from someone else with his consent." USC 18.knucklehead wrote: How in the world is saying "I will kill your $500 million project if you don't buy my property at a price that is ten times its value" not extortion?
If a government official told a developer that "I will not issue the permit your project needs to proceed unless you buy my house for an inflated price" it sure the heck would be extortion.
How is what Barber doing any different in concept?
Legally, he is free to ask whatever selling price he wants. It's just that simple.
-
- City Center Square
- Posts: 14667
- Joined: Wed May 25, 2005 3:34 pm
- Location: Valentine
Re: OFFICIAL: East Village downtown neighborhood
You are right - if you truly believe that the taking in Kelo was groundbreaking, you aren't being intellectually dishonest just misinformed. Kansas was indeed one of the forrunners of takings for "private use" long before Kelo. Ask the folks whose homes used to sit underneath Baron BMW if they think New London was the first development with a taking for economic development purposes. And yes, I have read the opinion.KC-wildcat wrote: No. it isn't intellectually dishonest horseshit. Further, I really resent being called intellectually dishonest and that my knowledge of the area is horseshit. Again, as stated above, I've read the opinion and based my stance upon what I've read. I didn't turn on NPR or FOX, or whomever and fall in step with some anti-ED folks. I would advise you to read the opinion as well. Maybe you already have. Who knows.
The only time I mentioned precedent was in a scentence where I said I had no interest in arguing it, but way to show off those citation skills.KC-wildcat wrote: Since, you brought up precedent, I guess I have to respond with some precedent. Sorry about the length
I would say more but alas I am overdue at the airport.
-
- Bryant Building
- Posts: 3528
- Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 10:54 am
- Location: UMKC Law
Re: OFFICIAL: East Village downtown neighborhood
"[P]oint is that the court only affirmed a practice that had been operating for several decades."LenexatoKCMO wrote: The only time I mentioned precedent was in a scentence where I said I had no interest in arguing it, but way to show off those citation skills.
Okay, while you don't use the word precedent, it is pretty clear that you believe the Court has been affirming these types of cases for a number of years. Well, they haven't. Sorry.
I am only speaking from a legal standpoint. I am referring to cases that have been brought before the Supreme Court. I can't speculate as to how common the practice is in other situations. I don't know the people whose homes were taken for BMW. Like I said, I only talking about Kelo and its deviation from other Supreme Court precedent.
Obviously, this is a pretty emotional topic for you. I understand that. But, the only reason I cited the cases was because you were questioning my intellectual honesty. I guess I've never considered citation as "showing off." I've always considered it a method for supporting an argument.
-
- Alameda Tower
- Posts: 1367
- Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 1:51 pm
- Location: Martin City
Re: OFFICIAL: East Village downtown neighborhood
Your hypothetical is not comparable to the Barber situation, but I can think of a comparable one.Kard wrote: This isn't extortion. This is the same as a kid putting up a lemonade stand and asking $25 a glass.
Extortion would be the opposite--taking the guy's land through intimidation at an "unfair" price.
Lets say the kid has a gallon of gas that was purchased for his dad's lawnmower. You run out of gas 10 miles from town without a cell phone and the nearest other house is 5 miles away. You have to get to town within 30 minutes to make a deal that will make you a profit of $100,000 and the kid is aware of this. So the kid charges you $25,000 for the gallon of gas.
Now that is fairly comparable to Barber wanting to charge $17 million for his property.
You can argue that what the kid is doing is price gouging rather than extortion, but you can't say it isn't price gouging. I don't understand why you are in favor of allowing price gouging. Espescially when its the tax payer that is getting gouged (because paying Barber his inflated price means the project requires higher tax breaks to work).
-
- Bryant Building
- Posts: 3528
- Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 10:54 am
- Location: UMKC Law
Re: OFFICIAL: East Village downtown neighborhood
While we may not like it when a particular set of sellers charge what we think is a high price for a product we want, requiring government approval of a fair price for any particular transaction opens up a Pandora’s box of complications. Price controls lead to wasted resources and even greater unfairness than the market.knucklehead wrote: Your hypothetical is not comparable to the Barber situation, but I can think of a comparable one.
Lets say the kid has a gallon of gas that was purchased for his dad's lawnmower. You run out of gas 10 miles from town without a cell phone and the nearest other house is 5 miles away. You have to get to town within 30 minutes to make a deal that will make you a profit of $100,000 and the kid is aware of this. So the kid charges you $25,000 for the gallon of gas.
Now that is fairly comparable to Barber wanting to charge $17 million for his property.
You can argue that what the kid is doing is price gouging rather than extortion, but you can't say it isn't price gouging. I don't understand why you are in favor of allowing price gouging. Espescially when its the tax payer that is getting gouged (because paying Barber his inflated price means the project requires higher tax breaks to work).
Because of this logic, price controls are only implemented in regulated industries such as the oil industry. Price controls are not - nor have they ever been - implemented in the real estate industry. While you may not like it, the price by which a private owner chooses to sell his property is his choice and his alone. The same would be true if Barber simply stated that his property was not for sale. The government may not compel this sale unless they are legally entitled to use eminent domain.
-
- Alameda Tower
- Posts: 1367
- Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 1:51 pm
- Location: Martin City
Re: OFFICIAL: East Village downtown neighborhood
I agree that the government cannot compel the sale unless it is legally entitled to utilize emmient domain.
My position is that allowing the use of emmient domain in this case is sound public policy. If the laws do not allow the use of emmient domain in this case, I would vote to change the laws to allow it.
I don't like price gouging, especially when the victem is the taxpayer.
My position is that allowing the use of emmient domain in this case is sound public policy. If the laws do not allow the use of emmient domain in this case, I would vote to change the laws to allow it.
I don't like price gouging, especially when the victem is the taxpayer.
- DaveKCMO
- Ambassador
- Posts: 20129
- Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
- Location: Crossroads
- Contact:
Re: OFFICIAL: East Village downtown neighborhood
here, here! i think most reasonable people who look at that property, what is planned to replace it, and are told the difference between the asking price and the assessed price, would wholeheartedly agree.knucklehead wrote: I agree that the government cannot compel the sale unless it is legally entitled to utilize emmient domain.
My position is that allowing the use of emmient domain in this case is sound public policy. If the laws do not allow the use of emmient domain in this case, I would vote to change the laws to allow it.
I don't like price gouging, especially when the victem is the taxpayer.
-
- Bryant Building
- Posts: 3528
- Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 10:54 am
- Location: UMKC Law
Re: OFFICIAL: East Village downtown neighborhood
I do think the sale for a reasonable asking price would be the best possible thing for Kansas City.DaveKCMO wrote: here, here! i think most reasonable people who look at that property, what is planned to replace it, and are told the difference between the asking price and the assessed price, would wholeheartedly agree.
I do not think it is sound public policy to compel real estate sales when the asking price is too high.
I do not think it would be constitutional to change the law so that government can take property from a property owner for a price that the city unilaterally sets. This never happens.
- DaveKCMO
- Ambassador
- Posts: 20129
- Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
- Location: Crossroads
- Contact:
Re: OFFICIAL: East Village downtown neighborhood
i think a major factor here is also that the property is unquestionably blighted. if it were an occupied business or single-family home i have to think most people would feel differently (myself included).KC-wildcat wrote: I do not think it is sound public policy to compel real estate sales when the asking price is too high.
-
- Bryant Building
- Posts: 3528
- Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 10:54 am
- Location: UMKC Law
Re: OFFICIAL: East Village downtown neighborhood
I haven't seen the property. But, if it is in fact blighted, then I see no problem with the use of eminent domain.DaveKCMO wrote: i think a major factor here is also that the property is unquestionably blighted. if it were an occupied business or single-family home i have to think most people would feel differently (myself included).
- Highlander
- City Center Square
- Posts: 10396
- Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 1:40 pm
- Location: Houston
Re: OFFICIAL: East Village downtown neighborhood
The place is a pit. If it was not surrounded almost entirely by government offices, I wonder if a case could be made for a lawsuit claiming the state of the property detracts from the property values of neighboring business. It's one thing to buy a property for future investment, I do not believe, however, that one should be allowed to let that property fester in a crucial part of the city.DaveKCMO wrote: i think a major factor here is also that the property is unquestionably blighted. if it were an occupied business or single-family home i have to think most people would feel differently (myself included).
-
- Valencia Place
- Posts: 1843
- Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 10:41 am
- Location: Brookside (KCMO)
Re: Eminent Domain and the Greyhound Bus Terminal
While not a lawyer or building inspector, I would venture a guess that the Terminal is indeed blighted. Next time you are by the place take a walkpast it. You can actually smell the mold and mildew coming out of it. There is trash and debris strewn about the property. Regardless of the legal issues associated with the sale of the property the owner has done nothing to support DT.
-
- Bryant Building
- Posts: 3528
- Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 10:54 am
- Location: UMKC Law
Re: Eminent Domain and the Greyhound Bus Terminal
If I'm ever at the Federal Courthouse, I'll take a look. Until then, if anyone is nearby, take a picture and post it.KCTigerFan wrote: While not a lawyer or building inspector, I would venture a guess that the Terminal is indeed blighted. Next time you are by the place take a walkpast it. You can actually smell the mold and mildew coming out of it. There is trash and debris strewn about the property. Regardless of the legal issues associated with the sale of the property the owner has done nothing to support DT.
- tat2kc
- Bryant Building
- Posts: 4196
- Joined: Wed Feb 19, 2003 6:32 pm
- Location: freighthouse district
- Contact:
Re: Eminent Domain and the Greyhound Bus Terminal
If its anything like the old Jones store building, its got to be pretty nasty inside.
Are you sure we're talking about the same God here, because yours sounds kind of like a dick.
- DaveKCMO
- Ambassador
- Posts: 20129
- Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
- Location: Crossroads
- Contact:
Re: Eminent Domain and the Greyhound Bus Terminal
pics from today. it's looked exactly like this for at least a decade, if not more.
- Highlander
- City Center Square
- Posts: 10396
- Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 1:40 pm
- Location: Houston
Re: Eminent Domain and the Greyhound Bus Terminal
I remember being in this place in its "heyday" as a bus station. It was a depressing place at best back then. Apart from the barely acceptable front side, the architechture is hideous. The only time in its history it was an interesting place was during its short stint as the KC manifestation of Denver's Gart Brothers Sporting Goods (at least I think it was Gart Brothers who were there).DaveKCMO wrote: pics from today. it's looked exactly like this for at least a decade, if not more.
- KCFutbol
- Alameda Tower
- Posts: 1072
- Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2006 7:41 am
Re: Eminent Domain and the Greyhound Bus Terminal
When I went through it in 2001 in order to prepare the KMBC proposal it was pretty bad. As you said there is a moisture problem as well as vagrants getting in an causing damage. The garage, IMO, is beyond repair. We proposed demolishing it and building a new garage.KCTigerFan wrote: While not a lawyer or building inspector, I would venture a guess that the Terminal is indeed blighted. Next time you are by the place take a walkpast it. You can actually smell the mold and mildew coming out of it. There is trash and debris strewn about the property. Regardless of the legal issues associated with the sale of the property the owner has done nothing to support DT.
- Thaine
- Western Auto Lofts
- Posts: 607
- Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 12:46 pm
Re: Eminent Domain and the Greyhound Bus Terminal
Some clarification. Barber bought the structure in order to build a fee-based privately held jail. His connection at the state didn't get re-elected so that deal fell through.
His property actually appraised at 2.3 million. The City's condemning because it doesn't want to pay any more than that, especially given the environmental concerns, as there used to be a gas station in the middle of the structure and for all anybody knows the tanks are still in the ground.
His property actually appraised at 2.3 million. The City's condemning because it doesn't want to pay any more than that, especially given the environmental concerns, as there used to be a gas station in the middle of the structure and for all anybody knows the tanks are still in the ground.
- DaveKCMO
- Ambassador
- Posts: 20129
- Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
- Location: Crossroads
- Contact:
Re: Eminent Domain and the Greyhound Bus Terminal
so that means the city should pay him $2.76m, not $17m.Thaine wrote:His property actually appraised at 2.3 million. The City's condemning because it doesn't want to pay any more than that, especially given the environmental concerns, as there used to be a gas station in the middle of the structure and for all anybody knows the tanks are still in the ground.