Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Of course, the new roads could be considered "public use" if there are existing plans for retail development that will also be accessed by them -- planned shops and restaurants and gas stations and medical, & etc. to come.
I agree that if the new roads are expected to have access to retail for other area residents, then the new roads would be public use and Eminant Domain would be appropriate.
I reckon them there farmers gettin' pennies on the dollar don't see it that way. Not to mention those nice city folks that moved to the country to get away from it all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2mares
Pennies on the dollar for their land (wanting 200,000K per acre when the average price is ~4K) to widen the roads or pennies on the dollar for a good job in an area that needs jobs?
You men those nice city folk who may commute from Memphis, Covington or Brownsville to Stanton or the locals (population ~500) or those from the surrounding small communities? Maybe the black farmers might want to stop growing cotton in favor of a good job with insurance and a 401K or at least have the opportunity for their children and grandchildren so they dont have to move off to the big city for jobs. I think most of them felt this way as they were happy to sell their property (at an inflated price) for the plant to be built.
Marvin Sanderlin is seeing the opposite of an inflated price:
Marvin Sanderlin, a longtime local farmer with 400 acres, said he’d like to take advantage of the coming development, too.
But the state has taken him to court for 10 acres of his property. The land lies in the path of a planned roadway connecting the Ford plant to the interstate. The state’s offer? $37,500 — or $3,750 per acre.
“That’s unheard of,” Sanderlin said of the offer, which includes the purchase of two acres of farmland outright and compensation for another eight acres of his property that will become inaccessible with the new interchange.
“You can’t buy no land here for $3,500 an acre. You can’t buy a swamp here for $3,500” Sanderlin said. “I told them this is the biggest ripoff there is. They want your land, but they don’t want you to participate in the wealth.”"
PS: "Whitmore said. “There’s nothing we can do with $8,000 except be mad.”"
Last edited by Ellis Bell; 04-07-2023 at 03:52 PM..
Marvin Sanderlin, a longtime local farmer with 400 acres, said he’d like to take advantage of the coming development, too.
But the state has taken him to court for 10 acres of his property. The land lies in the path of a planned roadway connecting the Ford plant to the interstate. The state’s offer? $37,500 — or $3,750 per acre.
“That’s unheard of,” Sanderlin said of the offer, which includes the purchase of two acres of farmland outright and compensation for another eight acres of his property that will become inaccessible with the new interchange.
“You can’t buy no land here for $3,500 an acre. You can’t buy a swamp here for $3,500” Sanderlin said. “I told them this is the biggest ripoff there is. They want your land, but they don’t want you to participate in the wealth.”"
PS: "Whitmore said. “There’s nothing we can do with $8,000 except be mad.”"
So the true value lies somewhere between $3,750 an acre and $200,000 an acre.
As Coldjensens pointed out - he doesn't have to accept the state's offer - it will go to court and the court will decide the fair price for the land.
You can torture the definition of "public use" to include everything. I would say "keep it simple, stupid" should prevail with regard to stealing someon's private property. It should be for a relatively straight forward public use, and not some serpentine, peripheral public use.
The Federal government provides many things useful to the populace, so should they be allowed to take anybody's private property at any time for any reason, because ultimately the government is useful providing an army to defend our shores?
No.
The 1960s space program resulted in the silicon microchip that revolutionized everyone's life and improved our lives dramatically. Should they have been able to condemn private property to build the launchpads for the space program, because decades in the future the resulting technology would someday be useful for most people?
That is not the intent of the 5th Amendment to the US Constitution, "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
It says “without just compensation”, they are being compensated.
Of course, the new roads could be considered "public use" if there are existing plans for retail development that will also be accessed by them -- planned shops and restaurants and gas stations and medical, & etc. to come.
I agree that if the new roads are expected to have access to retail for other area residents, then the new roads would be public use and Eminant Domain would be appropriate.
I don't know the specifics of the entire plan.
It is the area residents who will hopefully be the ones opening businesses on that road. Many small businesses will open to serve thousands of employees. Planned retail development sounds like they’d be bringing in chains or outside businesses vs letting their own residents start and own them.
So the true value lies somewhere between $3,750 an acre and $200,000 an acre.
As Coldjensens pointed out - he doesn't have to accept the state's offer - it will go to court and the court will decide the fair price for the land.
per the bold from the article:
"In windows all around the nearby Brownsville town square, businesses have tacked up “Welcome Y’all!” signs with the blue Ford logo, including one at a local real estate firm next to a listing for 70 acres of vacant land near Ford’s new BlueOval City campus. The listing is on the market for $14.5 million – an exorbitant jump in value from $10,000-per-acre asking prices several years ago."
I'm thinking that's where they get the $37,500 for the 10 acres, in the sentence, "The state’s offer? $37,500 — or $3,750 per acre."
Yes, unfortunately the court will decide the fair price for the land and guaranteed it won't be the same as that listing price.
You can torture the definition of "public use" to include everything. I would say "keep it simple, stupid" should prevail with regard to stealing someon's private property. It should be for a relatively straight forward public use, and not some serpentine, peripheral public use.
The Federal government provides many things useful to the populace, so should they be allowed to take anybody's private property at any time for any reason, because ultimately the government is useful providing an army to defend our shores?
No.
The 1960s space program resulted in the silicon microchip that revolutionized everyone's life and improved our lives dramatically. Should they have been able to condemn private property to build the launchpads for the space program, because decades in the future the resulting technology would someday be useful for most people?
That is not the intent of the 5th Amendment to the US Constitution, "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
True, but that's not a point I was responding to. I'm fully aware of the basic legal standard of the taking's clause. I merely responded to Annandale_Man's comment on "public good," which I will reiterate this project does fall under.
Moving on, I agree that these kind of takings violate the Constitution, though I say that strict constructionists/textualists have to be careful here as the takings clause is found in the 5th Amendment, which along with the rest of the Bill of Rights were only intended to be applied against the federal government. The takings clause has only been applied to the states via the incorporation doctrine of the 14th Amendment, despite this language being nowhere in the amendment; I do wonder whether it was the intent of the 14 Amendment's framers to apply as many of the Bill of Rights against the states that the Supreme Court has authorized over the years.
Regardless of intent or purpose, however, the reality--right or wrong--is that the state here does have the legal authority to engage in eminent domain here.
Marvin Sanderlin, a longtime local farmer with 400 acres, said he’d like to take advantage of the coming development, too.
But the state has taken him to court for 10 acres of his property. The land lies in the path of a planned roadway connecting the Ford plant to the interstate. The state’s offer? $37,500 — or $3,750 per acre.
“That’s unheard of,” Sanderlin said of the offer, which includes the purchase of two acres of farmland outright and compensation for another eight acres of his property that will become inaccessible with the new interchange.
“You can’t buy no land here for $3,500 an acre. You can’t buy a swamp here for $3,500” Sanderlin said. “I told them this is the biggest ripoff there is. They want your land, but they don’t want you to participate in the wealth.”"
PS: "Whitmore said. “There’s nothing we can do with $8,000 except be mad.”"
Difference is Ford was buying property on which to build their Blue Oval city. Supply and demand came into play as it does. The properties were sold at an inflated price because Ford was willing to pay that. The land in question is being purchased by the state for roads. The element of supply and demand does not apply here. It seems to me the farmers are wanting what the going price was for the highly sought after property that was purchased by Ford, but that ship sailed.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
