City to consider taking land from Wal-Mart ...by eminent domain

[truthpusher]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/05/05/HERCULES.TMP

HERCULES
-------------------
City to consider taking land from Wal-Mart
Prime bay property could be seized by eminent domain
-------------------
- Patrick Hoge, Chronicle Staff Writer Friday, May 5, 2006

The Hercules City Council will consider whether to use eminent domain to wrest a 17-acre property from Wal-Mart Stores Inc. after the nation's largest retailer rejected a city offer to buy the site with views of San Pablo Bay, city officials said Thursday.

The council asked that a "resolution of necessity'' be brought to it for discussion, City Manager Mike Sakamoto said. The matter has been put on the council's May 23 agenda. Efforts to reach council members about Thursday's announcement were unsuccessful.

Wal-Mart bought the property overlooking central Hercules in November after another developer received city approvals for a neighborhood shopping center.

(snip)

"What the council has said is that we want to buy the property,'' she said, describing the tussle with Wal-Mart as a "David and Goliath'' struggle. "At this point, we're concerned about moving ahead on this property. It's been hanging over us for a long time.''

(snip)


link: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/05/05/HERCULES.TMP

[mom cat]

1. He he!

[BattyDem]

2. Payback's a bitch!

:evilgrin:

[Grateful for Hope]

3. What goes around comes around

:evilgrin:

[Kolesar]

4. Hate 'em but I hope the process does not set a bad precident...eom

[skids]

9. The precedent was set in the SCOTUS...

And nobody, not even the freepers liked that ruling:

http://www.google.com/search?num=20&hl=en&lr=lang_en&safe=off&c2coff=1&as_qdr=all&q=supreme+court+emminent+domain&btnG=Search

...oh this is delightful irony! :bounce:

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

5. This I find amusing. nt.

[nicknameless]

6. It's a perfectly legitimate use of eminent domain,

if they put the land to public use.

WalMart costs a fortune in public assistance.

[ArbustoBuster]

7. My irony meter just exploded.

As another poster commented, payback is a bitch.

[BrklynLiberal]

8. Yesssssssss!

[Miss Chybil]

10. Eminent domain sucks.

Even if it is Wal-Mart.

[NEOBuckeye]

17. Nah. Screw Wal-Mart.

The way they have destroyed so much of our countryside, it serves them right.

[Miss Chybil]

19. Just wait until somebody wants your house. nt

[noel adamson]

20. This may be the surest way to reign in the mis-use of eminent domain

laws...

We would have very few roads if not for the eminent domain laws but using them to build a baseball stadium or strip mall or a Walmart is pure corruption.

There is an old saying "The best way to repeal a bad law is to enforce it vigorously" and I think it would be reasonable to expand on that to add "and apply it to all"

[Coventina]

11. I am in a sad quandry over this story.

I hate Wal-Mart & I hate the "legalized" theft of eminent domain.

[BeFree]

13. So...

.... every time you travel down a highway which was built on eminent domained land, you give yourself 30 lashes?

Just joking while raising a point, ya know, sarcasm. Nothing personal.

[Coventina]

14. Well, there are degrees of wrongness, I have a "nuanced" approach.

:-)

When I said I "hate" eminent domain, what I was thinking of is how it has been used in my own community. The city council has waged war against many businesses because big developers want to put in big projects that would wipe out smaller operations that have been there for decades. So the city council has condemned many, many properties that were upscale boutiques and bistros in the name of "improvement".

I have problems with highways through urban areas, they are often put through the poorest neighborhoods, it is a social justice issue, but as the public DOES benefit (as opposed to just big developers), it's a more complicated issue. And the roads have to go somewhere....I'll be the first to admit that I don't have all the answers.

:shrug:

[BeFree]

16. I second that

But it sure is sweet to see the law used against the big boys. Giving them a taste of their own medicine, I'd say.

[Coventina]

18. Yes, I won't be shedding any tears for Wal-Mart, that's for darn sure!

:freak:

[CPMaz]

21. I agree. The only good thing that could come out of this

would be for Wal-Mart to lose the property, AND for the city to lose the inevitable lawsuit.

I can't stand Wal-Mart, but the taking of private property by eminent domain to give to another private owner is worse than just wrong, it's vile.

[Pavulon]

12. Political weapon

the article states the residents of the community want the development. Looks like a big fu to walmart is going on.

They could do other things, eminent domain sucks.

Reverse this to a right wing city council shutting down a gay bar or strip joint.

This is a slippery slope indeed.

[951-Riverside]

15. I hope they are sucessful

The sooner we get this dangerous ruling off the books the better, every city should try to take land from Home Depot, Target, Best Buy, Circuit City, Kroger, Office Depot, etc and push to build low incoming housing *smirk* just to speed up the process :)