Forced sale of your real estate

slowrev · Jun 24, 2005

Eminent domain = 2x FMV
Municipality wants to buy = 3x FMV
Developer = 5x FMV

//

Yes I pretty much agree with those figures, however it is still wrong to take someones land for private enterprise use if they do not want to sell for any price.
Ben

PitbullMidwest · Jun 24, 2005

You're right they should receive at least the FMV, if not 2x the value as you suggest, but that's not the way it works in my neck of the woods. As I said in an earlier post my wife's grandfather received 25 cents on the dollar for his "condemned" cropland. So even at 2x FMV he would have received 50 cents on the dollar.

This is a hot button topic in our family, FMV for his farm should have been the going price for cropland, not the value of "condemned acreage of no commercial value" which is what he received. For that matter, what about his lost future revenue from that ground?

Developers who steal land in this fashion should be required to pay the land owner x% of their profit as if they were partners.

Spiffy · Jun 24, 2005

pay the land owner x% of their profit 

If that X=100; that will weed the greedies right out of the equation.

And even in valid cases [which I agree should be rare] of emminant domain...the basis should be Maximum value whether it is currently ag, residential, etc. ....and I still say several times the Maximum value at that.

bczoom · Jun 24, 2005

( Not good enough. Remember if the municipality is actually the intial purchasing party, they're just spending everyone else's money. Deep pockets - yours.

It's needs to be simple. NO emminent domain forced sales for private redevelopment. Of any kind. For any purpose. Ever.

Use of emminent domain should be restricted to an extremely limited and clearly defined and listed finite number of public uses, i.e. road construction. Don't leave any gray areas or wiggle room.)

Tim & slowrev,

I wholeheartedly concur. My post with the FMV multipliers was qualified "for all of this" (what has happened). That's also why I said that it should be voted on by the public since it's our money that's being spent.

I also wonder if FMV for the land itself should be derived from the value of the proposed purpose.

Brian

Mark4510 · Jun 24, 2005

To support Tim’s comments…..here is the first real world example of this in No CA.

I was chatting with my parents, who have a home in the very rural part of N CA (where cows still outnumber people) when this came up

In a nearby town there has been a push over the last 3 years or so to open a huge resort complex with usual compliment of year round activities. You know the type…..very high end homes, BMW’s, private jets, etc.

The problem, so far, has been the availability of private land that can be purchased to complete this. Some of the land is held by ranchers but most of it is held by good, hard working, honest families who are getting by. By in large these are homes that are in the 800-1,000 square foot range and are 40-70 years old. These folks won’t retire with a lot of money but they are raising great kids and living within their means.

While there has been some real appreciation of property prices of the local homes it is not enough for these folks to move other places and still have a home. Some of these homes have gone from $50,000 to $110,000 in 5 years, based on the speculation, although many have not.

So…..I understand that the development company has started to strategize how they can convince the local government to evict these families based on the recent Supreme Court ruling allowing the local/state government to take people’s homes or private property away to enrich someone else. I don’t know anything else but based on this admitted hearsay; some really great families may be forced out of their homes and off their land.

Brian’s comment about FMV is a good one but a case could be made that the properties are inflated based on speculation and their real value is closer to $50-60k. Try to find a place where a family of 4 can live in CA on that amount even if it is doubled.

I’d sure like to pull some of those supreme court justices of their high horses and give’em a painful dose of reality from the real America. In the meantime I have started calling my local representatives to VERY vocally express my displeasure with the ruling.

I don’t want to live in a country where good hard working families, who where not born with a silver spoon or did not get all the tools to make a ton of money, are kicked out of their homes by people that simply want to make more money.

Mark

riptides · Jun 24, 2005

( I also wonder if FMV for the land itself should be derived from the value of the proposed purpose.)

A little subtle hidden adgenda item not throughly discussed is the relationship between FMV and emminent domain. The process in the commonwealth BEFORE emminent domain gets brought in is an offer of FMV.
If you DECLINE, the local authority can use emminent domain as their kick out. The local authority, in theory, can rezone or condemn, "blight", your property. Thusly, at that point your out, and your screwed to boot.
You should have taken their offer in the first place.

PitBullMidwest has stated this is what happened in their example.

Not all states have emminent domain clauses/laws. So for those states, good for you.

Front page on the washpost this am, was something to the fact that now developers can scarf up land for the new nats stadium they wanted.

I still cannot understand how this happened. I need to get in good with my local county officers now. Picture this -

I like space.
My neighboor has a zillion dollar house on 50 acres.
I have a friend in the county.
I get the area rezoned to AG-use only. I do this because -
o they are paying the same property tax as me
o I pay more taxes because of my ag-produced products
o therefor it is in the authorities best interest to condemn

Authority condemns house, I as a corp buy place. Lucky me!
County has more open space, less infrastructure to support and more tax revenue from my product.

My neighboor is screwed.

Then of course the shopping mall developers does the same to me. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

-Interesting eh?

-Mike Z. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

bczoom · Jun 24, 2005

( A little subtle hidden adgenda item not throughly discussed is the relationship between FMV and emminent domain. The process in the commonwealth BEFORE emminent domain gets brought in is an offer of FMV.)

What I was proposing is that if they're going to change the rules and make it whereby developers or whomever can do this that the price for the person(s) being displaced is based on a multiple of FMV. I would "expect" an independent, non-biased appraiser would be brought in to determine FMV. The value should be determined without knowledge or consideration of the reason to make it equal for all.

If the DQ in a previous post was valued with consideration to the park, the value would probably be exponentially higher. Not real fair for a person who has a house where they need to put in a road or something that has no increased value.

DannyD · Jun 24, 2005

I am well aware that the scum are in for life, but the scum that put them there is not. I want to go to the 5 dipsticks that are stupid enough to sign this, demand eminent domain on THEIR property, give them squat for it, then sell it to some real low life business to increase the "tax" value. These jacklegs dont even know how stupid this move was, and the president had better tell them to back down, or his party had. There will not be another rep in the office for a very long time after this breach of power.

Sad day in America. I live where there are lots of farms sitting idle, beautiful land that will or could become someones playpen.

DannyD · Jun 24, 2005

Cant wait for my "local dipsticks" to show up at my door. It is a long fall to the street, and my size 11 will put their big cans on the street. They want to pay me what it is REALLY worth, they can have it. I want to leave Floyd County IN anyway, taxes way to high, sewer bills stink, water is lousy, politicians are all in the good ole boys club, etc.