Eminent domain happening right now in Kenmore, NY

[subsonic]

I have never heard of a VILLAGE in this stage using eminent domain to involuntarily seize a business just because it neighbors a municipal building. If Kenmore needs a more parking or a bigger police station so badly they can make an acceptable offer or move elsewhere.

In most upstate villages this would cause major citizen unrest at a village board meeting and you wouldn’t have clerk-treasurers defending this shit.

 

[spat]

Fair market value is the standard. The question is , what is the actual fair market value and cost. A business property next to a police station might be worth more than a general property in the area. Just small things can raise a value more than the average in the area.
This is no different than a house of business located where the government might want to build a road.
The legal argument is the amount rather than can they do it and the business owner can get money for more than the actual value of the land or just the building. Some things can’t be moved without destroying them, they can get money . They can sue or negotiate for the cost of the business being “ down” for the move.
It’s often not cut and dry as it might seem.

It should in the least be very painful for the government to even consider.

There is no reason it needs to be only "fair market value". If the government's interest in the property were only "fair market value" they would never buy it. The government interest is much higher, and they should pay appropriately.

If someone wants your property to finish their shopping mall, they need to pay a lot more than "fair market value" for it, because it's worth a lot more than that to them.

It's disgusting that the government exempts itself from so many rules that are considered necessary for a society to function properly.

 

[Saltwater60]

I have never heard of a VILLAGE in this stage using eminent domain to involuntarily seize a business just because it neighbors a municipal building. If Kenmore needs a more parking or a bigger police station so badly they can make an acceptable offer or move elsewhere.

In most upstate villages this would cause major citizen unrest at a village board meeting and you wouldn’t have clerk-treasurers defending this shit.

I doubt that’s the case here since kenmore butts up to the city of Buffalo and is seeing a huge increase in violence from Buffalo traveling northward. People are scared and that community has been historically very safe but it’s fairly liberal. I know more than a few people from that town but they are likeminded so asking them won’t give me much sense of how they are feeling in kenmore.

 

[Truebeliever]

It should in the least be very painful for the government to even consider.

There is no reason it needs to be only "fair market value". If the government's interest in the property were only "fair market value" they would never buy it. The government interest is much higher, and they should pay appropriately.

If someone wants your property to finish their shopping mall, they need to pay a lot more than "fair market value" for it, because it's worth a lot more than that to them.

It's disgusting that the government exempts itself from so many rules that are considered necessary for a society to function properly.

It was an expansion of that eminent domain that was the problem. Before Souters’s decision on the SCOTUS case ( I don’t know if he was the one who wrote the opinion but he widely gets the blame), it was only used for actual government projects like roads or a government building .
That seems to be the case here. Now what is fair market value is to be determined. It should be more than the land itself. A lawyer who specializes in this should be able to raise the price . The price might be high enough that the other options are better.

 

[spat]

It was an expansion of that eminent domain that was the problem. Before Souters’s decision on the SCOTUS case ( I don’t know if he was the one who wrote the opinion but he widely gets the blame), it was only used for actual government projects like roads or a government building .
That seems to be the case here. Now what is fair market value is to be determined. It should be more than the land itself. A lawyer who specializes in this should be able to raise the price . The price might be high enough that the other options are better.

I'm just saying that even a legitimate fair market value is too low.

It should be 10x fair market value, or fair value for what's *going* to be built there after seizure.

Want to take someone's house to build a strip mall ? Then you better pay them the value of the strip mall, not the house.

 

[Truebeliever]

I'm just saying that even a legitimate fair market value is too low.

It should be 10x fair market value, or fair value for what's *going* to be built there after seizure.

Want to take someone's house to build a strip mall ? Then you better pay them the value of the strip mall, not the house.

By that standard, the government could never build or widen a road again.

 

[spat]

By that standard, the government could never build or widen a road again.

Well, not unless they really really needed to.

I think that's kinda the point.

 

[Truebeliever]

Well, not unless they really really needed to.

I think that's kinda the point.

Often they really need to and have trouble getting the budget to do it properly with or without the cost overruns.
As I pointed out before, a lawyer who specializes in this can bring the price up, Msybe high enough that they will go with one of the other options.

 

[Acer-m14]

semiconductor Chip plant .. does this ring a bell ,,, like the solar plant that never produced ..

Onondaga County prepares to use eminent domain, if necessary, to acquire land for Clay chip plant site

County is in discussions with multiple semiconductor makers about White Pine Commerce Park.

www.syracuse.com

 

[Acer-m14]

this looks like a nice place for a police dept .. then can even offer hair cuts ..

, Kenmore, NY | LoopNet

, Kenmore, NY. This Retail property can be viewed on LoopNet.

www.loopnet.com

if there are places for sale or rent .. should trump eminent domain ..

 

[spat]

Often they really need to and have trouble getting the budget to do it properly with or without the cost overruns.
As I pointed out before, a lawyer who specializes in this can bring the price up, Msybe high enough that they will go with one of the other options.

If the government can't afford it, they can put a bond issue to the voters, or they can do without.

Why people think the government should just be able to screw over some private citizen because they want something they can't afford is beyond my understanding.

 

[Saltwater60]

I drove y last night and that building they want to take is probably larger than the police station. There is also a driveway between the two buildings. I’m not sure it really makes sense other than it’s next door.

 

[Grimscale]

I'd just accept a compromise.

Pay them what it would cost to find a new piece of land and have a comparable house built and the occupant moved.
That will be more than "fair market value" and less than "total cost of new project".

The only cost to the homeowner is time moving their stuff from one place to another.

Sadly you can't put a price on memories. but having a brand new house helps.

 

[spat]

I'd just accept a compromise.

Pay them what it would cost to find a new piece of land and have a comparable house built and the occupant moved.
That will be more than "fair market value" and less than "total cost of new project".

The only cost to the homeowner is time moving their stuff from one place to another.

Sadly you can't put a price on memories. but having a brand new house helps.

Except this was a business not a home.

And in all real estate, but especially commercial real estate it's all about "location, location, location".

If that wasn't a big deal then let the government be the one to relocated.


If anyone else can't afford what they need they have to figure something out or do without. But the government gets to just steal it. This has led to their notion of what constitutes a "need" to stretch pretty ridiculously.

"OH, you say this is a *need* ? Explain again how civilization will collapse if that police station doesn't get some more convienent parking".

 

[subsonic]

As I pointed out before, a lawyer who specializes in this can bring the price up, Msybe high enough that they will go with one of the other options.

The only thing worse than the government is lawyers. You'd be lucky if the lawyer took less than half of what you'd actually get trying to negotiate on your own. You don't get compensated by .gov in eminent domain for your lawyer, or your time, suffering, and losses associated with the taking. Just the economic market value of the property.

 

[Truebeliever]

If the government can't afford it, they can put a bond issue to the voters, or they can do without.

Why people think the government should just be able to screw over some private citizen because they want something they can't afford is beyond my understanding.

Or raise taxes, right?
The idea is less about what the government wants as opposed to needs. What if it was a hospital that they needed to build because there wasn’t any close by and in their jurisdiction, like the nearest one was over an hour away by helicopter. The cost should be how many times more than the property is worth ? Then why would anybody sell it to the government if they know they will get 10 times the value if they hold out?

 

[Acer-m14]

Or raise taxes, right?
The idea is less about what the government wants as opposed to needs. What if it was a hospital that they needed to build because there wasn’t any close by and in their jurisdiction, like the nearest one was over an hour away by helicopter. The cost should be how many times more than the property is worth ? Then why would anybody sell it to the government if they know they will get 10 times the value if they hold out?

go get a bank loan .. just like any other business or home buyer .. or set up a gofundme ..

if the nearest ER was 1 hour away .. then learn how to be medic and treat your self .. if you want to live that far away ..

 

[spat]

Or raise taxes, right?
The idea is less about what the government wants as opposed to needs. What if it was a hospital that they needed to build because there wasn’t any close by and in their jurisdiction, like the nearest one was over an hour away by helicopter. The cost should be how many times more than the property is worth ? Then why would anybody sell it to the government if they know they will get 10 times the value if they hold out?

Because they can either sell if they want the money, or the government will just build the hospital somewhere else and they get nothing.

And if they government really *does* need that property, then why shouldn't the taxpayers have to foot the bill ? Why should the one property owner have to take one for the team ?

And the notion that the governments "needs" are more important than anyone else's is frankly insulting.

If this business owner "needed" more parking, could he kick the cops out and pave over their station ? Of course not, the concept is laughable. Why should it go the other way ?

 

[Acer-m14]

@spat

any govt funding for that my pillow air craft landing strip yet ? lol ..

 

[Truebeliever]

Because they can either sell if they want the money, or the government will just build the hospital somewhere else and they get nothing.

And if they government really *does* need that property, then why shouldn't the taxpayers have to foot the bill ? Why should the one property owner have to take one for the team ?

And the notion that the governments "needs" are more important than anyone else's is frankly insulting.

If this business owner "needed" more parking, could he kick the cops out and pave over their station ? Of course not, the concept is laughable. Why should it go the other way ?

Sometimes it’s necessary. Sometimes a road can’t be diverted. The only questions that should be seen is what is actual fair market value and is the project truly needed.

 

[spat]

Sometimes it’s necessary. Sometimes a road can’t be diverted. The only questions that should be seen is what is actual fair market value and is the project truly needed.

Fuck that, no.

The government doesn't "need" anything it doesn't already have. If they can't afford it, then they don't get the new road, just like everyone else that can't afford it. Is civilization going to end ? I don't think so.

Some guy "needs" a new car to get to work, but he can't afford one, he can't just go down and take one from the dealership at gunpoint just because he "needs" it. Having a .gov email address doesn't change that.

The "fair market value" lies exactly between what the owner will sell for and what a buyer will offer. By definition.

If you need to force them out, then it *isn't* a fair market value at all.

 

[masterswimmer]

Gotta say, I'm actually stunned at the conversation here. I know I've said it before, numerous times. And I'll say it again. Not one of you, me included, owns the land or permanent structure on it. You only rent it from .gov. They are our landlords. Simple as that. If you 'owned' a rental property and you wanted to get rid of your tenant you'd let their lease expire and not renew it. That's basically what the landlord (.gov) is doing with THEIR property to this business owner. I don't care if you paid off your mortgage, you STILL DO NOT OWN THE PROPERTY. Does this suck? You bet your ass it does, but it is known, accepted, and will never change. You pay your property taxes so you are saying you understand the terms of your lease agreement. Don't pay your taxes, I think everyone knows the landlord will evict you and take THEIR property back.

I understand the bitching and complaining, and I know it is everyone just blowing off steam, but just know you're not going to win in a court of law.

/rant

 

[spat]

Gotta say, I'm actually stunned at the conversation here. I know I've said it before, numerous times. And I'll say it again. Not one of you, me included, owns the land or permanent structure on it. You only rent it from .gov. They are our landlords. Simple as that. If you 'owned' a rental property and you wanted to get rid of your tenant you'd let their lease expire and not renew it. That's basically what the landlord (.gov) is doing with THEIR property to this business owner. I don't care if you paid off your mortgage, you STILL DO NOT OWN THE PROPERTY. Does this suck? You bet your ass it does, but it is known, accepted, and will never change. You pay your property taxes so you are saying you understand the terms of your lease agreement. Don't pay your taxes, I think everyone knows the landlord will evict you and take THEIR property back.

I understand the bitching and complaining, and I know it is everyone just blowing off steam, but just know you're not going to win in a court of law.

/rant

Nobody thinks you'll win in a court of law, not after the New London case.

That doesn't mean we think it's right, or that we accept it.

Used to be that if you had a business in Chicago you paid Capone his protection money. Everyone did it. It was known, and accepted by many, but it did not last forever, and it was certainly not right.

The only difference is the size of the gang.

 

[Saltwater60]

Or raise taxes, right?
The idea is less about what the government wants as opposed to needs. What if it was a hospital that they needed to build because there wasn’t any close by and in their jurisdiction, like the nearest one was over an hour away by helicopter. The cost should be how many times more than the property is worth ? Then why would anybody sell it to the government if they know they will get 10 times the value if they hold out?

There are always options. There are other options in kenmore NY and it’s a very small town.
In your scenario of a hospital is that far away there is very likely to be vacant land, build there. Also everyone that moved to your fictitious community knew or should have known where the closest hospital was. When we move rural that’s one of our considerations.

 

[Saltwater60]

Gotta say, I'm actually stunned at the conversation here. I know I've said it before, numerous times. And I'll say it again. Not one of you, me included, owns the land or permanent structure on it. You only rent it from .gov. They are our landlords. Simple as that. If you 'owned' a rental property and you wanted to get rid of your tenant you'd let their lease expire and not renew it. That's basically what the landlord (.gov) is doing with THEIR property to this business owner. I don't care if you paid off your mortgage, you STILL DO NOT OWN THE PROPERTY. Does this suck? You bet your ass it does, but it is known, accepted, and will never change. You pay your property taxes so you are saying you understand the terms of your lease agreement. Don't pay your taxes, I think everyone knows the landlord will evict you and take THEIR property back.

I understand the bitching and complaining, and I know it is everyone just blowing off steam, but just know you're not going to win in a court of law.

/rant

I disagree with this. That maybe how it is but the government put my name on the property I own and I paid for it. Yes I pay taxes on that land but I knew that prior to buying it and is part of the contract. What I didn’t know before buying it and what wasn’t part of the contract is that the government might come and take it from me for their use or what they deem as more important. That was not part of the contract and a contract can’t be one sided or I would own your house with your beautiful backyard for $1.00.
I do understand your thinking but I feel like paying taxes is a known and getting your property forcefully taken from you isn’t know if you pay your bills.

 

[FRB]

I disagree with this. That maybe how it is but the government put my name on the property I own and I paid for it. Yes I pay taxes on that land but I knew that prior to buying it and is part of the contract. What I didn’t know before buying it and what wasn’t part of the contract is that the government might come and take it from me for their use or what they deem as more important. That was not part of the contract and a contract can’t be one sided or I would own your house with your beautiful backyard for $1.00.
I do understand your thinking but I feel like paying taxes is a known and getting your property forcefully taken from you isn’t know if you pay your bills.

Do not pay your taxes and see how long you "own" "your" property. We long ago lost the right to own property in much of America. We lease land from the government. Build on, improve on said on your leased land at your own risk. Just like all things life we have to weigh the risks. The risk is low if you pay the lease fees (county and school taxes).

 

[FRB]

That said it is a sham the police are taking that building.... a disgrace and stain on Kenmore.

 

[FRB]

I called the Town's office and left my profession opinion as a ZBA in my town as to how wrong is it to just try to pay FMV not covering moving costs of the business, not considering extra foundation work done for the printing presses. Read the article linking in the OP and make a call, politely! (716) 873-5700

and worse of all BORROWING the money to do it all - sticking it to the tax payers. They say 6.3 million, you just know that will end up as 10 million.

 

[masterswimmer]

I disagree with this. That maybe how it is but the government put my name on the property I own and I paid for it. Yes I pay taxes on that land but I knew that prior to buying it and is part of the contract. What I didn’t know before buying it and what wasn’t part of the contract is that the government might come and take it from me for their use or what they deem as more important. That was not part of the contract and a contract can’t be one sided or I would own your house with your beautiful backyard for $1.00.
I do understand your thinking but I feel like paying taxes is a known and getting your property forcefully taken from you isn’t know if you pay your bills.

Sorry, you're not thinking this through clearly.

Why would you think that a property you 'own' you'd have to ask permission for, and pay the fees for, to build a shed, install a pool, add a fence, construct an addition, run new electric lines, drill a well, install or change a septic system, or any one of a myriad of other improvements to 'your' property? No @Saltwater60 you're a bit misguided.

And then the improvements you made to THEIR property YOU are charged increased taxes on.

And as @FRB stated, try not paying your annual leasing fees, oh sorry, your taxes, and see how long you'll be allowed to stay in 'your' property.

Calling it your property is a moniker they like to use to make it seem more palatable to the serfs. No different than calling restrictive gun control laws the 'SAFE act'. No @Saltwater60 you do not 'own' your property. You only pay for the privilege of using their property.

 

[masterswimmer]

Oh, and for the record, I think it sucks big time.