Protest Against Eminent Domain in Lake County - Wed 10/28/2009

[rambone]

Protest the Lake County Government
For Taking Over Private Property

Wednesday, October 28, 2009
4:00 - 6:30 PM

801 W. Joliet Street
Crown Point, IN
​

There will be a rally at the Crown Point Library on Wednesday, October 28, 2009, from 4 to 6:30 p.m. It is to protest eminent domain proceedings against a property at 801 W. Joliet St., currently owned by the Stang family. The Lake County Council granted permission to condemn the house in order to build a new library building there, even though there are other property owners interested in selling their property for it. Go if you're interested. More information here.

Rally Planned to Protest Eminent Domain

CROWN POINT | The attorney representing a family involved in an eminent domain dispute with the Crown Point Community Library said supporters of the family will have a demonstration at the library Wednesday.

Brian Smith, a Merrillville attorney, said the rally will be from 4 to 6:30 p.m. and will be attended by those who have signed a petition in support of not locating the library at 801 W. Joliet St., a property currently owned by the Stang family.

"We're not against the library," Smith said. "We're against the process."

Library Director Lynn Frank said there has been no movement on the land, and has said previously she's hopeful that both parties can work out the situation without going to court.

Smith said there are still people who the library has negotiated with in the past who are still willing sellers, but the Stang property has never been for sale.

Mayor David Uran had previously said he was frustrated that the Lake County Council had granted permission to condemn the house, without his being notified. He said he has had discussions with Frank about where the library could locate.

"I support a new library. They're out of space and can't go up because of zoning codes and they're landlocked," Uran said. "We're trying to work with them. I'm not in favor of eminent domain."

​

If it can happen to them, it can happen to you. Join the rally against this infringement of property rights.

 

[hornadylnl]

Unless the homeowner has deep pockets, they don't stand a chance. The precedent hasbeen set with sports stadiums.

 

[Big John]

Hmmmm looks like our rich uncle is trying to reclaim the land somebody has been renting from him.

I see something it looks like the future but I can be sure it is spinning (making revolutions).

Coming soon to a neighborhood near you, The Guberment, we will do whatever we want because nobody can stop us.

 

[jedi]

Nobody can stop them because everyone drank the ISUM...
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVh75ylAUXY&feature=player_embedded]YouTube - Make Mine Freedom (1948)[/ame]

 

[rich8483]

are you going Rambone?

 

[rambone]

are you going Rambone?

Unfortunately I can't. I have a FTF sale lined up during that time. I encourage you guys to support the rally. Send a message to those who are infringing on our rights.

 

[Indy317]

Send a message to those who are infringing on our rights.

YES! Everyone who can't make this program can simply go out, rent a jack hammer, and jack hammer a section of their nearest interstate high way system. Turn I-70 into rubble until the government gives back that land to the rightful owner!!

If you don't want to get arrested, protest by not driving on any roadway on which the land under it was taken via eminent domain.

 

[hornadylnl]

YES! Everyone who can't make this program can simply go out, rent a jack hammer, and jack hammer a section of their nearest interstate high way system. Turn I-70 into rubble until the government gives back that land to the rightful owner!!

If you don't want to get arrested, protest by not driving on any roadway on which the land under it was taken via eminent domain.

I'm sure you'll still feel the same way when they take your property for a strip mall or sports stadium. Eminent domain had it's use in the past but I bet I wouldn't agree with more than 1 out of every 20 cases today. When eminent domain was started, there were no roads. Now, they want to use it so someone can save a few minutes on a 2 hour drive. That is not worth trampling on someones property rights. They used eminent domain to take the Hurst property for the dome so they didn't have to pay for a parking garage. Hurst was already letting people park there but Irsay and the city wasn't getting the money from it. It should tell you something when they have to "condemn" a perfectly good house in order to take it.

 

[Jubbie]

I don't think they used eminent domain to take property for the Little Calumet. Might be why it hasn't been finished yet. Only been close to 20 years if memory serves. That is a project that is supposed to protect against a natural disaster, so I can see why eminent domain might be necessary. As far as a library, they can offer the landowner a decent price, or they can find some other place to build their library.

 

[rambone]

Karl Marx beams with pride.

The First Pillar Of Communism:

1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
​

 

[Indy317]

The First Pillar Of Communism:

1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.​

If this is true, then this country has been a communist country since the first railroads were forced through private lands out west.
​

 

[hornadylnl]

If this is true, then this country has been a communist country since the first railroads were forced through private lands out west.
[/INDENT][/INDENT]

Can't you see the difference between taking transportatio where there absolutely was none and a city wanting to put up a library when there are other home owners willing to sell their property? This is about some bureaucrat who set on a mission to build on this particular piece of property and isn't willing to lose their face to some peon land owner.

 

[Indy317]

Can't you see the difference between taking transportatio where there absolutely was none and a city wanting to put up a library when there are other home owners willing to sell their property? This is about some bureaucrat who set on a mission to build on this particular piece of property and isn't willing to lose their face to some peon land owner.

Just like in this case, there is _always_ someone willing to sell, and 99% of the people are willing to sell if the price is right. It is wrong to take someone's land if they don't want to sell, regardless of the use. Stealing land for an interstate highway system or rail system is wrong. The fact is, everyone has their reasons for stealing/buying out certain land. Some folks are OK with it, as long as it is not their land. They are also hypocrites because they will cheer the land theft for a railroad or miles of roadway, but then boo a land theft in this case.

If a person owns thousands of acres of land and doesn't want transportation to it, who is the government to say there shall be? If that means a huge bend around the property, then that is what happens in a free country. People pay a few hundred dollars more in gas taxes, and distances are extended. We are either a free country, are we aren't. Using eminent domain, regardless of the use, price paid, etc. is still theft. In a truly free country, this wouldn't happen....ever.

 

[Jubbie]

Here's the story from the Times.

Library's intention provokes protest

 

[inxs]

That's rich- a government agency that needs to relocate because of zoning restrictions?

 

[hornadylnl]

Just like in this case, there is _always_ someone willing to sell, and 99% of the people are willing to sell if the price is right. It is wrong to take someone's land if they don't want to sell, regardless of the use. Stealing land for an interstate highway system or rail system is wrong. The fact is, everyone has their reasons for stealing/buying out certain land. Some folks are OK with it, as long as it is not their land. They are also hypocrites because they will cheer the land theft for a railroad or miles of roadway, but then boo a land theft in this case.

If a person owns thousands of acres of land and doesn't want transportation to it, who is the government to say there shall be? If that means a huge bend around the property, then that is what happens in a free country. People pay a few hundred dollars more in gas taxes, and distances are extended. We are either a free country, are we aren't. Using eminent domain, regardless of the use, price paid, etc. is still theft. In a truly free country, this wouldn't happen....ever.

Thanks for clarifying. You and I are on the same page after all. I think eminet domain has it's place but again, I wouldn't agree with 99% of the cases it's used for. There is a bid fight over the Hoosier Heartland in my area. I don't think it's justifiable at all to use eminent domain for that project. It will save a few people a half our or so going from Ft Wayne to Evansville, I guess. Now if you had to go from Ft Wayne to Evansville via Las Vegas, it would be a different story.

But yes, I'm a staunch supporter of propery rights.

 

[rambone]

It was my impression that the people are not going to be compensated for the Public takeover of their property. Am I wrong?

Here's the 5th Amendment to the US Constitution:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.​

 

[Greatestsin]

I have a friend who moved to michigan when her house was attacked with imminent domain when the old high school thats now a middle school in Crown Point was under going renovations a couple years ago. they leveled the house, and didn't even use the ground. On walnut street. Its just an empty lot now.

 

[Indy317]

It was my impression that the people are not going to be compensated for the Public takeover of their property. Am I wrong?

Here's the 5th Amendment to the US Constitution:

.... nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.​

I believe the article said the people want double the market price. It would be nice to know the market value of the home, what the owners are asking, what the library is wanting to pay, and what the assessor's office appraised the property at.

 

[rambone]

I believe the article said the people want double the market price. It would be nice to know the market value of the home, what the owners are asking, what the library is wanting to pay, and what the assessor's office appraised the property at.

I agree it would be nice to know those things. Remember the "market" is totally bogus right now. These homeowners may have no inclination to sell their property at all right now given the poor selling conditions. And if they are forced to, they want to get what they paid for it. Like many homeowners, maybe they want to wait until the market bounces back to sell their home.

How convenient that the Government come in and force people to "sell" them their properties during an awful economic recession. How convenient that the Government wants to build new public facilities, at the cost of the taxpayers. How convenient.

It would be devastating to spend your whole life paying off a mortgage and then the Government swoops in and confiscates your home, and pays you half of what you invested in it. I don't agree with this action at all.