This, by the way, is a STATE law. Who to hell is the governor of that
hell hole anyway? Oh, yeah, Jeb Bush!



Florida: Some see disdain in move to use eminent domain
Florida officials want to relocate 6,000 in blue-collar Riviera Beach
to build a waterfront complex across from high-dollar Palm Beach.
John-Thor Dahlburg, Los Angeles Times
Last update: December 6, 2005 at 10:44 PM
Printer friendly E-mail this story Nation
Twin Cities flights to eastern cities delayed

Wisconsin schools facing lawsuits over 'holiday' programs

'Doozy of a snowstorm' descends on Northeast

Gold coins among surprises showing up in Salvation Army kettles

Storms bring snow, freezing cold to middle of country
Page: 1 2

RIVIERA BEACH, FLA. - It's across the inlet from Palm Beach, but this
town -- mostly black and blue-collar, with a large industrial and
warehouse district -- could be a continent away from the Fortune 500
and Rolls-Royce set.

But Riviera Beach's fortunes may soon change.

In what has been called the largest eminent-domain case in the nation,
the mayor and other elected leaders want to move about 6,000 residents,
tear down their houses and use the emptied 400-acre site to build a
waterfront yachting and residential complex for the well-to-do.

The goal, Mayor Michael D. Brown said during a public meeting in
September, is to "forever change the landscape" in this municipality of
about 32,500. The $1 billion plan should generate jobs and move Riviera
Beach's economy out of the doldrums, local leaders have said.

Opponents call the plan a government-sanctioned land grab that benefits
private developers and the wealthy.

"What they mean is that the view I have is too good for me and should
go to some millionaire," said Martha Babson, 60, a house painter who
lives near the Intracoastal Waterway.

"This is a reverse Robin Hood," said state Rep. Ronald L. Greenstein, a
Coconut Creek Democrat who serves on a state legislative committee
making recommendations on how to strengthen safeguards on private
property.

With many Americans sensitized to eminent-domain cases after a
much-discussed ruling by the Supreme Court in June, property-rights
organizations have been pointing to redevelopment plans in this Palm
Beach County town as proof that laws must be changed to protect
homeowners and businesses from the schemes of politicians.

"Unfortunately, taking poorer folks' homes and turning them into
higher-end development projects is all too routine in Florida and
throughout the country," said Scott G. Bullock, a senior attorney for
the Institute for Justice, based in Washington, D.C. "What
distinguishes Riviera Beach is the sheer scope of the project, and the
number of people it displaces."

In June, a divided U.S. Supreme Court approved the plan of New London,
Conn., to force some homeowners to sell their properties for a private
development that was supposed to generate more jobs and tax revenue.

That ruling has led to moves in Congress and at least 35 states,
including Florida, to restrict the use of eminent-domain seizures of
private property.

'Blighted' land may be seized

In Florida, the law allows local officials to take private land for
redevelopment if they deem it "blighted." In May 2001, a study
conducted for the city found that "slum and blighted conditions"
existed in about a third of Riviera Beach and that redevelopment was
necessary "in the interest of public health, safety, morals and
welfare."

A skeptical Babson, who lives in a single-story, concrete-block home
painted aqua that she shares with parrots and a dog, did her own
survey. For three months, she walked the streets of Riviera Beach
photographing houses classified as "dilapidated" or "deteriorated" by
specialists hired by the city.

The official study, she said, was riddled with errors and
misclassifications. Lots inventoried as "vacant" (one of 14 criteria
that allow Florida cities or counties to declare a neighborhood
blighted) actually had homes on them built in 1997, she said. One house
deemed "dilapidated," she found, was two years old.

Mayor Brown and Floyd T. Johnson, executive director of the Riviera
Beach Community Redevelopment Agency, did not respond to repeated
requests from the Los Angeles Times for an interview.

The redevelopment agency's website says the plan will "create a city
respected for its community pride and purpose, and reshape it into a
most desirable urban [place] to live, work, shop and relax for its
residents, business and visitors."

In past media interviews, Brown has said that his city was in dire need
of jobs and that if officials weren't allowed to resort to eminent
domain to spur growth, Riviera Beach could perish

wrote:
This, by the way, is a STATE law. Who to hell is the governor of that
hell hole anyway? Oh, yeah, Jeb Bush!



Florida: Some see disdain in move to use eminent domain
Florida officials want to relocate 6,000 in blue-collar Riviera Beach
to build a waterfront complex across from high-dollar Palm Beach.
John-Thor Dahlburg, Los Angeles Times
Last update: December 6, 2005 at 10:44 PM
Printer friendly E-mail this story Nation
Twin Cities flights to eastern cities delayed

Wisconsin schools facing lawsuits over 'holiday' programs

'Doozy of a snowstorm' descends on Northeast

Gold coins among surprises showing up in Salvation Army kettles

Storms bring snow, freezing cold to middle of country
Page: 1 2

RIVIERA BEACH, FLA. - It's across the inlet from Palm Beach, but this
town -- mostly black and blue-collar, with a large industrial and
warehouse district -- could be a continent away from the Fortune 500
and Rolls-Royce set.

But Riviera Beach's fortunes may soon change.

In what has been called the largest eminent-domain case in the nation,
the mayor and other elected leaders want to move about 6,000 residents,
tear down their houses and use the emptied 400-acre site to build a
waterfront yachting and residential complex for the well-to-do.

The goal, Mayor Michael D. Brown said during a public meeting in
September, is to "forever change the landscape" in this municipality of
about 32,500. The $1 billion plan should generate jobs and move Riviera
Beach's economy out of the doldrums, local leaders have said.

Opponents call the plan a government-sanctioned land grab that benefits
private developers and the wealthy.

"What they mean is that the view I have is too good for me and should
go to some millionaire," said Martha Babson, 60, a house painter who
lives near the Intracoastal Waterway.

"This is a reverse Robin Hood," said state Rep. Ronald L. Greenstein, a
Coconut Creek Democrat who serves on a state legislative committee
making recommendations on how to strengthen safeguards on private
property.

With many Americans sensitized to eminent-domain cases after a
much-discussed ruling by the Supreme Court in June, property-rights
organizations have been pointing to redevelopment plans in this Palm
Beach County town as proof that laws must be changed to protect
homeowners and businesses from the schemes of politicians.

"Unfortunately, taking poorer folks' homes and turning them into
higher-end development projects is all too routine in Florida and
throughout the country," said Scott G. Bullock, a senior attorney for
the Institute for Justice, based in Washington, D.C. "What
distinguishes Riviera Beach is the sheer scope of the project, and the
number of people it displaces."

In June, a divided U.S. Supreme Court approved the plan of New London,
Conn., to force some homeowners to sell their properties for a private
development that was supposed to generate more jobs and tax revenue.

That ruling has led to moves in Congress and at least 35 states,
including Florida, to restrict the use of eminent-domain seizures of
private property.

'Blighted' land may be seized

In Florida, the law allows local officials to take private land for
redevelopment if they deem it "blighted." In May 2001, a study
conducted for the city found that "slum and blighted conditions"
existed in about a third of Riviera Beach and that redevelopment was
necessary "in the interest of public health, safety, morals and
welfare."

A skeptical Babson, who lives in a single-story, concrete-block home
painted aqua that she shares with parrots and a dog, did her own
survey. For three months, she walked the streets of Riviera Beach
photographing houses classified as "dilapidated" or "deteriorated" by
specialists hired by the city.

The official study, she said, was riddled with errors and
misclassifications. Lots inventoried as "vacant" (one of 14 criteria
that allow Florida cities or counties to declare a neighborhood
blighted) actually had homes on them built in 1997, she said. One house
deemed "dilapidated," she found, was two years old.

Mayor Brown and Floyd T. Johnson, executive director of the Riviera
Beach Community Redevelopment Agency, did not respond to repeated
requests from the Los Angeles Times for an interview.

The redevelopment agency's website says the plan will "create a city
respected for its community pride and purpose, and reshape it into a
most desirable urban [place] to live, work, shop and relax for its
residents, business and visitors."

In past media interviews, Brown has said that his city was in dire need
of jobs and that if officials weren't allowed to resort to eminent
domain to spur growth, Riviera Beach could perish



They ought to extend this to boats. Take my humble little tugboat for
example. I think it's a real blight on the marina. Somebody should
insist that a new 50-foot Nordhavn be moored in its place. I'm all for
that, of course, provided I get the document to the 50-footer. :-)

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On 9 Dec 2005 09:25:19 -0800, wrote:

Hey Bassy,

It was the Democratic City Council in New London, CT who turned all
eminent domain decisions to a PRIVATE developer - the New London
Development Corporation who immediately started proceedings against
people in the Fort Trumbull neighborhood which ultimately led to the
Kelo decision by the USSC. Let me spell it out for you - D E M O C R
A T S sold out to the evil P R I V A T E interests in New London which
made all this possible.

The implications of this immediately went nation wide. And it was all
the fault of a DEMOCRAT controlled City Council.

Let me be sure you understand - D E M O C R A T S...

Let me be sure YOU understand. This case is in the state of FLORIDA.
Florida's governor, and his henchmen, are REPUBLICANS. They are taking
PRIVATE homes from people to build DEVELOPMENTS that will increase the
tax base.
Let me be sure you understand - REPUBLICANS...

wrote in message
...
On 9 Dec 2005 09:25:19 -0800, wrote:

This, by the way, is a STATE law. Who to hell is the governor of that
hell hole anyway? Oh, yeah, Jeb Bush!


Palm beach county is democrat country. It is a democrat mayor who is
pushing this plan.
These are the same compassionate liberals who wanted mandatory photo
IDs for all "guest workers" in their community and wanted to gate the
whole damn town. If you are black or brown, don't let the sun go down
on your ass in Palm Beach. That also applies to poor white people.



Kevin, I would suggest you start reading your cut 'n pastes before you post
them here to make sure they actually do support your position.

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On 9 Dec 2005 09:25:19 -0800, wrote:

Hey Bassy,

It was the Democratic City Council in New London, CT who turned all
eminent domain decisions to a PRIVATE developer - the New London
Development Corporation who immediately started proceedings against
people in the Fort Trumbull neighborhood which ultimately led to the
Kelo decision by the USSC. Let me spell it out for you - D E M O C R
A T S sold out to the evil P R I V A T E interests in New London which
made all this possible.

The implications of this immediately went nation wide. And it was all
the fault of a DEMOCRAT controlled City Council.

Let me be sure you understand - D E M O C R A T S...



I had to go look up what kevin was posting, and as usual, he shoots
himself in the foot once again.

It is a D E M O C R A T mayor Michael Brown who is pushing the seizure of
private property, and very likely in violation of the restrictive state law
passed after the SCOTUS decision

And Kevin wonders why he is the "King of the NG idiots" ????

" *JimH*" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...
On 9 Dec 2005 09:25:19 -0800, wrote:

This, by the way, is a STATE law. Who to hell is the governor of that
hell hole anyway? Oh, yeah, Jeb Bush!


Palm beach county is democrat country. It is a democrat mayor who is
pushing this plan.
These are the same compassionate liberals who wanted mandatory photo
IDs for all "guest workers" in their community and wanted to gate the
whole damn town. If you are black or brown, don't let the sun go down
on your ass in Palm Beach. That also applies to poor white people.



Kevin, I would suggest you start reading your cut 'n pastes before you
post
them here to make sure they actually do support your position.



Yes.....it seems Florida restricted the E.D laws after the SCOTUS decision,
and the DEMOCRAT mayor is trying to skirt the law.

P Fritz wrote:
"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On 9 Dec 2005 09:25:19 -0800, wrote:

Hey Bassy,

It was the Democratic City Council in New London, CT who turned all
eminent domain decisions to a PRIVATE developer - the New London
Development Corporation who immediately started proceedings against
people in the Fort Trumbull neighborhood which ultimately led to the
Kelo decision by the USSC. Let me spell it out for you - D E M O C R
A T S sold out to the evil P R I V A T E interests in New London which
made all this possible.

The implications of this immediately went nation wide. And it was all
the fault of a DEMOCRAT controlled City Council.

Let me be sure you understand - D E M O C R A T S...



I had to go look up what kevin was posting, and as usual, he shoots
himself in the foot once again.

It is a D E M O C R A T mayor Michael Brown who is pushing the seizure of
private property, and very likely in violation of the restrictive state law
passed after the SCOTUS decision

And Kevin wonders why he is the "King of the NG idiots" ????

IT's a REPUBLICAN law, in the STATE OF FLORIDA, you dip****!!!!

*JimH* wrote:
wrote in message
...
On 9 Dec 2005 09:25:19 -0800, wrote:

This, by the way, is a STATE law. Who to hell is the governor of that
hell hole anyway? Oh, yeah, Jeb Bush!


Palm beach county is democrat country. It is a democrat mayor who is
pushing this plan.
These are the same compassionate liberals who wanted mandatory photo
IDs for all "guest workers" in their community and wanted to gate the
whole damn town. If you are black or brown, don't let the sun go down
on your ass in Palm Beach. That also applies to poor white people.



Kevin, I would suggest you start reading your cut 'n pastes before you post
them here to make sure they actually do support your position.

You idiot, it's a STATE LAW, NOT a county ordinance!! A STATE
LAW......now, quickly, what party is now governing Florida?

wrote:
On 9 Dec 2005 09:25:19 -0800, wrote:

This, by the way, is a STATE law. Who to hell is the governor of that
hell hole anyway? Oh, yeah, Jeb Bush!


Palm beach county is democrat country. It is a democrat mayor who is
pushing this plan.
These are the same compassionate liberals who wanted mandatory photo
IDs for all "guest workers" in their community and wanted to gate the
whole damn town. If you are black or brown, don't let the sun go down
on your ass in Palm Beach. That also applies to poor white people.

It's a STATE LAW, NOT A COUNTY ORDINANCE

*JimH* wrote:
wrote in message
...
On 9 Dec 2005 09:25:19 -0800, wrote:

This, by the way, is a STATE law. Who to hell is the governor of that
hell hole anyway? Oh, yeah, Jeb Bush!


Palm beach county is democrat country. It is a democrat mayor who is
pushing this plan.
These are the same compassionate liberals who wanted mandatory photo
IDs for all "guest workers" in their community and wanted to gate the
whole damn town. If you are black or brown, don't let the sun go down
on your ass in Palm Beach. That also applies to poor white people.



Kevin, I would suggest you start reading your cut 'n pastes before you post
them here to make sure they actually do support your position.

I"m not Kevin but gee, little twit, you might perhaps read it yourself
before opening up you **** filled mouth:
In Florida, the law allows local officials to take private land for
redevelopment if they deem it "blighted." In May 2001, a study
conducted for the city found that "slum and blighted conditions"
existed in about a third of Riviera Beach and that redevelopment was
necessary "in the interest of public health, safety, morals and
welfare."

Now, go back to your preying.............