Homes may be 'taken' for private projects
Justices: Local governments can give OK if it's for public good

The Associated Press
Updated: 12:23 p.m. ET June 23, 2005


WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that local governments may
seize people's homes and businesses - even against their will - for private
economic development.

It was a decision fraught with huge implications for a country with many
areas, particularly the rapidly growing urban and suburban areas, facing
countervailing pressures of development and property ownership rights.

As a result, cities now have wide power to bulldoze residences for projects
such as shopping malls and hotel complexes in order to generate tax revenue.

NOYB wrote:
Homes may be 'taken' for private projects
Justices: Local governments can give OK if it's for public good

The Associated Press
Updated: 12:23 p.m. ET June 23, 2005


WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that local governments may
seize people's homes and businesses - even against their will - for private
economic development.

It was a decision fraught with huge implications for a country with many
areas, particularly the rapidly growing urban and suburban areas, facing
countervailing pressures of development and property ownership rights.

As a result, cities now have wide power to bulldoze residences for projects
such as shopping malls and hotel complexes in order to generate tax revenue.

Yep, and it's horrendous. I guess there goes Naples Village by the Ritz
Carlton.

wrote in message
oups.com...


NOYB wrote:
Homes may be 'taken' for private projects
Justices: Local governments can give OK if it's for public good

The Associated Press
Updated: 12:23 p.m. ET June 23, 2005


WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that local governments
may
seize people's homes and businesses - even against their will - for
private
economic development.

It was a decision fraught with huge implications for a country with many
areas, particularly the rapidly growing urban and suburban areas, facing
countervailing pressures of development and property ownership rights.

As a result, cities now have wide power to bulldoze residences for
projects
such as shopping malls and hotel complexes in order to generate tax
revenue.

Yep, and it's horrendous. I guess there goes Naples Village by the Ritz
Carlton.

What is Naples Village?

NOYB wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...


NOYB wrote:
Homes may be 'taken' for private projects
Justices: Local governments can give OK if it's for public good

The Associated Press
Updated: 12:23 p.m. ET June 23, 2005


WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that local governments
may
seize people's homes and businesses - even against their will - for
private
economic development.

It was a decision fraught with huge implications for a country with many
areas, particularly the rapidly growing urban and suburban areas, facing
countervailing pressures of development and property ownership rights.

As a result, cities now have wide power to bulldoze residences for
projects
such as shopping malls and hotel complexes in order to generate tax
revenue.

Yep, and it's horrendous. I guess there goes Naples Village by the Ritz
Carlton.

What is Naples Village?

An area of older homes adjacent to the Ritz Carlton.

wrote in message
oups.com...


NOYB wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...


NOYB wrote:
Homes may be 'taken' for private projects
Justices: Local governments can give OK if it's for public good

The Associated Press
Updated: 12:23 p.m. ET June 23, 2005


WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that local
governments
may
seize people's homes and businesses - even against their will - for
private
economic development.

It was a decision fraught with huge implications for a country with
many
areas, particularly the rapidly growing urban and suburban areas,
facing
countervailing pressures of development and property ownership rights.

As a result, cities now have wide power to bulldoze residences for
projects
such as shopping malls and hotel complexes in order to generate tax
revenue.

Yep, and it's horrendous. I guess there goes Naples Village by the Ritz
Carlton.

What is Naples Village?

An area of older homes adjacent to the Ritz Carlton.

The homes immediately adjacent to the Ritz Carlton start at about 5 million.
The ones just down the road a half mile from there are part of a community
called Beach Walk. Those homes sell for half a million and up. The other
two areas around the Ritz are Vanderbilt Beach and Naples Park. Vanderbilt
starts at about one and quarter million. Naples Park runs in the high
$400's and up. Of course, there are condos that run anywhere from a half
millon in Vanderbilt on the bayside, to $15 million for the ones right next
to the Ritz.


But there's no "Naples Village".

"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

wrote in message
oups.com...


NOYB wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...


NOYB wrote:
Homes may be 'taken' for private projects
Justices: Local governments can give OK if it's for public good

The Associated Press
Updated: 12:23 p.m. ET June 23, 2005


WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that local
governments
may
seize people's homes and businesses - even against their will - for
private
economic development.

It was a decision fraught with huge implications for a country with
many
areas, particularly the rapidly growing urban and suburban areas,
facing
countervailing pressures of development and property ownership
rights.

As a result, cities now have wide power to bulldoze residences for
projects
such as shopping malls and hotel complexes in order to generate tax
revenue.

Yep, and it's horrendous. I guess there goes Naples Village by the
Ritz
Carlton.

What is Naples Village?

An area of older homes adjacent to the Ritz Carlton.

The homes immediately adjacent to the Ritz Carlton start at about 5
million. The ones just down the road a half mile from there are part of a
community called Beach Walk. Those homes sell for half a million and up.
The other two areas around the Ritz are Vanderbilt Beach and Naples Park.
Vanderbilt starts at about one and quarter million. Naples Park runs in
the high $400's and up. Of course, there are condos that run anywhere
from a half millon in Vanderbilt on the bayside, to $15 million for the
ones right next to the Ritz.


But there's no "Naples Village".


Why does this idiot who lives some 600 miles north of you think he knows
more about your city than you do?

Kevin continues to amaze me.

NOYB wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...


NOYB wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...


NOYB wrote:
Homes may be 'taken' for private projects
Justices: Local governments can give OK if it's for public good

The Associated Press
Updated: 12:23 p.m. ET June 23, 2005


WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that local
governments
may
seize people's homes and businesses - even against their will - for
private
economic development.

It was a decision fraught with huge implications for a country with
many
areas, particularly the rapidly growing urban and suburban areas,
facing
countervailing pressures of development and property ownership rights.

As a result, cities now have wide power to bulldoze residences for
projects
such as shopping malls and hotel complexes in order to generate tax
revenue.

Yep, and it's horrendous. I guess there goes Naples Village by the Ritz
Carlton.

What is Naples Village?

An area of older homes adjacent to the Ritz Carlton.

The homes immediately adjacent to the Ritz Carlton start at about 5 million.
The ones just down the road a half mile from there are part of a community
called Beach Walk. Those homes sell for half a million and up. The other
two areas around the Ritz are Vanderbilt Beach and Naples Park. Vanderbilt
starts at about one and quarter million. Naples Park runs in the high
$400's and up. Of course, there are condos that run anywhere from a half
millon in Vanderbilt on the bayside, to $15 million for the ones right next
to the Ritz.


But there's no "Naples Village".

It would be Naples Park, then. And if you'd buy one of those houses
there for $400k and up, good luck....

wrote in message
oups.com...


NOYB wrote:
Homes may be 'taken' for private projects
Justices: Local governments can give OK if it's for public good

The Associated Press
Updated: 12:23 p.m. ET June 23, 2005


WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that local governments
may
seize people's homes and businesses - even against their will - for
private
economic development.

It was a decision fraught with huge implications for a country with many
areas, particularly the rapidly growing urban and suburban areas, facing
countervailing pressures of development and property ownership rights.

As a result, cities now have wide power to bulldoze residences for
projects
such as shopping malls and hotel complexes in order to generate tax
revenue.

Yep, and it's horrendous.



Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the majority. He was joined by Justice
Anthony Kennedy, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8331097

Except for Kennedy, it's the same 4 idiots who sided with Gore in 2000.
"It Takes a Village" to steal your home.

"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

wrote in message
oups.com...


NOYB wrote:
Homes may be 'taken' for private projects
Justices: Local governments can give OK if it's for public good

The Associated Press
Updated: 12:23 p.m. ET June 23, 2005


WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that local governments
may
seize people's homes and businesses - even against their will - for
private
economic development.

It was a decision fraught with huge implications for a country with many
areas, particularly the rapidly growing urban and suburban areas, facing
countervailing pressures of development and property ownership rights.

As a result, cities now have wide power to bulldoze residences for
projects
such as shopping malls and hotel complexes in order to generate tax
revenue.

Yep, and it's horrendous.



Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the majority. He was joined by
Justice Anthony Kennedy, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen
Breyer.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8331097

Except for Kennedy, it's the same 4 idiots who sided with Gore in 2000.
"It Takes a Village" to steal your home.





Yep. They decided to rewrite the Constitution. Too bad we can't vote they
clowns out of office.

"*JimH*" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

wrote in message
oups.com...


NOYB wrote:
Homes may be 'taken' for private projects
Justices: Local governments can give OK if it's for public good

The Associated Press
Updated: 12:23 p.m. ET June 23, 2005


WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that local governments
may
seize people's homes and businesses - even against their will - for
private
economic development.

It was a decision fraught with huge implications for a country with
many
areas, particularly the rapidly growing urban and suburban areas,
facing
countervailing pressures of development and property ownership rights.

As a result, cities now have wide power to bulldoze residences for
projects
such as shopping malls and hotel complexes in order to generate tax
revenue.

Yep, and it's horrendous.



Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the majority. He was joined by
Justice Anthony Kennedy, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen
Breyer.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8331097

Except for Kennedy, it's the same 4 idiots who sided with Gore in 2000.
"It Takes a Village" to steal your home.





Yep. They decided to rewrite the Constitution. Too bad we can't vote
they clowns out of office.

Sure you can. Continue voting for Republican Presidents. Ginsburg, Breyer,
Souter, and Stevens can't live forever.