Giant Wal-Mart to rural landowners: Sell or else

Chat about anything and everything... (well almost anything) Whether it be the front porch or the pot belly stove or news of interest or a topic of your liking, this is the place to post it.

Moderator: S2k Moderators

Message
Author
User avatar
CentralFlGal
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 573
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 9:32 pm
Location: Cocoa Beach, FL

Giant Wal-Mart to rural landowners: Sell or else

#1 Postby CentralFlGal » Fri May 12, 2006 8:49 pm

Retailer cites eminent domain in its bid to build a massive distribution center

By Etan Horowitz
Orlando Sentinel
Posted May 12 2006, 9:28 AM EDT


The world's largest retailer, battling to build a huge new distribution center in Putnam County, is threatening a handful of rural residents that they may have their land taken if they don't agree to sell it to the company.

Representatives of Wal-Mart have told the landowners they will ask Putnam County to use its powers of eminent domain if the families won't sell. The retailer needs about a half-dozen parcels to widen a road that would provide access to a proposed 800,000-square-foot distribution center just over the Volusia County line -- a project Volusia officials have gone to court to block.

A letter to the landowners gave them until 5 p.m. Thursday to agree to a deal with the company.

The deadline came on the same day that Gov. Jeb Bush signed into law a bill curbing local governments' use of eminent domain to benefit private businesses. But the bill, which was in response to a U.S. Supreme Court decision that allowed a Connecticut city to condemn an entire coastal neighborhood for a developer, does not apply in this case because the road is public, said a legal expert who helped craft the legislation.

Wal-Mart's plan to build the massive distribution center -- nearly the size of the 952,000-square-foot Oviedo Marketplace -- has been opposed by several residents groups as well as Volusia County because of concerns about the traffic the center would create, its impact on the environment and whether it is compatible with the rural area. Although the center would not be open to shoppers, trucks would crowd U.S. Highway 17, opponents say.

The latest effort by Wal-Mart to keep the center on track drew immediate criticism from some residents and raised concerns even with officials who support the project.

Putnam County Administrator Rick Leary said the county hasn't agreed to use its powers of eminent domain for Wal-Mart.

"Some people might think these individuals [the Wal-Mart representatives] are agents of the county, and they aren't," Leary said. "We haven't talked about using eminent domain, and it hasn't been anything the county has practiced."

Wal-Mart said it needs to buy about seven lots to widen Clifton Road in Crescent City and install a utility line.

John Williams, 61, a retired corrections officer who owns a mobile home on the road, said he doesn't want to sell the land he worked for years to buy. But he fears he might not have a choice.

"They are the big bear, and there's nothing we can do about it," Williams said. "The big bear comes in and takes whatever they want."

Keith Morris, a Wal-Mart spokesman, said that despite the letter from the consultant, the company does not plan to ask the county to use eminent domain to acquire the properties.

Morris said he did not know why the consultant had written that the properties might be acquired through eminent domain.

"It sounds like there is a miscommunication somewhere along the way," he said. "We have instructed a consultant to negotiate on our behalf [for the right of way], but beyond that, we have not given any instructions to say that if that doesn't work out, we should look at eminent domain. I can't tell you why they wrote that."

Mike Mullis, the consultant who wrote the letter, would not answer questions about the possible use of eminent domain.

Residents were given letters offering them $1,000 for the right to buy their property at prices Mullis claimed were twice the market value. But the letters went on to warn what could happen if they don't agree to the deal:

"In the event any of these property parcel owners are not willing to either sell, or to provide the needed r.o.w. [right of way] . . . our firm will ask the County to proceed with the necessary legal actions to secure those properties from the property owners to accommodate the public purpose needs to serve the planned project's utility and road requirements."

"One or two people are scared to death," said Michael Woodward, an attorney representing some of the Putnam residents opposing the Wal-Mart. "They think if they don't give Wal-Mart what they want, they will get sued and will get kicked out on the street. It can be pretty scary when somebody comes to your door and starts telling you they represent the biggest corporation in America, and they have the county backing them, and you better get in line."

Although the new state law does not apply to this case, it's still unclear whether Putnam would be able to use its powers of condemnation, said Andrew Brigham, a Jacksonville attorney who helped write the new state legislation.

"I would say this is a jump ball," Brigham said.

Traditionally, eminent domain has been used to take private property needed for public improvements such as roads, schools and public buildings.

But although the road would be open to the public, lawyers could argue that the improvements mainly benefit Wal-Mart, Brigham said.



LocalLinks

"There is an argument there for the owners if it could be shown that the widening of the road predominately favored Wal-Mart and that the public purpose is incidental," he said.

Volusia County Council member Dwight Lewis, who represents the part of Volusia closest to the planned Wal-Mart site, is disturbed by the possibility of using eminent domain to make way for the distribution center.

"They may say it is for public purpose to widen the road, but it is for the purpose of allowing the largest and richest corporation on the planet to come into the neighborhood and disrupt the neighborhood," Lewis said. "That's a misuse of eminent domain."

Putnam officials have hailed the center as a godsend, saying it would bring high-paying jobs to the area, which has a high unemployment rate and low income levels.

Even Williams, one of the homeowners, said the Wal-Mart center would be good for Putnam. He just doesn't want to give up his home for it.

"I don't have the money to fight them," said Williams, who lives in a five-bedroom, triple-wide trailer with his wife and sister-in-law.

He said Wal-Mart offered him $150,000 to sell, but he told representatives he's not selling and threw one of their letters in the trash.

"If they will let me keep part of the land, I will do that. But I don't know if they can do that or not."

Etan Horowitz can be reached at ehorowitz@orlandosentinel.com or 386-851-7915.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/florida/sfl-512walmartthreat,0,1098485.story?page=2&track=rss
0 likes   

Janice
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 4564
Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2002 6:14 pm
Location: Puerto Rico
Contact:

#2 Postby Janice » Fri May 12, 2006 8:53 pm

That is a shame. Can't Walmart find another area to build on? I am sure there is lots of land people are willing to sell.
0 likes   

User avatar
Stephanie
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 23843
Age: 63
Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2003 9:53 am
Location: Glassboro, NJ

#3 Postby Stephanie » Fri May 12, 2006 9:00 pm

That is not what eminent domain is for. I haven't been to Walmart for a long while - the one nearby has just changed to a Super Walmart and I don't think that I will be back. :grr:
0 likes   

User avatar
george_r_1961
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 3171
Age: 64
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2002 9:14 pm
Location: Carbondale, Pennsylvania

#4 Postby george_r_1961 » Fri May 12, 2006 10:05 pm

Recently here in Hampton many homeowners were forced out of their homes so a developer could build there. More tax $$$ for the city. Ok i'll stop my rant now before this gets political. My point is eminent domain is abused..it was meant to take private land for public use. for example highways. Nothing more, nothing less.
0 likes   

User avatar
senorpepr
Military Met/Moderator
Military Met/Moderator
Posts: 12542
Age: 43
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2003 9:22 pm
Location: Mackenbach, Germany
Contact:

#5 Postby senorpepr » Fri May 12, 2006 10:24 pm

I agree. Back in my hometown, they forced a farmer to give up his land through eminent domain so that a Lowe's could be built. This farmer, who originally moved to this down of a few hundred, grows and sells pumkins every fall. Even as the town grew to nearly 30,000 and the road he lived on became a 5-land highway... he still would set up his pumpkins along the side of the road. Now that's all gone for Lowe's because the city wanted some extra tax money.
0 likes   

User avatar
Audrey2Katrina
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 4252
Age: 76
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 10:39 pm
Location: Metaire, La.

#6 Postby Audrey2Katrina » Fri May 12, 2006 11:05 pm

The SC decision on eminent domain is the worst decision since Dred Scott, IMO. It empowers local governments entirely too much to abscond with private property under the guise of "for the greater good" and cloaked as a claim of "blighted property"... this is a sham and a disgrace.

A2K
0 likes   
Flossy 56 Audrey 57 Hilda 64* Betsy 65* Camille 69* Edith 71 Carmen 74 Bob 79 Danny 85 Elena 85 Juan 85 Florence 88 Andrew 92*, Opal 95, Danny 97, Georges 98*, Isidore 02, Lili 02, Ivan 04, Cindy 05*, Dennis 05, Katrina 05*, Gustav 08*, Isaac 12*, Nate 17, Barry 19, Cristobal 20, Marco, 20, Sally, 20, Zeta 20*, Claudette 21 IDA* 21 Francine *24

Janice
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 4564
Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2002 6:14 pm
Location: Puerto Rico
Contact:

#7 Postby Janice » Sat May 13, 2006 5:53 am

Well, looks like this law is being abused. Retail outlets are not government. They need to look into this law and come up with a conclusion so retailers cannot take property.
0 likes   

User avatar
Stephanie
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 23843
Age: 63
Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2003 9:53 am
Location: Glassboro, NJ

#8 Postby Stephanie » Sat May 13, 2006 8:21 am

george_r_1961 wrote:Recently here in Hampton many homeowners were forced out of their homes so a developer could build there. More tax $$$ for the city. Ok i'll stop my rant now before this gets political. My point is eminent domain is abused..it was meant to take private land for public use. for example highways. Nothing more, nothing less.


I agree. There's never a guarantee anyway that the "big boxes" or new strip malls are going to survive. THEN WHAT???
0 likes   

User avatar
Audrey2Katrina
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 4252
Age: 76
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 10:39 pm
Location: Metaire, La.

#9 Postby Audrey2Katrina » Sat May 13, 2006 9:35 am

Well, looks like this law is being abused. Retail outlets are not government. They need to look into this law and come up with a conclusion so retailers cannot take property.


Unfortunately the "law" has already been looked into, and taken all the way to the Supreme Court. Just as they turned thier backs on runaway slaves with the Dred Scott Decision (arguably the most hideous decision it's ever made), now they turn their backs on the right of private ownership, and held up the right of local governments to quite literally "seize" private property to suit their own purposes. I will refrain from further comment because it's a political powder keg--but if the American people don' wake up to the implication of this slip away from private rights, one day they WILL wake up, and find they have virtually none left any more.

A2K
0 likes   

User avatar
Audrey2Katrina
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 4252
Age: 76
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 10:39 pm
Location: Metaire, La.

#10 Postby Audrey2Katrina » Sat May 13, 2006 9:42 am

Recently here in Hampton many homeowners were forced out of their homes so a developer could build there. More tax $$$ for the city. Ok i'll stop my rant now before this gets political. My point is eminent domain is abused..it was meant to take private land for public use. for example highways. Nothing more, nothing less.


That is ABSOLUTELY CORRECT, George, it was meant for when land was needed for major public projects: schools, needed highways/freeways, etc. Sadly it's slipped onto a much more treacherous slope wherein the land is seized by the "public" (i.e. local gov't.) then forked over to a "private" corporation for its own self interest... and like you I think I'll let it end there because as stated in my previous post--it'll be hard to avoid politics in this one. :roll:

A2K
0 likes   

User avatar
jusforsean
Category 1
Category 1
Posts: 395
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 8:22 am
Location: South Florida

#11 Postby jusforsean » Sat May 13, 2006 10:17 am

Wow Walmart keeps pissing me off latley. Heres a question though in asking these people to sell what kind of money are they being offered??? Well above what the homes are worth or just enough? In some cases a persons home is thier home and not a million dollars could replace it and they shouldnt be forced to leave how horrible! Just curious how they do it.
0 likes   

User avatar
alicia-w
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 6400
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 2:55 pm
Location: Tijeras, NM

#12 Postby alicia-w » Sat May 13, 2006 12:15 pm

retail outlets arent government, but that isnt what eminent domain is all about. the govt abuses it on a regular basis to increase revenues. a retailer will pay more in taxes than a single resident.... not saying i agree with it at all. it happens all the time.
0 likes   

Janice
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 4564
Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2002 6:14 pm
Location: Puerto Rico
Contact:

#13 Postby Janice » Sat May 13, 2006 12:57 pm

I live directly across the street from the brand new courthouse in our town. They are welcome to walk over here anytime and offer me a good price. Being commercial now, the lots are probably worth more than the house anyway. I am ready to move.

PLEASE DOMAIN ME... :cry:
0 likes   

User avatar
alicia-w
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 6400
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 2:55 pm
Location: Tijeras, NM

#14 Postby alicia-w » Sat May 13, 2006 3:20 pm

Janice wrote:I live directly across the street from the brand new courthouse in our town. They are welcome to walk over here anytime and offer me a good price. Being commercial now, the lots are probably worth more than the house anyway. I am ready to move.

PLEASE DOMAIN ME... :cry:


dont kid yourself, these people arent getting market value for their property. they're being offered amounts much less than the worth of the property. if they dont take it, the govt can (and sometimes does) condemn it and then impound it. and the owners wont get a red cent.

another reason to hate walmart (like i needed one more...)
0 likes   


Return to “Off Topic”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests