Last night, my community was one of many that participated in National Night Out, which is held annually, on the first Tuesday in August. It was a success, as the turnout was good, particularly as it was a humid, sticky evening. The coordinator was pleasantly surprised, as folks hadn't e-mailed him to notify him whether they were coming. (Oops!) The important thing was to get together to have a good time and demonstrate community solidarity en masse, which we did. All's well that ends well.
Across town, the city of Langley Park also had a successful National Night Out event. Perhaps too successful, as it's been reported that members of the MS 13 gang said that they were keeping an eye on that event. Hmm...
* * * * * * * *
For the first time, I saw one of the Guardian Angels on the subway. She almost appeared to have come from another car in the train; maybe there's some special cooperation agreement with Metro, as passengers are not allowed to walk between train cars, for safety reasons. She seemed quiet, and not overbearing. I hope this experiment works out.
* * * * * * * *
Speaking of community development, some state legislatures are fighting back against the recent Supreme Court decision (Kelo vs. New London) that allows state and local governments to seize homes for private development. [Finally, some politicians have developed a spinal column.] Alabama and Delaware are the first sates to limit the use of eminent domain, and other states have such plans in the works (Pennsylvania, Texas, New Jersey, California, Illinois, Michigan, New York, and Oregon).
* * * * * * * * *
A fun way of preserving and improving communities includes the easy suggestion in today's Washington Post: Buy Fruit, Save A Farm. The article explains how the growth in farmers' markets has enabled farmers to keep their land as farmland, make improvements to their property, put children through college, etc. What the article didn't mention, explicitly, was how the markets also benefit the urban and suburban communities where they are held on a regular basis--humanizing the landscape, easing the city-country divide, etc.
Like the farmers, I do have to get out in the sun today (but unlike them, for only an hour or so). Keep cool.
musings about Washington, DC, and anywhere, and anything else (politics, food, the environment...)
Showing posts with label eminent domain. Show all posts
Showing posts with label eminent domain. Show all posts
Wednesday, August 03, 2005
Friday, June 24, 2005
The Little Guy Gets Hit, Yet Again...
For most people, Supreme Court decisions are a yawn, a minor blip in the day, if that. Yesterday's decision in Kelo v. City of New London was different in that, potentially, every homeowner who is not wealthy and politically well-connected could be faced with losing his or her home if developers with an economic development scheme manage to convince local officials to back their plans. The citizens of the town of New London who refused to give up their homes have lost this round, as they have refused "just compensation" for their homes. (I have a sinking feeling that the proposed compensation was not in the ballpark of fair market value, but I quibble.)
Attorney Andrew Cohen of CBS News said that the ruling "practically invited citizens who don't want to see this land-grab happen again to change their laws in order to prevent"(it). Hmm...
D.C.city officials are rejoicing at the ruling [free regi. req'd], as it will facilitate its plans for a new baseball stadium, which currently require that some homes and businesses in part of SE be destroyed to make way, all for a "public purpose," not merely a pesky "public use" that you were taught in civics class was necessary for government to seize homeowner land, that inconvenient concept of eminent domain.
Scott G. Bullock, an attorney for the organization that represented the New London homeowners, the Institute of Justice, said that the fight against eminent domain abuse would continue in the state supreme courts, as the decision does confirm that states can decide, and restrict, just what constitutes a "public purpose."
This ruling suddenly made me wonder how the development at the National Harbor in Oxon Hill would be affected, if at all. Could some Prince George's homeowners in that area be "asked" to leave in the name of economic development?
Attorney Andrew Cohen of CBS News said that the ruling "practically invited citizens who don't want to see this land-grab happen again to change their laws in order to prevent"(it). Hmm...
D.C.city officials are rejoicing at the ruling [free regi. req'd], as it will facilitate its plans for a new baseball stadium, which currently require that some homes and businesses in part of SE be destroyed to make way, all for a "public purpose," not merely a pesky "public use" that you were taught in civics class was necessary for government to seize homeowner land, that inconvenient concept of eminent domain.
Scott G. Bullock, an attorney for the organization that represented the New London homeowners, the Institute of Justice, said that the fight against eminent domain abuse would continue in the state supreme courts, as the decision does confirm that states can decide, and restrict, just what constitutes a "public purpose."
This ruling suddenly made me wonder how the development at the National Harbor in Oxon Hill would be affected, if at all. Could some Prince George's homeowners in that area be "asked" to leave in the name of economic development?
* * * * * *
It's that season. Yes, good old summertime is also prime crime time [free regi. req'd]. Be careful out there, and look out for your neighbors as well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)