Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 41

Thread: City may sue developer who spent $20,000 to remove 40 tons of trash from vacant lot

  1. #11
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    11,597

    Re: City may sue developer who spent $20,000 to remove 40 tons of trash from vacant l

    Quote Originally Posted by Shadow Serious View Post
    Hmm, I wonder if hostile occupation would work in this situation.
    That is an interesting concept. Government entities are generally exempt from adverse possession, but the reverse is not true. If you have a path through your property that the public uses openly for a period of time, then the government can step in and prevent the closing of the path.

    At any rate, it is the bureaucracy that failed in this case. It is also the bureaucracy that is arguing that they would rather have a field of junk next to a restaurant than the park that the neighbor built.

    Our homeowners association has regular clean up days along the roads leading to the subdivision. We get full cooperation of the DOT since they recognize the inherent value. Seems like a thank you is in order, not a citation.

  2. #12
    Phonetic Mnemonic
    radcen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Look to your right... I'm that guy.
    Last Seen
    03-28-18 @ 07:32 AM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    34,817

    Re: City may sue developer who spent $20,000 to remove 40 tons of trash from vacant l

    Quote Originally Posted by jimbo View Post
    That is an interesting concept. Government entities are generally exempt from adverse possession, but the reverse is not true. If you have a path through your property that the public uses openly for a period of time, then the government can step in and prevent the closing of the path.

    At any rate, it is the bureaucracy that failed in this case. It is also the bureaucracy that is arguing that they would rather have a field of junk next to a restaurant than the park that the neighbor built.

    Our homeowners association has regular clean up days along the roads leading to the subdivision. We get full cooperation of the DOT since they recognize the inherent value. Seems like a thank you is in order, not a citation.
    I think what the city is really arguing, albeit unknowingly and subconsciously, is that their power is beyond question, and no matter how absurd must be obeyed.
    Roy L. Fuchs: I'll tell you something. This country is going to the dogs.
    You know, it used to be when you bought a politician, that son of a bitch stayed bought.

  3. #13
    Bring us a shrubbery!
    tessaesque's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Plano, Texas
    Last Seen
    11-09-17 @ 05:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    15,910

    Re: City may sue developer who spent $20,000 to remove 40 tons of trash from vacant l

    I'd tell them I'd see 'em in court. They're just butt hurt. If he can afford the $20k to rehab the plot, I'm sure he can afford whatever it'll cost to pacify those idiot officials.
    "Hmmm...Can't decide if I want to watch "Four Houses" or give myself an Icy Hot pee hole enema..." - Blake Shelton


  4. #14
    Sage


    MaggieD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Chicago Area
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    43,244
    Blog Entries
    43

    Re: City may sue developer who spent $20,000 to remove 40 tons of trash from vacant l

    Quote Originally Posted by radcen View Post
    I think what the city is really arguing, albeit unknowingly and subconsciously, is that their power is beyond question, and no matter how absurd must be obeyed.
    I like to call my Building & Zoning Department the Nazi Fringe. They rule beyond all reason, punish the homeowner/do-it-yourselfer and act like Little Napoleans when they knock on a neighborhood door. Old drywall at the curb for pick-up? Here comes the Nazi Fringe!!

    I think you're absolutely right.
    The devil whispered in my ear, "You cannot withstand the storm." I whispered back, "I am ​the storm."

  5. #15
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,700

    Re: City may sue developer who spent $20,000 to remove 40 tons of trash from vacant l

    Quote Originally Posted by radcen View Post
    City may sue developer who spent $20,000 to remove 40 tons of trash from vacant lot

    City may sue developer who spent $20,000 to remove 40 tons of trash from vacant lot | The Sideshow - Yahoo! News
    The city should be thanking him for the free trash removal and area beautification. Not threatening to sue him to put trash back on the lot.

    If I was Ori Feibush I would run ads stating that Paul D. Chrystie( and or whoever else is threatening the lawsuit )wants to dump 40 tons of trash in their neighborhood. If certain city officials want to act like dirt bags then that is what they should be treated as.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  6. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    SE Asia
    Last Seen
    07-12-14 @ 09:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    2,333

    Re: City may sue developer who spent $20,000 to remove 40 tons of trash from vacant l

    Yep, he technically broke the law. I don’t care. I applaud him. I hope this gets a lot of press and I hope it is good for his business. If the city is going to do something with the land then I am fine with them ordering him to remove any constructs he put there, but they should change their mind on fining him.

  7. #17
    Guru

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Oaxaca, Mexico
    Last Seen
    01-08-18 @ 08:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,579

    Re: City may sue developer who spent $20,000 to remove 40 tons of trash from vacant l

    The government is not your friend. The government does not exist to help you. The government has no public servants. I realize I might be generalizing and there might be some people working in government who are your friend, do want to help, and consider themselves public servants but they're marginalized in the system and eventually destroyed.
    Last edited by Patrickt; 09-25-12 at 05:44 AM.

  8. #18
    Guru
    HonestJoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,769

    Re: City may sue developer who spent $20,000 to remove 40 tons of trash from vacant l

    I don't think there is a straight forwards answer to this situation, despite a number of people's instinctive reaction.

    The basic principal some people are supporting is that anyone can enter private property, remove anything they determine "trash" and build anything they want. If anything went wrong with that, the property owner would still have some if not all legal responsibility for it. While there is an obvious common sense argument to congratulate rather than punish this guy, there is a risk of setting a legal president that could bite them all on the ass later. For example, would the response be as positive if it was local government entering, clearing and building on someone's private property without any kind of legal backing?

    It'd be relevant to know what general legal responsibilities property owners have in that locality around visual impact and the like. If someone want to keep a pile of rubble on their property, is it anyone else's business? What level of responsibility is there to keep your property beatified? You can certainly argue a social/moral duty but how far should that be enforced? Again, remember that in principal, any action deemed legitimate in this case could be deemed legitimate regarding your property too.

  9. #19
    long standing member
    justabubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    37,681

    Re: City may sue developer who spent $20,000 to remove 40 tons of trash from vacant l

    Quote Originally Posted by HonestJoe View Post
    I don't think there is a straight forwards answer to this situation, despite a number of people's instinctive reaction.

    The basic principal some people are supporting is that anyone can enter private property, remove anything they determine "trash" and build anything they want. If anything went wrong with that, the property owner would still have some if not all legal responsibility for it. While there is an obvious common sense argument to congratulate rather than punish this guy, there is a risk of setting a legal president that could bite them all on the ass later. For example, would the response be as positive if it was local government entering, clearing and building on someone's private property without any kind of legal backing?

    It'd be relevant to know what general legal responsibilities property owners have in that locality around visual impact and the like. If someone want to keep a pile of rubble on their property, is it anyone else's business? What level of responsibility is there to keep your property beatified? You can certainly argue a social/moral duty but how far should that be enforced? Again, remember that in principal, any action deemed legitimate in this case could be deemed legitimate regarding your property too.
    all of that argument is undermined by the fact that the city had issued a notice to the business owner to police the debris - on the city's property
    clearly, the city notified the business man that the items lying on that lot was debris
    we are negotiating about dividing a pizza and in the meantime israel is eating it[
    Quote Originally Posted by oneworld2 View Post
    Except it's not their land and it was a war of conquest wrapped up as a defensive war. Subsequent events confirm this

  10. #20
    Guru
    HonestJoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,769

    Re: City may sue developer who spent $20,000 to remove 40 tons of trash from vacant l

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    all of that argument is undermined by the fact that the city had issued a notice to the business owner to police the debris - on the city's property
    I'm not sure it's that clear cut from the report linked. That just has a single statement about "a citation in August 2011 from the city for litter on the same lot" without any further detail. Regardless of those details, I don't think it alters the basic principals involved or the complexity surrounding them.

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •