zen

I highly doubt it.It would be for great karma if the county re-appraised their property value based on their own legal demands in this case, but it's more likely that the value will still be appraised the same way it was before.

nice

Somehow, I imagine, 50 years from now, after UAkron becomes Summit State, after the cuyahoga river floods Akron, after WWIII, after the State of Ohio goes into default and sells several counties to neighboring States, and after Aliens land and sequester large areas of all major cities for human prisoner camps, there will still be people from this board saying "See, and that just proves the property owners on exchange got way too much money"

Which agenda. You mean like the one where local folks think that Craig Krenzel probably got a Nobel prize for his studies in Molecular Biology as cowtown U.

If they could find a way to get energy out of coal (economically) without the pollution, Ohio would be sitting on an energy goldmine. But somehow I have a feeling the environuts will still stop it from reaching public use anyway, regardless of it's effectiveness.

To put that into perspective, a single laser-guided bomb costs the tax payer $2,000,000. But the laser-guided bomb is a viable asset. Seeding some program that may or may not ever reap a single usable result is not always easy to float past the people who control purse strings.

He was making significantly more than 40k per year, net. I would be shocked if he made that little.

the decision to knock down carroll hall and make that all open green space is genius. UA is going to feel like a really nice campus all around buchtel hall.

WE HAVE ERECTION! They have placed some seriously tall steel columns on the west edge, and they have cross braced them to other columns with horizontal beams. Woooo!!!

If that's the case, then you are right. My arguments are on shaky ground.I can't understand how someone would agree to having their property be acquired without agreeing to a price.Hell, I had a developer come and ask me about my property. I gave him a tentative verbal agreement to sell only if he gave me more than a certain amount. He never got back to me. Apparently it was too high. But I gave him the price I did for a reason. I found a property that I liked for a variety of reasons. I told him that it would be hard for me to take market value and turn around and find another place for the same price that I was as happy with, which is the reason my house wasn't for sale. I wasn't lying when I told him that. I really do think I would have a hard time finding a place like the one I have now if I was given 'market value', and that's why I have no regrets. If the nemers agreed to sell to the UA without even agreeing to a price or other conditions, then they are just plain stupid in my opinion.

I was hoping (*bites tongue*) that Hasselbeck would get hurt and Frye could go in and shine.Then, I heard the talking heads before last draft talk about how Seattle may have wanted to draft high to replace Hasselbeck and because of that, since then, I don't get the vibe that the Seahawks think of him as a future starter, I really think that Charlie is doomed to be Mr.Backup for the rest of his career.

I can agree with you, technically.It is probably a bad choice of words.I think that I am only trying to express the fact that the property owner basically has no choice in the matter.Take the money and leave.

*sigh*I only think that people who are evicted from their own property should get more than fair market value for a reason.I will try to explain that reason, and do it from two angles.1) That person owns that property. They are using it, and they have been paying taxes on it. It may have sentimental value to them, it may have financial value, and it may, in some ways, be irreplaceable. If that person was selling the property, it would come under market forces and market value would actually be culled out by the market, rather than an arbitrary appraisal. But what is important is the fact that the owner was selling it. When eminent domain is used, the owner is forcably evicted when he had no intent to sell. He should be compensated for various reasons that I have listed in other threads. Some of which are the fact that if he moves, a new location could cost more and still be less profitable (or have less personal value if it's a residence instead of a business). The university never had to try to outbid anyone for the property. They basically took it.2) "The people" don't own that property, a person does. People own their own property (unless they are renters or dependents). This is not communist system with public ownership of everything. You have your house and I have mine. You have your business and I have mine. Using the powers of government to procure land from private land owners should include some level of punitive effect. Taking land for market value only encourage government to use eminent domain more and more, and play some sortof Sim City with people's property. The people in government who make up the decisions may or may not be right in whether certain decisions help the city overall, but that's not the point. The point is property rights are being made worthless. People are being forced to sell and move when they don't want to, and that sale is not going to give them anything more than "fair market value"???? I believe that there should be a putative fee attached to all eminent domain cases. If government thinks that property is soooo damned important to steal it away from a private land owner, then it should not be allowed to take it at face value. This only encourages government to diminish the people's property rights.Just because something appears to be for the benefit of "the many outweigh the few" doesn't make it right. It makes it "mob rule".Rights are not subject to "mob rule". It's the reason minorities have protected rights. The majority could turn minorities into slaves if they had enough votes to do it in a 'mob rule' democracy. We all know that minority rights and even individual rights are protected from the oppression of the many. This is the American way. Now please remember, I am not arguing that eminent domain should be abolished. I believe their are legitimate civil and safety reasons for land use.However, I do think that there should be punitive and compensatory aspects to eminent domain, particularly when a project is not a directly civil or safety issue. Afterall, in this very case, what we have here basically comes down to is the fact that you got more people wanting to sip on beverages and watch football games 8 times a year somehow being more important than people's homes and businesses. This project is NOT decreasing traffic accidents, reducing pollution, feeding the hungry, clothing the cold or making the world a better place, and even if it was, property owners should still be compensated.I'll be going to football games, and I will be admiring the new stadium, and I will have pride for my Alma Mater. I am NOT against the stadium project, as most of you know. I have even posted pictures from the work site.It's just that, I feel it's important enough to stand up for a principle. An Idea.Some day, it could be your property that is taken. Who knows, maybe you will be happy to move. But then again, maybe you wont.

What you are saying is, because I don't live there, and because it doesn't affect me personally, I should look the other way when we evict people from their own property because you have deemed your reasons worthy.

not pro-citizen's rights. You use the wrong words.When I say pro-property rights, what I mean is individual rights.When you say pro-citizen's rights, what you mean is mob rule, OR, socialism. If enough people want it or benefit by it, then it's time to start kicking people out.Well, I for one think that there are uses for eminent domain. Genuine civil needs and safety needs. I believe that if you are going to start kicking American citizens off of their property because of "we want", then you are going to have to pay a bit of a penalty.

Is that a fact?Because you state it so matter-of-factly.I'm willing to bet that you quite wrong.I think most people who you categorize as whiners or complainers are not so much anti-eminent domain as they are pro-property rights. All I have ever asked for by people on this site is to simply acknowledge (as I have) that we are not objective observers on this issue. We want a stadium. We are biased. If Waste Management Corp convinced the City of Akron to take hundreds of homes and businesses through eminent domain to put in a land fill, I think your perspective might change a little.

I could have swore a read a beacon article around 2006 about the APS donating or selling central hower to the university.... but now i feel like I'm going crazy because I google it and I can't find a single thing about it.

I thought hower was sold or donated to UA already

really not necessary

if not i'll start one. HEY GUYS! i heard from a very reliable unnamed source in the athletic department that we're getting a winking lizard in the new complex.I had to look it up. Eight posts down (Aug 07)mysterious

All in fun. You know you gotta have a sense of humor to come on over here.

Yeah, but you gotta admit that there is something very satisfying about watching liberal organizations attacking the mascot of a liberal bastionLOL, this is a funny story. The truth is, PETA sucks, always has. They would be way more effective if they were more ethical in their approaches.Also, it's important to understand that K-S-U paid a great deal of money to keep this eagle alive. He (or She) is blind in one eye, we adopted it from a refuge center and pay to have it fed and cared for. The alternative for this bird would be either death or being in a small cage. Instead it gets a comfortable life.And about the liberal statement, believe it or not K-S-U students are split 50/50 on conservative/liberal ideologies. Just throwing that out LOLawww common!Please tell me that your hippies don't get suckered into the concept that teh poor bird might suffer emotional trauma and start discussing protest ideas over mocha-chino-lattes. Common sense doesn't matter to hippies. The fact that animals suffer greatly (physically) in the wild doesn't matter. The fact that animals frequently encounter situations of great threat and distress in their natural habitat doesn't matter either. The fact that these guys have taken good care of this animal doesn't matter.All that matters is that people are parading around a bird for entertainment sake, and that is enough to allow them to lodge a complaint that compliments their whole self-worth/self-identity raison d'etre. The cause needs targets.The reason I enjoy it is because the results of what liberal organizations want doesn't matter. It's always idealism over common sense, and this time Can't gets a taste of the opposite end of the stick.BTW, I recognize that much of the Can't State population is probably not hippie or even fully liberal. However, you do have to admit that there is an unusually strong contingent of hippies and libs there if your reputation is anything like your reality, comparatively speaking. Thus my use of "bastion"

damn, you got some earlier pics than I do. I started doing screencaps in march

Yeah, but you gotta admit that there is something very satisfying about watching liberal organizations attacking the mascot of a liberal bastion

[/The end]I know you better than you know yourself. lolYou just don't like it when someone disagrees with your position and sounds valid doing it.Yes, you asked for snide, now your getting it.[The end /]