PDA

View Full Version : Property Seizures PART II (SWEET JUSTICE)


GoodOlBoy
06-29-2005, 01:27 PM
Press Release
For Release Monday, June 27 to New Hampshire media
For Release Tuesday, June 28 to all other media

Weare, New Hampshire (PRWEB) Could a hotel be built on the land owned by Supreme Court Justice David H. Souter? A new ruling by the Supreme Court which was supported by Justice Souter himself itself might allow it. A private developer is seeking to use this very law to build a hotel on Souter's land.

Justice Souter's vote in the "Kelo vs. City of New London" decision allows city governments to take land from one private owner and give it to another if the government will generate greater tax revenue or other economic benefits when the land is developed by the new owner.

On Monday June 27, Logan Darrow Clements, faxed a request to Chip Meany the code enforcement officer of the Towne of Weare, New Hampshire seeking to start the application process to build a hotel on 34 Cilley Hill Road. This is the present location of Mr. Souter's home.

Clements, CEO of Freestar Media, LLC, points out that the City of Weare will certainly gain greater tax revenue and economic benefits with a hotel on 34 Cilley Hill Road than allowing Mr. Souter to own the land.

The proposed development, called "The Lost Liberty Hotel" will feature the "Just Desserts Café" and include a museum, open to the public, featuring a permanent exhibit on the loss of freedom in America. Instead of a Gideon's Bible each guest will receive a free copy of Ayn Rand's novel "Atlas Shrugged."

Clements indicated that the hotel must be built on this particular piece of land because it is a unique site being the home of someone largely responsible for destroying property rights for all Americans.

"This is not a prank" said Clements, "The Towne of Weare has five people on the Board of Selectmen. If three of them vote to use the power of eminent domain to take this land from Mr. Souter we can begin our hotel development."

Clements' plan is to raise investment capital from wealthy pro-liberty investors and draw up architectural plans. These plans would then be used to raise investment capital for the project. Clements hopes that regular customers of the hotel might include supporters of the Institute For Justice and participants in the Free State Project among others.

# # #

Logan Darrow Clements
Freestar Media, LLC

Phone 310-593-4843
logan@freestarmedia.com
http://www.freestarmedia.com



ROFLMAO Serves him right I hope it goes through!

GoodOlBoy

LoneWolf
06-29-2005, 06:27 PM
Now wouldn't that be sweet!
And I'd even chip in a few bucks for that one:D

rubicon
06-29-2005, 07:22 PM
No doubt that will happen big time in DC. Buildings going up everywhere and land in the city is getting harder to find. They rent them as fast as they build them. Buildings cannot be as high as the monument so that limits them to approx 11 floors. Average office space is renting for $150.00 a square foot and the tenant just gets a deck to be built out at their expense. Then the management company comes in and provides an engineer and assistant, a consiege, and security. For this they get somewhere between 3% and 10% of rental fees. When any maintainence needs to be done they backbill the tenant. Many of the homes I worked in during the past five years are gone, kinda, as they leave the original front and as a face to the new buildings which are a block square. I just cant imagine all those homeowners want to sell.

Valigator
07-06-2005, 04:06 AM
Found this in paper this morning....Sun-Sentinel

Florida Attorney General Charlie Crist was asked how this ruling might affect Florida property owners. Crist stated:

"Florida's Constitution, as interpreted by the courts, and Florida statutory law provide greater protection of private property rights than either the U.S. Constitution or Connecticut law."

"Under Florida law, only if property is designated as a blighted area can it be taken through the extraordinary power of eminent domain for redevelopment, and then only if it would primarily serve a public purpose.''

Quite simply, eminent domain is not available in Florida if the benefit to a private party is the paramount purpose of the project.