@@traindude70 That is not true, they would just have to pay fairly, like everyone else. What you mean is 'they would not exist the same way as they do'
@@traindude70 The current land model of railroads should change. All tracks should be public roads and then any train company can run on it by scheduling a run.
We're taking your land and giving it to this huge corporation that just by coincidence donates to my campaigns and gave my child who has no qualifications a job making 50,000$ a month. But none of that has anything to do with it.
Yep. If people in that country start some sort of investigation or start to question my actions first I will threaten them I that I will tell me friend who's the leader to withheld military aid.
It is the state government doing this, not the federal government. Georgia state government. No one cares about hunter biden, most wealthy people, government or not, give their family members overpaid jobs. Has nothing to do with Biden, has to do with capitalism, but most of these people looooove capitalism, so I'm not sure why they care.
We had a local city who tried to use "Eminent Domain" to take property to build a Walmart. The residents raised enough of a ruckus that the city backed off but it didn't end there. The residents started a petition drive to place a ban on the government from using eminent domain for anything other than roads placed on the ballot. They were successful and it passed by an overwhelming majority.
@@jonathan7249 Or they work around it by taking the land for a road and then abandoning th e project and selling the land to the corporation for pennies.
I vaguely recall something like this in Alabaster, Alabama back in the late 90's, if I'm recalling correctly. I moved to Atlanta during the peak of the disdain and don't know whatever happened in the end.
@@basillah7650 True but you don't need to take land going back a mile from where the road is. I was thinking of a fairly specific case that happened around here a few years... Ok decades ago now. Mill wanted to build a warehouse, a few of the people who had property (mostly for hunting) wouldn't sell to the mill. State came in and took the land with eminent domain because of a projected road to go from the highway to one of the county roads. Not just taking what was needed for the road itself but a mile wide swath of land. Pretty much the minute the ink was dry on the transfer they scrapped the project for the road. Few months later tried to quietly sell the land to the mill. Now there is a warehouse on that land and a non-public road.
This has been going on for generations. In the late 1800,s my Great great grandfather owned a former plantation. One day a field hand came up to him saying that there were a bunch of men cutting down his fence. He went out with the hand, a foreman and some other workers and sure enough there were a bunch of men tearing down his fence. He asked them who they were and what they were doing? The leader of the work gang told him that they were going to run a railroad through there and they were clearing the way for the track layers. My ancestor told them that they were not crossing his land and he would shoot the first man that touched his fence. After conferring among themselves the work gang left and my great great grandfather. had his men repair the fence, he then had a worker keep watch in case the men came back. A few days later the man on watch told him the men were back. Again, my Great great grandfather rushed over with his foreman and a number of workers, all armed. This time a different leader of the workers came forward. He told my Great great grandfather they had legal permission to built the railroad across his land and handed my Great great grandfather a piece of official looking paper. My Great great grandfather looked at the paper and informed the man that this pager was issued in New Orleans gave the Railroad the right to build on land in Orleans parish, and it had no jurisdiction in the parish he was in. He reiterated that if they broke his fence and trespassed on his land he would shoot them. The work gang boss ordered his men to tear down the fence and enter the land, because my Great great grandfather would not shoot them. My Great great grandfather told them, "Don't cross and get shot. Hey boss man you cross and get shot." So the man climbed over the fence and my Great great grandfather shot and killed him. His body was passed over to the workers and they left. My Great great grandfather was arrested, tried and acquitted of murder. All these details were from the court records of the time, which we had a copy of, as well as reports in the various Newspapers. The Railroad was eventually put across his land, but only after they negotiated a fair price for it.
@@the_expidition427 actually no, because we lost all the records we had in Hurricane Isaac. Other family members may have copies, and I will check. Most of the records should be online for the New Orleans Times Picayune Newspaper.
Back in the 1990s, the city of Arcadia, CA, wanted to use eminent domain, to take a restaurant, and sell it to the adjacent car dealership. Didn't go well, and most of the city council was voted out. Using eminent domain for public use (public road, park, public building) is one thing. Using for the sole benefit of a private entity is another.
@@jamesmason2228 While that's technically true for public transit and goods transit, you have to remember that it is all privately owned companies. Ones that have historically acted horribly in every aspect you can possibly think of and many you wouldn't think of.
@@jamesmason2228 It's for the singular use of one company solely for their own profits. Are they going to share this new infrastructure for anyone who needs a rail line? Are they sharing their profits with the public? Are they going to build out a publicly accessible rail network? No. None of these things are their intention. It's purely for their own private use and profits therefore they should have to find a way to acquire the land on their own dime without resorting to government force.
@@Strideo1 Sandersville Railroad is a "common carrier", so yes, if you were a rail shipper and wanted to ship to/from a point on that railroad, they'd have an obligation.
Rail is a tangled mix, and each locality and railroad has its own sordid history. Also though - especially for heavy freight like minerals (rock/ore/coal) or tank cars - it's a public good. Rail is so much more efficient it's different in kind, and has generally been regulated like a utility. (so add political & tax tangles too) I default to supporting the land owner in disputes, mostly because compensation is never fair market value unless you win a lawsuit...
Knowing Georgia? Do you live there? Did you come from there? If you did not come from generations of the average citizen there then you should spend time in the state living as others have had to live before making assumptions. I can accommodate you if you love learning. Try going in and living exactly as the people there have lived. It is wrong on so many levels how people are lumped into these generalizations. Also, one vote or a hundred means no voice against five hundred. An open mind please.
The property owners should submit a claim to have the quarry condemned and sold to them under eminent domain. There is a clear benefit to having a quarry owned and operated by a local entity rather than a (presumably) foreign corporation.
When the Supreme Court last visited Eminent Domain, for the purpose of "city takes land and sells to company", I recall hearing that within days one or more of the Justices' homes were submitted for Eminent Domain for similar reasons. I don't recall if that passed or not... but I'm down for that type of shenanigans. You submit my land for ED, I submit yours for ED as it's a vastly better piece for whatever you're doing than mine is, for reasons I'll pull from the same place you pull yours from.
That's not a bad idea. Make the plant a public amusement park/ family outing venue. (after clearing and cleaning the land of course!) I like the idea! Which would have more public benefit?
I completely agree! I mean, who will the people in office please, the company, or the people who can vote them out of office then vote in citizens of the place who to then allow the use of Eminent Domain to buy the quarry at "market price" (which can be manipulated) and sell it to the people.
In the early 2000’s the Supreme Court ruled on a case where a city in Massachusetts seized several homes on the banks of a river. The city wished to demolish the homes and build a riverside park, restaurants and condos. The homeowners lost. The Court decided the benefits to the community and the tax revenue trumped the homeowners rights to the properties. It was a terrible legal precedent and essentially destroyed private land ownership.
That's the Kelo vs City of New London decision that Steve mentioned. It was a 5:4 decision, so hopefully gets overturned soon. Hopefully after someone gets the government to take one of the Supreme Court Justices' homes via eminent domain.
@@benwagner5089 If only. What actually happened was after the SCotUS decided in the city's favor, the city evicted the homeowners AND charged them back-rent for the years they'd been appealing the case. There's a special place in hell for people who pull crap like that.
Aside from the blatant rip-off, this proposed spur line is only for one purpose, to serve that concrete factory. If it closes, now they have a spur that goes nowhere and gets no maintenance and may even become a public nuisance. I have seen this happen in my neck of the woods. Thanks Steve and team for all you do!!
It’s one thing with Texas where its railroad issue is meant to have a purpose that’s good for the public and could potentially support the economy beyond one factory It’s another thing when it’s clearly not for anything more than one business
@@theupscriber65 Ok, Then the railroad should be required to not only sell the land back to the owners, but also remove any trace that they had the land in the first place. You know, just for those situations that don’t happen ever, but could would should happen.
I have always thought that the only way for eminent domain to be fair would be for there to be a large multiplier added to the market value to make whoever is coming in think twice about seizing the land. If it is REALLY in the public good, then they should be willing to pay 5x the market price for it. If they just want to force a sale AT market price, it is simply thievery. They can adjust the market price themselves. The person being forced out should be able to afford a much nicer place with the proceeds of the forced sale, period.
I completely agree on principle, but knowing politicians the first thing that would happen is eminent domain used on friends/family/corporations to funnel that 5x money where it doesn’t belong… If the disincentive becomes good enough it can become an incentive for an entirely new nefarious purpose…
@JamesJamersonIsAGod That got the Oklahoma Turnpike Commission in trouble recently. While acquiring land for expanding a turnpike, they purchased a parcel from a politician for 15× the market value.
Make them pay the market value on what the planned improvement would be. 1/4 acre lot with 2 story house for $185k is turning into a section of $5.6MM office building... so pay the market value on 1/4 of $5.6MM. :P
The question needs to be asked: how many city employees hold a stake in the company, and what do they have to gain if they can get the land as cheaply as possible? The concept of "Follow the money" is always valid!
This reminds me of cases I have seen where "highest and best use" of the land is invoked. My daughter is a court reporter and I proofread for her. I remember one case here in California where a family owned a small orange grove. It was a family farm and they increased their income by fixing up a rustic shelter among the orange trees and renting it as a venue for weddings. Then the State decided it wanted the land to enlarge a nearby highway, and when the family would not sell the State claimed that the little orange grove was not the "highest and best use" the land could have. It made me angry then and still makes me angry that the government could do this.
"I don't think this is the highest and best use of your land. Give it up." I don't think this is the highest and best use of your governmental power. Give it up.
@@dorothywillis1 well, the problem with being in govt is you get seen in public to much so if not cowards around you then get taken out if harass wrong people.
I had a great uncle that lost part of his farm this way. He tried to fight it back in the 1960s but lost. They put a 4 lane in to a steel mill that went bankrupt before the road was completed. It was called the road to nowhere. It's finally getting use because the state decided not to fix the original side roads and now push people out of the way to use the road and block the others. Chrysler was going to build next to the steel mill as was Hormel. They all back out leaving tax payers to foot the bill including those that lost their land. There is two pipe lines that go close to where I live. The incentive was the township would recieve the taxes. It wasn't long til the state decided that all that revenue should go to the state and be divided by population. So the areas where the pipe lines are recieve the least.
Unfortunately, as it stands currently the Constitutions value is depreciating rapidly and is worth little more than the paper it is written upon currently. The system is marching ever further into the maelstrom of totalitarianism. Elitist, self serving, authoritarian clown have taken up residence in the halls of Government and have twisted and manipulated the entire system into something that very closely resembles TRUE Fascism when considering the incestuous relationship they involve themselves with concerning Corporations and the injection of both entities influence upon the economy and the public at large. The Executive and Legislative branches have long been compromised and worse still completely captured. But it is increasingly evident that now even the Judicial branch has fallen out of favor of We the People. Encroaching further and further into the realm of our individual, inalienable rights and liberties. This is what happens when you have a populace that becomes complacent and distracted, and allows those they have afforded power and control to in pursuit of representing the common interests of said populace. A Government left to its own devices and never held accountable will, without doubt, inevitably go FAR off the rails it was once set upon. And this is ALWAYS the case with Rulers. Be they Democratically elected, Dictatorships whom seized power through force of violence or Monarchies which are passed on through lineage, inherited through blood generation after generation. It makes no difference. Eventually it all leads to the shackling of the masses. Those shackles usually forged from the inaction and/or complacency of those whom are then clasped in irons. The only GOOD Government, is NO Government.
In the mid 1960s, a portion of my husband's boyhood home, along the roadside, was claimed by eminent domain to widen the road. Sadly, the family knew they were going to lose some large maples, but keep some others. One day, the construction crew started to put heavy chains around two of the remaining trees, to use them as leverage to pull the other trees. They met the immovable force of my 5'1" MIL, who refused to allow them to damage the trees by dragging/wrapping chains over the bark, and pulling on the roots! She & FIL had attended the town meetings and knew their rights. Being forced to sell a strip of land was bad enough, but she wasn't legally required to let people damage the remaining trees. The stately trees stood tall and lovely for the next four and five decades.
If the state wants the land for a railway, put in a clause that if no trains run over the tracks for a year and a day the original owner (or decendants) can buy the land back for $1.00
Eminent domain is dirty. If it's for the betterment of a community, I understand it. However, using it to sell to a private business should be EXTREMELY and obviously illegal. People should be allowed to sue if they are lied to. Good video Steve!
Getting the cargo off the road and onto a rails would benefit the community. Especially when there are public roads involved, for which the community has to pay the maintenance costs from taxes. There is no doubt about that. On the other hand, the people who get displaced to build the rail line have at least some benefit to the community as well. And then it should be looked into how the route of the rail was decided on. Did the company take a look on the map, drew a direct line across, without paying any attention to the ownership of the land, the line will be built on? Is there really no route that would be less intrusive? Finally, an independent party should be called in to appraise the value of the land. The compensation should be at least double, maybe even triple (treble? trible?) of the market value. Incidentally, if the company would be forced to pay top dollar for the land they need to acquire for the rail line, they might find another route, that is much cheaper.
@@peregreena9046 the railroad company cannot get anyone to their offer is their problem, eminent domain should never be used to provide land to a private entity for any reason. If the railroad wants easements or land they can pay the costs that the land owners are willing to pay even if it bankrupts the company.
Guess you didn't watch the video. The railroad corridor doesn't affect any houses and they are only asking for a 90' corridor. These people are going to lose.
@@traindude70 Not "asking for" They are taking these people's property. Guess you didnt watch the video where Steve said your home includes the land the dwelling sits upon. And it isnt a small deal to just take someones property and give it to a foreign business.
The city of Wausau, WI used eminent domain to take four houses (one of which was decrepit) to widen a road. Three of those houses were owned by my brother who didn't like their offer of compensation. At one point the price was within $20K of what he felt they were worth and he didn't take it. This fight went on for years and he ultimately lost his 3 houses, got very little compensation, and to this day they haven't built the road wider at all. It's a little park they planted grass in after they tore down the 4 houses that had been turned into duplexes with multiple families living in them. My brother and sister-in-law had kept up the properties, they looked nice, but someone on the town board didn't like my brother and was determined to take this away from him. They won.
The rail road makes billions every year. It is unconscionable that judges think its okay to give the land to a company at a low price. The company is clearly rich enough to offer enough money, whether tens of million, or hundreds of millions of dollars, to get the land if they really need it.
@@Mesa_Mike Your right, it's a complex network of smaller rails that were swallowed up by the big rail companies and exploit their workers endlessly to get the billions. Shouldnt let their exploitation reach wherever it wants.
I'm either for: 1) Eminent domain being removed entirely which would (ideally) force gov go earn cooperation, not force it at the point of the gun. Or 2) Eminent domain compensation must make the people subject to it fully whole + a percentage on top. For example taking property? Gov must provide equal or greater property in comparable area that the victims accept, pay 100% of moving costs, lost wages, lost job, etc. due to it with a percentage on top for pain and suffering.
#2 is how eminent domain is already SUPPOSED to work, but the language in the Constitution regarding it is vague and today's politicians aren't as idealistic as those who wrote it.
I agree with the first option you noted. As the second option you listed still lays the burden of funding onto the shoulders of the public at large as it will be the taxpayers flitting that bill. On that note, isn't it a funny thing that the Government finds NO problem flippantly and flagrantly spending our hard earned funds without hesitation when it comes to a litany of subjects and reasons. That is EXCEPT in the case where a member of the public need be compensated fairly in regards to the price of goods or property seized or destroyed BY said government (mind you that this citizen USUALLY is one whom has provided, through payment of taxes, some of the very funds that are being greedily withheld in regards to fair value in compensation for lost, damaged or seized property
@@TheOriginalJphyper Yeah, I'm often saying I would love a new amendment along the lines of the no victim/no crime and mandate criminal charges on any gov who tries to pass/enforce any law on a citizen where there is no victim. I'm staring to think that we need an additional amendment to combat the courts giving themselves the infinite power to "interpret" the constitution and the law any way they feel like without consequence. Maybe something along the lines of "All constitutions and laws must be interpreted in the light most favorable to individual citizens and their rights.' With of course accompanying language mandating serious prison time for the blatant treason that results when they do anything else.
@@sheepishmclemmingston5550 Mostly agree. Massive issue. Unfortunately, you understated the problem. What you describe is a rosy paradise where they limit themselves to only spending our tax dollars. Nope, they also print massive amounts of money, far, far more than our tax money, and spend that too which is fundamentally stealing from our future. Modern monetary policy is how the evil elites are draining this country dry to enrich themselves.
So glad that the Institute for Justice is helping those people. Such a great group! I agree with you, Steve, regarding just compensation. There is no place like home and even if they were to keep part of their land, the stress on them would be enormous. Imagine instead of looking out your kitchen window or back porch and seeing a nice green pasture with a pond, that you now have to look at an ugly railroad. That stress would then be perpetual at least for the current generations which remember the land as it originally was.
It's not just looking at it, it's hearing it, feeling the vibrations and the associated dust that will be settling in. Even if the property taken is fair and just, the property left to the owners will be devalued due to the railroad.
Railroad traffic vibrations can also cause damage to surrounding foundations. "But its only one train a day" One train a day NOW. 80 tomorrow no doubt as the corp sells rail service to others. Also train derailment is tremendously danger in the US with over 1,000 derailments per year. To compare that is 156% higher then Japan (after adjusting for total miles of track) who's trains on average travel multiple times faster. Insurance companies even raise rates of properties due to proximity to rail lines. A railroad damages your property in a huge and huge number of ways.
There was a story in NY in the 70s where a road was going to be built on a private land owners land. They introduced imminent domain and land owner lost. A few days before construction the land owner moved all the stakes marking the construction off his land and the construction company built a bunch before anyone noticed. Idk what happen but he wasn't having it.
Also, your 'home' is not just the building you live in. It's also the land it sits on. If I own a 5 acre plot my home is those 5 acres. Installing a road across my home is unacceptable.
That's the thing that makes it even worse. These whorebags intentionally run this garbage right through the middle, they don't even try to skirt the edge of the property. Government will always hold the view of "F__K YOU!" when it comes to Citizens, at every level.
@@dansanger5340 And that has to do with...WHAT? Most of the mileage of the Interstates was built on existing rights of way, either via railroads, who themselves had gotten most of THEIR land via 19th century eminent domain land takings, or existing US highways. And there were costly and difficult legal battles, as often less wealthy landowners were displaced against their will, often being offered rather paltry compensation, based on valuations PRIOR to knowledge of the new interstates being proposed, even though neighbors whose lands were not seized experienced significant increases in THEIR property. More or less, eminent domain was mis-used to effectively STEAL land for the new freeways. It was also noted that in a lot of instances, rather wealthy and connected real estate speculators, usually with connivance of local officials, had acquired land directly with leaked knowledge, or, in some cases, the city/county had already condemned the land for a different purpose, then changed their plans and SOLD that land to the connected "investors", which coincidentally would be at a planned interchange along major streets/surface highways. Mere economic convenience should NEVER be an excuse to not fairly negotiate for someone's land. Mis-use of eminent domain has become, in effect, a legalized method of real estate THEFT.
@@dansanger5340 not really a similar situation. Let's say I want to install a for profit business, like let's say a quarry, somewhere. I should be required to purchase any land needed to service my for profit business, whether that means road space, railway access, whatever, from the owners of those properties. Whether installing a store, an office high rise, or a quarry, it's all still a 'for profit' venture, and as such it should not get to use the eminent domain privilege. The excuse that this will benefit the state via jobs and reduced traffic on the roads is weak and frankly more of a post hoc rationalization. Those people own land the for profit business needs. The for profit business needs to buy that land at a price the seller wants. If the seller does not want to sell then they need to find a different route for their rails.
interesting that I stumbled across this. I retired from the City of Sandersville and had many occasions to interact with the Sandersville Railroad. They own a significant amount of property in the county and we would often need to work with them over utility easements. They were/are the richest shortline RR in the nation and primarily serve the Kaolin clay industry. They also own a large trucking enterprise. It would not surprise me if they don't also own the concrete production they are seeking rail service for. Please note that once property is established as rail r/o/w it is pretty much forever and the rules to use or cross it are very stringent. The Tarbuttons are not known for selling property. I wish good luck to these property owners.
There is a way around that problem. It is a reverter clause. It often was written into leases and ROW deeds by smart people. Only problem is it can take years to enforce thru the courts. I know because at one time the PRR ran thru our farm. When Conrail pulled up the tracks, they did not want to give the land back to the land owners. And the rails to trails nuts wanted to use it. But many of the deeds said that if the RR did not maintain it as a railroad, the land was to return to the landowners or their heirs or future property owners. It took a court case in Ohio to keep the rail to trail nuts out. It took another case 16 years to get thru the courts for the land owners whose property the tracks had crossed some of their money back for the lands that they had had to buy back at auction. That case was done in Warren, Ohio and I am on the court's record in that case. The case is Paula D Maas ET AL., v Penn Central Corporation ET AL., 99CV723 in Trumbull County, Ohio.
@@gravelydon7072I remember that case. A few friends live in that area still, the old railroad tracks are a blight and the crossings are a bloody hazard in quite a few spots. Is the Greenway trail in Warren still a problem area for crime? The trail folks never seem to consider the wisdom of putting in those things in an urban, high crime area. On the other hand, Andover, up in Ashtabula county received a grant when I was a kid (30 years ago now) to put in a trail on the old railroad bed. Then in 2019 they got another sizable sum. (I think it was Cleveland Metro Parks or something like that.) The "trail" still ain't what I would call top notch.
The MO constitution, the framework of which is based on the 1875 constitution, explicitly disallows the use of eminent domain and subsequent transfer to private hands. In other words, it disallows Kilo style taking. This was in response to railroad depredations and those related to Civil War Reconstruction events. The state courts over the last 150 years have done one somersault after another to permit Kilo style takings. No matter what we do, no matter what the statutes say, the courts don't seem to want to back property rights. I wish these people all good fortune in fighting this taking.
@@dansanger5340 During Reconstruction, there was plain old government thievery going on under color of law. Some government official would find cause to take real estate, then it would be handed to a friend or business associate with a little palm greasing to smooth the way. For the record, MO wasn't officially a Confederate state.
I watched Foxconn try this route in Wisconsin. Rather than Eminent Domain, though, assessors conveniently declared the land as blighted and unsuitable for habitation... plunging the value and forcing people out anyhow.
There was a case in Indiana that lasted about 20 years to build a U.S. Highway bypass. The land was a "Presidential Land Grant" from the 1800s that gave the land to the family for as long as just one member lived on the land. The family kept offering a different parcel of land but the "Planners" kept telling the state that the parcel offered wouldn't work. After some 20 years in court battles, the parcel that the family had first offered was the tract that the U.S. Highway ended up going through.
My family had land seized during WWII to use for machine gun training. After that it was found to have "archeological value" and was then given to the state after they were done shooting up all the structures that were also of archeological value.
But the quarry company would get to pay a lot less in wages and benefits to have their product transported. One train per day, and only two people required to operate a train, no matter the capacity of the train. Versus a steady stream of trucks, limited to the gross vehicle weight permitted on the roads, and requiring one driver per truck.
I deal with Railroads and Right of Way issues on occasion with my job. Back in the days when railroads were just beginning, the people that owned them were some of the richest people in the country. They got all the laws written in their favor and most are still on the books. It is nearly impossible to ever fight a railroad company and win.
it is possible but you have to fight dirty, make your land unstable for the railroad, because at the end of the day they need firm land, if however you where to blast the ever living hell out of it and fill it back in it would take 10 years for it to be stable enough to safely support a train, thats the solution, same thing for roads, you find out they want it, you buy exposives and crater the part they want before the thing goes to court.
@@candle86 LOL. Just... No. Railroads go right through swamps. They go right over ravines. It doesn't take much to stabilize ground enough to where several feet of crusher run gravel supports rails and trains. The gravel spreads the weight. If the rails ever get to sagging, they simply bring in more gravel. If the ground simply won't support it, they drive piles down to solid ground and form the tracks over that. Same for roads. It doesn't take a lot to stabilize a road thickness-wise. Cut the bad spots out, bring in good soil or aggregate, treat the top 8 inches with lime or Portland, maybe some petromat on top of that, then asphalt or concrete as normal.
@@candle86 You aren't comprehending. You can't blast a hole big enough that they can't just build a truss and go over. They go straight across valleys hundreds of feet up. Your scenario doesn't work in any way, shape, or form except for that you get a visit from the ATF for the explosives, where you'd most likely get to be acquainted with your new boyfriend, Bubba, in prison.
Someone please tell me: When is the last time eminent domain was used against a major corporate property? How many roads did they carve through GM, Ford and Chrysler automotive factories, back in the day? Could you imagine if they tried to do this to an Amazon facility? CORPORATIONS OWN US!!
Historically a problem in GA, but some examples are much more egregious - like taking mobile homes "for a park" to ultimately build a fancy subdivision I also personally believe eminent domain should require 3x fair market value to protect from abuses.
I remember in the 1960s, friends of ours had a family dairy farm. It was confiscated for the Tocks Island Dam project. A dam that was never built. Of course no one ever got their property back. Most people can see that there can be circumstances requiring eminent domain for public purposes. But it should be used most sparingly. And the use of eminent domain to improve the profits of a private company is a travesty.
I'm 25 and I know about that project. I do have the theory about why people hate the government up near Walpack, and that's because the government did all that work, booted people out, only to find that the ground was too unstable for the dam. That project was beyond idiotic. All because a big flood happened in 1955 and the federal government made an impulse decision.
Theses things are often a trick just to take the states money. Promising jobs is one unkept promise. I wonder if the politicians are in on it. I remember DeLorean robbed Brittan. He had blackmailed Margaret Thatcher. What this nation has done to other 3rd world countries is unspeakable.
About 10 years ago, the state wanted to take about 40' along each side of a road that runs along 1 side of our property in order to widen the road and improve drainage. My wife and I, as well as all of the property owners along that stretch of road had no problem with selling those parcels because the road REALLY did need to be wider and, the land they wanted to take always flooded after even a light rainfall. With all that said, cases like this, where someone is trying to screw "the little guy", are the exact reason that IJ gets my monthly donation automatically! The magazine is just a nice bonus.
This happened to me in California many years ago. I had a small triplex and it was close to a much larger apartment complex. It was fortunately placed near a very nice area along the beach. However, the big apartment complex was going to go condo and they needed my land to fulfill a parking space requirement. I would not sell because they were offering me somewhere between 20 to 70% of its evaluation. The company came in and tried to file imminent domain immediately. When we arrived at the required initial meeting, I showed up with one lawyer and they showed up with six. In a very interesting turn of events, the judge pulled me aside and recommended that I work with them to settle or else they would eventually bankrupt me and take the land. The judge then pulled the other lead attorney aside and essentially told him to give me a compensatory.... I eventually had to settle, unfortunately it was for only 25% over evaluation.
We had similar advice from our county judge in an eminent domain easement taking by a power co. The land in question had no improvements, but we knew we wouldn't be able to raise our regular crops under their double sets of power poles, thus about 10 acres along the edge of the farm's property line would become a nightmare weed patch we'd have to manage forever. Sure enough we were right about the weed nightmare, but the 3 man appraisal group we hired to help us arrive at a settlement value didn't take into consideration that the inconvenience of dealing with those power poles would go on forever. The appraisers were leading local farmers who owned similar land, but all were in their 60s like my mom who was owner at the time. They were all thinking in terms of inconvenience during their lifetime and arrived at a number between 5 and 8K $. All the landowners that signed without contest received under $3K per mile. The compensation received for the 3/4 mile long strip 60 or 70 feet wide did nothing to compensate for inconvenience of subsequent owners, yet we've dealt with it 8 times as long as my mom did. When eminent domaine is used for easement alongside or through agricultural property the compensation should be an annual amount rather than a one-time sum. The power co should have paid as if they leased it from us. Their claim was that their easement didn't stop us from farming under the high power transmission line. It not only stopped us from raising crops, it caused us to hire a part-time employee to spray chemicals and maintain that strip of land for 35 yrs... and our progeny will have the same expense. Plus, the stray electricity for roughly 200 feet beyond their humming lines is stunted and suffers attack by insects that don't affect the remainder of crops outside their zone.
Should make it law, if they force you to sell, they have to give you some grandfather rights to any income they generate, and that is forever, something you can pass down, a form of compensation that has real effect, all too easy to play the financial game and wear you down, take your property by default.
Twenty years ago a company in Orlando Fl talked the county into obtaining a section of the county so they could develop it. Then they came to our county and induced our county to take a large portion of a previous development. After a bond was floated and the property was seized the company decided to bail out on the project. The county is now left with a huge parcel that is no longer producing tax revenue (which it had been) and a bond issue debt that keeps on growing and will bankrupt the county when in the future. They also bailed on the Orlando project.
In many cases a "developer" and/or the activity planned for also got TAX ABATEMENTS, again, for purposes of "economic re-development". Of course, some of the monies saved on taxes went into the pockets of the local politicians who brokered those "sweetheart deals".
@@selfdo they need to just ban giving companies tax abatements. It never turns out well. In Kelo, Pfeizer is the company that was supposed to benefit. They never built on the land. And they moved their only location in New London out, right before the tax abatement expired for their other building.
100% behind the land owners , the Sandersville railway is the richest railroad per mile in the United States ! It’s private owned by the Tarbutton family it hauls chalk kaolin to tennille Georgia where it’s given to the Norfolk Southern Railway , some goes to the port of Savannah Ga. To be exported other cars go throughout the United States to various manufacturers almost no product is made without this Kaolin! Very interesting ! I know this because I was a locomotive engineer with Norfolk Southern! Now retired
@@Greenkrieg They were nationalized in World War I. I suggest that you research how the nationalization of railroads during that time frame left their infrastructure. AmCrash is a nationalized passenger service. Have you seen how that money pit runs? Late, inefficient, and in the red year after year. I'm also against having more overpaid federal workers with federal benefits than we already have with a crappy federal work ethic.. One national railroad strike and freight service grinds to a halt as it has happened in Europe several times in the last several decades.
They might have NS use their "land grant" status to seize the land if Sandersville RR loses the case. NS, CSX, BNSF, UP all are covered under the RR Act of 1865 and have eminent domain by an act of Congress.
I still visit my childhood home - and I'm 67! I'll visit it on google maps and "walk" down the street if it's been a while and I can't physically get there. it gives me amazingly good memories that I love to ponder on. it was in a rural town and very little has changed. I often wished I could have bought it but life didn't go that way.
My grandparents placed all their money into building a dam it was taken over by the government by eminet domain It is now part of the TVA every time I get my electric bill it reminds me of what they did to my family
I heard a story about a man that put a lien on his property for the price he wanted for his land that the state was trying to take. Because the state didnt want to pay that amount he was able to keep his land. Maybe this is an option for these people. I don’t know how all that works but it worked for that person. It was an attorney that told me the story while discussing imminent domain. I don’t know the details but I’m sure the process could be figured out. ✌🏻
other side of the coin: there have been a few cases in my area where people found out the state was improving a road, and did things to inflate the value of property the improvements needed. in once case, a person bought a lot and threw up a house while the improvement was in the planning process, and then demanded top dollar for the house. in another case, a line of derelict houses all suddenly had new paint jobs. moral of the story is when it comes to eminent domain, the state's not always the only crook involved.
@@MonkeyJedi99same happened 20 years ago when the coal mine near us went in. They were building a rail to haul their coal to the main line. My grandparents and their neighbor to the east didn't sell because it was going to go right between their houses. The neighbors to the north didn't have a problem with it and sold 100' right-of-way on the south end of their property (just north of our north property line). Luckily they didn't try any imminent domain, just bought ground from those more willing to sell. Worked out good for me in the end because 5 years ago I was able to buy an old farm a mile to the west of my family ground. This couple had sold out and moved to another town. The RR cuts through the back field and most of the time my wife and I don't even notice it
My town has done Eminent Domain at least twice since I have been here. BOTH times nothing was built on the land and in 1 case the family's home was way undervalued. After the court case, they were forced to sell for even less than the offer.
This happened in NEPA, government wanted to build a dam, we lost farms and businesses and the dam was never built. Very sad to drive along the roads and see.
we have the right to property but can lose the property to imminent domain. we have the right to money but have to be able to prove the moneys innocence. the fact is you dont actually own anything unless daddy says its okay. at what point do we consider whats being done malicious?
I wish I hadn't noticed this video until after my next meeting was over. Now my blood pressure is through the roof, and I am upset at the thought of the government stealing land on behalf of private businesses!
I am on a local city council and we purchased 28 local houses to build a new development. We did not use imminent domain we negtiated with all of the homeowners a more than market value fair price for their home and all agreed to sell. It cost more but was satisfactory for all as the homeowners were more than fairly compensated.
One big problem with eminent domain is that it does not fairly compensate all who are involved. The retail present value of a property can be totally irrelevant. Also, taking your land will cause you to move, incurring costs, and can cause you to refinance with unfavorable terms! Meanwhile, any tenants on the property get nothing! This is obscene!
They did it to my grandfather. After 50 years, they decided the neighbors driveway was to close to the highway exit. They wanted to put there new driveway thru the middle of his back yard. They offered him peanuts for the land. He said no. After years of fighting it they took it, gave him a fraction of its value at the same time cutting the value of his land in half or more. Who wants to buy a property with a driveway running thru the middle of it. He owned it for 60 years. Lived there 85 years. They took out 3 maple trees worth more than what they gave him. One big oak tree worth alot to. They also took half his front yard to widen the street. Cut all the roots off one side of a mature black walnut tree as big around as a Volkswagen. Next big wind it fell down. They killed that tree and he got nothing for it.
Very sad for your innocent grandfather and the innocent trees. Trying to imagine the huge black walnut, what a terrible shame. All of those trees were part of a local ecosystem. Animals (visible to the eye) relied on them for food, as did smaller worthy creatures, enriching the soil, and providing food, themselves!
@@reginaschellhaas1395 a guy from the college up the road showed up to look at the walnut trees. He was about in tears. He said a tree that big was very very old. There was actually 2 trees on his land. One in front of the house, one on the back corner of the house. We used to give up, collect some of the nuts. My grandmother was a baking person. Walnuts was and still are very expensive. Black walnuts are a little different than reg walnuts like you buy in a store. There not as big and have a much better taste. The thing is they have a thick(1/4 inch) green cover on them. You gotta let it kinda rott off. It turns black. You take it off then, let the nuts dry. After they dry you can crack them open. She crack them open, bag up the nuts, freeze them. It was quite a process but with trees that big there had to be tens of thousands of nuts off each tree. We used to clean up the nuts,leaves,switches that fell in the fall. Take them out to the edge of his property and dump them. Little walnut trees grew there to. Watching these trees grow I know how long it takes. They grow very very slow. As time passes the same happens that happens every place nice. He and my grandmother died. My greedy uncle, instead of selling the land when he had chance,or letting family live there, he he'd out thinking someone would pay what he was told it was worth. He was told the land was worth $350,000. He had offers up to $325,000 and didn't even negotiate. He lived at home his whole life because he was visually impaired and had no understanding of how the world works. He let the land go for back taxes. My mother and her other brother got nothing. The developers came in cut the other walnut tree down along with 3 apple trees, crabapple trees, etc etc. The apple trees was not those ugly green apples you can't eat. They was the best apples you would ever have. Every year there was a lot of them. They cut the cherry tree down. The worse thing was the chestnut tree. Chestnut trees got wiped out of our country years ago by disease. This tree was huge. It dropped nuts every year. Lots of them. I have no idea how this tree didn't get it. If you look it up there was a blight came in on, take a guess, Chinese chestnut trees. The blight wiped out the chestnut trees in the US. It's actually a endangered species. Yet they cut it down without any hesitation or push back from anyone. The land now has a dentist office on it. No trees left.
@@waffalobill Well, you have ruined my day. I am so angry and disgusted at the terrible waste and destruction. Trees, back taxes, the whole situation. And I'm just a random stranger! I love black walnuts and realized they were expensive at the store due to processing costs. My mom used to make a delicious cake, containing black walnuts. A friend has a black walnut tree, and I have cracked a few. Had to hold them in a vise, hit with a hammer. Fine art woodworkers would pay well for black walnut, cherry. Not to mention the endangered chestnut. The Appalachian Mountains used to be covered with chestnut trees, which were a valuable food source . I don't think I've ever even seen one. Your story reminds me of a Joni Mitchell song: "They take paradise and put up a parking lot". Thank you for telling me about this.
@@reginaschellhaas1395 out back, where we used to dump the nuts , leaves, switches, more black walnut trees grew. There was dozens in verious stages of growth from saplings to one right behind our house was roughly 50 feet tall and about 15 inches in diameter. They clear cut everything, tore down 3 houses on my grandfather's land. His house was a big house sat right on the main road. Our driveway came up the edge of his property to 2 smaller houses out back. We lived in one, the other he rented out. We had a pear tree in our yard. Every year had big beautiful pears on it. Lilac bushes all over it. Grandmother and my mom had flowers all over the place. Its all gone. No idea why all the trees had to go. The small walnut trees was on the back side of the property . They didn't build anything there. Bet there's alot of hungry, mad squirrels. We wanted to buy the house we grew up in. They had the property split up for sale. But if any of the family tryed to buy any of it, we would have to pay all back taxes on the whole thing. We couldn't do it. They wanted ppl out so it could be built back up commercial property. That brings more tax money in. Most the neighbors sold out to. Those houses got torn down. So the road cut thru the middle of our land was only used a few years. Out of 8 houses only 2 are left. The guy who owned the 2 houses was holding out for more money. They was gonna build a big motel/resort. He figured they gotta pay him or no deal. They walked. Now he's got 2 land locked houses in a bad spot. Value plummeted. He passed away. His grand kids live there now.
@@waffalobill Again, I am so sorry! Pear trees sound yummy, the delightful scent of lilacs, the joy of the renewal of black walnuts, flowers too! Yes squirrels and other creatures, including humans, suffered, such a waste! My husband's family fared better In the mid 1960s, a portion of my husband's boyhood home, along the roadside, was claimed by eminent domain to widen the road. Sadly, the family knew they were going to lose some large maples, but keep some others. One day, the construction crew started to put heavy chains around two of the remaining trees, to use them as leverage to pull the other trees. They met the immovable force of my 5'1" MIL, who refused to allow them to damage the trees by dragging/wrapping chains over the bark, and pulling on the roots! She & FIL had attended the town meetings and knew their rights. Being forced to sell a strip of land was bad enough, but she wasn't legally required to let people damage the remaining trees. The stately trees stood tall and lovely for the next four and five decades. Out back, there were two or three huge willow trees. In the early 2000s, the largest came down in a microburst tornado, causing damage to the house. Insurance paid for cleanup and damages, fortunately. The willow had a six foot diameter! We have photos of my husband, standing upon it. I grew up near the NC/VA border. In the late 60s-early 70s, we had ice storms. The heavy ice would accumulate on our tall pine trees. The weight would cause them to snap, during the night. It sounded like gunshots. Fairly terrifying! Always seemed to happen when Dad was out of town, Mom, brother and I cowered in our beds, or together. After aging the wood, we burned the pine logs in our fireplace. Still, the pine cones provided food for the small forest creatures.
I live in a very small town of 500 people and there is a UP rail line that runs right through the middle of town that serves just one client: one of the state's biggest landfills. There are no other stops these trains make on this line as it goes through our town to any other businesses. What I have always wanted to see is a group of residents here start a petition to have this rail line moved to skirt the city instead of running right through it. Keep in mind that these trains can be quite long and run several times each day seven days a week and are double stacked with stinky, fuming containers. This landfill does take hazardous wastes so the fact that we are all breathing the fumes from these trains is a concern, as are spills in the event of a derailment.
I live in Georgia and I am 60 years old. In my life I have heard eminent domain several times. The biggest one in my city that I remember is they took a bunch of land from this man to build a water runoff Reservoir. And the reservoir never really worked. It was right behind the man’s house so until the man died, he had to look at that crap every day.
If you only need the spur once a day, then you haven't demonstrated that this spur is necessary. Right? I mean Let's say I could use eminent domain to seize your automobile. I'll fairly compensate you with the blue book value. I'm only gonna use the car to go to the post office once a day and the use of the car will benefit no one but myself. Why couldn't I go get my own car? why couldn't i find another means of transportation? Why do you have to be inconvenienced and bereft for my personal benefit? None of this makes sense to me.
My neighbor has had his commercial property taken by eminent domain twice. He operates an automotive repair shop. The first time the city built a 50 foot by 150 foot park which is nothing more than a yard space for the nextdoor homeless shelter. He relocated and erected a nice new metal pole building that was 60 foot by 100 foot. after 8 years the city took that property to build a parking lot for their transit authority. An empty parking lot. The entire transit authority carries about 300 passengers a day. Only a small number of them are park and ride passengers, most of whom utilize a different park and ride lot. Roughly 300 total passengers per day yet they have nearly that number of park and ride parking spaces. Their latest expansion is a new building, built again on eminent domain seized property, to house their spare and disused busses. This is all happening in an economicly depressed region of western Pennsylvania that has been experiencing a loss in population since the early 1970's. The city recently removed metered parking because it cost more to operate than it generated. Walgreens, RiteAid, and dollar general are the only new commercial construction that we've had in decades.
Crooked system! My grandparents owned a small three-story building on Pearl Street in Lower Manhattan. The Rockefellers wanted to put up an office tower. Of course, they used eminent domain to steal the land for a private enterprise and did not pay them for what the land was worth. I cringe when think how much that land is worth today.
Around my part of the states (Pa), years ago the railroads used eminent domain to take private lands to build spur lines. Now the railroads tracks are gone. Instead of giving the property back to the original owners the local governments made the lands into public hiking trails. Now instead of having a train going thru their backyards they have strangers walking thru.
Same thing happened in my town where a ConAgra factory pulled the eminent domain along with the city on a row of houses at the end of the same block as the factory. ConAgra won out, tore down the 5 houses, extended their fence and let weeds grow on those lots.
Here in Indiana the state was adding a 4 lane road. A group of doctors bought 5 acres that the state needed. They were open to sell the land to the state. However, they wanted to get about 5 times they paid for it. The purchase ended up going to court. I don’t remember the result but the group did not get what they wanted but the state spent more then they wanted. Who was greedier?
So you didn't know being politicians, doctors, judges, BANKERS, CEOs, cops, generals, lawyers, preachers, kings, queens, media, sales, etc.. are favorite jobs for narcissists/sociopaths/psychopaths that 💕 power and 💵💵, and 💕 to be admired and adored like GODS?? 😊😊
The fact that they already have a track in place, but they want a more direct route, by stealing land, helps no one but the corporation! It's GREED, Plain and simple!
It's not just trains running through, at some point the line will no longer be profitable and can be sold to another entity which mighty turn it to a walking trail. At that point you have strangers strolling through your property. Happened near my, where the tracks ran between lakefront houses and the lake.
Typically that means the state owned the land. Not the railroad. Usually the railroads will have an abandonment clause when dealing with private owners. Some railroads were built on public land and the state leased it to the railroad.
Happened where I used to live too. University through a park, ending at an old dump. SMH. So all those along the trail, had people walking into their backyards, trash, and people doing unmentionable acts in their yards.
@@dansanger5340 Not when it means people will be walking through your private property, possibly straying off the trail. Plus, if the railroad isn’t using it anymore, why wouldn’t you just give it back to the homeowners after the railroad returned the land to its original state? You took the land from them, you should give it back.
Several decades ago, when I was living in Ohio, there was a home owner that caught win of a project that was still in the planning stage. So he put his house on the market for about 3 times what it was worth. When the city was ready to start the project, they ended up having no option then to negotiate the purchase. The home owner got about twice what his property was actually worth, but since it was already on the market, the city had to enter into the purchase contract at the owner’s gain. The law was changed shortly thereafter.
Something similar happened in the UK years ago, a new reservoir meant flooding a village, so the company built a NEW village for the people a short way up the road. I guess they can't do that in the US since the country is so small.
What do you think of the situation of a county building a road across a property, then the town decides that there are now 2 distinct taxable parcels and charges the landowner $500 a year extra for the "additional" parcel?
I think its another perfect example of those whom were "elected" to represent us, instead viewing us as little more than "Tax Cattle", easy marks for the extraction of wealth they pursue in order to fund THEIR visions and agendas. We are little more than a means to an end for these despots. And they care little, if any, of who is crushed under heel in pursuit of that end
I'd guess the tax amount is directly proportional to the size of the plot.. so that'd be 2 charges of $250, one for each half-sized plot. I don't know the law though so maybe not, but this would make sense.
In 1968 my brother in laws parents had their home expropriated to build a road. They had to move (Luckily they were able to move to property they own in Muskoka and had recently retired) . Today in 2023 that road stops about a kilometer away and the land they owned has a bunch of mini mansions on it. If the family still owned that land it would be worth millions . In 1968 they probably got $50000 or so.
Something like this happened to me. I owned an auto repair shop in a city where the yuppie council felt "We have too many auto repair shops." The vacant corner lot we used for parking and better access was taken by the city; they blocked me from purchasing it with the "Best/highest use" language. They proceeded to build a so called pocket park which mainly got used by bums and substance abusers, with a row of tall shrubs placed specifically to conceal my business from public view. Only remaining access was a single driveway on the busy street with a deep gutter that cars and tow trucks bottomed out in. I have no doubt they will one day make both parcels available to a wealthy developer.
I thought for a minute that the Railroad may have been part of the larger company I worked for (Genesee & Wyoming of New York). They own and operate about 120 railroads, are the largest short-line operator in the U. S. Sandersville is not part of that, but a small, independent railroad.
They tried the Scooby Doo tricks of ghosts, vampires, and werewolves, and they would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for those meddling kids at IJ.
If they really wanted the owners to be able to basically still own the land. They could have offered handsome leasing terms for borrowing the land.... Also on a separate note but topic related I fear that if this couple prevails, and it's ruled in their favor that private corporations cannot do this... that the federal government will simply start to take land for whatever pennies on the dollar they choose to pay for it, then turn around and sell it for a profit to the private corporations. They will always find a loophole...
Best Buy Corporation in MN did this. The city took property from a car dealership and sold it to Best Buy. Eminent domain is heavily abused and needs to stop
Chicago did this to my family back in the 80s, they condemned it then tore it down and made it into a miniplaza/grocery store. It was a multi unit mixed used with store fronts and lot. They basically stole it from them and sold it to a well plugged developer who had ties to the politicians of that time. Im sure if i named a few people would remember them, at least one especially well known mayor.
I am in my 60's but I still remember the address of the house I grew up in. It was sold while I was in college. Can't remember the address of any other place I have lived in. Have trouble remembering floor plans, but my childhood home I can remember every detail of the house and yard.
Killdozer, same thing happened to that guy, but he wasnt even allowed to have his case heard. The state just forfeit his property because they were chasing dollars. Then during his rampage the governor wanted to order a missle strike, against the guy whose property he helped to steal. Calling it a conspiracy might be a bit far, but it certainly was a conspiracy of self interest to destroy a man after you see how closely everyone including the governor, judges, police and other local authorities were working together. One problem that is going to come up more and more as development expands, are interactions like these. So cases like this video can become a landmark in a way that can either help property owners be more secure from private interests, or less secure if the courts decide to further encroach into citizens long held understanding of what it means to own something.
Galveston used imminent domain to force a fishing company to sell along the galveston area gulf coast, so it could be developed into a restaurant, entertainment center.
There are government agencies, there is private property - and then there are railroads. Railroads are unique in that they have certain governmental privileges. As with utilities, they have the power of eminent domain - something not even Disney World has.
Railroads have the right to eminent domain and falls under interstate commerce. I'm sorry but without eminent domain this country would be a third world country. I train of 20 cars replaces 80 to 100 trucks. I understand the families frustration but just compensation when done fairly is a great way to get things done. I don't agree with it and in the end they will loose.
my grandparents property been in the family prior to this country travelling back there and standing on land that i had not visited in 30 years brought great mamories and brought tears to my eyes
My grandpa lost his home to a road built by the city. They gave him pennies thru Eminent Domain. Then private developers came in and built expensive homes along the road built by taxpayers.
I believe that Eminent Domain should be limited to public usage, never such outrageous behavior. „I can make money if I had that“ is never a valid argument. And even if it would benefit the public, it should be subject to strict guidelines. And a percentage of profits should be apportioned to the benefit of the people forced to give up the rights.
There were tw2o famous cases in Cincinnati area. The one was Rack Builders. They had land on the west side of Cinci when Cinci was cash-strapped. The city used eminent domain to take away the land from Rack Builders & awarded it another builder to develop into residential neighbor hoods (It was a lot of land). They lost. The other case was in Norwood where one owner refused to sell. The city was trying the same type of land grab, taking it to give a private developer. I think though, by that time, SCOTUS had ruled or changed opinions that offered more protection to the land owner. They won. Great video, Thank you!
I was always under the assumption that E.D. meant they had to pay the owners a fair market value for the property and condemnation would lower the value drastically so they could get it cheaply.
BNSF Railways has been doing it for years. They locals did not sell them land, they would get the land condemned, purchase it for much cheaper, then build there anyways. I heard of multiple occasions when I worked there as a dispatcher.
What some companies don't understand is this. If you had generations living in the same house. There are personal reminders. Like measuring the growth of a child on a doorway.
My grandma, grandpa, and uncle’s ashes are all buried on my grandparents’ property. They really loved that place. Per my grandma’s wishes when she passed, the property went to the local department of fish and wildlife conservation and while it stings to see all signs of people slowly get dismantled, it feels good. Bittersweet. She always cared about things like the wildlife. She wanted this. If anyone else were to come along to use that land for their private interests i’d be devastated. Not all the land in the world could replace where that house once stood and where they rest
That couple should 1) register as an historical site 2) file for homestead exemption with their secretary of state 3) sue the that company for elder abuse both in criminal and civil court
I live along the original land grant for the Northern Pacific Railroad, now BNSF Railway. There is a line in our property abstract that states the railroad has the right to take my property for any reason with compensation dated from the 1870's. There is no immediate possibility of this of this happening but it is an interesting thing I never expected.
