Floridians say good bye to your property rights.

“Copy and paste from Neil Boortz's web page.

Print this out ... go warm up a cup of coffee .. then come back and read this. I'm furious. Frightened and furious. So mad, in fact, that I could literally spin around on my eyebrows and spit wooden nickels. You heard me talk about it yesterday. Hell ... you heard me rant about it yesterday, then finish with a promise that I would put my thoughts in the Nuze for you to do with as you please.

The issue? Two bills, essentially identical; one making its way through the Florida House, the other in the Florida Senate. The House bill is HB 1513, sponsored by Rep. Gayle Harrell, a Republican from the Stuart area. She's a former government school teacher. Her House office number is 850-488-8749. The Senate Bill is SB 2548, sponsored by Sen. Mike Bennett, another Republican. Bennett is from the Bradenton area. His Senate phone number is 850-487-5078.

OK .. so what's the big deal? Both HB1513 and SB2548 would give to local Florida governments the power to take property away from an individual landowner and sell it to a private developer for a shopping center, office development, or virtually any other private purpose. This legislation would allow any local government in Florida to seize private property and hand it over to a private developer for no other reason than to increase the amount of money the local government could get from that piece of property by way of real estate taxes. The government's responsibility to the land owner? To pay the owner a "fair" price. Fair .. as determined by the government. Isn't this just great? Two Republicans showing us all that the Republican Party is the party of freedom and property rights. And you wonder why I'm a Libertarian?

Back to your history books. Not the nonsensical dog dung they force on our government school students today, but the the straightforward world histories written by great men and women who weren't bound by the dictates of multi-culturalism and political correctness that pollutes virtually all of modern education. Look into a comprehensive history of this world and I will guarantee you that you will not find one society, one culture, one country based on economic and social freedom that did not guarantee the property rights of its citizens. Not one.

What good is the freedom to use your talents and your willingness to work hard to acquire wealth in the form of property if the government, on a whim, can simply seize that property from you with compensation that only a government bureaucrat would consider fair.

How many times have you looked at a piece of real property and thought to yourself, "Man, if I bought that property right now, and then sat on it for a few years, it could really be worth something!" Throughout our history many millions of Americans have taken that very thought and put it into action. First they dedicated their savings and no small amount of their future work effort to the purchase a piece of property. Then they sat back and waited to see just how much they can get for it five, ten, fifteen or twenty years hence.

Here's how it used to work. Here's how it's supposed to work. Let's say you're a developer. There's nothing wrong with being a developer. You probably bought your home from one. They're good for the economy, though they have to be watched like hawks. OK, you're a developer. You're driving through town and you see a few pieces of property that you think would make a dandy strip shopping center. You search the real estate records and get the names of the owners of each individual parcel of real estate in that block. You have an agent pay these people a visit. You make an offer to buy their property. The property owner can then do one of three things. He can sell at the price you offered. He can negotiate for a higher price, or he can simply tell you that he doesn't want to sell. If the owner doesn't want to sell you certainly can keep upping the offer .. so high, if you wish, that the owner's eyes are bugging out like a stomped-on bullfrog. But ... if the owner doesn't want to sell, at any price and under any circumstances, that's used to be the end of it. You, Mr. Developer, simply go out there and find another location for your strip mall. Maybe a location where people might be more eager to sell.

That's the way it used to be. That's not the way it is now. If this anti-property rights legislation becomes law in Florida the scenario will be quite different. The developer will discover a piece of property that he thinks would be a great site for a shopping center, an office development ... whatever. But, the developer does not go to the individual property owners to strike a deal. He knows that if he goes to the individual property owners they might drive the price way, way beyond what he is willing to pay. After all, what if the owner of that property has been hanging onto it for years so that he could make a big profit? What if that person bought that property 20 years ago just for this day? Just for the day that some developer would want it for a Wall-Mart, a McDonalds, or a big office park? Good grief! That greedy property owner is going to want a profit! A big one! The developer, certainly doesn't want to deal with him! No! Why deal with him when all the developer has to do is go visit his friendly local county commissioner or city councilmember instead! He knows that the politician remembers his generous campaign contributions during past elections, so he expects nothing less than open arms and full cooperation.

So the developer spins a yarn to the politician. Its a wonderful story ... a story about an expanded tax base and hundreds of jobs for his constituents. It's a story about additional property tax money that the politician can use to buy votes with various projects around town. It's a story about the politician's need for more money to spend versus a greedy private property owner who dared to actually believe that owning real estate actually meant something. It's a story the politician likes.

So ... the machinery of government is brought to bear. The property owner will soon come to a full understanding of the vital difference between himself and government. Government can use force to accomplish its goals, while he cannot. The developer has now managed to harness the government's unique asset, the ability to use force, to be used for his personal gain. The private property owner is helpless against the onslaught ... especially after the Harrell-Bennett Elimination of Individual Property Rights Act of 2004. The property is taken. It doesn't matter whether the property was just being held as an investment, or if it was a family home for generations past ... it's gone. All the property owner has left to do is to wait to find out what the government considers a "fair price" for his property to be. One thing is certain. The government will find that that property was worth far less to its original owner than the value placed on it by the developer.

How do politicians justify this? How can so many Republicans, who are supposed, after all, to be opposed to big government and always poised to rush to the defense of individuals threatened by government. Just listen to the statements of some of Florida's finest:

Senator Mike Bennett, the Senate sponsor, says that the bill is absolutely essential for some communities where thousands of individuals own small residential lots. Well isn't that a shame. All of those individuals actually buying residential lots, and then being stupid enough to believe that those lots would belong to them until they decided they wanted to sell ... so long as they paid their taxes, of course. The good Senator Bennett doesn't believe that an individual's property rights should be able to get in the way of some good local commercial development, now does he?

Then we have Terry Stewart. Stewart is the City Manager for Cape Coral. He's been in Tallahassee lobbying for the bill. He says that Cape Coral needs more commercial development, and the bill would help the city to accumulate the property it needs. The trouble, Mr. Stewart, is that the property already belongs to someone else. Damned inconvenient, isn't it, when property rights get in the way of your city management.

The Mayor of Cape Coral is Arnold Kempe. He says that eminent domain is the only way to assemble land. Hey, Mayor Kempe. Try buying it. Try giving the owners a good profit on their wise investment ... instead of trying to steal it from them.

One of my listeners immediately contacted his Florida legislators yesterday upon hearing this story on my show. He contacted Republican Representative Mike Fasano. Fasano is the House majority leader.

Here is what Phillip Weissburg wrote:

To: FASANO.MIKE.WEB
Subject: Senate Bill 2548
Palm Harbor, Florida

This bill is a clear attack on the rights of private property and I oppose this bill. You should NOT vote for it. Not if you want my vote again.

Phillip Weissburg
Palm Harbor


Apparently Florida House Majority Leader Mike Fasano didn't appreciate Weissburg's sentiments. Here is what he wrote back:

Phillip.
Thanks for your e-mail. First, I don't appreciate your threats. Second, I will consider your request and please don't e-mail me any further if you feel compelled to throw out threats with your vote.

Thanks and God Bless

Mike Fasano


What a guy! This constituent feels strongly enough about a bill to tell his representative that his vote is riding on the representatives stance on eminent domain abuse, and the representative acts as if his life has just been threatened! What arrogance!

These bills deserve to die. At a time when other states are actually acting to preserve the property rights of their citizens, these Florida legislators are acting to eviscerate property rights at every level. I'm led to understand that the Senate will be voting on SB 2548 today.

Tomorrow the politicians may be after a piece of property across town or down the street. The day after tomorrow it may be your property. Do you care enough about your property rights to make a call?”

“It's, uh, called expropriation. It can only be done with 'fair' restitution and , as usual, the devil is in the details (details = fair).”

“WTF, Hooter's needs those places to open new establishments.”

“Now Chili is a man with well established priorities.”

“I think B Bear was dealing with this same issue in his neighborhood a while back.
Big developers need love too! (Sarcasm)”

“They had a similar case here in Alabama last year. They wanted to put a Wal Mart supercenter in a location off the interstate. Lucky for the developers most of the land owners were african american and the real-estate had little to no value. They gave one family $40k for a house and the land. Sure the real-estate was only worth $40k because of it's location, but to this family the land and house were priceless. This was a house this elderly couple had built with their own hands. They planned on retiring there. There is absolutly no way they could buy anything equivalent for only $40k. But, that's not the point. They wouldn't have sold it for any price. They just wanted to live in peace i the house they had built together. Are you saying you're fine with the government saying a Wal Mart is more important then your personal rights and freedoms? The America I want to live in my freedom and rights are more important then a few dollars in taxes. IMHO there is no such thing as fair restitution when you are forced at gunpoint to sell what you do not want to sell.”

“Yeah, Lakewood Ohio went through the same thing. I can't believe those dumba$$es put those people into office in the first place.

I always thought governmental annexes were a shaft but this gives a whole new meaning to the word "molestation".”

“Wal-Mart has seven, (count them, SEVEN), lawsuits against the town where I live. They already have a mega-store in this town, but they want a mega-mega store on the other side of town. The city says no, because the zoning doesn't accomodate the super-mega-colossal store, but that doesn't satisfy Wally-World. They have way more money and time on their hands than our municipality, so they might win this one. Why anyone in this town would continue to patronize their stores is beyond me, when they are suing us and forcing us to waste our tax dollars on their fantasy. Wal-Mart is the second largest PAC in the USA.
People are willing to come to the mega-super-gargantuan store's defense because, in their minds any curtailment of their misguided efforts is going to "ruin our economy". Get used to it, or become active, now.”

“A while back, just a quick jount north of were I live resides the famous I-696 freeway. They had most of that thing built, except a little chunk in the middle that would tie the whole thing together. That freeway was choked for about 15 years, until the gubment stepped in and proclaimed "Emiminate Domain" and re-located the lot outta the way. The freeway took so long to complete, that the by the time everything was done and opened, the parts that had been in service had to be completly re-done due to use.

That case was in the the best interest of the coumminty, however. Much different than a situation where a developer can lobby yer ass off yer lot!”

“Boortz is a little hysterical and inaccurate. I have a study that was conducted several years back that shows that homes taken under eminent domain went for a higher price than those sold in a free market. So compensation isn’t low – in many cases its high. Property owners have full access to courts to determine a ‘fair’ price. In many states a jury sets the price. Juries may not know much about property valuation, but they have sympathy for the little guy fighting against the government – guess who benefits?

I personally know of speculators who were privately very pleased that a government wanted their land – they made a bad gamble and couldn’t sell their property for any price – the condemnation saved their butts. What they said in public is a different matter.

In may cases, a lone property owner can hold out for a price that makes the whole project unfeasible and the whole community loses out. Eminent domain is the only way to break a stalemate.

I’ve seen what happens to cities that can’t generate enough in property taxes to maintain infrastructure. Everyone loses out when that happens.

I can show you around a few beautiful neighborhoods that were dangerous slums in the recent past. Residents were provided with brand new homes in exchange for run down rat holes at no cost.


That said, there are numerous cases where the concept of ‘public good’ has become so convoluted that eminent domain is an abuse of state power. I’m not really sure where I would draw the line.”

“Violin has a point, but the little people that Deore talks about still get screwed. Sometimes people get to-gether and fight the big corps as a group until they give up because they realise that the negative publicity grief isn't worth it.

Gotta fight back.”

“"Are you saying you're fine with the government saying a Wal Mart is more important then your personal rights and freedoms?"

DeoreDX
08:47:23 AM
04/27/04

No, only Hooter's should be allowed to do that.”

“Personally I have no problems with the use of Eminent domain for public utility. I do have a problem with a large corporation using the eminent domain power to forcibly remove people from privatly owned lands for profit. When it comes to civil liberties and rights, as soon as you have to draw the line you've already lost your rights. I have 1.5 acres of land with a nice pond and lots of trees. They just built a new strip mall about 3/4 mile down from my house. Are you saying some large company has more right to my land then I do (even though I own it) because they can generate more tax revenue? Of course if they make a good offer I'd sell in a hearbeat. But, I find it disturbing that some large company thinks that my house would be a good place to put a TJMax or Comp USA there is nothing I can do to stop it even if I DIDN"T want to sell. Violin agreeing with evil large corporate Republican policies, who would have thunk it?”

“I think Violin is just talking about things he knows unemotionally and without judgement.

WalMart does suck.......the money out of an area.”