Goats_vs_Aliens t1_j9nw1de wrote
So the city stole his property.
jttIII t1_j9pognf wrote
No... they didn't steal it, they just used their government influence to acquire the property without his consent and without arriving at an agreed upon value from the owner for their version of a "greater good". Maybe you should just be thankful our benevolent lords have a vision for that serfs former property.
Goats_vs_Aliens t1_j9s9ar0 wrote
Right? how dare I, and how dare he.
jttIII t1_j9v7028 wrote
Now you're getting it... kiss the ring and ask no questions.
ghenghis_could t1_j9ojhxy wrote
No, he failed to maintain it to safe standards and its being condemned and purchased by the city for fair market value.
mb10240 t1_j9pc7w2 wrote
There’s no safety issue, in spite of the word “condemn”. Condemnation is just the legal proceeding that is used to take property using the city’s right to eminent domain.
Renn_1996 t1_j9ptim6 wrote
The safety and insurance clames beg to differ. This building and operation has not been safe for a while.
mb10240 t1_j9pztel wrote
While there may very well be issues at the property, that has no bearing on whether it is being condemned. Condemnation is simply the name of the proceeding used to acquire property through the city’s eminent domain rights.
Own_Ear_7356toss t1_j9q5qj1 wrote
You should re read the whole story. Your remark demonstrates your clear ignorance of the facts.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments