Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
10/20/2017 1:01:18 AM
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 9/9/2005 4:15:02 AM EDT
Unbelieveable.

WHEN IS SOMETHING GOING TO BE DONE ABOUT THIS TREND!?



Article linkey

-------------------

Mayor Bill White commandeered a vacant supermarket Thursday so it could be used as a central location for administering federal aid to Katrina evacuees in the area.

White had been involved in negotiations for several days with the owners of a large empty warehouse at 6059 South Loop East that once housed an Auchan supermarket.

The owner declined Wednesday to lease or rent the building as offices for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, prompting White's action.

FEMA officials have not said whether they will need the building, but White said he wanted to ensure it is available.

White said he was trying to think "two chess moves ahead" so the facility would be ready.

"The site may or may not be used," White said. "We need to make these services available so that when FEMA makes a decision, they'll have a central location."

FEMA usually administers federal assistance programs in a central location after a natural disaster. FEMA currently has offices for assistance at several large Houston shelters, such as the Reliant Astrodome complex and the George R. Brown Convention Center.

White took over the large warehouse, which could be used as a central place for Hurricane Katrina survivors to register for or pick up federal assistance. Federal programs range from debit cards and housing reimbursement to disaster unemployment insurance.

As reporters watched, White signed paperwork authorizing Houston's takeover of the building. He said the facility is needed to provide services to evacuees who aren't housed in shelters at the Reliant Complex or the George R. Brown facility.

City Attorney Arturo Michel said the mayor has the legal authority to take over private property during times of "public necessity."

Under the Texas Disaster Act — and an executive order signed by Gov. Rick Perry in 2002— the governor and mayors have the authority to "commandeer or use any private property" Michel said.

The city of Houston's emergency plan also empowers the mayor to utilize "the physical resources within the city, whether publicly or privately owned," Michel said.

The mayor's authority to take over a private property during any disaster also is established under common law, Michel said.

The warehouse has a huge parking lot, which would relieve pressure outside the existing large shelters, where evacuees are standing in long lines under the hot sun waiting to register for federal assistance.

"There are still evacuees that are in churches and houses and shelters all over this community," White said. "We want to have alternatives so that we can get people quickly out, with the ability to have a safety net financially."

The owner of the property will be fairly compensated, White said.

According to records of the Harris County Appraisal District, the warehouse is co-owned by Jay Michael Epstein, and Robert B. Sisson. Neither man could be reached for comment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------



I am so pissed. The Republic is truly dead. The sheeple have bred in significant numbers to follow their masters and do whatever thay so choose.



CMOS
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 4:17:18 AM EDT
This is happening quickly.
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 4:18:21 AM EDT
Eminent Domain.
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 4:22:58 AM EDT

Originally Posted By migradog:
Eminent Domain.


exactly, plus it's a frigging national emergency! c'mon guys, think about it! these are exceptional situations requiring exceptional TEMPORARY measures!!!
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 4:27:57 AM EDT
Anyone catch his name? Mayor WHITE?
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 4:32:43 AM EDT
Nothing at all to do with eminent domain. Part of the "emergency powers" most states recently passed while everyone was yawning. No "just compensation" either. Oh, and more to come, much more.
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 4:32:54 AM EDT
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 4:33:52 AM EDT

Executive orders will kill this country. Laws being made by the one person without any recourse against them.
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 4:34:27 AM EDT

Originally Posted By hardcorps1775:

Originally Posted By migradog:
Eminent Domain.


exactly, plus it's a frigging national emergency! c'mon guys, think about it! these are exceptional situations requiring exceptional TEMPORARY measures!!!



Uh, no it's not. The coastal areas of a couple of states, including towns both large and small, were flooded. This is definately a local emergency, perhaps even regional, but it's not a national emergency by any stretch. At least not yet. If seizures of property and confiscation of arms continue or expand in scope, it might escalate into one, but it's not there yet.

Can we agree to leave the hyperbole for the talking heads on the news channels?

Link Posted: 9/9/2005 4:36:04 AM EDT
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 4:38:18 AM EDT

Originally Posted By hardcorps1775:

Originally Posted By migradog:
Eminent Domain.


exactly, plus it's a frigging national emergency! c'mon guys, think about it! these are exceptional situations requiring exceptional TEMPORARY measures!!!



Ever hear of tents?

Seizing property is wrong. Period. It's one of the reasons our country was founded. And now, our own government is doing it against us.

"Benjamin Martin...Why would I trade 1 tyrannt 3000 miles away for 3000 tyrannts 1 mile away?"

Guess this is coming true, huh?
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 4:41:15 AM EDT

Originally Posted By hardcorps1775:

Originally Posted By migradog:
Eminent Domain.


exactly, plus it's a frigging national emergency! c'mon guys, think about it! these are exceptional situations requiring exceptional TEMPORARY measures!!!



BULL SHIT!
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 5:00:25 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 82ndAbn:
+1 for the mayor of Houston.




With respect, it's not the specific case that pisses me off. It's the TREND that concerns me.

What's next? Confiscating your home because some tree-hugger politician likes the trees in your yard???

CMOS
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 5:13:00 AM EDT
Mayor Bill White commandeered a vacant supermarket


VACANT


Link Posted: 9/9/2005 5:13:57 AM EDT
Hold on to your horses, because states rights are going take another blow very soon. I see the response to the bureaucratic disaster with Katrina heading in the wrong direction already as people start questioning states response vs. fed involvement. Eventually the fed will have complete control over the nation...scary.
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 5:17:34 AM EDT
All of you scream eminent domain, assuming some ulterior motive where the mayor will eventually profit from this move. But if you've seen that building, and that area, you can tell this is not the case. He's trying to make arrangements for the tens of thousands of people Houston has taken in. Maybe you should look into the FACTS before you take cover from the falling sky.
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 5:18:37 AM EDT

Originally Posted By ChiefPilot:

Originally Posted By hardcorps1775:

Originally Posted By migradog:
Eminent Domain.


exactly, plus it's a frigging national emergency! c'mon guys, think about it! these are exceptional situations requiring exceptional TEMPORARY measures!!!



Uh, no it's not. The coastal areas of a couple of states, including towns both large and small, were flooded. This is definately a local emergency, perhaps even regional, but it's not a national emergency by any stretch. At least not yet. If seizures of property and confiscation of arms continue or expand in scope, it might escalate into one, but it's not there yet.

Can we agree to leave the hyperbole for the talking heads on the news channels?




How many people did you guys inherit up there? I'd say the number Houston has taken in merits the term "emergency".
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 5:19:52 AM EDT
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 5:20:42 AM EDT

Originally Posted By hardcorps1775:

Originally Posted By migradog:
Eminent Domain.


exactly, plus it's a frigging national emergency! c'mon guys, think about it! these are exceptional situations requiring exceptional TEMPORARY measures!!!




Link Posted: 9/9/2005 5:22:53 AM EDT

Originally Posted By PinPointOne:
Mayor Bill White commandeered a vacant supermarket


VACANT






NEGATIVE.

A vacant large PRIVATELY OWNED BUILDING.

CMOS
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 5:28:30 AM EDT
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 5:29:10 AM EDT
If you lived in the city, wouldn't you rather have the "refugees" getting their $2000 dollar shopping sprees and wandering a nearby vacant building than coming to a bus parked in front of your house?
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 5:30:27 AM EDT

Originally Posted By ArmedAggie:
How many people did you guys inherit up there? I'd say the number Houston has taken in merits the term "emergency".



It's not a national emergency. At this point, as I said, it's a regional emergency at best.

BTW, the number the local news in St. Paul is reporting is 5,000 "displaced citizens" will be relocating here from the Gulf area. I can't see that number remaining through the two or three weeks of sub-zero cold we get in January or February.

Link Posted: 9/9/2005 5:32:35 AM EDT

Originally Posted By lippo:

Originally Posted By hardcorps1775:

Originally Posted By migradog:
Eminent Domain.


exactly, plus it's a frigging national emergency! c'mon guys, think about it! these are exceptional situations requiring exceptional TEMPORARY measures!!!



Ever hear of tents?

Seizing property is wrong. Period. It's one of the reasons our country was founded. And now, our own government is doing it against us.

"Benjamin Martin...Why would I trade 1 tyrannt 3000 miles away for 3000 tyrannts 1 mile away?"

Guess this is coming true, huh?




You know deep down it's true. When I first heard the line I smiled a little and thought "good point".
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 5:35:46 AM EDT

Originally Posted By ChiefPilot:

Originally Posted By ArmedAggie:
How many people did you guys inherit up there? I'd say the number Houston has taken in merits the term "emergency".



It's not a national emergency. At this point, as I said, it's a regional emergency at best.

BTW, the number the local news in St. Paul is reporting is 5,000 "displaced citizens" will be relocating here from the Gulf area. I can't see that number remaining through the two or three weeks of sub-zero cold we get in January or February.




So where would you propose we house these people? You know you're not getting them (they will stay here) long term so you don't give a damn. I don't think you have a grasp on how many we inherited. WHat are they supposed to do? I'm not saying it is the right thing to do unless it is short-term and the owners are compensated. I bet you'd have a lot less heartburn with it if the alternative was to ship them up to you.
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 5:36:36 AM EDT

Originally Posted By ChiefPilot:

Originally Posted By ArmedAggie:
How many people did you guys inherit up there? I'd say the number Houston has taken in merits the term "emergency".



It's not a national emergency. At this point, as I said, it's a regional emergency at best.

BTW, the number the local news in St. Paul is reporting is 5,000 "displaced citizens" will be relocating here from the Gulf area. I can't see that number remaining through the two or three weeks of sub-zero cold we get in January or February.




They are declaring "State of Emergency" almost anywhere they send large numbers of these people. Those declarations put in motion things we all probably not believe living 700 miles from the area hit. Lot's of local officials are getting to play boy-king and some seem to like the fit of the new robe.
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 5:36:41 AM EDT
What is the basis for the legality of an 'Executive Order', anyone?
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 5:36:51 AM EDT
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 5:43:44 AM EDT

Originally Posted By ArmedAggie:
So where would you propose we house these people? You know you're not getting them (they will stay here) long term so you don't give a damn. I don't think you have a grasp on how many we inherited. WHat are they supposed to do? I'm not saying it is the right thing to do unless it is short-term and the owners are compensated. I bet you'd have a lot less heartburn with it if the alternative was to ship them up to you.



Sigh...I never said it wasn't an emergency, only that it wasn't a national emergency. Get it? Go back and re-read the thread.

And it's not that I don't "give a damn", because with parts of my family down there that is simply not the case. However, I stand by what I said earlier - this is not a national emergency at this point in time.
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 5:45:04 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 82ndAbn:


I'm against nearly 99% of all ED type seizures but my guess is the owner of the vacant (non-revenue producing) property envisioned a huge federal payoff in the midst of the billions being tossed around under this relief umbrella. I'd put my bet on the notion of greed from the landlord - not governmental tyranny.




That is was the great thing about private property. I can be greedy with it if I want. I have a preban NIB AR. You want it? $2500 + shipping. Too high? Don't buy it. I can build a nice, second house and tear it down if front of a group of homeless and laugh about it later at the country club. I wouldn't do it (because I believe it would be wrong), but the .gov shouldn't be able to say, "Wow, you have this empty house! We are going to take it and put who we want into it.


Link Posted: 9/9/2005 5:45:42 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Grunteled:
They are declaring "State of Emergency" almost anywhere they send large numbers of these people. Those declarations put in motion things we all probably not believe living 700 miles from the area hit. Lot's of local officials are getting to play boy-king and some seem to like the fit of the new robe.



Yup. If the trend continues and more and more officials like the fit of their newly acquired robes and the powers they are granted, then it could escalate into something far more serious than where to house the refugees (and the crime that seems to accompany them).
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 5:48:39 AM EDT
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 5:51:37 AM EDT
How about ED on the Mayor's house?
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 5:54:33 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/9/2005 5:55:52 AM EDT by hardcorps1775]
hahahaha fuck you!

i'm as anti-govt as the next guy, even more so cuz i actually know how it works, but all these states involved in the refugee situation have been declared nat'l disaster areas. i'm willing to give them SOME leeway to deal with the situation as they deem necessary. seizing a vacant bldg, AFTER THEY ASKED AND WERE REFUSED PERMISSION BY THE OWNER, to house emergency services to deal with the situation is incredibly minor in my eyes!

this incident is a non-starter to me compared with the firearms seizures going on in nola...


Originally Posted By fight4yourrights:

Originally Posted By hardcorps1775:

Originally Posted By migradog:
Eminent Domain.


exactly, plus it's a frigging national emergency! c'mon guys, think about it! these are exceptional situations requiring exceptional TEMPORARY measures!!!




Link Posted: 9/9/2005 5:55:59 AM EDT
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 6:14:09 AM EDT
"They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British NATIONAL guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston New Orleans! The war is inevitable--and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come."

Gee, I guess history *does* have a habit of repeating itself.
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 8:43:02 AM EDT
as good a quote as that is, it's apples and oranges, totally irrelevant to this situation. that was americans fighting for their independence from the british. this is an american mayor responding to a natural disaster to help other americans by seizing VACANT property from other americans (epstein and sisson) who were apparently too selfish to agree to let him use it. the mayor also said they'd be fairly compensated. also, right now it's a contingency plan IN CASE it has to be used.
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 8:48:20 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 82ndAbn:

Originally Posted By CMOS:

Originally Posted By 82ndAbn:
+1 for the mayor of Houston.




With respect, it's not the specific case that pisses me off. It's the TREND that concerns me.

What's next? Confiscating your home because some tree-hugger politician likes the trees in your yard???

CMOS



I'm against nearly 99% of all ED type seizures but my guess is the owner of the vacant (non-revenue producing) property envisioned a huge federal payoff in the midst of the billions being tossed around under this relief umbrella. I'd put my bet on the notion of greed from the landlord - not governmental tyranny.



Maybe he doesn't want a toxic cleanup and HUGE headache on his hands. Oh well. His concerns are meaningless. The government will allow his place to be trashed for him.
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 9:16:26 AM EDT

the mayor also said they'd be fairly compensated.



"Fairly cpmpensated" by who's standard?


It's STILL private property. The OWNER has a right to that choice.

Think there's a possbility that he didn't want his building getting trashed by the greateful refugees?

CMOS
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 9:59:09 AM EDT

Originally Posted By hardcorps1775:
as good a quote as that is, it's apples and oranges, totally irrelevant to this situation. that was americans fighting for their independence from the british. this is an american mayor responding to a natural disaster to help other americans by seizing VACANT property from other americans (epstein and sisson) who were apparently too selfish to agree to let him use it. the mayor also said they'd be fairly compensated. also, right now it's a contingency plan IN CASE it has to be used.



Well, I trotted it out for the genaral appropriateness of everything we've seen in NO over the last several days, including the gun confisaction. Think globally and all that

You could use the "too selfish" argument any time a person doesn't want to let the .gov have their property.

At some point in the future, it will once again be American Patriots fighting for thier independence from their own government...it won't be the Brits they're shooting at this time, although that Union Jack you're sporting is a VERY tempting target

(dude, that last part's a JOKE...don't take it seriously)

I'm 53...the America I grew up in is gone already...and within 20 years, what we have NOW will be gone too. Hopefully, I'm wrong...but nothing I've seen happen in the last weeks and months (SCOTUS decisions on interstate commerce and eminent domain, and local .gov shenanigans in NO) leads me to believe that I am. I fear that the real reason our Founding Fathers gave us the 2nd amendment is soon to be upon us, if it isn't already.

Now, I'm sure you'll accuse me of needing to loosen my tinfoil hat...that's okay...I don't WANT to be right about all of this.
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 10:36:49 AM EDT

Originally Posted By migradog:
Eminent Domain.



Eminent Domain requires a court order.
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 10:44:56 AM EDT
This is a good idea, in fact, why not just put the people up in vacant houses, apartments, people's cabins and where ever else they want to take. How about empty rooms in people's houses? They should sieze those too.
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 10:52:16 AM EDT
Is it OK for them to seize my property (AR) as long as it is vacant (unloaded)?

Seriously, I do not see much difference in seizing my house or my firearms.

Seydou
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 10:52:41 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 82ndAbn:

Originally Posted By CMOS:

Originally Posted By 82ndAbn:
+1 for the mayor of Houston.




With respect, it's not the specific case that pisses me off. It's the TREND that concerns me.

What's next? Confiscating your home because some tree-hugger politician likes the trees in your yard???

CMOS



I'm against nearly 99% of all ED type seizures but my guess is the owner of the vacant (non-revenue producing) property envisioned a huge federal payoff in the midst of the billions being tossed around under this relief umbrella. I'd put my bet on the notion of greed from the landlord - not governmental tyranny.



So what, it's still HIS PROPERTY !!
Like there aren't countless govt. and community buildings that could serve this purpose.
It's pure BULLSHIT !!
Here's what really happened......The mayor contacted this individual and tried to lease this property. The individual, for whatever reason, didn't want to lease it out. THAT"S HIS RIGHT btw....
The mayor then decided to show this peasant who's boss and STOLE his property.
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 11:12:16 AM EDT
So, why haven't they siezed John Kerry's or Teddy Kennedy's vacation houses?
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 11:23:58 AM EDT
LOOTER
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 11:32:50 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/9/2005 11:34:58 AM EDT by Merrell]

Originally Posted By Blued-Steel:
How about ED on the Mayor's house?




+1



Portrait of a thief:


Doesn't matter if it's a shithole or the Taj Mahal, it's NOT HIS PROPERTY.


May his campaign go down in flames.



(edit: btw, we've had a Democrat mayor up here trying to muscle property out of the hands of private owners for years - his efforts have wound up trashing the city's credit rating)
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 11:35:39 AM EDT
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 11:45:02 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/9/2005 11:50:31 AM EDT by danno-in-michigan]
I call BS (on the legality of his actions). Most state laws give the governor certain powers during an emergency but I doubt a mayor has the authority to confiscate property. Anyone know Texas law?

Never mind, I looked it up. Here's the executive order: LINK
Here's the relevant portion:

The mayor of each municipal corporation and the county judge of each county in the state shall be designated as the Emergency Management Director for each such political subdivision in accordance with Sections 418.102, 418.103, and 418.105 of the Act, and published rules of the Division of Emergency Management. These mayors and county judges shall serve as the Governor's designated agents in the administration and supervision of the Act, and may exercise the powers, on an appropriate local scale, granted the Governor therein. Each mayor and county judge may designate an Emergency Management Coordinator who shall serve as assistant to the presiding officer of the political subdivision for emergency management purposes when so designated.

Link Posted: 9/9/2005 11:48:13 AM EDT

Originally Posted By migradog:
Eminent Domain.



Yup and I actually agree with it for once. Only because it is being done because of an emergancy situation, and the building is not being used anyway. Since it's temporary, if it even gets used, not a problem.
Link Posted: 9/9/2005 12:05:40 PM EDT
What could possibly be a more acceptable use of ED than to house people who were just evacuated from a disaster zone?

Maybe you just don't agree that government should have that power, but its explicitly granted in the Constitution. Can you think of anything else explicitly granted in the Constitution that some people have a problem with?

And whoever said that they won't compensate this guy for comandeering the supermarket -- regardless of what executive order or state law they are using, it can not cancel his constitutional right to receive just compensation. They will pay him some kind of rent (certainly more than he's getting on a vacant building).

Want to take someone's house to build an office building? F*** you. Want to take someone's empty supermarket to house evacuees? Go for it.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top