Should we perform the mother of all civil dis?

[David]

eminent domain has broad based opposition.  so do taxes.  The property tax is enforced with liens, and outright siezure.  It is of course, very common.

[FTL_Ian]

Minimum wage just passed...

[Lloyd Danforth]

I guess you will have to let Mark go, now

[Dave Ridley]

min wage does lend itself to visible disobedience of the outlaw manicure type

one other thought I had...the analogy of a fire.    If our goal is to light a fire, we want to light a spark under some issue that will begin to burn easily, and will then catch the bigger kindling on fire, followed by the logs.

Ideally we might want the "logs" would be something important...not just rebellion on limited issue....

In other words what I'm saying is I think it would be better to have widespread rebellion over eminent domain or property taxes...rather than rebellion over a seatbelt law or manicuring regulation.   

Also:  Someone else had another suggestion for us as far as the issue to fight.  He thinks seving wine to a wounded iraq war vet, age 19 or 20, would be the best civil dis to wage in a big way.

[d_goddard]

I think it would be better to have widespread rebellion over eminent domain or property taxes...rather than rebellion over a seatbelt law or manicuring regulation.

A hell of a lot more likely, too.

serving wine to a wounded iraq war vet, age 19 or 20, would be the best civil dis to wage in a big way.

I like this idea. A lot.

* Requires only 1 person to put himself/herself on the line.

* Does not require waiting for bureaucracy to perform an injustice on their schedule.

* Does not require any 3rd parties (land owners, etc)

* Gets support from the left (drinking age) and the right (war vets)

* Has an easy legislative remedy (lower drinking age) that has more pro-freedom short- and intermediate-term steps that can easily follow, by creating a single, well-defined "age of consent" (instead of 16 for cigs, 18 for school, 21 to drink, that erodes the whole idea of "an adult who can make all his own decisions")

* Easy to make media-friendly. Easily filmable action at a pre-announced place-and-time (like Mike F.'s manicure)

* Easy for the average person to understand

* Hard to oppose, except on purely authotitarian grounds ("you must respect all and any laws!")

[penguins4me]

* Hard to oppose, except on purely authotitarian grounds ("you must respect all and any laws!")

You damned hippies!

[Dave Ridley]

More thoughts on this...

There is a family in Concord that is fighting an eminent domain case over a road.  We've almost ignored them.

Another thought....I'm wondering if there are enough eminent domain cases in NH for us to be able to find a good one that lends itself to our intervention.

I understand there are very few ED case per year here, and only some small percentage of those would want to engage in this kind of last ditch defense, only a few people are willing to fight.  Of those who are, many cases might be unsuitable for other reasons.

[Dave Ridley]

An old Monitor article about the Concord case

City may seize property
Landowners are still negotiating transfers

By SARAH LIEBOWITZ
Monitor staff
May 11. 2006 8:00AM

In order to build a road linking Clinton and Pleasant streets, the city of Concord could seize property from as many as six landowners if it can't negotiate transfers. City councilors authorized staff to use eminent domain as a last resort several years ago.

But before resorting to that, councilors need to approve the layout of the $6 million bypass, called Langley Parkway. Next month, councilors are scheduled to hold a public hearing on the final layout. The hearing will likely be the last public forum on the road plan, which will allow drivers coming from Interstate 89 to reach Concord Hospital without having to make an out-of-the-way loop from Clinton to Fruit Street. The city hopes to begin construction this summer but it must first obtain the right to cross several privately-owned pieces of land in the area. So far, the city has only secured the rights to cross state land off Clinton Street.

"By defining where the public right of way would occur, that would give us the authority to use eminent domain if necessary," said Roger Hawk, director of the city's community development department. "We're in negotiations with all the property owners right now, and they're all going reasonably well. But if push comes to shove,"the city will use eminent domain, Hawk said. "This is crucial."

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled last year that the city of New London, Conn., could seize homes for a commercial development that could boost the economy. That ruling led to angry outcries against excessive application of eminent domain. New Hampshire lawmakers have proposed amending the state constitution to limit the use of eminent domain.

Despite the controversy, eminent domain is a common tool, city officials said.
---ADVERTISEMENT---
   
"This is what eminent domain is for, in spite of all the attention it has gotten in the Connecticut case,"said Mayor Mike Donovan. "These negotiations have been going on in some cases for several years. It's time to move forward with the project, and if we haven't been able to negotiate, we have to do it."

Councilors have authorized the use of eminent domain for almost every major road and building project that requires property acquisition, city staff said. "It's more unusual to do a large public project without it," said Matt Walsh, the city's community development project manager.

But just because councilors authorize eminent domain doesn't necessarily mean it's used. Councilors approved the use of eminent domain for the $25 million public-private Capital Commons project, for example. But the city managed to negotiate property acquisitions in time. Martha Drukker, an associate engineer for the city, said she didn't think the city has ever used eminent domain to seize property.

For now, property owners are still negotiating with the city, which conducted independent appraisals of the properties.

Only one building - a 1933 Cape on Pleasant Street - stands in the road's path. Because the structure is listed on the National Register of Historic Places, the city can't demolish it. The homeowners, Morton and Carolyn Tuttle, have to decide whether they want a payment or to move with their house. Morton Tuttle wouldn't comment on the negotiations.

To build the bypass, the city also needs to cross portions of property owned by the Carmelite Monastery, Pleasant View Retirement Home, the Hitchcock Clinic, Concord Electric and RCH Properties.

"We have been in dialogue with the city all along, and we continue to be in dialogue with them," said Sister Claudette of the Carmelite Monastery, a religious community on Pleasant Street.

Several property owners have expressed opposition to the project. "It's going to totally change the ambience," Sister Claudette told the Monitor last summer. Last August, the Tuttles said they would fight the move. "I'm not going to somewhere I don't approve of, because the (new) lot is not anywhere close to the lot that we have now is worth," Carolyn Tuttle said.

If the city does seize property through eminent domain, property owners can still contest their compensation. If they believe their property is worth more than they receive, they can file an appeal with the New Hampshire Board of Tax and Land Appeals.

Acquiring the property - either through negotiations or right of way - will likely be the final hurdle to the construction of Langley Parkway. City officials have been pushing for the three-quarter-mile bypass for more than a decade. Concord Hospital, the city and St. Paul's School will equally divide the $6 million cost of the road.

In January, the city received the final permit needed to build the road. The permit followed years of legal appeals to stop the project; opponents protested that the project would cut into wildlife habitat and open space. Supporters argued the bypass would ease traffic and increase public safety by giving emergency vehicles an alternative route to the hospital.

The city has already received bids from construction companies for the project. Once the property acquisitions are settled, the city can decide on a contractor, Hawk said. "Assuming the council approves the layout next month, we expect to award bids shortly thereafter."

Clinton Street will undergo reconstruction this spring, a separate project that coincides with the bypass. City officials hope to begin work on the bypass after the Clinton Street overhaul and finish in 2008.

(Sarah Liebowitz can be reached at 224-5301, ext. 254, or by e-mail at sliebowitz@cmonitor.com.)

[Dave Ridley]

My read on this after reading even more articles about this case...the tuttles would almost certainly not be up for "the mother of all civil disobedience"   They are elderly, private and tired.

but I'm sure they'd welcome calls, and could give us suggesions how we could help.  I may give them a ring.

[Russell Kanning]

those city thugs are rotten

[d_goddard]

My read on this after reading even more articles about this case...the tuttles would almost certainly not be up for "the mother of all civil disobedience"   They are elderly, private and tired.

but I'm sure they'd welcome calls, and could give us suggesions how we could help.  I may give them a ring.

Did you ever speak to them?
They may not be up for "Civil Disobedience" but maybe they'd be up for friendly people with signs, LTEs, and dozens of well-wishers showing up to observe at bureaucrat meetings.

[Dave Ridley]

called them today , no answer