Flight 93 families ask Bush to OK land seizure

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Svonavec has rejected an offer of $250,000 from the federal government. It has also rejected an offer of $750,000 from the families.

Mike Svonavec has said the park service has not done enough to negotiate a deal, so for that reason it seems to me that Svonavec are willing to sell. Therefore, it's not so much about principle as it is about price.

The Svonavec property in question (273 acres of the proposed 2,200) contains most of the crash site itself. It is logical to assume that the crash site is integral to any memorial.

Svonavec is a quarry company. The area where the crash happened has been strip mined by Svonavec. However, this strip mining took place prior to the crash. At the time of the crash it had reverted to an area of meadows and trees. There appear to be no further plans for recovery of natural resources from this area - so I guess it is likely to remain fallow.

After rejection of the initial federal offer, the parks service initiated an appraisal. This appraisal, once complete, was rejected internally because it did not comply with federal standards (according to the parks service). A third appraisal was commissioned earlier this year and is due to be ready around January 5th. Svonavec appears to be saying that lack of publication of the 2nd appraisal is cause for concern.

It would be interesting to know what price was paid for the other (presumably similar) acres that have already been acquired by the parks service.

If it was significantly more pro rata that the $750,000 offered by the families, then Svonavec clearly have a legitimate grievance both about the price they have been offered and about potentially undue pressure being brought to bear.

If it was significantly less than the $750,000 (and there are no strategic plans for further strip mining or other use of what is currently dormant property), then Svonavec are clearly profiteering scumbags.

Hopefully we'll know which soon after January 5th. Whatever turns out to be the case, I hope a deal can be reached.

Either way, to mock the families of the dead with comments like...



...is quite disgusting IMO.

It may not be a nice thing to say, but it is accurate. I find their willingness to have the government steal from somebody else so they can have their memorial quite disgusting.

 

[xsited1]

It's wrong, but what can the average person do about it? Nothing. Take the "Kelo v. City of New London" case, for example. The government will do what they want and does not fear the people.

 

[Modbert]

this is not just ONE person, moron

I realize this but when one does life equal more then another life? Do a certain # of people need to die on your property to make it into a memorial? 10? 20? 1,000? The # on Flight 93?

 

[tigerbob]

Actually if the land has mining deposits the land owner may not be out of line Bob. Mines and land with mineral deposit resources are very profitable and valuable.

As I said...

If it was significantly less than the $750,000 (and there are no strategic plans for further strip mining or other use of what is currently dormant property), then Svonavec are clearly profiteering scumbags.

If there are mineral rights then Svonavec are entitled to be compensated commensurately. But as a mining company, one would have thought that they would taken advantage of such an opportunity, or at least have mentioned it to generate some positive PR.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

really? just the families want it?

It is the family that is willing to have the government steal from somebody else on their behalf.

 

[DiveCon]

It is the family that is willing to have the government steal from somebody else on their behalf.

i disagree with your generalization of this as "stealing"
i see it as the land owner trying to extort more money out of the tax payers

 

[WillowTree]

If Svonavec are demanding more than fair market value just because the plane crashed there, that is abhorrent.

sure it is. so the alternative is to tell them to take their property and shove it!

 

[tigerbob]

It may not be a nice thing to say, but it is accurate. I find their willingness to have the government steal from somebody else so they can have their memorial quite disgusting.

I don't think they view it in quite the black and white terms you do, nor indeed might you if you were in their position.

I think they are just desperate to try and break a logjam that to them is unfathomable and very distressing. I suspect they are taking DiveCon's view. The government buys it and pays them fair market value whether they like it or not. If the owners have entered into negotiations, it would seem that they are willing to sell.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

i disagree with your generalization of this as "stealing"
i see it as the land owner trying to extort more money out of the tax payers

It is the landowners private property, they can set the price at anything they want. Nobody is being forced to buy the land.

 

[tigerbob]

sure it is. so the alternative is to tell them to take their property and shove it!

Or consider it a clear example of eminent domain.

 

[WillowTree]

just build the memorial and all the parking lots around this little piece of property, it will devalue it more than anything else will. We had a local hospital who tried to buy up property around it for expansion and parking lots, everybody sold their property for profit but one homeowner held out for untold amounts, well the hospital refused to buy for that price but proceeded with the expansion and parking lots anyway. Ended up to be a sea of concrete right around this tiny little house. Most unpleasent scenery imaginable. so then the owners practically had to give it away. More n one way to skin a cat!

 

[DiveCon]

Or consider it a clear example of the proper use of eminent domain.

fixed

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I don't think they view it in quite the black and white terms you do, nor indeed might you if you were in their position.

I think they are just desperate to try and break a logjam that to them is unfathomable and very distressing. I suspect they are taking DiveCon's view. The government buys it and pays them fair market value whether they like it or not. If the owners have entered into negotiations, it would seem that they are willing to sell.

The government buying something for a "fair market value" against the owners wishes is stealing.

It certainly would seem that they are willing to sell, but the fact that they're not willing to budge on the price indicates that they don't necessarily want to sell. It being their private property, they don't have to sell at all if they don't wish to do so.

 

[tigerbob]

just build the memorial and all the parking lots around this little piece of property, it will devalue it more than anything else will. We had a local hospital who tried to buy up property around it for expansion and parking lots, everybody sold their property for profit but one homeowner held out for untold amounts, well the hospital refused to buy for that price but proceeded with the expansion and parking lots anyway. Ended up to be a sea of concrete right around this tiny little house. Most unpleasent scenery imaginable. so then the owners practically had to give it away. More n one way to skin a cat!

Difficult when the crash site is part of the property that can't be bought.

 

[WillowTree]

The government buying something for a "fair market value" against the owners wishes is stealing.

It certainly would seem that they are willing to sell, but the fact that they're not willing to budge on the price indicates that they don't necessarily want to sell. It being their private property, they don't have to sell at all if they don't wish to do so.

true, and what I'm saying is if National Parks would go ahead with their memorial on available land, including concessions and parking then the landowners would be shut out. Oh, and if legal I would make sure they never got a permit to build a memorial on the land they refuse to sell.

 

[WillowTree]

Difficult when the crash site is part of the property that can't be bought.

well, as someone pointed out. the WW 2 Memorial is not on the exact spot either.

 

[RodISHI]

As I said...



If there are mineral rights then Svonavec are entitled to be compensated commensurately. But as a mining company, one would have thought that they would taken advantage of such an opportunity, or at least have mentioned it to generate some positive PR.

It costs a small fortune to actually build a mining operation or even lot of time and a sizable amount of money. It took my husband and I several years and several hundred thousand dollars to build just the areas to prepare to mine an operation. Just because we did not sellout to a large company does not mean the mine was not very valuble. We used our own paid for equipment and time to establish the means to be able to facilitate a mining operation. A larger company came along later and told me it would have cost his company a million dollars to do the work we had already performed and even another million would not complete the operation he would establish at my mine site.

There is a case on the books in Idaho where DOT took a mans mining operation for an enlargement of the Interstate. The state ended up paying over five million for the theft of the man's operation. He won that case because they took away his property on an eminient domain claim. The state argued that they only took the property. Giving no regard to the man's livelyhood.

The facts are people should not have to fight over what property they already own for any reason.

 

[Modbert]

well, as someone pointed out. the WW 2 Memorial is not on the exact spot either.

For once Willow, we agree.

DC has still not answered my question on how many people have to die on his property before he's willing to agree it should be sold off at a "reasonable price" which is much lower then what it's actually worth and made into a memorial.

 

[DiveCon]

well, as someone pointed out. the WW 2 Memorial is not on the exact spot either.

but they DO have WWII and WWI memorials on the site
saying they have additional memorials on other sites does not mean the same thing

 

[DiveCon]

For once Willow, we agree.

DC has still not answered my question on how many people have to die on his property before he's willing to agree it should be sold off at a "reasonable price" which is much lower then what it's actually worth and made into a memorial.

i DID answer yoiu stupid fucking question asshole
you just didnt like the answer so you pretend i didnt answer