It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Philly man practices reverse Eminent Domain on city and they are PISSED!

page: 3
56
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 06:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Gridrebel
 


Great piece of research there. Shows what a bunch of hypocrites the city really is.


BTW, I found the reference to his being cited by the city for not taking care of that lot that he does not own several times.


And the situation is not without irony. Feibush says he received a citation in August 2011 from the city for litter on the same lot that the city now points out is not his property.

Yahoo News


Here's what Feibush finds funny about the situation: In the past few years, he's received three citations from the city fining him for not removing the snow from the sidewalk in front of this lot. Last August, he received a citation for the trash on the lot.

But he doesn't own the lot. He never did. And now that he's cleaned the lot, he's been threatened with legal action.

Philly.com



What I find really maddening about all this is that the property was owned by the REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY. Isn't it their responsibility to see that the properties under their care are rehabilitated in ways like Feibush did to this lot? :shk:




posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 06:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sparky63
His best bet would have been to sue the city and also sue the city officials individually. or at least name them in the primary suit.
We had to do this in Romeoville, Ill when the city refused to issue final building permits after we purchased property and paid for the permits. Once the suits were threatened against the city and we threatened to sue the officials personally, the permits were miraculously granted and all obstacles magically disappeared.
I think what this guy did was honorable, but it just wasn't wise considering the legal ramifications.


Agree, he should still sue based on the city's own ordinances it enforces on others. He has a lot of history and evidence to prove his case. It'll become a wash though, you don't sue me, I won't sue you type of thing. In a world of disregard and apathetic people, it's a shame to penalize someone who cares AND has the money to make a difference. I'd bet everything, if that were Bill Gates doing that, they wouldn't say a word against him. In fact, they would probably expand it and name it after him. Such a shame. They're destroying our real heros.
edit on 20-9-2012 by Gridrebel because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 06:53 PM
link   

it's a simple matter of trespassing.
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


If that's a simple matter of trespassing, I'm sure there are a lot of blight properties that would welcome this business man's trespassing. This is nothing but a way for the development authority to take advantage of someone's good deed and use a trespassing law to gain revenue. Any reasonable Judge should throw the trespassing suit out, and tell the authority they should be ashamed of themselves for something they should have done themselves to help beautify the city and make the property more attractive for investors.



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by FortAnthem
reply to post by Gridrebel
 


Great piece of research there. Shows what a bunch of hypocrites the city really is.


BTW, I found the reference to his being cited by the city for not taking care of that lot that he does not own several times.


And the situation is not without irony. Feibush says he received a citation in August 2011 from the city for litter on the same lot that the city now points out is not his property.

Yahoo News


Here's what Feibush finds funny about the situation: In the past few years, he's received three citations from the city fining him for not removing the snow from the sidewalk in front of this lot. Last August, he received a citation for the trash on the lot.

But he doesn't own the lot. He never did. And now that he's cleaned the lot, he's been threatened with legal action.

Philly.com



What I find really maddening about all this is that the property was owned by the REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY. Isn't it their responsibility to see that the properties under their care are rehabilitated in ways like Feibush did to this lot? :shk:



You know that saying "can't win for losing"???? This is a true smack yourself on the forehead moment.



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 06:58 PM
link   
So, would it be that difficult to contact the City of Philadelphia? I don't seem to find an email address but here is the contact info if anyone cares to make a call or write a letter:


Mayor's Office of Neighborhood Services Hotline
215-686-0000 Contact Us @ 1401 JFK Blvd. Rm 930
Philadelphia, Pa. 19102

If we all pull together for the underdog every time, we CAN make a difference.

I say...give 'em hell Harry!
edit on 20-9-2012 by Gridrebel because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 06:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by RealSpoke
He should have never admitted to doing it. They couldn't prove otherwise unless someone had him on video, which I doubt.


One of the articles mentioned that city reps stopped by hourly while the work was being done warning the workers to stop cleaning the lot.


After the city "ignored" this lot for decades, Feibush said he is surprised it has taken such an interest, even visiting the site hourly when his work crew cleaned up the property to tell them to stop.

ABC Philly

Its strange that the city suddenly took such interest only AFTER he began cleaning the lot. They were probably tipped off by the neighbors who feared "gentrification" (Drug dealers and thugs).

The city should be holding this guy up as an example of how people should take responsibility for their neighborhoods and step up to help out. Instead, they are threatening legal action.

Actions like this ensure that blighted areas will stay blighted and people won't dare to lift a finger to raise the standards in their neighborhood for fear of gubment persecution. Maybe the reason the world is going to hell in a hand-basket isn't because nobody cares, maybe its because they're all afraid to act for fear of being slapped down by big gubment.



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 08:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Sly1one
 

The City is the owner...

This is what is wrong with our whole country...

we are not even allowed to improve things in our towns and cities, partially because going on the property and doing anything means someone can sue the city if they get hurt.



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 11:20 PM
link   
Are the residents of the area really complaining over "gentrification?" So I suppose they would rather live amongst trash and debris that run the risk of the property values rising sometime in the future. It is just a horrible argument. All one needs to do is a thought-experiment that imagines if every neighborhood had that attitude. There are also health-risks associated with places like that, as well as the possibility of some kid getting hurt.

And the city is moronic as well. Maybe they just should have told him thank you. You know what I would like to see happen in court? I would like to see the city have to pay him for the clean up and renovations. THAT would be justice in this case, considering they shirked their responsibilities. I mean how hypocritical are they if they cite the guy for not shoveling a bit of snow, and citing him for trash on the city's own lot, when they are the ones with 40 tons of debris they won't clean up? I mean this is just facepalm territory. A time when one just looks at a situation and loses face in those who run our governments, from local all the way to the top. I am just mesmerized by the stupidity and lack of grace on the part of the city.



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 11:36 PM
link   
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


I find his business building quite unattractive and even perhaps a blight on the community. If he refuses to change it for me, I can go change it myself now? That is cool?



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 11:37 PM
link   
There is no excuse for not being able to establish the owner of the lot.

He just needed to go to his County Recorder's office. Property records are recorded and available to the public in every county/state.


Sorry, I don't feel sorry for him, he broke the law.

Oh, he also could have contacted a title agency and had a title report run on the property.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 12:01 AM
link   
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


This is the kind of idiocy we have running the governments of the world. Mankind is so screwed.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 12:05 AM
link   
I think one of the saddest things about this woeful tale of government idiocy is how unsurprised I am at the municipal reaction to common sense and old-fashioned citizen initiative.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 01:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Sly1one
 


thanks for your write up. off topic...
unfortunately ATS has no regard for their community regarding ads. the too left ad and right side bar ad are so grossly predictable and out of place it's gross.
best real estate given away to crappy user experience. good going guys...

on topic. our system really does want to make you vomit.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 01:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Sly1one
 


Hell, if anyone wants to come revamp my back patio to their liking...please be my guest.

Yea he was trespassing but screw the law okay? It was a dump and he fixed it, kudos to him and screw the city and the "law".



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 02:26 AM
link   
A typical case of upholding the letter of the law rather than the spirit of the law.
The city is cutting off their nose to spite their face so to speak.
This is a big problem in america today, people lack critical thinking skills. government employees are like trained monkeys they seem to have lost touch with their common sense and only know how to parrot the laws without ever stopping to see if the law makes sense or applies to each individual situation.
i guess the government doesn`t pay them to think so they lose the ability to think and use common sense.

When the SHTF people like that won`t survive because they have lost the ability to think, improvise and adapt to changing situations and circumstances.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 02:34 AM
link   
I couldn't resit. The earth, especially America, is full of downright idiots.


Some idiots logic:

You own land. Land gets messy. Nobody likes land.
Noble man grabs hard earned money. Throws down to clean up your land free of your expense. You sue them.


'Merica
edit on 21-9-2012 by Soulece because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 03:38 AM
link   
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


I am perplexed to say the least at the content of this story - others here have articulated perfectly the way I also feel about the situation. Do the right thing - get hammered by money hungry twits. I'm not even from your country but if a petition goes out to protect this individuals' good intentions then I will sign it - stinks of money hungry fat cats corrupting the system to their own advantage.

Here in Australia, a portion of all private and commercial property is council owned BUT must be maintained by the landowner - this portion extends from the front boundary to the road and is termed the "crossover" or verge. failure to maintain it to an expected standard results in the council doing so and sending you the bill - simple.

Is there some equivalent local law there where this could be further investigated to this individuals' advantage? Even from a health perspective the state of that block was high risk (rats, termite infestation, drug user needles, fire hazard due to overgrowth etc etc) this is just so wrong on so many levels

Scenario - if the block in question caught fire and destroyed this individuals property - where would the landowner of that filthy piece of land stand legally given no due regard was exercised to protect the interests of adjacent property owners?

.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 04:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Soulece
I couldn't resit. The earth, especially America, is full of downright idiots.


Some idiots logic:

You own land. Land gets messy. Nobody likes land.
Noble man grabs hard earned money. Throws down to clean up your land free of your expense. You sue them.


'Merica
edit on 21-9-2012 by Soulece because: (no reason given)


...and again, if I decide in my opinion your property is trash, I can rightfully alter it to my satisfaction?
I guess so much for property rights when you dont like the property?



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 04:33 AM
link   
You know, anyone who thinks this guy did something wrong is part of what is making this world just a little more miserable each day. Everyone recall this thread?

Man grows 1,360-acre forest in India

Funny how people generally praised him and good for that too. He saw a problem as well and just went ahead and fixed it. In the process he made something beautiful. Much like this man in the "City of Brotherly Love" isn't it? Not feeling very brotherly there recently, are they? For shame to Philly as a city and P.A. as a state for tolerating it.

People, including myself there on page 2, joked on that thread about what the U.S. would do to a guy like that here....the nerve of some people to actually make the world a better place. Truth is stranger AND worse than fiction at times.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 05:51 AM
link   
My guess is the city belatedly realized that by his taking action and taking care of business he now has a adverse possession claim on the lot. They may have to pay him to go away. Or he may be able to simply lay claim to the lot and the city might find itself sol at this point. They may wind up paying thousands in legal fees trying to get rid of this guy. Far more than what the lot is worth. He really needs to see a lawyer.

It may depend on what the local and state laws say about adverse possession. He may have squatter's rights now.

Also in ignoring him and his requests and claiming the city didn't own the property he may have enough proof to show the city abandoned the property. If he took the proper actions it could be his.
edit on 21-9-2012 by ntech because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
56
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join