Orlando City stadium construction thread

You should see what my oldest daughter (almost 9) can do on Minecraft in 45 minutes...

 

Mine is the same way - that and she junks up my Kindle with MLPFIM games

 

How sad is it that I know what MLPFIM stands for?

 

I think it means that we're great dads.

 

Hey we agree on something! He is definitely one of the best comedians in the last 20-30 years.

 

The following is probably the real reason why the stadium project was delayed.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...ando-miami-mls-dreams-20140425,0,4613904.post

It seems that Orlando is getting ready to build the more expensive $110 million version of the stadium if they manage to win the state aid.

 

I was under the impression they were prepared to upgrade to the higher price option throughout the design and build process.

Either way, cool.

 

Any chance that sunrail will be up at running on weekends for games at the new stadium?

 

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...occer-stadium-church-20140429,0,6821506.story

 

I hate that the article left out the fact that the City of Orlando had already offered to pay $1.5 million for the land, which is over twice the appraised value.

A lot of comments on the article are full of vitriol based on the fact that they think the city is refusing to offer anything more than the appraised value.

 

That's how it works now. Since a large majority of people don't bother researching, are very likely to react on the first news they hear, the best way to manipulate them is by telling them only parts of the truth. The parts that get the reaction. They didn't lie....right?

Kill all the lawyers? Nah...kill the media...then again most of them are lawyers now.

 

The thing about Kelo though is that it was about economic development as a public use, not blight reduction as a public use or "public purpose". While it might seem unsettling to most people, almost every neighborhood in the country can be argued to be blighted (soil in million dollar neighborhood is poor = neighborhood blighted) and even if your specific piece of property is not blighted it can still be taken as public use if the rest of the area is blighted. See e.g Berman v. Parker 348 U.S 26 (1954) (holding that while the owner's property was not blighted, the taking was justified under the overall purpose of blight reduction in the neighborhood). Unless Florida changed its blight statute after Kelo there is still a very good argument, and most likely winning argument, that the city could take the property for redevelopment by stating that the area is blighted.
My entire analysis could be wrong though because my Land Use final isn't until the 13th and I have Evidence, Estates and Trust, and Crim Pro before that so I have not studied those cases in a couple of weeks.

 

It's post sequences like this that keep me coming back to Big Soccer.

 

I'm not into gambling all that much, but I'll see your post sequence and raise you a Freddy Adu thread post sequence.

 

I can still understand people being upset about this. Eminent Domain pisses me off. I love soccer and all but I can definitely understand people being upset that he government is coming in and trying to forcefully take land that this church has rightfully owned for decades.

Just because we love soccer doesn't mean our rights trump the land owners. The amount being offered is really irrelevant as the current owners don't want to move or sell. That is there right to not want to do either. They are the ones that were approached and have every right to want more money than the land is worth.

 

Yea, nothing justifies the amount they're asking for. They're just greedy. Hard for me to feel any empathy for them when they pull this kind of stuff.

 

It is their way of saying "we have no interest in moving or selling. this is our land." How are they greedy when they aren't the ones that are trying to sell? Did they manipulate the county into picking that site for the stadium? They know they aren't going to get the 35 million or whatever. They don't want to sell that is why they are putting a crazy number on it.

 

Problem is they are willing to move. They're just greedy and want way more then they deserve. Orlando has been very patient with them and was willing to do anything within reason, but the church thought they where lowballing them. All this church cares about is the money.

 

I see the world completely differently than you do. The church has said this, "If negotiations break down, we ask that the city leave us alone" This isn't something someone says if they are all about money. They also said they had no interest in moving.

If someone is going about life just fine and then the city comes and says we want your land and we are going to take. The person being approached isn't the greedy one. The city is the greedy one trying to forcible take something that isn't' theirs. To say Orlando has been very patient while trying to take something that someone rightfully owns is crazy. The church doesn't want to sell or move so this is why they have set the ridiculous price that they know they aren't going to get. If the city came to get my land I would do the same thing. You know you are going to lose in the end and you absolutely should get way more than market value. You do realize that it is going to cost them money to move and rebuild.

 

At one point Orlando was going to fund their move and rebuild along with giving them 1.5 million, but the church wanted a lot more. I'll agree to disagree with ya.

 

So you don't think it is greedy to try to take something that isn't yours? Interesting outlook on life. It doesn't matter if they are offering money for it. The owners have no interest in moving or selling. I hope I never have to do business with you. I bet you would have a completely different outlook if this was you or had happened to you before.

Now they have to try to find a location that will work for all their members. It isn't as easy has close your doors, blink your eyes and then you magically have a new location in a place that is easily accessible for your members.

 

Eminent domain is an old idea that has gone to the supreme Court multiple times. This debate is a legitimate one that has caused the laws to shift over decades.

The fact is that American citizens do not own their land, in practice it's probably more accurate to say they are given a semi permanent lease by the federal government.

The current law of the land States that "public good" which as of recently includes economic benefits, is a reasonable justification to retake property.

Citizens are not all landowners living in isolation, they have responsibilities to each other and to the state along with their rights.

Our modern cities would be impossible without eminent domain. Without Robert Moses NYC would be a shell of it's current form.

And yet as Jane Jacobs showed, there is room for resistance and debate. For a discussion on what qualifies as reasonable seizure. A church? a park? a warehouse? a residential home?

What are you building? a stadium? a transit line? a factory? a highway?

There is a whole spectrum here, and dismissing eminent domain in its entirety is literally an uncivilized position.

 

Superb post. It's why I made Shakespearean wise ass comment about the media/lawyers.

In our world, because of these two entities performing in their current fashion, there is no middle ground/common sense allowed anymore. Laugh if you like, but that is the reality...and most don't even recognize the manipulation of themselves because they are "to smart" for it....just like a drug user. No, it won't happen to me because I am to smart. Yeah...that is the perfect patsy right there.

 

I don't think that's what is happening at all. The church was founded back in 1970 by a couple. The husband died a few years back and I think that the widow and the congregation are just incredibly attached to the church. As an evangelical Christian I don't really agree with them. Church is the people never the building or the land. So I think they are wrong but I would never dismiss them as greedy.

 

I agree that "dismissing eminent domain in its entirety" could cause problems, but this isn't what I was doing or the church is doing. I am very anti big government so you will never sway me into the eminent domain is for our betterment mindset. I don't think it is OK for Americans to just be paying for land for a "semi permanent lease by the federal government."

I should have never replied to the first post. Sorry for the off topic rants that have followed.