My Photo
Blog powered by Typepad

« Watch the Downing Street hearings, live! | Main | The campaign against the Sellwood WalMart is up and running »

June 16, 2005


Measure 37 claims...

I would think that the claim would only hold true if he were trying to build something there. It doesn't count if he's leasing the land to someone else for them to build there, does it?

I haven't read a whole lot on Measure 37, so I don't know all the ins and outs. But I thought it was if the owner was restricted in his use of the property or the property's fair market value was reduced.

I don't see not allowing a Wal-Mart there reducing the property value. And it wouldn't be restricting the owner's use-- he's not the one putting in the Wal-Mart.

There are lots of ways to fight it without even re-zoning the area. The city could pass a moritorium on all buildings over a certain square footage. They could pass a rule that allows more things to be considered when a business is coming in that is over a certain size (such as taking into consideration how it would hurt area businesses).

All of these items deal with the leasee, not the property owner, of where they want to place the Wal-Mart.

Costco is great. Wal-Mart blows.

I opine that to receive the credit loans from creditors you ought to present a good motivation. Nevertheless, one time I've got a short term loan, just because I wanted to buy a car.

I would love if something like this came to the Hartford area.Thanks for sharing!

The comments to this entry are closed.

Most Recent Photos

  • War_prez_prima_1
  • Bushvaca2nh
  • Dscn1145_2
  • Dscn1144_1
  • Dscn1144_4
  • Dscn1137_4
  • Dscn1137_3
  • Dscn1051
  • Dscn1046
  • Dscn0883_1
  • Dscn0881_1
  • 422d683505eb4821_1