Florida's 'tin-can tourists' get $1 million offer

dawgfan · Post by **dawgfan** » January 2, 2007 6:45 pm

They looked a lot better as beer cans, maybe not

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16440697/?GT1=8921

flipflopgirl · Post by **flipflopgirl** » January 2, 2007 6:52 pm

WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! i'd sell!!!!!!!!

Crazy Navy Flyer · Post by **Crazy Navy Flyer** » January 2, 2007 7:39 pm

I saw that. They'll never find a location like that again, something to be said for it. And at that age some might say to hell with the million, too old to spend it anyway.

blackjacks wife · Post by **blackjacks wife** » January 2, 2007 10:22 pm

I'd certainly tell my folks to sell that real estate before emmident (sp?)domain took over....

~Hippolyte~ · Post by **~Hippolyte~** » January 2, 2007 10:49 pm

I was thinking sell untill I read the part about walking your dog in your pajamas....and the boat just a few feet away.

It'd be a hard decision, though it sounds like the local zoning may not permit the buyers to do what they want, so maybe they wouldn't buy....not yet anyway.

I wonder if they've got someone negotiating for more money if they do sell?? sounds like the developers stand to make plenty once it's done...not that getting it done won't cost them anything.

Skibo · Post by **Skibo** » January 3, 2007 9:22 am

If the developer is offering Fair Market Value or better to the trailer park, only a fool would refuse. Times they are a changin', money talks BS walks.

RinglingRingling · Post by **RinglingRingling** » January 3, 2007 9:44 am

blackjacks wife wrote:I'd certainly tell my folks to sell that real estate before emmident (sp?)domain took over....

Eminent domain is not for developers... it's for roads, bridges, and the like. I am sure that FL has passed a law or two defining it in the wake of the Supreme Court decision in CT. Condos and a hotel don't exactly meet the "enhanced public good" standard by any stretch of the imagination, and it isn't like there is a need for more condos and a hotel in the stretch from South Beach in Dade all the way up to Jupiter...

RinglingRingling · Post by **RinglingRingling** » January 3, 2007 9:46 am

Skibo wrote:If the developer is offering Fair Market Value or better to the trailer park, only a fool would refuse. Times they are a changin', money talks BS walks.

FMV doesn't cover the access to beach and IWW.. doesn't cover intangibles, etc.

screw the developers.

The Lost Manatee · Post by **The Lost Manatee** » January 3, 2007 2:46 pm

RinglingRingling wrote:
blackjacks wife wrote:I'd certainly tell my folks to sell that real estate before emmident (sp?)domain took over....
Eminent domain is not for developers... it's for roads, bridges, and the like. I am sure that FL has passed a law or two defining it in the wake of the Supreme Court decision in CT. Condos and a hotel don't exactly meet the "enhanced public good" standard by any stretch of the imagination, and it isn't like there is a need for more condos and a hotel in the stretch from South Beach in Dade all the way up to Jupiter...

While I would love to believe that this is the case, I'm not so sure since the argument is that the new development will enhance tax revenues and therefore is the best possible use for the land and will enhance the public good. See CT for details on how that works.

RinglingRingling · Post by **RinglingRingling** » January 3, 2007 2:50 pm

The Lost Manatee wrote:
RinglingRingling wrote:
blackjacks wife wrote:I'd certainly tell my folks to sell that real estate before emmident (sp?)domain took over....
Eminent domain is not for developers... it's for roads, bridges, and the like. I am sure that FL has passed a law or two defining it in the wake of the Supreme Court decision in CT. Condos and a hotel don't exactly meet the "enhanced public good" standard by any stretch of the imagination, and it isn't like there is a need for more condos and a hotel in the stretch from South Beach in Dade all the way up to Jupiter...
While I would love to believe that this is the case, I'm not so sure since the argument is that the new development will enhance tax revenues and therefore is the best possible use for the land and will enhance the public good. See CT for details on how that works.

I do hear you, but a lot of states and localities saw the backlash afterward. I'd like to think that FL was bright enough to do that. Now, granted, the best thing the scumba.. "developers" could do is buy it, grant the current occupants the right to live there until they all croak, and then come in and take it over.