So, if you value it so much, put up the money? San Francisco could have purchased the property for preservation. Evidently, it wasn't worth that. Needlessly i

So, if you value it so much, put up the money? San Francisco could have purchased the property for preservation. Evidently, it wasn't worth that. Needlessly infringing on private property rights is disgusting. If you want to preserve something, you should own it, or at least purchase some sort of right to keep the property preserved. Simply seizing that right, by force of government without payment, is at least unethical. I feel it is also unconstitutional, given that our constitution prevents the taking of property without compensation. In these cases, the property has to some degree been taken. Oh, we maintain the legal fiction that you still own it, but you can't actually do what you want with it.