5 ms·

I don’t think he said they shouldn’t get paid. He is just saying that sometimes the best solution/route is over private property where the owner gets paid.

donkeyd 3y ago
Correct. It's also not just about the money, it also takes a lot of time and adds a large amount of uncertainty to a project. Not every owner is willing to comply, causing an entire route to have to be reconsidered, which takes a lot of time. Eminent domain is pretty much never used, because judges (in my country) will pretty much always side with the property owner, unless the utility can proof that there's really no other way (which they almost never can). So on a 10km+ route with hundreds of properties, multiple municipalities or other public organizations and other utilities, this gets really complicated really quickly.
- cmmeur01 3y ago
  Eminent domain being “pretty much never used” is a bold face lie in the US. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/local/2023/04/04/bullitt-county-judge-rules-against-bernheim-in-lge-pipeline-case/70080827007/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/local/2023/04/04/bullitt... Here’s a story from this week where a gas company took land from a forest to build a pipeline that the previous and current landowners had no interest in selling to the gas company.
  - donkeyd 3y ago
    I'm not in the US, hence me explicitly writing 'in my country', because I'm aware that more countries exist and that things aren't the same everywhere.
  - markdown 3y ago
    That's so bizarre. In my country only the government can force you to sell them your land under eminent domain. Insane that in the US, companies can use eminent domain as well.
    - 1123581321 3y ago
      Much of the activity stems from a disastrous Supreme Court ruling a couple decades ago. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_London https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_London A lot of farmland and lovely homes have been unprotected since. Many Americans wish for this case to be revisited (if they know about the case.)
      - ghaff 3y ago
        While Kelo was IMO a bad decision, it's also not the case that eminent domain is routinely exercised at low cost and effort in the US. Private property owners routinely block many types of development on their land and adjoining land. People like to decry NIMBYism all the time. I suspect building an interstate highway system in the US today would be effectively impossible. ADDED: And, in general, exercising eminent domain should be hard. One can simultaneously believe it should exist and have a lot of safeguards against exercising it.
        eppp 3y ago
        Eminent domain for a public road is one thing. Forcibly taking land for a private company to make profits on is entirely different and not comparable. That is the part I object to the most.
        markdown 3y ago
        > I suspect building an interstate highway system in the US today would be effectively impossible. The government should be able to take whatever land it needs for a highway, railway, etc. When we're talking about public infrastructure, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one landowner.
eppp 3y ago
Perhaps the reward isn't enough if it is that difficult to get permission. Landowners near me compete for cell tower leases because it is absolutely worth it. I suspect profit sharing on the electricity sold through the line would grease the wheels a bit.
- epistasis 3y ago
  Perhaps landowners have unreasonable negotiating leverage when a small number who have little to gain or lose can stop a project that is worth billions to society as a whole. If you need to get permission of thousands of people, and any single one can hold up the entire endeavor, then the economically rational thing to do is to be the last holdout, as you will get paid a lot more. Everybody loses in that scenario except the holdout.
  - MichaelZuo 3y ago
    Negotiations can be done en bloc but the downside is that it may take decades to do anything big.
    - biomcgary 3y ago
      In the US, class action lawsuits allow multiple entities to be rolled into a class to sue another party. Is there an equivalent in the other direction (i.e., could a utility company roll everyone into class)? I see lots of possible problems (i.e., class participation allows opt-out).
      - mindslight 3y ago
        The dynamic of class action lawsuits isn't about the quantity of class members, but rather that they're unenumerable. As such they don't really make sense to apply to defendants, and would have terrible results if they were. A plain old suit with many enumerated defendants would work for this topic though, assuming there was a cause of action.
  - eppp 3y ago

donkeyd 3y ago

Correct. It's also not just about the money, it also takes a lot of time and adds a large amount of uncertainty to a project. Not every owner is willing to comply, causing an entire route to have to be reconsidered, which takes a lot of time. Eminent domain is pretty much never used, because judges (in my country) will pretty much always side with the property owner, unless the utility can proof that there's really no other way (which they almost never can). So on a 10km+ route with hundreds of properties, multiple municipalities or other public organizations and other utilities, this gets really complicated really quickly.

cmmeur01 3y ago
Eminent domain being “pretty much never used” is a bold face lie in the US. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/local/2023/04/04/bullitt-county-judge-rules-against-bernheim-in-lge-pipeline-case/70080827007/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/local/2023/04/04/bullitt... Here’s a story from this week where a gas company took land from a forest to build a pipeline that the previous and current landowners had no interest in selling to the gas company.
- donkeyd 3y ago
  I'm not in the US, hence me explicitly writing 'in my country', because I'm aware that more countries exist and that things aren't the same everywhere.
- markdown 3y ago
  That's so bizarre. In my country only the government can force you to sell them your land under eminent domain. Insane that in the US, companies can use eminent domain as well.
  - 1123581321 3y ago
    Much of the activity stems from a disastrous Supreme Court ruling a couple decades ago. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_London https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_London A lot of farmland and lovely homes have been unprotected since. Many Americans wish for this case to be revisited (if they know about the case.)
    - ghaff 3y ago
      While Kelo was IMO a bad decision, it's also not the case that eminent domain is routinely exercised at low cost and effort in the US. Private property owners routinely block many types of development on their land and adjoining land. People like to decry NIMBYism all the time. I suspect building an interstate highway system in the US today would be effectively impossible. ADDED: And, in general, exercising eminent domain should be hard. One can simultaneously believe it should exist and have a lot of safeguards against exercising it.
      - eppp 3y ago
        Eminent domain for a public road is one thing. Forcibly taking land for a private company to make profits on is entirely different and not comparable. That is the part I object to the most.
      - markdown 3y ago
        > I suspect building an interstate highway system in the US today would be effectively impossible. The government should be able to take whatever land it needs for a highway, railway, etc. When we're talking about public infrastructure, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one landowner.

eppp 3y ago

Perhaps the reward isn't enough if it is that difficult to get permission. Landowners near me compete for cell tower leases because it is absolutely worth it. I suspect profit sharing on the electricity sold through the line would grease the wheels a bit.

epistasis 3y ago
Perhaps landowners have unreasonable negotiating leverage when a small number who have little to gain or lose can stop a project that is worth billions to society as a whole. If you need to get permission of thousands of people, and any single one can hold up the entire endeavor, then the economically rational thing to do is to be the last holdout, as you will get paid a lot more. Everybody loses in that scenario except the holdout.
- MichaelZuo 3y ago
  Negotiations can be done en bloc but the downside is that it may take decades to do anything big.
  - biomcgary 3y ago
    In the US, class action lawsuits allow multiple entities to be rolled into a class to sue another party. Is there an equivalent in the other direction (i.e., could a utility company roll everyone into class)? I see lots of possible problems (i.e., class participation allows opt-out).
    - mindslight 3y ago
      The dynamic of class action lawsuits isn't about the quantity of class members, but rather that they're unenumerable. As such they don't really make sense to apply to defendants, and would have terrible results if they were. A plain old suit with many enumerated defendants would work for this topic though, assuming there was a cause of action.
- eppp 3y ago