[News] ‘Two Lake’ Developer McGowan Against Eminent-Domain Limits
The Northside Sun has a story about developer John McGowan’s opposition to the eminent-domain bill before the Mississippi Legislature, that would limit the government’s ability to take private land for use by private developers:
According to McGowan over 100 people own land that would be affected by the LeFleur Lakes project, and if a stricter eminent domain amendment or bill is passed, just one landowner, owning even the smallest piece of land in that area, could stop the project from being built by refusing to go along with the project.
?If we go in there and we get everyone but one person ? and we want to build an island and a downtown park and do it privately ? the way this law reads that?s impossible,? McGowan said. ?One person could fold his arms and say, ?I?m going to shut this whole thing down,? and there isn?t a thing a judge can do about it the way that law is written.?
Posted by ladd at 01:33 PM in Legislature, Economic, MS Newspapers, News | Email this entry
Comments:
Awww… Now McGowan may have to pay these people like they are a part of the investment. The 100 people should be given market value equal to the value of land AFTER the project is built! OR, given prime land along the lake front in return! Greedy, greedy, greedy!
Posted by on 01/27 at 03:13 PM | #
If Two Lake is a private development project, then one citizen should be able to shut it down. No citizen has the right to simply take land from another without consent. The government can do that in emergency cases, for the public good and with compensation to the homeowner, but a private developer should never be given that power just because s/he happens to have more money. Good grief. What kind of country does this guy think he’s living in?
Cheers,
TH
Posted by Tom Head on 01/27 at 04:02 PM | #
...suddenly I’m for this new bill. Wow, I’d never seen it like this before. :D
Posted by on 01/27 at 04:47 PM | #
The truth is, it’s smart for the government to get out of the business of public-private “partnerships” that have eminent domain powers, because the lawsuits can be something terrible.
If McGowan can’t get this project past the Corps, then the local polticos need to drop it. It’s going to cause untold lawsuits from many different interested parties, in particular those downstream. If it ain’t flood control (or if it doesn’t track well enough with the Corps, which, while it can make mistakes, this is their job), then there’s no point in all of these municipalities throwing in with it.
And the idea of taking people’s land for a flood control project that the Corps won’t back? Some politicians gonna put his butt on the line for that? Dunno. Maybe.
Posted by on 01/27 at 11:08 PM | #
If the Congressional Black Caucus can vote to support a resolution honoring Jefferson Davis in the same week the House seriously considers a bill establishing that men who marry 15-year-old girls must be at least 19, and we’re fighting 12 idiotic pieces of anti-abortion legislation, then I guess anything is possible.
On the plus side, the Coleman-Fredericks domestic violence bills (HB 885 and 905) look wonderful! Have you seen those? Great, great stuff.
Cheers,
TH
Posted by Tom Head on 01/28 at 02:10 AM | #
What a shocker! A rich private developer is against eminent domain restrictions. I bet McGowan calls himself a conservative too.
Posted by on 01/29 at 09:17 AM | #
Who does McGowan claim to be, George Bush? “I’m in charge and I’m not going to change my mind.”
More and more some Americans are beginning to have the tone of The Royal Authority and anyone saying anything that is not in keeping with their thoughts/demands is out of touch with reality.
Far too many people owning land have lost to conditions of eminent domain and secondary to the wishes of the private investor. The deal is almost always unfair and many of the land owners have value that is not considered - family ownership that has passed down through many generations.
Posted by on 01/29 at 10:50 AM | #
Does anyone have a link to the proposed bill?
Posted by on 01/29 at 11:16 AM | #
Hey admin,
The “some politicians gonna put his butt on the line for that” you mention are Ben Allen and Margaret Barrett-Simon. Word is Allen struck an agreement with McGowan in October. Mcgowan was garuanteed certain politicians would support his ideas to the very end at all costs. McGowan lives in Allen’s Ward. McGowan has given “heavily” to Allen’s elections. Check the finance reports in the City Clerk’s office.
Why all of a sudden is Allen holding all of these “special city council meetings” and coattailing to “editorial board meetings” with McGowan?? He sure seems to be pushing this issue extremely harder than most - and its not for the “economic development benefit of Jackson” political doublespeak, hogwash Allen thrusts upon the media either - trust me. The issues surrounding this project have been around for 3 years and never a peep have we heard from any council people until now. What gives??
Have you seen McGowan’s monstrosity of a “home” in Eastover on the banks of ther Pearl?? 20K sq. ft. and McGowan and his business interests own over 10K acres in Hinds County already!!!
I smell something and it doesnt smell good for Allen....
Brian you and Donna have an obligation to check this stuff out and not just take Allen’s word for it.
cyanara,
the riddler
Posted by on 01/29 at 11:19 AM | #
McGowan doesn’t live on “the banks of the Pearl” nor is his house that large but those are good exaggerations being foisted on the website of a couple small for-profit local Jackson business owners.
Since you are digging through campaign financial statements, to whose failed candidacy did McGowan give $10,000 in 2005?
If the square footage of a fellow Jacksonian’s house is some type of obscenity then, by all means, let’s discuss the sizes of the homes owned by Winter, Molpus, Good, (David) Watkins, McAlister, Carter, Johnson Jr, Byrd and the countless others of those favored by the owners of this capitalist enterprise.
Let’s dig into ALL the trusts and partnerships to determine who owns what, where and who will benefit handsomely. Let’s be sure to expose everyone who is benefitting anywhere in the tri-county area by public and private development. Heck, let’s find out who is making hay of the accelerated GO Zone depreciation schedules right here in Jackson and how much that legislation will add directly their own lucrative personal bottom lines!
It is all public record so let the sun shine in where it may though I’m certain, no, make that positive, that some of those friendly to this small business won’t be pleased that they’ve been forced out of the shadows by the ‘do gooding’ crusaders here.
Posted by on 01/29 at 02:50 PM | #
McGowan does’nt live in a large house on the Pearl....compared to many in the area it’s modest. There aren’t any large houses on the Pearl in fact I know of only one, if it is still there, at the end of Westbrook road and what ever is in the “J” Country Club of course.
Most of that area that is too be effected by residential devleopment is what we use to call bottom land. It’s useless tanglewood. What is useless bottom land worth anyway ?......it can’t be developed with out a flood control plan ie levees or lakes....in this case some of it would end up under the lake but some would indeed be lake front.....seems like a win win for a property owner that owns essentially worthless land today?
Posted by on 01/29 at 04:44 PM | #
sorry again for my lousy spelling...bad day on black rock in the ATL.....but just checkin over at the “J”.....
Posted by on 01/29 at 04:52 PM | #
Frankly, I don’t care why kind of house McGowan lives in, although his campaign contributions could certainly be relevant.
Justin, just got in from San Francisco; I’ll see if I can get that bill up for you Tuesday. Great idea. We plan to start posting more bills anyway, now that a couple of weeks of madness may slow down a bit. 
Other StateDesk features on the way, too ....
Posted by on 01/29 at 09:07 PM | #
