was there a clause that if it isnt used as intended, it return to the owner?
I’m curious what would be the better approach if someone wanted to donate land to be used for a park? Give it to a charity? Or somehow find the cash and just build the park yourself and let people visit your land?
My town had a guy that loved baseball a long time ago, he had money and wanted it local so he built a baseball field right on the river, made a big park and donated it to the city. He was pretty smart about it and worked the deed so that it would take a two-third vote of the citizens to sell it.
Fast forward to a couple of years ago and the mayor petitioned the governor to change the deed under an NDA as he wanted to lease the park to a minor league baseball team. In the deal he also gave them the naming rights for the park, so the baseball team renamed the park after a local bank that gave them money.
Damn, you really can’t control your legacy, huh?
It would be easier if you weren’t dead
Keep the land. Build on it that park you have in mind. A donation means you give away any control.
tax benefits to donations, as opposed to maintaining it
For a financial benefit, a sale beats a donation.
Depends how it was dontated, you can specify a loan of the land indefinetly to the city as long as its use is xyz.
If its a straight donation with no caveats attached then the city can do what it wants
My local council tried to build on some park land donated 100 years ago but the donator had specified its usage in the donation so they got shut down pretty hard.
Unfortunately it seems like the donator specified the usage in this case as well, but the courts are straight up ignoring it.
On July 7, 1999, Bland’s descendants granted 87.97 acres of land to the “Texas Parks and Recreation Foundation, a Texas non-profit corporation, to be held in trust for future use as parkland by Williamson County, Texas,” according to a copy of the deed reviewed by 404 Media.
Sell a part of your land and use the money to build a park on the rest.
deleted by creator
Hmmm Providence RI by any chance? LOL
She’s gonna get a share of the lease revenue on that, right?
…right?
Best they can do is no trees, half of everyone riding mobility scooters and neighbors with dogs that can poop EVERYWHERE.
One of the more fucked up aspects of eminent domain. City/county/state governments can nuke deeds by using eminent domain. It allows them to turn a plot of land, regardless prior restrictions, into things like dumps.
The fucked up part about it is they can also turn public lands into private lands with that same trick.
What’s frustrating is we still need eminent domain for good. It’s basically the only way to build railways and roads. It even ends up being one of the few ways to deploy things like district heating/cooling and new fiber lines.
I believe eminent domain should have a very limited scope legally and should mostly only be used for public infrastructure projects and housing honestly…
We have different definitions of good. I don’t see how building a highway system through other animals homes is considered “good”.
I know the saying is “don’t mess with Texas” but Texas seems to fuck itself over all the time. I would be raising hell about this if it was my backyard.
Shoulda got that in writing I guess.
Sounds like she did and the city just ignored it.
I was curious where the land was, and if I could help in any way.
It’s in Texas. I made a promise to myself that I’d never go back to Texas.
Texas. Fucking. Suuuuuucks.
“Don’t mess with Texas” now has a different meaning.
“Don’t mess with Texas, it might be contagious”
Just like “Everything Is Bigger In Texas” is considered a self-own to the rest of the world, they’re the brunt of the joke. (Sorry Austin, you too. Yes, even SXSW)
“Texas hurt itself in its confusion.”
Fuck me. I used to live around there a while back
What can we do to fight this particular court ruling?
