EPA To Property Onwer Your Land Is Our Land

[red states rule]

The EPA is one of many government agencies that needs to go

The sooner the better for all of us





snip




Just imagine. You want to build a home, so you buy a $23,000 piece of land in a residential subdivision in your hometown and get started. The government then tells you to stop, threatens you with $40 million in fines and is not kidding.


That's the case now before the U.S. Supreme Court, with briefs being filed today by the Pacific Legal Foundation (http://www.pacificlegal.org/) on behalf of a Priest Lake, Idaho, family, Chantell and Mike Sackett.


Attorney Damien Schiff, who will be arguing before the high court in the case, said it's simply a case of a government run amok, and it poses a potential threat to perhaps not every landowner across the nation, but untold millions.


snip




The Sacketts, Schiff said, "bought property, and the government in effect has ordered them to treat the property like a public park."


"The EPA has not paid them a dime for that privilege," he said. "The regime we have operating now allows the EPA to take property without having to pay for it, or giving the owners the right to their day in court.""


The case developed when the Sacketts bought a .63-acre parcel of land for $23,000 in a subdivision in their hometown of Priest Lake, Idaho. The land is 500 feet from a lake, had a city water and sewer tap assigned, had no running or standing water and was in the middle of other developed properties.

The couple obtained all of the needed permits for their project and started work. Suddenly, the Environmental Protection (http://www.debatepolicy.com/#)



Agency showed up on the building site, demanded that the work stop and issued a "compliance order" that the couple remove the fill they had brought in, restore the land to its native condition, plant trees every 10 feet, fence it off and let it sit for three years.


Read more: EPA to property owner: 'Your land is our land' (http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=348077#ixzz1Ys8lhRzJ) http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=348077#ixzz1Ys8lhRzJ

[Kathianne]

Wow, this is worse than Kelo, which was horrible.

A more informative presentation is found here, by the organization representing the plaintiffs:

http://www.pacificlegal.org/page.aspx?pid=1697


Supreme Court takes on important wetlands case by Daniel Himebaugh
Published in BIAW Building Insight July/August 2011
This fall, attorneys with Pacific Legal Foundation will litigate one of the most important cases (http://www.pacificlegal.org/page.aspx?pid=616) for the building industry in recent memory at the U.S. Supreme Court. The case, called Sackett v. EPA, asks whether the EPA can order the restoration of private property under the Clean Water Act without any proof of violation or an opportunity to contest the order. The Supreme Court's decision will have ramifications for developers everywhere, but it all began when Idaho couple Mike and Chantell Sackett set out to build a house...

...

Fortunately, the Supreme Court saw the importance of the Sacketts' case and granted review to determine whether the Sacketts have the right to challenge EPA's assertion of jurisdiction over their property without first satisfying the compliance order and seeking a permit. PLF attorney Damien Schiff, lead counsel for the Sacketts, says that the Supreme Court's decision to take the case and review an anti-property rights ruling by the Ninth Circuit should be encouraging for all property owners. "With this case, the Supreme Court confronts important issues for property rights and due process," says Schiff. "When government seizes control of your land, and you disagree with the justification, shouldn't you be allowed your day in court? Just as important, should EPA be a law unto itself, without meaningful accountability to the courts and the Constitution? Charging property owners a sky-high admission fee to get into court isn't just wrong, it's flat-out unconstitutional."


The Court will hear argument in the Sackett case in its upcoming 2011-2012 term, meaning it will issue a decision by next June.

[fj1200]

WTF is the EPA doing harassing property owners in a subdivision. Don't they have actual work to do assessing interstate pollution concerns.

[ConHog]

WTF is the EPA doing harassing property owners in a subdivision. Don't they have actual work to do assessing interstate pollution concerns.

While this case seems ridicolous, so too is the notion that the EPA should be done away with.

About 5 years ago, my neighbor just decided out of the blue to use his property as a dump site. Just one day we had neighbor with a 30 feet high by about 100 feet in diameter pile of garbage right on his fence line which happened to be along the county road that leads to my property. The smell was so bad that we couldn't even stand to be outside, meaning my $30K investment in my pool was just useless, among other things.

A call to our city council , we were told they couldn't do anything, try the country judge, so I called the county judge. He couldn't help us either. Try the EPA I was told. Called them and they were out within a week and informed the guy that he had 1 week to get all that garbage off his property and for everyday after that he would be fined $5K a day until he got it cleaned up. Within 3 days the trash pile was gone.

Don't tell me that people should just be able to do whatever they want with their property.

[Kathianne]

While this case seems ridicolous, so too is the notion that the EPA should be done away with.

About 5 years ago, my neighbor just decided out of the blue to use his property as a dump site. Just one day we had neighbor with a 30 feet high by about 100 feet in diameter pile of garbage right on his fence line which happened to be along the county road that leads to my property. The smell was so bad that we couldn't even stand to be outside, meaning my $30K investment in my pool was just useless, among other things.

A call to our city council , we were told they couldn't do anything, try the country judge, so I called the county judge. He couldn't help us either. Try the EPA I was told. Called them and they were out within a week and informed the guy that he had 1 week to get all that garbage off his property and for everyday after that he would be fined $5K a day until he got it cleaned up. Within 3 days the trash pile was gone.

Don't tell me that people should just be able to do whatever they want with their property.

Seems you need new city government, shouldn't need the EPA for an ordinance violation.

[ConHog]

Seems you need new city government, shouldn't need the EPA for an ordinance violation.

I live WAY in the country Kath, no city ordinances in regards to this. That's why they said there was nothing they could do. Same with the county.

[Kathianne]

I live WAY in the country Kath, no city ordinances in regards to this. That's why they said there was nothing they could do. Same with the county.

Then get some people on those governing bodies that write what needs to be written. Sheesh!

[J.T]

The EPA is one of many government agencies that needs to go

Just move to China (http://www.chinahush.com/2009/10/21/amazing-pictures-pollution-in-china/). The rest of us aren't eager for a return to the good ol'days when the rivers would burn

[ConHog]

Then get some people on those governing bodies that write what needs to be written. Sheesh!

Well, there are now, or at least there are many in the books, but until there is a need, you know how that goes. No one ever gave thought to needing an ordinance saying "you can't have a dump in your yard" until this idiot actually had a dump in his yard, for example.

[Kathianne]

Well, there are now, or at least there are many in the books, but until there is a need, you know how that goes. No one ever gave thought to needing an ordinance saying "you can't have a dump in your yard" until this idiot actually had a dump in his yard, for example.

Well unless totally without government, there should be state laws about licensing and such. Seems your government just wasn't willing to do what needed to be done. I'd be pissed as hell.

[ConHog]

Well unless totally without government, there should be state laws about licensing and such. Seems your government just wasn't willing to do what needed to be done. I'd be pissed as hell.

well, I don't know, it's kind of a mixed blessing. I mean when we built our home several years back for instance, we didn't have to get ANY permits, nor tell anyone what we were building. We just built our home. So it's a trade off. I prefer as little oversight as possible, but there are some things people shouldn't be allowed to do , even though it's their own property. Ideally yes the local governments should be the ones taking care of those issues, but realistically , that isn't always possible.

[Kathianne]

well, I don't know, it's kind of a mixed blessing. I mean when we built our home several years back for instance, we didn't have to get ANY permits, nor tell anyone what we were building. We just built our home. So it's a trade off. I prefer as little oversight as possible, but there are some things people shouldn't be allowed to do , even though it's their own property. Ideally yes the local governments should be the ones taking care of those issues, but realistically , that isn't always possible.

That is a weird stand. "Little government." When that fails, 'call in the feds.' Now you got GOVERNMENT!.

[ConHog]

That is a weird stand. "Little government." When that fails, 'call in the feds.' Now you got GOVERNMENT!.

Kath, our town has 500 people spread over about 100 square miles. We don't have a city council which could possibly consider every possible scenario nor do we have the resources to punish those who violate city ordinances. We don't even have anything more than a constable.

[LuvRPgrl]

Kath, our town has 500 people spread over about 100 square miles. We don't have a city council which could possibly consider every possible scenario nor do we have the resources to punish those who violate city ordinances. We don't even have anything more than a constable.

with so much open land, why do you have a neighbor so close?

And why did you build your pool so close to this guys property line?

Seems like this guy must have shown warnings of be a whacko, so you could avoid being near his property

[DragonStryk72]

This isn't so much about the EPA being useless, in so much as it is about the EPA being given far too much power, with an authority handed to them that does not have check or balance. No Act passed can completely bypass due process, I mean, it's the foundation of our whole legal system. The EPA does need to be pruned, badly so, but it doesn't need to be gotten rid of entirely. That's just throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

[ConHog]

with so much open land, why do you have a neighbor so close?

And why did you build your pool so close to this guys property line?

Seems like this guy must have shown warnings of be a whacko, so you could avoid being near his property

I'm not that near him, about 3 miles (I have 300 acres) but the county road to get to MY house goes right by HIS farm. So there is essentially no way of avoiding driving by his place to get to mine. And if you've ever smelled a dump site you know how the smell travels.

He's since sold the place and moved on. Turns out he was a goddamned Yankee.

[fj1200]

While this case seems ridicolous, so too is the notion that the EPA should be done away with.

That's certainly not going to happen but don't you have a state EPA without calling in the black helicopters?

[ConHog]

That's certainly not going to happen but don't you have a state EPA without calling in the black helicopters?

I don't think Arkansas does. And CLEARLY I agree that just like every other government agency the EPA often goes overboard.

[fj1200]

Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (http://www.adeq.state.ar.us/)

[ConHog]

Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (http://www.adeq.state.ar.us/)

woohoo, guess we do have one, ohwell.

[Kathianne]

This isn't so much about the EPA being useless, in so much as it is about the EPA being given far too much power, with an authority handed to them that does not have check or balance. No Act passed can completely bypass due process, I mean, it's the foundation of our whole legal system. The EPA does need to be pruned, badly so, but it doesn't need to be gotten rid of entirely. That's just throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

I'd agree. It needs massive oversight; it's been off the rails for a long time, but out of control since Obama. Seems to me the current example is every bit as much of a red flag as the red squad in Chicago/New York or what was going on with the CIA years ago. Time to rein in indeed.

Now an aside, related to the post by CH; doesn't seem right that folks in rural areas can avoid the local taxes to mind their own store. By relying on the EPA we're all paying for a local issue and that's wrong.

[ConHog]

I'd agree. It needs massive oversight; it's been off the rails for a long time, but out of control since Obama. Seems to me the current example is every bit as much of a red flag as the red squad in Chicago/New York or what was going on with the CIA years ago. Time to rein in indeed.

Now an aside, related to the post by CH; doesn't seem right that folks in rural areas can avoid the local taxes to mind their own store. By relying on the EPA we're all paying for a local issue and that's wrong.

Oh, we don't avoid local taxes. Ours may not be as high as in some areas. but we DO have taxes.

[Kathianne]

Oh, we don't avoid local taxes. Ours may not be as high as in some areas. but we DO have taxes.

Really? Why? Seems the government you have locally can't govern in simple matters. How much did you pay? My last property tax from county, $4,989.60 for a townhouse. I 'own' the land literally my house sits upon +36 in, beyond the foundation.

Now I'm not asking for a tit-for-tat regarding a rural location and a suburban big city area. Dollar wise though, my house is on the market for $140k and not selling. 4 years ago it appraised at $305k. Go figure. Yet I can tell you, that there's nothing, no issue that would have us call in federal government for anything that didn't concern a multi-state issue.

[ConHog]

Really? Why? Seems the government you have locally can't govern in simple matters. How much did you pay? My last property tax from county, $4,989.60 for a townhouse. I 'own' the land literally my house sits upon +36 in, beyond the foundation.

Now I'm not asking for a tit-for-tat regarding a rural location and a suburban big city area. Dollar wise though, my house is on the market for $140k and not selling. 4 years ago it appraised at $305k. Go figure. Yet I can tell you, that there's nothing, no issue that would have us call in federal government for anything that didn't concern a multi-state issue.

I own 300 acres with 2 houses on it, one the newer house my family lives in, the other an older home that my grandparents lived in before passing on. It was assessed at $1.55M last year and we paid $1491 in property tax. 75% of that goes to our local school district as a matter of law.

[Kathianne]

I own 300 acres with 2 houses on it, one the newer house my family lives in, the other an older home that my grandparents lived in before passing on. It was assessed at $1.55M last year and we paid $1491 in property tax. 75% of that goes to our local school district as a matter of law.

Now you know why even 'conservatives' find some 'red states' more than a bit hypocritical. It's not YOUR fault, but the fact that you or surrogates called in the EPA, costing all of us mega dollars, rather than the norm of local government, while claiming to be conservative is a joke.

[LuvRPgrl]

Now you know why even 'conservatives' find some 'red states' more than a bit hypocritical. It's not YOUR fault, but the fact that you or surrogates called in the EPA, costing all of us mega dollars, rather than the norm of local government, while claiming to be conservative is a joke.

People usually move to very rural areas like that to be left alone, and to be away from govt interference in their lives.

What I dont understand is how, with 300 freaking acres, something couldnt be done without calling the EPA.
He doesnt, if i recall correctly, even mention talking to the guy.

There are other remedies I would try first. In fact, calling in the EPA is gonna bite CH in the butt one of these days. Once they get their claws into an area, they rarely leave it alone after. They have to justify their existence.

Its like calling a city official here in suburbia, once they come out, they start snooping about everything, and keep coming back, the gift that doesnt stop giving.

As for CH being a conservative, he is a Law and order control freak. As long as its something he doesnt do, then he thinks it should be illegal.

[ConHog]

Now you know why even 'conservatives' find some 'red states' more than a bit hypocritical. It's not YOUR fault, but the fact that you or surrogates called in the EPA, costing all of us mega dollars, rather than the norm of local government, while claiming to be conservative is a joke.

I just went where my local county judge told me to go. If the guy had said "no problem i'll take care of it" that would have been fine with me to.

Being conservative doesn't mean allowing my neighbors to destroy the environment

[ConHog]

People usually move to very rural areas like that to be left alone, and to be away from govt interference in their lives.

What I dont understand is how, with 300 freaking acres, something couldnt be done without calling the EPA.
He doesnt, if i recall correctly, even mention talking to the guy.

There are other remedies I would try first. In fact, calling in the EPA is gonna bite CH in the butt one of these days. Once they get their claws into an area, they rarely leave it alone after. They have to justify their existence.

Its like calling a city official here in suburbia, once they come out, they start snooping about everything, and keep coming back, the gift that doesnt stop giving.

As for CH being a conservative, he is a Law and order control freak. As long as its something he doesnt do, then he thinks it should be illegal.

You're right I didn't mention talking to the guy. Doesn't mean I didn't though. Just means I didn't give every detail of what happened. I guess I just assumed people would figure out that I didn't just start out by calling the law.

As for law and order control freak. I don't know where you get that at? For instance, I am fine with allowing each state to vote on the issue of marijuana. As for enforcing the current laws , yes I am FOR that. Sorry, I'm a conservative in many ways, but I'm an anarchist in no ways.

[red states rule]

Just move to China (http://www.chinahush.com/2009/10/21/amazing-pictures-pollution-in-china/). The rest of us aren't eager for a return to the good ol'days when the rivers would burn

You forgot to scream how women, children, and minorites would be harmed the most if the EPA was put out of business

Please remember to include ALL the talking points next time :laugh:

[red states rule]

WTF is the EPA doing harassing property owners in a subdivision. Don't they have actual work to do assessing interstate pollution concerns.

Here are the property owners and their side of the story

<IFRAME height=315 src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Pe8TBXgwpnw" frameBorder=0 width=560 allowfullscreen></IFRAME>