[geeks] Wal-Mart

[Lionel Peterson]

>From: Rick Hamell <hamellr at gmail.com>
>Date: 2007/12/03 Mon PM 08:11:36 CST
>To: The Geeks List <geeks at sunhelp.org>
>Subject: Re: [geeks] Wal-Mart

<snip>

>Due to citizen pressure the City Council finally said no to Wal-Mart, but it
>was a pretty tough fight. The problem is that due to some new land use
>measures voted in last year, the owners of the land are suing the City for
>$77 million dollars in lost sales and "damages" in not being able to sell
>the land to Walmart. Keep in mind the land is valued at $2million at most.
>
>So the City is faced with a problem, pay $77 million, or allow Walmart to
>buy the land and build a store that will greatly increase wear and tear on
>the local infrastructure, reduce taxes, increase the burden on public health
>care and a whole host of other problems.

I don't get it - the land owners can't sue for lost "potential" profits, only actual profits (say the WalMart was a permitted use, and the city council stepped in and re-zoned the land mid-transaction, so the land owner had to pay back WalMart and take the land back - that would be lost profit).

WalMart is SOL as soon as they need a variance, because then the locals can kill the deal - at least until the state government steps in and seizes the land and gives it to WalMart...

Lionel