Editor's Note: The U.S. public remains in shock at the belligerence and audacity of the U.S. Supreme Court in their "Kelo vs. City of New London" decision. The decision gives the government the right to take the property of a private landowner and give it to a private corporation as an act of Eminent Domain (ED). Supreme Court Justice David H. Souter made love to the corporate empire by voting for this incredible land-grab act. Perhaps we should him send the ED Survival Kit pictured above?
Logan Darrow Clements is trying to serve up a little justice of his own to "Justice" Souter. If the courts are as brazen as the USSC, they will just brush Clement's action aside with the same panache they decided ED for the corporate empire. But it could be interesting to see how this develops. Anyone care to reserve a room at the Lost Liberty Hotel? - Les Blough, Editor
Below this press release is our letter to begin the development process.
Press Release
For Release Monday, June 27 to New Hampshire media
For Release Tuesday, June 28 to all other media
Weare, New Hampshire (PRWEB) Could a hotel be built on the land owned by Supreme Court Justice David H. Souter? A new ruling by the Supreme Court which was supported by Justice Souter himself itself might allow it. A private developer is seeking to use this very law to build a hotel on Souter's land.
Justice Souter's vote in the "Kelo vs. City of New London" decision allows city governments to take land from one private owner and give it to another if the government will generate greater tax revenue or other economic benefits when the land is developed by the new owner.
On Monday June 27, Logan Darrow Clements, faxed a request to Chip Meany the code enforcement officer of the Towne of Weare, New Hampshire seeking to start the application process to build a hotel on 34 Cilley Hill Road. This is the present location of Mr. Souter's home.
Clements, CEO of Freestar Media, LLC, points out that the City of Weare will certainly gain greater tax revenue and economic benefits with a hotel on 34 Cilley Hill Road than allowing Mr. Souter to own the land.
The proposed development, called "The Lost Liberty Hotel" will feature the "Just Desserts Café" and include a museum, open to the public, featuring a permanent exhibit on the loss of freedom in America. Instead of a Gideon's Bible each guest will receive a free copy of Ayn Rand's novel "Atlas Shrugged."
Clements indicated that the hotel must be built on this particular piece of land because it is a unique site being the home of someone largely responsible for destroying property rights for all Americans.
"This is not a prank" said Clements, "The Towne of Weare has five people on the Board of Selectmen. If three of them vote to use the power of eminent domain to take this land from Mr. Souter we can begin our hotel development."
Clements' plan is to raise investment capital from wealthy pro-liberty investors and draw up architectural plans. These plans would then be used to raise investment capital for the project. Clements hopes that regular customers of the hotel might include supporters of the Institute For Justice and participants in the Free State Project among others.
# # #
Logan Darrow Clements
Freestar Media, LLC
Phone 310-593-4843
logan@freestarmedia.com
http://www.freestarmedia.com
http://www.freestarmedia.com/hotellostliberty1.html
Read Mr. Clements' letter to the Towne of Weare, NH, launching the development process for putting Souter's land to better use.
Monday, June 27, 2005
Mr. Chip Meany
Code Enforcement Officer
Town of Weare, New Hampshire
Fax 603-529-4554
Dear Mr. Meany,
I am proposing to build a hotel at 34 Cilley Hill Road in the Town of Weare. I would like to know the process your town has for allowing such a development.
Although this property is owned by an individual, David H. Souter, a recent Supreme Court decision, "Kelo vs. City of New London" clears the way for this land to be taken by the Government of Weare through eminent domain and given to my LLC for the purposes of building a hotel. The justification for such an eminent domain action is that our hotel will better serve the public interest as it will bring in economic development and higher tax revenue to Weare.
As I understand it your town has five people serving on the Board of Selectmen. Therefore, since it will require only three people to vote in favor of the use of eminent domain I am quite confident that this hotel development is a viable project. I am currently seeking investors and hotel plans from an architect. Please let me know the proper steps to follow to proceed in accordance with the law in your town.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Logan Darrow Clements
Freestar Media, LLC
http://www.freestarmedia.com/hotellostliberty1.html
What can you do?
Supreme Court:
No Home is Safe
On June 24, 2005, the Supreme Court put a big UP FOR GRABS sign on your home.
The Court said it’s perfectly OK, under the U.S. Constitution, to take your home or business and give it to a politically connected private developer because that developer might be able to produce more taxes and more jobs off of your land.
In the face of this disgraceful decision upholding takings for private development, it might seem like the fight is over. Nothing could be further from the truth. We have been overwhelmed by emails and phone calls from citizens who are shocked and outraged by what the Supreme Court has done.
We have learned that individual citizens CAN make a difference. We have seen dozens of proposals for eminent domain go down in flames because of popular opposition. We’ve seen cities and states change their laws in response to the outrage of their citizens.
Right now, there is a tremendous momentum against this abuse of power, and we ask each of you to begin organizing to change the law in your city or county or state. The Castle Coalition will help you write the language, but now is the time to start organizing your friends and neighbors. Your local government will tell you there’s nothing to worry about, that it would never use eminent domain, or that it's only as a “last resort.” Don’t believe a word of it. Your only protection is a change in the law (or good state court rulings, which is what the Institute for Justice is working on).