Shoulda got that in writing I guess.
Sounds like she did and the city just ignored it.
She’s gonna get a share of the lease revenue on that, right?
…right?
they’re not even leasing. It’s a flat sale. For a measly 10 million
Best they can do is no trees, half of everyone riding mobility scooters and neighbors with dogs that can poop EVERYWHERE.
Nice try, Big Dungbeatle Inc. 😑
No takey-backs! ✝️
Even if they didn’t do her dirty, she wouldn’t. She donated it to the city and relinquished ownership of it. The expectation, even written into the deed, was that the land was to be used as a park, but they turned around and sold it multiple times. Despite the stipulation in the original deed to the parks and recreation department, the data center is still going forward.
The story is just such a tragedy all around.
Huh, I’m not an attorney but that sure seems actionable if the intended use was documented in a contract.
She’s got an attorney and they’re trying to stop it based on that, but it just seems like everyone involved just doesn’t give a fuck.
They’ve been taught that if they ignore the law and do whatever they want to they don’t get punched in the face.
That will only go on for so long but it’s going to suck until someone gets punchy.
Especially with the recent East Wing argument, the lesson is “if you do it fast enough and ignore other people getting angry about it, you can do whatever you want.”
The only reason they ever didn’t ignore people getting angry about things was because when people used to get angry they also got shooty.
What’s the saying? “Ownership is 90% posession.”
Like with the stuff going on at the East Wing or the Kennedy Center, some people just move forward even if they’re not allowed to because chances are they won’t be stopped or penalized.
“Possession is nine-tenths of the law” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Possession_is_nine-tenths_of_the_law
gimme some wiskey and point them out, I get punchy, 1 shot or 20
The relevant case law may be found in Molotov vs. New Construction .
Can’t find what it was, what did that one end with?
A bang
Oh, that, well it was definitely a hit
You don’t get it, they will build a data center park!
While in many ways it is a tragedy, the cure is often worse. I on balance oppose deed restrictions, either you own the land and pay taxes, or you give up all control. Deed restrictions just force future generations to live by your values and that is a bad thing.
It’s a lot like another commenter mentioned about eminent domain. It can be used for good (roads, fiber deployments, district heating, etc) but also for things not so good (data centers, etc).
I went out of my way to find a house that didn’t even have a vestigial HOA deed restriction, so I get that. But when a private citizen donates something to the local municipality, it’s pretty egregious to not honor those restrictions, especially for things that may take a while to develop.
I’d donate my share of my family’s farmland to build a park, but I wouldn’t sell it for all the money in the world to build a datacenter or landfill or anything else, really.
It is a jerk move for sure and the voters should be mad about this. If you can’t keep your word without a contract that says a lot about your lack of honor.
I’m talking pure legality here though. The cities actions are legal and should be. They are however dishonorable and nobody should deal with the city again.
As for your last line there, forcing future generations to live by the values of having a park isn’t a bad thing.
What makes you so sure? I mean, I would hope that future generations will have parks, but we don’t know what the future is going to be like. There may be some consideration that we couldn’t even conceive of that would make it not a good thing for them to have a park. Or maybe parks are considered good in future generations, but there’s a reason that that is a particularly bad spot to have a park.
Fuck me. I used to live around there a while back
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?
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.
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
Sell a part of your land and use the money to build a park on the rest.
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.
Something worse happened in my city. The city hall expropriated some land from the owner with the justification it was needed for a public interest project. The project wasn’t very detailed and pretty much half-assed like it wasn’t serious. The owner was pissed since the land was sure to raise its price by a lot in a few years. The city was experiencing a major boom and the land was right where the city center was expanding to. But he loses the land and receives a “fair market price”.
Right after the land is expropriated the city hall cancels the project and, since it was no longer needed and the land is considered useless sells it very cheaply to a known real estate entrepreneur with ties to the (very corrupt) Mayor. In a couple of years construction has started in the area (by other friends of the mayor) and the value of the land explodes. The entrepeneur sells it back for a fortune to the city hall. The city hall justifies the huge payment due to the need for a mall there. That mall never turned a profit and was bankrupt in a few years.
The original owner sued city hall and the old mayor. The case is tied in courts for decades now. It’s ridiculous. My city is the capital of corruption in a corrupt country.
Hmmm Providence RI by any chance? LOL
OP claims to be from southwestern europe here: On a post about his cat
Lol I wasn’t expecting op to actually reply don’t need them doxxing themselves was just poking fun at how that crap happens more often than you’d think with the corruption , shits a plague everywhere
Not judging but curious, why did you dig into post histories? I see plenty of people doing it even if I never do, so I’m just curious why.
Can’t answer for them but the few times I’ve done it is to make sure I’m talking with someone that can actually hold a conversation and I’m not arguing with a shill or looney. Sometimes just to see what a person is like on average. Especially if they act like a cunt for little reason. Some do it just for curiosity sake.
Makes sense. Thanks for the answer!
Sure thing. 🙂
Lol, that’s clearly Portugal. They have burrokracia over there, and they are honorary Balkan.
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.
That’s kind of but not exactly a mistranslation. The original Chinese is closer to ‘do not interrupt your enemy while he is making a mistake’, but in the american vernacular, you can just say ‘don’t mess with Texas’ and it means the same thing locally. Its one of those very regional sayings.
Thank you for the correct interpretation, I really need to remember that one
Any time I think of the art of war, I think of this song:
Any time I think of the art of war
That is how Americans do things. A third of angels fell, but that’s ok because we have the Illuminati to kerfuffle their feathers.
This has nothing to do with any translation of any language, it’s a US English expression.
It is a joke.
They are intimating that texas makes so many mistakes that “Don’t mess with texas” may be a blowhard boast to texans, but to everyone else it means “just let the idiots wreck themselves”
Still has nothing to do with translating anything from any other language.
And since they doubled down on it being the actual origin when pressed on it, I don’t think they were joking.
…it was pretty obviously a shitpost, dude.
Absolutely not. You don’t double down on a joke.
Also that ‘Texas’ is synonymous with ‘enemy’ for all Americans.
Pretty sure “Don’t mess with Texas” began its life as an anti-littering campaign in the late 80s or early 90s. It has been appropriated to mean all sorts of things, though. The original meaning might be even more relevant to data centers…
No, the EPA just appropriated sun tzu.
I mean… I guess it could mean that now, but that is certainly not what it meant originally or how it was ever used.
Oh, you speak Chinese?
Is “don’t mess with Texas” Chinese?
I just said its a translation. Yes. From sun tzu I think. In england they translate it the other way I said here.
Except the actual phrase didn’t originate from whatever Chinese saying you’re talking about. It was an anti-littering campaign, from Texas, in the 1980s.
No, its from translating ‘the art of war’ into an american dialect. EPA just appropriated it.
In the most Peggy Hill way possible.
Pave paradise and put up a
parking lotdata center
This is why you don’t donate property and large sums of money unless you’re already rich. I used to date a girl whose parents inherited like a million dollars, and they donated all of it to their fucking church. Shortly they’re after, the preacher retired and build a new giant house. Fuck that shit.
If you’re poor and win a lot of money, the best thing to do is to shut the hell about it.
What can we do to fight this particular court ruling?
Stories like this always remind me of the Peter’s parking deck at GA Tech. The couple that donated the land wanted it to be a park, so that the students would have a green place to play and relax. Once Tech had the land, they put a parking deck there instead. But they put a basketball court on the top level so that they technically met the letter of the law.
In fairness, as a student I needed that parking deck way more than I needed the park.
omg, never knew about this donation. Sad, but also in the spirit of an engineer doing absolute minimum to pass compliance while achieving what you need. Whats the good word!
The said part there is truly that the you needed a parking lot more than greenspace.
She trusted the government I don’t understand what Went wrong
It should be legal and acceptable to take back things given for one purpose that end up being used for something else.
In my country it is legal to do so
It actually is if the gift is conditional on a specified use - in writing of course.
Don’t even mention:
Datacenters Behaving Like Acoustic Weapons
AI is starting to show that it isn’t worth the investment and they are STILL building more?!? WTF is going on?
Red line go up.
That is crazy and would make no sense for them to do. Why do you think they’re doing that?
Because I do not think AI is the actual end goal. I think the actual end goal is cloud computing. They want everyone to use thin clients and connect to their data center instead of using a pc at home.
Jensen Huang has been pretty open about that being the plan lately. Although he still insists that even the cloud computers will be run by AI agents.
Good thing my rural internet isn’t strong enough for that
Don’t forget the surveillance state! The global buildout for the NWO one government surveillance state will be paid with your pension and retirement savings.
Nothing to do with a so called new world orde just the same people as before. It is just the government and industrialist that want more power. We are just living though the beginings of a cyberpunk setting.
Yeah but without the cool tech or space exploration. We just get the shitty parts.
Well there is cool tech for the ultra rich (some examples, robotic prostetics, private space companies, Gabe’s private lab yachts, brain interface, private exploration of the Marianna trench).
We definetly get the sloppy seconds, if that.
I think the real goal is the billionaires uploading their minds to achieve immortality. Definitely impossible, but that’s what I think.
That was my theory to why Zuck was so interested in his Metaverse. Every billionaire is planning some sort of post-life or extending their lives one way or another. The same way kinds and emperors of history have.
Chinese emperors often consumed mercury in pursuit of eternity. Zuck and friends want to print themselves onto silicon. Coincidence?
You also have Brian Johnson’s blood transfusions and it wouldn’t be a stretch that Musk’s children are all potential organ donors.
full circle, back when I started, main frames with thin clients.
The bailout money will be double what they lost I am guessing.
