Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

vdogg

GSA/Federal Courts Expansion issue

305 posts in this topic

I decided to take it upon myself to do a little research into the dealings of the GSA and local communities across America. Needless to say, the examples I found were not promising. This particular article from San Diego really stood out to me as an example of the situation we are currently dealing with today. Story

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


I decided to take it upon myself to do a little research into the dealings of the GSA and local communities across America. Needless to say, the examples I found were not promising. This particular article from San Diego really stood out to me as an example of the situation we are currently dealing with today. Story

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm getting rather sick to my stomach <_< If they do something shameful like that in Norfolk and block this project... I don't know what will happen but they have to be held accountable for these more-than-questionable practices and for destroying private developments to make way for "unremarkable, high-rise court complexes".

"Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., is celebrating today's event: "Today is a great day for San Diego, one that has been many years in the making." "

And... Why am I not surprised that psychotic b**** would say something idiotic like that...? My heart goes out to the people of San Diego.

2004-11.jpg

The Hotel San Diego ^ constructed in 1914. *sighs*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hopefully the city will be able to move them somewhere else. Maybe on the parking lot by the marriot. They aren't knocking down a old building but they are now trying to stop future development from helping the city out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must admit this article is scaring the hell out of me. These people had wall to wall support backing their fight against the GSA and they still lost. It doesn't look good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
While the GSA is not required to follow local public review or parking, planning or affordable housing laws, the agency helps "create meaningful places in and around its properties, and participates in community revitalization initiatives," according to a brochure about the GSA's Good Neighbor Program.
:rofl: Must've been the brochure Buddy got right before he told them where to put it. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:rofl: Must've been the brochure Buddy got right before he told them where to put it.  :lol:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I would rather have that 31 story condo tower than a freakin new federal courthouse. How can they really say they care for the community with their track record.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would rather have that 31 story condo tower than a freakin new federal courthouse. How can they really say they care for the community with their track record.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What gets me is how they have gotten away with this type of thing for so long. Surely there has to be someone high up enough in government willing to take these people on. No one is invincible, not even the GSA. I think if more of their actions are brought to light and these issues of the GSA hurting communities are raised to the level of national conciousness, some things may start to change. It amazes me that there hasn't been a bigger uproar against their poilicies yet. I mean, these people have been doing things like this for years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What gets me is how they have gotten away with this type of thing for so long. Surely there has to be someone high up enough in government willing to take these people on. No one is invincible, not even the GSA. I think if more of their actions are brought to light and these issues of the GSA hurting communities are raised to the level of national conciousness, some things may start to change. It amazes me that there hasn't been a bigger uproar against their poilicies yet. I mean, these people have been doing things like this for years.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Maybe this is time for it to change and we need to come together and help Buddy with this project show the public support for this project. Maybe a petition will help sway the GSA from this!!!!!! :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


What gets me is how they have gotten away with this type of thing for so long. Surely there has to be someone high up enough in government willing to take these people on. No one is invincible, not even the GSA. I think if more of their actions are brought to light and these issues of the GSA hurting communities are raised to the level of national conciousness, some things may start to change. It amazes me that there hasn't been a bigger uproar against their poilicies yet. I mean, these people have been doing things like this for years.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think the thing that irks me isn't so much what they do---I mean they do need a new courthouse and federal offices---it's just how slick and deviously they go about accomplishing their goals. Run a development through the mud, go over the protests of local leaders, abuse power on a horrendous scale. It has to stop at some point and if they make any headway on this... I think we can create enough of a media buzz as we've shown we're already capable of doing. The connections amongst us in this site are almost incalculable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the thing that irks me isn't so much what they do---I mean they do need a new courthouse and federal offices---it's just how slick and deviously they go about accomplishing their goals.  Run a development through the mud, go over the protests of local leaders, abuse power on a horrendous scale.  It has to stop at some point and if they make any headway on this... I think we can create enough of a media buzz as we've shown we're already capable of doing.  The connections amongst us in this site are almost incalculable.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

They are acting like this is a communist govt. with the control factors. The damn federal courts don't even have the money to buy the land let alone build the damn thing. Why now threaten something that has been in the works for two years now and wait till about 5 months for the development to start. They have been kept up to date the entire time. B***T A R D S :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the thing that irks me isn't so much what they do---I mean they do need a new courthouse and federal offices---it's just how slick and deviously they go about accomplishing their goals.  Run a development through the mud, go over the protests of local leaders, abuse power on a horrendous scale.  It has to stop at some point and if they make any headway on this... I think we can create enough of a media buzz as we've shown we're already capable of doing.  The connections amongst us in this site are almost incalculable.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That is true but connections alone aren't gonna get us where we need to be. We need someone with the ability to affect careers and livelihoods in order to get their attention. As with all goverment agencies, they must have an oversight committee. The real challenge would be finding a senator on that oversight committee who would care enough to champion your cause. The people in San Diego were unfortunate because it appears their local senator was on the governments side. We have a leg up on the situation because it appears, at least on the outside, that our local reps are on our side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is true but connections alone aren't gonna get us where we need to be. We need someone with the ability to affect careers and livelihoods in order to get their attention. As with all goverment agencies, they must have an oversight committee. The real challenge would be finding a senator on that oversight committee who would care enough to champion your cause. The people in San Diego were unfortunate because it appears their local senator was on the governments side. We have a leg up on the situation because it appears, at least on the outside, that our local reps are on our side.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Have anyone heard from the senators that they emailed yet? I would like to see what Senator Warner would have to say or what Bobby Scott will do or if he will even reply to our cries for justification in Buddy's case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have anyone heard from the senators that they emailed yet? I would like to see what Senator Warner would have to say or what Bobby Scott will do or if he will even reply to our cries for justification in Buddy's case.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not a word. I've been checking my email regularly too. <_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe a good place to continue this effort is to connect and communicate with the San Diego forumers and the City officials there? We see how they've done this before, maybe the people over there in California can help us stop them from doing it again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe a good place to continue this effort is to connect and communicate with the San Diego forumers and the City officials there? We see how they've done this before, maybe the people over there in California can help us stop them from doing it again.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This case in San Diego is much different from what were facing. If Gadams doesn't sell and they condemn his property he can take them to court. Then they will have proceedings on wether or not the new court house is in the best interest of the area. I'm sorry but the feds know that they can't win this battle. San diego was a different case. As much as I like to preserve old buildings, if the building is blighted then the feds have the right to condemn it and build if its in the best interest. Unfortunatly lots of low income housing was lost due to this move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


This case in San Diego is much different from what were facing.  If Gadams doesn't sell and they condemn his property he can take them to court.  Then they will have proceedings on wether or not the new court house is in the best interest of the area.  I'm sorry but the feds know that they can't win this battle.  San diego was a different case.  As much as I like to preserve old buildings, if the building is blighted then the feds have the right to condemn it and build if its in the best interest.  Unfortunatly lots of low income housing was lost due to this move.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Low income housing in San Diego thats a joke. Its so high out there its ridiculous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Low income housing in San Diego thats a joke. Its so high out there its ridiculous.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm sorry ... but I'm lost... what's the GSA doing here in HR that is so scary?

I have to admit, reading that thing about San Diego is pretty fudgeed up ... but I just want some more background.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry ... but I'm lost... what's the GSA doing here in HR that is so scary?

I have to admit, reading that thing about San Diego is pretty fudgeed up ... but I just want some more background.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

They are threatening now to condem the property which Granby Tower is to be built on saying they need to annex the land for more courthouse room. The city says they have been ongoing discussions for probably a decade with GSA but they never expressed a true interest in acquiring the property.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry ... but I'm lost... what's the GSA doing here in HR that is so scary?

I have to admit, reading that thing about San Diego is pretty fudgeed up ... but I just want some more background.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Scary :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this a local GSA division that is making this decision? If so than involvement of local officials and the media might be enough to get their attention. However, if this is the action of some insulated bureaucrats in Washington then we'll have one heck of a battle ahead. And Feds will claim that the increased traffic of cases and the need for increased security due to the recent courthouse problems in Atlanta make this in the best interest of the community that this court would serve. With all of their claims, Washington will not be concerned about the construction of a private development. It is sad but this is my thoughts on the matter.

As an aside, Washington DC is the first locality to use the new Sup Court decision on Eminent Domain. The City wants to buy out a local shopping center called Skyland and then turn over the keys to a developer. I didn't think that this would occur so soon after but it has. Thank God that VA has statutes that limit this sort of activity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This case in San Diego is much different from what were facing.  If Gadams doesn't sell and they condemn his property he can take them to court.  Then they will have proceedings on wether or not the new court house is in the best interest of the area.  I'm sorry but the feds know that they can't win this battle.  San diego was a different case.  As much as I like to preserve old buildings, if the building is blighted then the feds have the right to condemn it and build if its in the best interest.  Unfortunatly lots of low income housing was lost due to this move.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's true but that building wasn't blighted or derelict. It was outdated in style, but it had good bones and history behind it. It could have just as easily been renovated, but it was condemned and stolen from its owners and on its property a big "architecturally insignificant" courts complex is going up there. <_< I'm more than just a little livid about this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's true but that building wasn't blighted or derelict.  It was outdated in style, but it had good bones and history behind it.  It could have just as easily been renovated, but it was condemned and stolen from its owners and on its property a big "architecturally insignificant" courts complex is going up there.  <_<  I'm more than just a little livid about this.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Could be and going to be are two different things. For 20 plus year it could!!! have been taken care of and updated. The fact is it wasn't, it was run down and the feds wanted it. The owner could have fought it but apparantly he didn't put up much of a fight. Not to mention that he probably would have lost in that situation.

My point is that this instance in no way relates to what is going on here. The building had no future and plans unless someone else bought it and spent alot of money to restore it. Here the property is has already been under planning and would result in a economic prosperity for downtown. I hardly think a run down hotel could provide the same type of economic development.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could be and going to be are two different things.  For 20 plus year it could!!! have been taken care of and updated.  The fact is it wasn't, it was run down and the feds wanted it.  The owner could have fought it but apparantly he didn't put up much of a fight.  Not to mention that he probably would have lost in that situation.

My point is that this instance in no way relates to what is going on here.  The building had no future and plans unless someone else bought it and spent alot of money to restore it.  Here the property is has already been under planning and would result in a economic prosperity for downtown.  I hardly think a run down hotel could provide the same type of economic development.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think the main point is that the GSA has no right to do this to us, and judging from local reaction in San Diego, I don't think they wanted them to do it with their old hotel, no matter how run down it was, historic buildings are at a premium and if it wasn't a federal agency doing it, San Diego probably wouldn't have let it happen. :\

As far as the owner "fighting it"---it probably wouldn't have done much good. The GSA has powers similar to eminent domain and would simply just take it if they wanted it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the thing that irks me isn't so much what they do---I mean they do need a new courthouse and federal offices---it's just how slick and deviously they go about accomplishing their goals. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yeah of course they are slick... why condemn all the properties that you want for a new courthouse when you can just wait for a developer to go through the process for you and then take everything once he has the lots in place? And probably give him peanuts as well.

This is still making my stomach turn but if it does go through for the GSA then Gaddams must be able to cobble enough support together to get it built somewhere else nearby (like the Grehound lot...).

And more seriously, if they are so worried about safety and such why would the intersection of Granby and BRAMBLETON be ideal at all? This is one of the busiest roads and it is consistantly clogged during rush hour with traffic. It is probably the most ideal location for a truck bomb like the one in OK City to go off. What should happen is that they relocate it somewhere safer for both the courthouse and the citizens as a whole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would really like to know their intentions. Are they serious or are they playing games

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.