Top
Comments
21 Responses to “Friends In High Places - Houston Plans To Steal Twins Retirement”
  1. american woman on March 7th, 2008 at 6:23 am

    What can we do to help the twins? Who do we write. Who do we embarrass? We have to stand up for the little guys, who get steam-rolled in the big scheme.

  2. Ree-C Murphey on March 7th, 2008 at 7:42 am

    Outrage. Outrage. OUTRAGE!. There is no other way to put it. For a pocket park. phw.

  3. southerntragedy on March 7th, 2008 at 7:51 am

    #2: Calm down, Sheila Jackson-Lee!!

    I’m with AW. There has to be something that we can do to help.

  4. Robert 1 on March 7th, 2008 at 7:52 am

    I’ll bet if that property was owned by some current or former city official that property would have sold for a “pretty penny”. It’s always who you are or who you know that gets you fair treatment in any “deals” with the government!!!!

  5. winklmj on March 7th, 2008 at 8:22 am

    Why didn’t they condem all that land for the soccer stadium then? Coulda saved us taxpayers a lot of money (and screwed over an ex-council person to boot). I really hope the brothers win.

  6. texpat on March 7th, 2008 at 8:46 am

    The Kelo vs New London decision in 2005 by the SCOTUS encouraged this new municipal attitude that “takings” are not taken seriously by the courts. I will remind everyone again what is at stake in this Presidential election. There will be at least two seats on the Supreme Court up for nomination in the next administration. If you want to see this sort of judicial travesty continue, then by all means, vote for the Democrat or don’t vote at all.

  7. Shannon on March 7th, 2008 at 9:22 am

    It is my understanding that most states–and especially Texas–moved quickly to stop Kelo in its tracks.

    Is it that this property is in a TIRZ that allows this taking??

  8. BigJolly on March 7th, 2008 at 9:38 am

    Shannon,

    I think you are referencing SB7 from 2005’s second special session. There are so many loopholes in that law that it is pretty much worthless. Check this link out:

    Texas’s law contains strong pro-property rights rhetoric before providing that taking private property and handing it to private developers is just fine so long as the private benefit results incidentally from community development or urban renewal efforts aimed at improving ”blighted areas.” Another section permits eminent domain in connection with a pending stadium project for the Dallas Cowboys, while yet another allows it for constructing a museum.

  9. dcgirl on March 7th, 2008 at 10:03 am

    Texas’s law contains strong pro-property rights rhetoric before providing that taking private property and handing it to private developers is just fine so long as the private benefit results incidentally from community development or urban renewal efforts aimed at improving ”blighted areas.”

    Since when is land that developers were willing to pay nearly $200 per square foot considered to be in a “blighted” area?

  10. Shannon on March 7th, 2008 at 10:28 am

    That old blighted Uptown area where they have the Christmas lights and Galleria?

  11. texpat on March 7th, 2008 at 11:06 am

    The Institute for Justice is a libertarian legal foundation very active in property rights law. They defended the homeowners in the Kelo case before the Supreme Court. Here is their website:

    http://www.ij.org/profile/index.html

    and here is a page with a clever tv commercial they produced:

    http://www.ij.org/profile/video-property-rights.html

  12. american woman on March 7th, 2008 at 1:49 pm

    Texpat, do we contact the Institute for Justice? I’m just a peon, what do we do?

  13. Gordon on March 7th, 2008 at 3:53 pm

    The twins were offered $1.4 MILLION dollars, and turned it down. Why? Because they thought they could get MORE. Well - they were wrong, and they have no one to blame but themselves. Ever watch Howie on ‘Deal or No Deal’?

    Well, sorry they over-reached

  14. american woman on March 7th, 2008 at 4:14 pm

    Gordon, was 1.4 million fair market value? I don’t know the answer. I was assuming it was not.

  15. trl3 on March 7th, 2008 at 4:46 pm

    Gordon

    It was their right to turn down 1.4 million. The property belongs to them.

    How does the City now think they have the right to TAKE the property for 400 thousand?

  16. winklmj on March 7th, 2008 at 6:15 pm

    Anyone read lately that the developer in the Kelo suit has done nothing with the land other than tear the houses down. They can’t get financing for the project so there it sits–doing nothing.

    http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2007/11/30/kelo-update-media-ignores-latest-new-london-development-setback

  17. NAT PIERCE on March 7th, 2008 at 6:47 pm

    Yesterday, I believe, ST said when they offer you a buy out take it because it will be worse after that.

  18. trl3 on March 7th, 2008 at 6:50 pm

    #16

    Anyone want to bet they end up selling the land to someone else and make a ton of money. All with the help of a government that FORCED unwilling landowners to give up their property to a PRIVATE DEVELOPER.

    Personally I call that governemt assisted stealing.

  19. fat albert on March 7th, 2008 at 7:23 pm

    Gordon -

    Do you have person insight into their thought processes? It’s THEIR house! Maybe they just want to live in it for a while, maybe for the rest of their lives. Why should they be forced to sell their property just because a developer wants it?

    Also, doesn’t an offer of $1.4 million establish a fair market value? Where the hell does the city get off offering them $400,000? This isn’t a TV show and you should be ashamed of your government for pulling this kind of crap. I know I am.

    You should be ashamed of yourself for the comment above.

  20. Adee on March 8th, 2008 at 8:34 am

    That cartoon is choice and needs to be kept at the ready for whatever applicable situation arises.

  21. PFMinTN on March 10th, 2008 at 5:49 pm

    If you will check the Houston Chronicle link
    you will find that the brothers rejected the payout, not the amount. There’s also a good map showing the size of Wulfe’s development and the time line.

    http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/metro/5599975.html

    I do not know the details of the payout, but these brothers are 75 years old. How long of a payout was it?

    Besides, as several before me said or alluded to - Wulfe set the price… They bought it in 1982 for $363,750. This land is ON San Felipe, near Post Oak. Anybody know how land has appreciated in the area? I am not exactly sure to the penny, but I can tell you it’s gotta be more than $39K!!

    Now the City wants to come in and take it to make a “park”.

    It’s my understanding that it’s about 1/3 of an acre and half of THAT is going to widen the street, leaving 1/6 of an acre for a park. So - what can they put on all that land hmmmmm?

    Anybody been there and heard the traffic? Would you “play” there? I’d be afraid to let my dogs use the park for fear of all of us getting run over. People in the area have yards bigger than this!! Why would they come play in a “park” there? Doesn’t make any sense.

    As far as the house is concerned, have you driven by there? Go take a look. It’s gone. I’m not sure what happened to it.

    According to the press, BLVD Place is to be 21+ acres plus 600,000 square feet of retail sales plus more than 1400 upscale apartment units, luxury hotels, and office space. It will probably cost in excess of $500,000,000 to build in today’s market.

    The cost of land acquisitions in large projects is always weighed against the total – and the last parcels acquired are ALWAYS the most costly.
    What will this acquisition add to the final cost of the project? I suspect the answer would be less than one dollar per square foot at whatever the asking price.

    Someone on another site took the time and posted this:

    Accessible wrote:
    Contact the members below and/or each of their respective companies represented on the board of directors to express your view or to let them know if you intend to sell your stock in those that are publically traded in protest:

    John Breeden, President
    Uptown Houston Management District
    1980 Post Oak Boulevard
    Suite 1580
    Houston, Texas 77056
    Phone: 713-621-2011
    Fax: 713-622-4678
    E-mail: uptownhouston@uptown-houston.com

    Uptown Houston Management District is governed by an appointed 12-member Board. The Board are landowners, tenants or agents of landowners. Board Members include:

    Ed Wulfe; Wulfe and Company
    Mark Bell; Simon Properties Group
    Patty Bender; Weingarten Realty Investors
    Louis S. Sklar; Hines
    H. Kerr Taylor; AmREIT
    Todd H. Casper; CB Richard Ellis
    Martin Debrovner; Weingarten Realty Investors

    Raymond Brochstein; Brochstein’s, Inc.
    Mary Catherine; Miller Tanglewood Corporation
    Kendall A. Miller Tanglewood Corporation
    John Nash The Hanover Company
    Lisa Simon MFT Interests GP, LLC

    http://www.uptown-houston.com/about/organization/district-board.html

    http://www.uptown-houston.com/about/organization/tirz-board.html

    Uptown TIRZ and Uptown Development Authority has an eight-member appointed board who own property within the Uptown TIRZ or are employees/agents of property owners.
    Board Members are:

    Louis Sklar, Hines
    Martin Debrovner Weingarten Realty Investors
    E.D. Lester Stewart Title Company

    Janice Harris KH Technologies, Inc.
    Marvin Kaplan Legacy Asset Management
    Kendall A. Miller Tanglewood Corporation
    Urban “Obie” F. O’Bri en III Apache Corporation
    Judson Robinson, III Harris County Commissioner’s Office
    Lisa Simon MFT Interests GP, LLC

    http://www.uptown-houston.com/about/organization/tirz-board.html

    Also write to Whole Foods or to sell your stock if that is your choice and let them know what you think of what’s goin’ down on Post Oak:

    World Headquarters
    Whole Foods Market, Inc.
    John P. Mackey,-CEO and President
    Shareholder Services
    550 Bowie Street
    Austin, TX 78703-4644
    512.477.4455
    512.477.5566 voicemail
    512.482.7000 fax

    3/10/2008 1:57 PM CDT
    Recommend Report abuse

    Accessible wrote:

    DOES AMOUNT OF CONTRIBUTIONS = ACCESS AT CITY HALL: decide for yourself–Is this Pay to Play–WULFE surname contributions below just for 2007 alone to City of Houston Elected Officials on search of City Campaign web site?:

    Edmond Wulfe William White $5,000.00 5/4/2007 30

    Edmond Wulfe William White $5,000.00 5/4/2007 57

    Edmond Wulfe $5,000.00 5/4/2007 83

    Edmund Wulfe Anne Clutterbuck $1000 20070409
    Ed Wulfe MJ Khan $1000 6/25/2007

    Lorraine Wulfe Sue Lovell $250 3/12/2007
    Edmond Wulfe Annise Parker $1000 02/22/2007
    Lorraine Wulfe Annise Parker $250 02/17/2007
    Edmond Wulfe Antoniette Lawrence $1000 3/15/2007
    Edmond Wulfe RONALD GREEN $1000 02/06/07
    Edmond Wulfe Jarvis Johnson $1,000.00 4/9/2007
    Ed Wulfe Peter Brown $1000 3/23/2007
    Edmond Wulfe Annise Parker $1000 02/22/2007
    Lorraine Wulfe Annise Parker $250 02/17/2007
    Ed Wulfe Pamela Holm $1,000.00 4/2/2007

    Edmund Wulfe Anne Clutterbuck $1000 20070920
    Lorraine Wulfe Anne Clutterbuck $250 20070927
    Lorraine Wulfe Melissa Noriega $250.00 9/5/2007
    Edmund Wulfe Adrian Garcia $1,000.00 7/3/2007
    Lorraine Wulfe Sue Lovell $250 8/17/2007
    Edmond Wulfe RONALD GREEN $1,000.00 10/24/2007
    Lorraine Wulfe Jolanda Jones $250.00 12/5/2007
    Edmond Wulfe Jolanda Jones $500.00 12/7/2007
    Edmond D.Wulfe Wanda Adams $500.00 12/3/2007
    Edmond D. Wulfe Wanda Adams $500.00 12/3/2007
    go to http://www.houstontx.gov and city secretary site for campaign finance:

    Search for Collins brothers contributions to city officials below?:

    http://cohapp.cityofhouston.gov/CampaignFinanceWeb/CFRwebsiteSimpleSearchResultContrDetails.aspx

    3/10/2008 12:37 PM CDT

    I hope we all contact any and everyone we can. If the City and their cronies can do this to these brothers, they can do it to ANY of us.

    I’m proud of them for standing up to City Hall. Let’s help them fight!

Feel free to leave a comment...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!

You must be logged in to post a comment.

     Back to main page

Bottom