Bookmark & share: 
Welcome to reader comments forum, which is offered as
a "public square" for our audience. We view this space as our readers'
section of the Web site, separate from our journalistic offerings.
We hope you will use the forum to advance public dialogue and community
discourse. As such, we ask that participants refrain from personal
attacks and offensive comments. If you believe a comment is inappropriate or
offensive, you can bring it to our attention by clicking on the 'report
abuse' link by the comment. It will be reviewed by online staff.
Please understand that 1) a comment is not "inappropriate" solely
because you disagree with its author; and 2) there may be a delay while
the comment is being reviewed.
Please review our Reader Comment Guidelines.
Sort by: Oldest first | Newest First
bob
of albion, ME
Jun 26, 2008 5:08 PM
One bridge replaced another. It's likely the governor didn't want the view from the top of his 80 million dollar monument ruined by the site of this restaurant.report abuseTraveler
of Farmington, ME
Spock
Did they get offered a job giving guided tours on the elevator?report abuse
Jun 26, 2008 4:41 PM
"Sometimes the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one"
Spock
Did they get offered a job giving guided tours on the elevator?report abuse
WILLIAM BROWN
of ALBION, ME
Jun 26, 2008 4:29 PM
Shame on this state eminent domaine should not exist!!!Build the damn bridge somewhere else!!!report abuseJohn
of SoPo, ME
They didn't dispute the $470,000, so they're out of luck. The State purchased the property from them for the price they agreed was fair. Moreover, they failed to present any evidence on their behalf. Pretty straightforward case, actually.
The full opinion (since PPH didn't see fit to link to it) is here: http://www.courts.state.me.us/court_info/opinions/2008%20documents/08me107ci.pdfreport abuse
Jun 26, 2008 3:59 PM
The owners received $470,000 for it. Their argument was that the State didn't need to take all five acres. However: 1) If the state took less, they would have received less and would not have been able to legally operate the restaurant during the construction (this is the bridge up in Bucksport; the construction took foreever) and 2) afterwards, DOT determined that the new configuration on the land would have shut the business down for safety reasons.
They didn't dispute the $470,000, so they're out of luck. The State purchased the property from them for the price they agreed was fair. Moreover, they failed to present any evidence on their behalf. Pretty straightforward case, actually.
The full opinion (since PPH didn't see fit to link to it) is here: http://www.courts.state.me.us/court_info/opinions/2008%20documents/08me107ci.pdfreport abuse
You must be a registered user of MaineToday.com to post a comment. Register or log in.
