PDA

View Full Version : BILL MILLER BOYCOTT!: Tracy Bogert on KTSA @ 420pm



Chris Duel
08-12-2004, 02:27 PM
Yesterday we had Mayor Ed Garza, County Judge Nelson Wolff and City Insider T.J. Connolly on the Toyota Land / Bill Miller Family controversy. :smokin2

Today, TRACY BOGERT at 4:20pm will tell us about his BOYCOTT of Bill Miller Restaurants! :argue

Tune-in for the fireworks! :gun

LOCAL ACTIVISTS ORGANIZING BILL MILLER BOYCOTT

With shamelessness that would make Raul Prado and Kike Martin blush the Bill Miller family is attempting to extort money from the City of San Antonio and the citizens of Bexar County over land they own adjacent to Toyota.

The Miller's plan to build 2000 houses on 385 acres of land they own. When Toyota stated their intention to build their facility they had asked the city of San Antonio to basically zone all land around the plant outward of 3 miles as commercial. Toyota needed this guarantee so that they could
expand their plant to build more vehicles and provide more good jobs for the south side. One scenario has Toyota adding an additional 2000 jobs and a Sequoia truck plant next to the one they are building.

Let us figure this out. The Miller family thinks that building 2000 houses is more important than an additional 2000 jobs at the Toyota site.

Where exactly was the Miller family for the past fifty years when south Bexar County needed development and the tax revenues it would provide. The Miller family suddenly appears to care about development on the south side
when the family realizes they can make millions riding the coattails of Toyota and the City of San Antonio.

The Miller family has stated that the only acceptable deal they would makeis to be allowed to build 2000 houses on the 385 acres or for the city ofSan Antonio to buy the land from them or pay them not to build houses.

The Miller family attorney Barry McClenahan stated, " I would hate to seethe Miller family vilified by the mayor or anyone else- a family that hasdone so much for San Antonio"

Excuse us but doesn't the Miller family owe the citizens of San Antonio adebt of gratitude for making their family one of the wealthiest in SouthTexas. Mr. McClenahan and the Miller family have some nerve saying that thetaxpayers of San Antonio owe their family. If this were any common family
they would be charged with blackmail and extortion.

We call on all city and county leaders to follow the lead of Mayor Ed Garzaand stand up to the bullying tactics of the Miller family. It is time to stand up and be counted.

We would also like to call on all residents of San Antonio and Bexar County to join us in a boycott of all Miller family owned businesses including Bill Miller BBQ and Barnacle Bill's restaurants. When the Miller family decides to do the right thing and allow the land to be zoned commercially then the citizens of San Antonio will once again enjoy a meal at their favorite Bill Miller restaurant.


Tracy Bogert / John Lambert
Lifelong residents of the Southside.

Tommy Duncan
08-12-2004, 02:38 PM
Wow, that moron is still around. :lol


The Miller's plan to build 2000 houses on 385 acres of land they own.

That says it all. If the good old boy Democrat has a problem with that he should put together a group to buy the property from the Millers.

And of course it was the Millers who provided South Texans with a place to eat and jobs for some of them for over 50 years.

spurster
08-12-2004, 03:12 PM
Isn't this just politics as usual? Bill Miller is probably just looking for a big payoff from the city for the land he owns. As far as the houses, Toyota wants no houses within 3 miles of their plant. This sounds a little excessive to me.

Tommy Duncan
08-12-2004, 03:20 PM
The Miller family has stated that the only acceptable deal they would makeis to be allowed to build 2000 houses on the 385 acres or for the city ofSan Antonio to buy the land from them or pay them not to build houses.


Well, they do own the property. The above is well within their rights.

Joe Chalupa
08-12-2004, 03:35 PM
I agree. The Miller's are doing what I would do if I owned that land.

exstatic
08-12-2004, 03:42 PM
You do realize that said payoff/buyout would come out of taxpayers pockets, MB? No thanks. I have two words for the Millers:

Eminent Domain

Play ball. NO corporate welfare.

Tommy Duncan
08-12-2004, 03:50 PM
Oh good, so you would have governments at all levels free to take property from citizens without just compensation?

Also, how exactly do you refer to taking property from someone to give Toyota what it wants not "corporate welfare"?

You might want to rethink your argument.

Tommy Duncan
08-12-2004, 03:53 PM
You did read the following part of the original post, did you not:


When Toyota stated their intention to build their facility they had asked the city of San Antonio to basically zone all land around the plant outward of 3 miles as commercial. Toyota needed this guarantee...

?

Sounds like "corporate welfare" to me.

Nbadan
08-12-2004, 03:54 PM
You can build crappy houses anywhere else on the South side. Toyota needs the land guarantee for future expansions. Great Jobs over crappy homes.

The city needs to sit down with the Millers and come up with a amicable number. Maybe, this is just one way to pressure the Millers.

Tommy Duncan
08-12-2004, 03:57 PM
That's great, dan. However, this is their property.

I know you like the idea of taking things from people to give to others but let's get some perspective here.

Spurminator
08-12-2004, 04:14 PM
This is the most preposterous boycott I've ever read about, and my parents subscribed to Focus on the Family.

Joe Chalupa
08-12-2004, 04:31 PM
Personally I've only eaten at Bill Miller's a few times since I've moved back down here and that was to find out what a po boy was. But I soon found out they were everywhere just like Jim's and Taco Cabana's and McDonald's and HEB's and Diamond Shamrocks and...well never mind.

Nbadan
08-12-2004, 04:40 PM
I know you like the idea of taking things from people to give to others but let's get some perspective here.

Taking away? I assume that the Millers will walk away with a very tidy profit in either senario. Nevermind the pro-business stand, right Marcus?

mstexmex
08-12-2004, 05:03 PM
Rest assured mstexmex is not going to boycott Bill Millers
I love them and fantasize about their food all the time since we have shit for bbq places here in Vegas.
Anyway, It's their land, and the city is going to have to buy them out plain and simple. I don't see what they are requesting to be unreasonable, it's actually the correct procedure.
too bad I don't own that land!!

When McCarren airport expanded here in Vegas they HAD to buy out a couple of hundred homeowners to give up their property for the sake of expansion.

SpursWoman
08-12-2004, 05:13 PM
too bad I don't own that land!!


No kidding...that was my very first thought.


Dan, they aren't doing anything differently than anyone else who has the money to invest in real estate would do. By investing in real estate...that's what you dream of happening, and they are taking advantage of it.

Nbadan
08-12-2004, 05:31 PM
Dan, they aren't doing anything differently than anyone else who has the money to invest in real estate would do. By investing in real estate...that's what you dream of happening, and they are taking advantage of it.

Maximizing profits on a 'speculative' land deal is one thing. As I mentioned, I'm sure the Millers will walk away with a tidy profit in either scenario, but I think the Toyota plant will revitalize the south-side (its already happening), a long economically-neglected area. Something that other cities spend 100's of millions of dollars to try and accomplish.

The Millers must decide between what is best for them and what is best for all the citizens of the City of San Antonio and the surrounding economic area.

Tommy Duncan
08-12-2004, 05:39 PM
Here's a clue...I don't think the government should be "Pro-business" or 'Anti-business.'

MannyIsGod
08-12-2004, 05:44 PM
Something that other cities spend 100's of millions of dollars to try and accomplish.

Then maybe the city can start by paying the Millers proper value for the land.

Eminent Domain my ass. Another infringement on rights, property rights.

Toyota will employee people, but so will land development. You people act as though the Millers are going to wave a magic wand and all of a sudden those homes will appear.

It's funny to hear somebody say no to corporate welfare in an attempt to make special accomidations for a corporation.

No, I take it back, it's not funny. It's fucking STUPID.

Nbadan
08-12-2004, 05:57 PM
Toyota will employ people, but so will land development. You people act as though the Millers are going to wave a magic wand and all of a sudden those homes will appear.

It's funny to hear somebody say no to corporate welfare in an attempt to make special accommodations for a corporation.

Land development would only employ people for a little while, while Toyota could employ people for decades. Apples and Oranges.

I think the controversy here is trying to come up with a number that is acceptable to the city and the Millers. After all, the city and our elected Mayor, guaranteed Toyota that they would get this done.

Joe Chalupa
08-12-2004, 05:59 PM
It was a wise investment 50 years ago and it's finally paying off.

MannyIsGod
08-12-2004, 06:01 PM
Yes, and a boycott on a company that has employeed thousands FOR decades is smart is it not?

Nbadan
08-12-2004, 06:01 PM
Here's a clue...I don't think the government should be "Pro-business" or 'Anti-business.'

Then you are politically naive.

Tommy Duncan
08-12-2004, 06:06 PM
I think it's bullshit that anytime there is a major project in San Antonio some groups like to show up with their hands out expecting a cut of things or perhaps expecting to dictate the terms of the deal.

You are not entitled to anything with respect to someone else's property in this situation. It is not yours.

You know, this is the same type of mentality which reared its ugly head when Kelly was on the Base Closure Commission's list.

Nbadan
08-12-2004, 06:06 PM
Yes, and a boycott on a company that has employeed thousands FOR decades is smart is it not?

I'm not advocating a boycott. In this circumstance, it's silly. However, lets not underestimate the economic impact that the higher paying Toyota jobs and benefits are going to have for South Texas, and S.T. pool of employees. These aren't Bill Millers jobs, no matter how loyal to the company you may be.

Tommy Duncan
08-12-2004, 06:07 PM
Again, danny boy, I said I don't think the government should do that. That does not imply naitivity of how local and state governments tend to operate, especially for the benefit of commercial interests.

Figure it out.

Tommy Duncan
08-12-2004, 06:08 PM
That's great dan. Then perhaps Toyota or the City of SA will be willing to make the property owner a decent offer for that property.

MannyIsGod
08-12-2004, 06:13 PM
EXACTLY MARCUS.

Nbadan
08-12-2004, 06:16 PM
What is a decent offer? It's obvious that if the Toyota plant wasn't started around the corner, the value of the land would be much less. Real Estate agents have square footage breakdowns for every part of town, including the Toyota plant area. Lets come up with a fair number and get this done.

MannyIsGod
08-12-2004, 06:17 PM
And if my uncle didn't have a dick he'd be my aunt.

Tommy Duncan
08-12-2004, 06:19 PM
I would write out a detailed response to danny boy's comments but Manny expressed it perfectly.

Nbadan
08-12-2004, 06:19 PM
And if my uncle didn't have a dick he'd be my aunt.


What if he was a hermaphrodite?

exstatic
08-12-2004, 06:26 PM
I think it's bullshit that anytime there is a major project in San Antonio some groups like to show up with their hands out expecting a cut of things or perhaps expecting to dictate the terms of the deal.

Isn't that exactly what the Miller family is doing?

Eminent Domian <> seizure of the property


What is Eminent Domain
Eminent domain refers to the power possessed by the state over all property within the state, specifically its power to appropriate property for a public use. In some jurisdictions, the state delegates eminent domain power to certain public and private companies, typically utilities, such that they can bring eminent domain actions to run telephone, power, water, or gas lines. In most countries, including the United States under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution, the owner of any appropriated land is entitled to reasonable compensation, usually defined as the fair market value of the property. Proceedings to take land under eminent domain are typically referred to as "condemnation" proceedings.

Tommy Duncan
08-12-2004, 06:32 PM
It's their property, ex. They obviously have an interest in not getting screwed, especially by Toyota and its puppet the City of San Antonio.

Real estate valuation is an art, not a science. Raw land is also much more difficult to value than developed property. It's not hard to see the City of SA use eminent domain to screw them out of full value for the property. For what? An essential public project such as a road?

No, to give more handouts to Toyota.

Continue to google, you might find something I don't know.

exstatic
08-12-2004, 06:41 PM
Continue to google, you might find something I don't know.

I already have.

eminent domain <> seizure of property.

You're welcome.

Tommy Duncan
08-12-2004, 06:45 PM
That's not exactly what I am arguing.

Do you really think they are likely to get more from a valuation conducted in the course of legal proceedings than in an actual deal? How about tax implications?

It's not the same. I know you saw "fair market value" and assumed it would be.

JohnnyMarzetti
08-12-2004, 06:56 PM
I'm sure the Native Americans feel they received a fair deal for their land. All in the name of American progress.

mstexmex
08-12-2004, 07:07 PM
It was a wise investment 50 years ago and it's finally paying off.

This is why Real Estate is a sound investment. If the Millers really did buy that land 50 years ago then hats off. Who in the hell knew 50 years later their would be a toyota plant there. Please!!! You know people bought friggin desert here 40 years ago for a couple of thousand dollars and when casinos started expanding these people made millions from selling an acre or two. What is the difference.

DeSPURado
08-12-2004, 07:26 PM
What the hell does any of this matter? Bill Miller can afford to pay a few lawyers, and get fair compensation. He's far better off than if this were people living in the barrios (tenants are the worst off when it comes to these things.) So what does this matter. These things always get settled one way or another. The Government rarely if ever has to claim eminent domain, usually a settlement can be reached. There is no need to boycott Bill Miller, thats just plain stupid. The government has all the ability it needs to obtain that land if it deems it necessary.

Tommy Duncan
08-12-2004, 07:43 PM
What is this "necessary" for, exactly? Other than, of course, to give more to poor Toyota?

How is the compensation going to be "fair"? The Miller family is forced to sell today. The value of raw land lies in the optionality inherent in its potential uses. One can easily see that a valuation today would not accurately assess that value.

Tommy Duncan
08-12-2004, 07:45 PM
tenants

...are there according to the terms of their leases. What you mean are lower and middle class homeowners.

DeSPURado
08-12-2004, 08:00 PM
Do you even disagree with me?

mstexmex
08-12-2004, 08:00 PM
The government has all the ability it needs to obtain that land if it deems it necessary.

Yeah it's called the IRS

Tommy Duncan
08-12-2004, 08:02 PM
Um, yeah. You claimed that a property owner could not be screwed in condemnation proceedings. Regardless of the quality of their legal representation that is a distinct possibility.

DeSPURado
08-12-2004, 08:05 PM
I did not. I said they could be screwed especially those without the ability to hire a lawyer. I said I wasn't worried about the Millers getting screwed in this case because they would get good representation.

BTW this is an entirely different thing from, and it has absolutely nothing to do with, condemnation proceedings.

Tommy Duncan
08-12-2004, 08:06 PM
So it was irrelevant to the point at hand. Great.

MannyIsGod
08-12-2004, 08:25 PM
if toyota wants the land a certain way so damn badly, why can't they simply buy it

:Q


coorporate welfare alright.

doesn't toyota have enough money desperado/

man, screw you people who sit there and try to decide who has enough money and who does not.

DeSPURado
08-12-2004, 08:34 PM
I haven't really addressed that issue Manny, and it is a very important one. I was merely looking at this from a government/asinine boycott standpoint. I don't think the government should have to step in, except as a possible arbiter.

Part of the problem is that the land is essentially worthless until Toyota wanted it. The value is therefore contingent upon their need for it. They therefore get to assess fair value to a point. But that doesn't mean the government should step in and enforce that price. Somewhere along the lines the city government will make a judgment call on public good vs. property rights. And hopefully a fair market value will be assessed to a property based upon the value of surrounding developed property. (thats usually how the price is determined.)

MannyIsGod
08-12-2004, 08:41 PM
thats bullshit man.

you are eating into the profits of citizens for no good reason.

and you obviously don't have all the information [i don't mean that in a mean way], but it's the city's fault to begin with for making these promises to toyota without having it worked out.

you know, when the city was making concessions for the pga village, the same people that are arguing for concessions for toyota were screaming bloody murder.

the simple fact is that there are groups of people in san antonio that think they know what is best for everyone else. they don't want you to have the right to make your own decisions and either reap the rewards or suffer the consequences, they want to have the right to decided what is acceptable for you.

DeSPURado
08-12-2004, 08:47 PM
Chill out Manny...This is something that happens all the time. And over the course of history, the courts have managed to arbitrate most emminent domain cases with extreme care for civil liberties. I know my Aunt and Uncle went through this with their land in New Mexico. There are two sides to this argument, and both have a very legitimate argument. I am not siding with the governments right to take someones land or the right to property. Just that these things have been almost always decided fairly without emminent domain coming into play at all.

MannyIsGod
08-12-2004, 08:51 PM
i hate these groups that get people riled up for uniformed actions like this so called boycott and the actions against the pga village.

from what i can tell however, it's backfiring. the millers are a great san antonio family and many people in this city recognize that over tracey bogarts ridiculous antics.

exstatic
08-12-2004, 08:53 PM
Um, re-reading the original article, Toyota doesn't WANT the land, they just want no houses built within 3 miles. They are FINE with commerical development. There goes the Toyota corporate welfare theory.

Tommy Duncan
08-12-2004, 09:23 PM
Um ex, Toyota is basically taking that option away from the Millers. That has value, whether or not you want to believe it.

Hook Dem
08-13-2004, 12:04 AM
"the simple fact is that there are groups of people in san antonio that think they know what is best for everyone else. they don't want you to have the right to make your own decisions and either reap the rewards or suffer the consequences, they want to have the right to decided what is acceptable for you." ...........I am not agreeing or disagreeing but how is this any different than the people in this forum?

Joe Chalupa
08-13-2004, 02:21 AM
There you go again Hook Dem...making sense.
I know I do what what I think is best for our children even though they don't agree.
I have eminent domain over them right now.

Nbadan
08-13-2004, 06:29 AM
I am not agreeing or disagreeing but how is this any different than the people in this forum?

It was so much easier being a looney-liberal when it wasn't so much in vogue. Since when has presenting the complete story, often still ignored by the so-called 'liberal' mainstream media, equal to making someone's mind up for them, or thinking we know better?

Hook Dem
08-13-2004, 11:11 AM
"It was so much easier being a looney-liberal when it wasn't so much in vogue. Since when has presenting the complete story, often still ignored by the so-called 'liberal' mainstream media, equal to making someone's mind up for them, or thinking we know better?" .......Damn Dan! I didn't single out either party. Got a guilty conscience????:lol

MannyIsGod
08-13-2004, 11:16 AM
I am not agreeing or disagreeing but how is this any different than the people in this forum?

well, it's obviously not that different because some of the people in here are the same types of people.

however, there are a good amount of libertarians here as well, who argue for the right to make up thier own minds.

Hook Dem
08-13-2004, 11:29 AM
Manny...A libertarian supporting Kerry = Democrat and a libertarian supporting Bush = Republican. Don't see that many libertarians!!!!!

ChumpDumper
08-14-2004, 06:13 PM
It's a ploy by the Millers to get more money, and they will get paid. And the city will end up zoning it however it wants to. This is much ado about nothing.