Submitted by Guest1966 (not verified) on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 5:12pm.
Well if the city is basically seizing the property and placing a lien on it, then yes the city should have to pay the cost of demolition of the buildings, not the owners, you can't take something away from someone then bill them for it, unless it's life in some form, that's being harmed, and that's not the case here!
City Eyesore
Well if the city is basically seizing the property and placing a lien on it, then yes the city should have to pay the cost of demolition of the buildings, not the owners, you can't take something away from someone then bill them for it, unless it's life in some form, that's being harmed, and that's not the case here!