A Farmer Donated Land to Turn into a Park. The City Is Building a Data Center • Hacker News Board

Re: A Farmer Donated Land to Turn into a Park. The City Is Building a Data Center

#241

Post by _heimdall » Tue, Jun 09, 2026, 2:29 AM UTC

bluGill wrote: post #190

bitmasher9 wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was recently involved in a civil suit where an 50+ year old easement was brought up. I’m glad you only consider the easement valid for 5 years or when in use, but the courts disagree.

The courts have no choice - they are following the law as they should. However that doesn't mean the law is just or right. This is an important philosophical difference

A philosophical difference for sure, I happen to find plenty of laws to be unjust, not right, and even unconstitutional. In this comment chain that seems a bit out of place though, I thought we were specifically talking about the laws at play here (maybe I misread it though!)

Re: A Farmer Donated Land to Turn into a Park. The City Is Building a Data Center

#242

Post by thayne » Tue, Jun 09, 2026, 3:17 AM UTC

order-matters wrote: post #229

ip26 wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A never had the authority to contract the land as a park indefinitely ... once C owns it they own it That's not what a deed restriction is. are you stuck with passing that obligation forward Generally yes. Which is why the deed restriction can affect the market value of the property.

The city usually has the authority to dismiss deed restrictions if it is in the best interest of the city. my wording was too vague though, youre right in that I took for granted we were talking about the city and this doesnt generally apply to normal ownerships or else HOAs wouldnt be anywhere near as annoying as they are.

> if it is in the best interest of the city

I think a lot of people, including many of the citizens of this city would say this is not in the best interest of the city.

Re: A Farmer Donated Land to Turn into a Park. The City Is Building a Data Center

#243

Post by JuniperMesos » Tue, Jun 09, 2026, 8:30 AM UTC

alasdair_ wrote: post #194

Does this mean Mamdani can build a datacenter in the middle of central park if he wanted to?

No, the specific land use regulations around central park in new york city have basically nothing to do with the specific land use regulations around this particular piece of land in Texas.

Re: A Farmer Donated Land to Turn into a Park. The City Is Building a Data Center

#244

Post by JuniperMesos » Tue, Jun 09, 2026, 8:31 AM UTC

elzbardico wrote: post #93

Never donate things for the government. No matter if it is local, state, NEVER trust politicians. You want to give something for the community? for nature? create a foundation or deed it to a natural conservancy organization, another foundation, a church, but never the government.

You can't necessarily assume that the people in charge of managing a foundation or natural conservancy organization or church will act as wise stewards of that resource in the future either.

Re: A Farmer Donated Land to Turn into a Park. The City Is Building a Data Center

#245

Post by JuniperMesos » Tue, Jun 09, 2026, 8:34 AM UTC

nancyminusone wrote: post #119

ianm218 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen a lot of people indicate they think people's predictions for the future with AI are like a psy-op and that none of them really believe it. Isn't it simpler to believe that people like Terrance Tao who have been in good standing with the academic community for a long time are telling the truth? Like you may very well disagree with their predictions based on your lived experience or theories... But it doesn't…

>we can scale this up exponentially Lost me here. It usually means something will require exponentially more resources, and eventually a finite limit (money, time, raw materials, land, energy, lifespan, speed of light, etc) will be hit.

Humanity should absolutely aim to be limited by the speed of light in more domains than it currently is.

Re: A Farmer Donated Land to Turn into a Park. The City Is Building a Data Center

#246

Post by JuniperMesos » Tue, Jun 09, 2026, 8:35 AM UTC

ProllyInfamous wrote: post #237

The US Federal Government donated surplus ammunition depots to the city of Chattanooga, decades ago. Deed restrictions limited its usage as "parkland." Recently, our mayor attempted to sell this parkland (technically zoned "industrial") to gain a quick half-million for the county. It is adjacent to VW's Tennessee assemblyline. Fortunately this was rejected, and now it's being greenwashed as "conservation" by that sam…

Why is it better for the city of Chattanooga to use land formerly occupied by ammunition depots as parkland, than for it to sell it to VW so they can use it to expand their assembly line?

Re: A Farmer Donated Land to Turn into a Park. The City Is Building a Data Center

#247

Post by lazyasciiart » Tue, Jun 09, 2026, 9:21 AM UTC

mr_00ff00 wrote: post #211

order-matters wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

presumably because it's not their land and if A wanted to build a data center on it to begin with then B could do nothing about it. the key issue is C doing things that it's taxpayers dont want done. in this case though taxpayer money is not being spent, the property is being sold which means money is being generated for the taxpayers, and the new property owner is ultimately A never had the authority to contract the…

This is well thought out and a good point, it does feel like though there should be some “special case” for donating land to keep for public use as a park. You are right though, how long can someone who doesn’t own that land, have authority on how it is used.

In Seattle the city is not allowed to take away park land without replacing it with the same area of new park land. No need to special case “if it was given by a citizen to be a park” - just make it park land at the time, and it’s permanent enough.

Re: A Farmer Donated Land to Turn into a Park. The City Is Building a Data Center

#248

Post by projektfu » Tue, Jun 09, 2026, 10:57 AM UTC

dylan604 wrote: post #231

projektfu wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone apparently thought that about a Texas option contract but the Texas Supreme Court disagreed and said the contract was still valid, endorsing the fiction.

Hmm, if I refuse to pay my car note, they repossess it. If you fail to pay taxes, the gov't places a lien on the property. Can the family that never received payment put a lien in place instead? That would prevent the $10million sale. That'd get someone's attention

The thing is it's just a promise. If it would actually torch the deal to not hand over the $10, you can do it at any time. But the court agreed that it was just a fiction. Presumably if you didn't pay the option price, which may not have been specified directly in the contract, or was in some other exhibit, the deal never happened. But this technicality of consideration is not the same thing.

Re: A Farmer Donated Land to Turn into a Park. The City Is Building a Data Center

#249

Post by maxerickson » Tue, Jun 09, 2026, 11:21 AM UTC

infinite_spin wrote: post #50

Aunche wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a tax loophole where you buy a lot of land and donate 90% of it to the government to be "public parkland". However, in actuality, you're the only person who has convenient access to this land and nobody else can build there, so you get nearly all the benefits of this land while claiming a big tax deduction. It doesn't sound like what is happening here, but I don't think you should be able to block developmen…

seems like this behavior would have a chilling effect on deathbed donations, especially when it sends the message gives: "screw you, we'll do what we want" I also don't see how this behavior is in the public good, even if the donor has some ulterior motive, governments are free to reject donations

If you take one step further back, you can make the discussion about what deed restrictions are reasonable rather than about breaking the deed restriction.

Like for an example with different dynamics, Menard's will say you can't use the building as a hardware store when they sell to build elsewhere. That's a stupid restriction for society to allow.

Re: A Farmer Donated Land to Turn into a Park. The City Is Building a Data Center

#250

Post by culi » Tue, Jun 09, 2026, 4:52 PM UTC

cameldrv wrote: post #126

Notwithstanding the merits of this case, I'm against the concept of unlimited time deed restrictions on property. Dead people should not be able to decide what living people can do with land or any other property indefinitely. That's why we have things like the rule against perpetuities, and requirements that charitable foundations spend a certain percentage of their assets every year. Some of these ideas strongly ca…

Unfortunately this is just the only defense we currently have against powerful interest groups. It's the reason we still have any redwoods today. Absent of a fair replacement, a powerful corporation will, over time, always win even if it's not the net social benefit.