Quote
sstrams
What I can't remember if I stated, was that the residents there lease the property of the lake,but own the structures they built.. pretty common for these parts as the other oracle lakes are similar.. They build houses because the landowners are not supposed to yank the leases from under them.. Stan decided to do so,and, as we all know, its not to improve the ecosystem... So, i'm really sad for these people who have a whole 6 months to move their structure or abandon them..
And, no, they have no financial help in moving - they are on their own.. my guess is most will have to abandon their homes because they won't be able to afford to move them - that's a pretty big deal to move a house...
You did mention it, but I just don't understand why somebody would build and own a dwelling on leased land. About the only way I could see doing something like that is if there were some timeframe built into your lease. Maybe like if you build a permanent structure the lease becomes perpetual until the building is sold, or something like that.
I can imagine for the person owning the lake, and surrounding property, and the building owners it works out pretty good. Then in this particular case something not very likely, and I would think mostly unheard comes to pass.
I see it as a huge risk, building something you own on leased land. Like what just happened, it's got to be a nightmare for those homeowners, who can manage to find a new place to live, and set things up with such short notice. They pretty much have to abandon what you've built, as it has no value now, it never really did have any value being on a piece of leased ground.
