The strangest eminent domain case ever

There is an intriguing eminent domain case going on in south Mississippi. It involves a popular, well-known local eatery, the Mississippi Department of Transportation (MDOT), the local county government and a 100-foot strip of land alongside a highway. The real estate issue is property value, but that is only the beginning.

Let’s begin with a brief, but incomplete factual timeline because there are so many issues with this case.

2001 – The Shed Barbecue and Blues Joint opens on Highway 57 in Jackson County. It becomes popular and well-known outside the county. It even had a season on the Food Network channel.

February 2012 – The Shed destroyed by fire.

2012 – Owners rebuild, but without permits in a special flood-hazard area, and for having unpermitted signs out front, according to county officials.

August 2012 – MDOT files court case to take 100-feet of The Shed’s property to widen Highway 57.

2012 – 2014 – Owners given permission by county to operate as a temporary structure.

July 2014 – County notifies The Shed it is in violation of building code.

April 26, 2016 – Jackson County cites The Shed with building code violations

October 2016 – MDOT case is set to go to trial over taking of strip of land beside roadway. Case had been continued five times. MDOT has said the land is worth less than $200,000. The business owners want more than $1 million for the .43 acre.

November 2016 – A jury sets the value of .4 acres at The Shed at $408,334 that the Mississippi Department of Transportation will have to pay owners. Owners deciding whether to appeal.

In short, there are two cases: An eminent domain case with MDOT and a building permit violation case with the county. One of the main issues in the eminent domain case was how much the business value contributed to the land value. And one argument there is whether a business that may be operating without the proper permits even has any value. Obviously, the jury thought so.

Now for a bit of real estate primer.

Highest and best use is defined as that use that is physically possible, legally permissible, financially feasible and most profitable. These four attributes are the ingredients for determining highest and best use. In this case it could be argued that because The Shed’s use was not legally permissible then the current use is not the highest and best use. It does not mean that it has no value.

Value, as it applies to anything, has for basic components, as represented by the acronym DUST, where D stands for demand, U is for utility, S is for scarcity and T is transferability. For something to have value it must have all four. Demand means that there is a market for the property or the item. There is someone willing to pay for it. Utility refers to that idea that it has some use. For example, a pencil can be used for writing, a refrigerator can store things at a cool temperature and a parcel of real estate can be developed or can be used for other purposes, such as agriculture or recreation. Scarcity means that there is a limited supply available. All real estate parcels are considered scarce because no two are exactly alike if for no other reason than they are physically located in different places. Transferability refers to the concept that title to the property can be conveyed to another party.

There are many different types of value. For example, there is sentimental value, assessed value and insurable value. When valuing real estate, the most common form of value used is market value, which is defined as “The most probable price, as of a specified date, in cash, or in terms equivalent to cash, or in other precisely revealed terms, for which the specified property rights should sell after reasonable exposure in a competitive market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, with the buyer and seller each acting prudently, knowledgeably, and for self-interest, and assuming that neither is under duress.”

It will be interesting to see how these cases are resolved. As mentioned earlier, The Shed is a popular, well-known place. It is a bona-fide tourist attraction. It serves thousands of customers each weeks in a collection of – well – sheds. The owners are involved in the community, and the community is involved in The Shed. After Hurricane Katrina over 50 volunteers helped to rebuild the place. There was some wonderment in the county about whether there could be found twelve impartial jurors.

Now that the eminent case has been before a jury, we now await the county’s building code case. The question being asked: What’s the future of The Shed?




Why do some organizations thrive and really make a difference when others seem to be just hanging on? One thorough research project revealed that there are several things that make a significant difference in the success of associations. This research, which was conducted by the American Society of Association Executives, was presented in a book entitled 7 Measures of Success: What Remarkable Associations Do That Others Don’t. If you manage an association, serve in a leadership role in an association or are a member of an association this book is worth reading.

The 7 Measures Project, as it was called, began in 2002 and resulted in publication of the book in 2006. An updated version was published in 2012. It presents as checkup on the associations that were mentioned in the first edition. The research used the matched-pair methodology, which was also used by Jim Collins and colleagues and resulted in the classic business management book, Good to Great. Basically, what that means is that the researchers looked at organizations that were in the same era and faced the same challenges. The successful companies were then compared to those that were not so successful to find out why. The researchers looked at 104 associations that had been in business for a minimum of 20 years.

Listed below are the seven measures, or factors, that were discovered. along with some comments by this writer.

1. A Customer Service Culture – The remarkable associations built their organizations by serving members and providing value to their members. They actively sought ways to continuously improve services to their members.

Some organizations make the mistake of forgetting that they are membership organizations. For example, the leadership of one chamber of commerce in Mississippi decided that it wanted to effect change in an issue facing the public. It got involved in a campaign that resulted in a referendum that was defeated by the community by a wide margin. The members were never asked if they wanted to participate in the campaign. It took a while for the chamber to rebuild member trust.

  1. Alignment of Products and Services with Mission – The associations were driven by mission, not money. Everyone knew the mission of the organization and whom they served. The mission was central, regardless of the external environment.

Some organizations that are really good at what they good get lured into doing other things by funders who are in search of effective organizations. For example, an organization good at building houses may not be so good at job creation. But because of their success and opportunity to expand they refocused their mission, which led to a crisis when the funding dried up.

  1. Data-Driven Strategies – Surveys of members, analysis of the environment in which they operated and continuous analysis of information resulted in accumulation of data that was acted upon. The remarkable associations were good at gathering and sharing information. They knew what members wanted and were willing to pay for.
  2. Dialogue and Engagement – The staff and volunteers listened to each other and talked to each other. There were cross-functional teams, and no so-called silos. There was constant communication. By the way, the typical level of member non-involvement is 69.9 percent.
  3. CEO as a Broker of Ideas – The CEO facilitated “visionary thinking” throughout the organization and developed a strong staff and volunteer partnership. The CEO was not necessarily the idea generator, but was the person who connected ideas with people and action.

Organizations should beware of charismatic leaders who have followers. It should be the organization and its mission that is followed, not the leader.

  1. Organizational Adaptability – When remarkable organizations face a crisis they learn from it and change accordingly. Nevertheless, they know when not to change. The key is to know when to change. Sometimes that means abandoning a project or idea; sometimes it means refocusing.

This is why regular strategic planning is so important. Planning is about looking ahead, but it is also learning from the past, e.g. what worked and did not work.

  1. Alliance Building – These associations were very good at finding and forming alliances and partnerships that complemented their mission and purpose. They also were good at communicating clear expectations about the partnerships. They are not driven by money, nor were they afraid to dissolve the partnership if it was not effective.

Finally, just in case you are wondering, here are the nine organizations listed as “remarkable” in the book:


American College of Cardiology

American Dental Association

Associated General Contractors of America

Girl Scouts of the USA

National Associations of Counties

Ohio Society of CPAs

Radiological Society of North America

Society for Human Resource Management



Anatomy of a Failed Economic Development Project

(June 28, 2016)
This is the story of a failed economic development project. The names and locations have been changed to protect the guilty. It is a lesson for economic developers and community leaders seeking to recruit large projects to their areas.

A large retailer operating in a dozen states in the southeastern part of the United States was seeking to expand. Headquartered in a major metropolitan area, its sales were increasing and its market area was growing. Its analysts recommended opening a new distribution center to improved logistics and increase sales even more. They hired a site selector who recommended two sites in a certain area.

The company was family-owned, having been founded 30 years ago by a man and wife who began their business with a dress shop managed by her and a men’s clothing store managed by him. Their joint business expanded to household items and more. Their sons took over day-to-day management of the business with the goal of doubling in size in 10 years.

The area under consideration was located at the intersection of two large U.S. highways. It had a steady increase in population, and was projected to grow at even faster rate in the coming decade. Growth was occurring at a faster rate in the suburban area, which is located outside the city limits of the central city. Average income was higher than the state average and the unemployment rate was lower than the national average.

The central city had a well-established industrial park. There was only one vacant building, which was formerly used by a trucking company that went out of business. It met the needs of the company, with only slight modifications and could be ready in less than 90 days. A second option for the expanding company was to construct a new facility in the county. Although it would be slightly more efficient it would mean a construction period of at least nine months. The company decided that both options were equal. It sent its in-house real estate vice president to meet with local officials in the city and the county.

Recently, there had been increasing animosity between the chambers of commerce in the suburban areas and the one in the central city. A year ago, county leaders formed an economic development organization and hired its first economic developer, a 31-year-old male with previous experience as the assistant economic developer in a suburban county in the Atlanta area. His hiring was somewhat contentious from the beginning. A search committee put forth two candidates, one from the local area who was well-known and respected and one from outside the area. One faction of county leaders felt that a certain local candidate would be the best choice because the position required someone who knew the local “lay of the land.” Another group felt that the best choice would be someone from a growing suburban county from another state. Eventually, the board chose the economic developer from the other state.

On the appointed day, the real estate vice president met with the city economic developer in the morning and the county economic developer in the afternoon. As is now customary in the economic development world, there were discussions of incentives that would be offered to the company. Each economic development official was informed that two sites were under consideration and were asked why the company should choose their respective site. The central city economic developer pointed out the reasons that the city site met the needs of the company. The county economic developer did the same, but then chose to talk about the reasons that the city site was a bad choice. He pointed out that suburbia was where distribution companies were locating. He then handed the prospect a sheet that compared the city and county. The facts presented were about crime, schools, infrastructure, government officials and future growth. The county economic developer concluded his presentation by saying, in effect, “… choose that other site and it will get burglarized, your drivers will get mugged and it will be difficult to recruit employees who have children in school.”

The real estate vice president went back to headquarters and reported the details of his visit. It did not take long for the company management to choose the city site. The CEO of the company remarked if the county economic developer talked that way about his competition then he probably talks that way about other things. Today, the company is still in its distribution center in the city and the county economic developer was fired a long time ago.

The primary lesson in this story is that one should not disparage their competition, but should instead sell the benefits of their own assets. As this writer’s grandfather was fond of saying, “Never talk bad about someone else because when you do you’re really taking bad about yourself.”

A secondary lesson in this story is that sooner or later the city and county will be marketing itself as a region. Talking negatively about a neighbor will not be tolerated. When prospective clients see a divided region it raises the proverbial red flag. All one has to do is look at the most successful economic development projects in Mississippi to conclude that regions that work together get the best projects.

Friendly competition and pride in one’s community is a healthy thing. Attempting to sell a community by telling why a prospect should not move to a neighboring community is a disease that needs treatment.

The Benefits of Sharing a Meal

Collaboration among community leaders is one of the keys to success in moving an area forward. But what if leaders don’t seem to want to collaborate? What if they are more concerned with their own territory than the community as a whole? What can be done to get them together? One good place to begin is the dinner table.

One of the reasons that community leaders don’t work together is that they don’t respect each other. They may see each other as unequals or even adversaries. The reason they don’t respect each other is that they don’t understand each other. And one of the reasons that they don’t understand each other is that they don’t listen to each other. One of the best ways to begin to listen to each other is to have a meal together. And not the kind of meal that they usually attend together, i.e. the civic club luncheons, the public/private partnership meetings, the board meetings, etc. The meal should be one-on-one or better yet one-on-one in each other’s homes.

Dining in each other’s homes is not as common as it used to be. Nowadays, friends and business acquaintances are more likely to go out to dine at a restaurant. That was not always the case. This writer recalls the time some 20-plus years ago when he was summoned to jury duty at the federal courthouse. At the beginning of the jury selection process, the judge asked prospective jurors if any of them were personal friends of any of the attorneys. One person raised his hand, saying he knew one of the attorneys. The judge then began probing into how well the juror was acquainted with the attorney. He asked the usual questions, and then he asked, “Have you ever had dinner in his home or has he ever had dinner in your home?” The prospective juror replied in the negative, whereupon the judge said that the man did not know the attorney well enough to be excused from jury duty.

Sharing a meal with someone else, and not having an agenda other than to get to know each other better can be the beginning of a joint effort to improve the community. Once upon a time, there was a community in Mississippi where there were three main influencers. One was the mayor, one was the president of the county board of supervisors and one was the chief executive of the largest employer in the area. The only time they dealt with each other was in public meetings where many other people were usually present. The community was not growing and no new businesses of significance were opening. An outside consultant evaluated the situation, recognized the dysfunction and recommended that the three leaders have a monthly meal together. Before long, they began to understand each other, respect each other and work together. Today, that community is on the move.

History is filled with leaders having meals together to get to know each other better, to resolve their issues and to plan the future. Let us begin with some noteworthy World War II meals. In 1942, Winston Churchill met Stalin for the first time. The purpose of their meeting was to generally discuss the end of the war and who would get what. They had dinner at the Kremlin. At the website History Professor David Williams gives his impression of the dinner and the meeting as Churchill would have perceived it:
“There’s a man here who I can deal with. Okay, so we had a bad day yesterday, but today is a good day, we’ve had dinner, we’ve had a booze, we’ve talked about families and things, this is human stuff. And given how remote Stalin was before, that’s progress. Churchill always hangs onto this, he always feels that if he could get round the table with Stalin things could be sorted out.”

There were many more dinner meetings in which Churchill, Stalin and others, including President Franklin D. Roosevelt would attend. There was the Tehran Conference in November 1943 and the Yalta Conference in February 1945.
In American history, there is probably no more famous meal than that which occurred in 1621 between the Pilgrims and the Wampanoag Indians. It is not known exactly what was consumed at this meal, but turkey was probably one of the dishes. Governor William Bradford wrote about the food situation of the autumn of 1621, saying that “there was great store of wild turkeys, of which they took many.” Although this meal was probably a harvest celebration, there is no doubt that the participants got to know each other better.

Leaders of all stripes use luncheons and dinners to meet with those who oppose them and those who support them to discuss issues. In February of this year, President Obama met with House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell in a private lunch session to discuss ways they could work together. Not really sure how that has worked out.

Without a doubt, the most famous meal would be that known as The Last Supper, in which Jesus Christ foretold coming events and instructed his disciples on what to do when he was gone.

As this writer observes current political events in Mississippi it is hoped that leaders from different sides of the issues would simply take the time to have a meal together and get to know each other on a more personal basis. Who knows what might happen?

What was your best customer service experience last year?

April 8, 2016

What was your best customer service experience last year?

That’s the question I asked 31 participants at a recent workshop I was facilitating. The responses were enlightening, entertaining and had something in common. In almost every case an employee with the company or organization had gone beyond their regular job duties to make sure that the customer was more than satisfied, indeed received something that they had not expected. was the company mentioned several times. In one case, one of the participants from Mississippi told of how she lost a cellphone power cord during a visit to a family member in North Carolina. To her amazement, she received a package a few days later from that contained her power cord. She wondered how such a thing could have happened. It turned out that while on her visit to North Carolina she had returned a pair of shoes to It seems that the power cord had somehow dropped into the shoe box. When the employee opened the returned shoes they found the power cord, packaged it and sent it to the customer in Mississippi.

Another participant told about her experience with a Target store. She had left her purse in a shopping cart in the parking lot because she had been attending to her young grandchildren. In addition to the usual credit cards, there was several hundred dollars in cash in the purse. When she arrived at home there was a message on her home telephone informing her that her purse had been found and could be picked up at the store. She went back to the Target store and learned that the employee whose job it was to collect the shopping carts from the parking lot had found her purse and turned it in. He told her that he did so because someone had done it to a member of his family and he felt that he should do the same.

Two participants related stories of how an employee paid their bills because they had forgotten to update their expired credit cards. Although the amounts were relatively small there was certainly no requirement for an employee to take their own money to pay a customer’s bill. And yes, the customers returned to the stores and repaid the employees.

And then there was the case of the participant who went on a Carnival cruise with her friend. The friend had a certain eating disorder that required a certain type of meal. At dinner on the first evening of the cruise the server was informed of the condition, to which he replied that there was no problem because the kitchen was prepared. When the meal arrived it had to be sent back because it did not meet what had been ordered. When the replacement meal arrived it too was unsatisfactory. The diner/customer did not eat it and apparently displayed a bit of displeasure on her face. The dining room manager noticed the situation, apologized and had a private table for them with the appropriate food for the remainder of the cruise.

In another case, a customer called a state agency that needed some information from the customer’s income tax return. The employee at the state agency took the time to go line-by-line to help the customer fill out the form and help provide the information. When a fellow employee asked why that was done when it was not necessary, the helpful employee stated, “I treat everyone who calls here just like I would want my mother to be treated.”

The stories served to remind me that there was still plenty to celebrate in the customer service world. I also discovered that there is an organization, the American Consumer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) that researches and surveys this topic. Each quarter it publishes a report on overall U.S. customer satisfaction. The index is on a scale of 1 – 100. ACSI’s latest results reveal that overall consumer satisfaction is dropping slightly. In the 4th quarter of 2015 the Index stood at 73.4. That compares to 75.2 in the same quarter in 2014 and 76.3 at the same time in 2013. By the way, the 2013 score was the highest 4th quarter mark in over 30 years. You can see much more details reports of various industries and companies at

Below are the ASCI 2015 scores by industry, followed by the score for federal departments.
Manufacturing/Durable Goods …………79
Accommodation & Food Services ……..78
Manufacturing/Nondurable goods …..77
Retail trade ……………………………….…..77
Health care & Social Assistance …….…75
Finance & Insurance ……………………….75
Energy Utilities ………………………………74
Transportation ………………………………74
Information …………………………………..69
Local Government ………………….……..64
Federal Government …………….……….64

Here are the 2015 scores for federal departments:
Interior ……………………………………..75
State ………………………………………….71
Defense …………………………………….70
Homeland Security ………………….…67
Commerce …………………………………66
Social Security Administration ……66
Agriculture ………………………………..63
Health & Human Services ………….62
Transportation ………………………….61
Education ………………………………….61
Veterans Affairs ……………………..….60
Justice ………………………………………59
Treasury …………………………….……..55

The Growing Importance of Symbols

Today I wore my hound’s-tooth hat to the office. I did not get past the reception room before someone said, “Roll Tide.”

Why did that happen? It’s because just about everyone in the South knows that the hound’s-tooth hat is the headgear often worn by legendary University of Alabama football coach Bear Bryant. Although he retired in 1982, it is not uncommon to see dozens of fans at Alabama football games wearing a hound’s-tooth hat. The reason is that the hat is a symbol of his reign as one of the great coaches and a period of Alabama football success. One wonders what Coach Nick Saban’s reign will be symbolized by. But that’s another story.

According to most dictionaries, a symbol is a thing that represents or stands for something else. It seems that there is a symbol for just about everything. Everyday, drivers respond to traffic symbols, consumers respond to buying symbols, couples respond to symbols of touching and military personnel respond to salutes.

In the Roman Catholic church, saints are symbols of a virtue, a profession or even a condition. For example, St. Christopher is the patron saint of travelers, St. Francis of Assisi is the patron saint of animals, merchants and ecology and St. Frances de Sales is the patron saint of writers and journalists. St. Erasmus is invoked to relieve stomach cramps and colic.

One of my favorite scenes in the movie, “The Da Vinci Code,” is the one in which the character Robert Langdon, a college professor symbologist, shows his class a series of symbols and asks what comes to mind when seeing the symbol. The first one he shows is a picture of a group of persons wearing white-hooded robes. The class members respond with “hatred,” “racism” and “Ku Klux Klan.” Langdon then points out that there might be some disagreement in Spain because there these are depictions of priests. He goes on to show several pictures of symbols and then points out that what a symbol might mean today is not what it meant before or to someone else. His question then is: “How do we separate truth from belief?”

There quite a few examples of symbols that have lost their original meaning. For example, most people probably think of pirates or the Jolly Roger flag when seeing an image of the skull and crossbones. Perhaps they think of poison. However, a trip to Spain reveals that it is not uncommon to find the skull and crossbones depicted in places hundreds of years old. Those places are graveyards, because that is how cemeteries were once labeled. The swastika is another symbol that has a common meaning to most people today. It is associated with Nazis. However, in Hinduism it is one of the symbols of the god Vishnu, and has been around for centuries. In Sanskrit, it’s meaning is “all is well.”

The official state flag of Mississippi is the subject of much discussion because it is a symbol of something else. To some it represents a proud heritage; to others it symbolizes racial hatred.

There is another symbol that has received a lot attention recently. Allow me to describe it to you and ask you to think about what it represents. It is in the shape of a shield, not unlike what you would think of what a Roman soldier would hold in front of him. Across the top of the shield is the word “Veritas,” which stands for truth or truthfulness in Roman mythology. Depicted in the center of the shield is an image of three sheaves of wheat.

What does that symbolize to you, dear reader? Probably not much unless you are a graduate of, or have some interest in, Harvard Law School. However, to those affiliated with Harvard Law School it symbolized quite a bit because the seal was an homage to the family of Isaac Royall Jr. , a plantation owner who bequeathed land to Harvard that funded a professorship and led to the school’s founding in 1817. In 1936, at the tri-centennial celebration of the university’s founding, the seal was adopted as that of the law school. However, in November of 2015 a group of students called for the seal’s removal. A committee was formed, a report released and last week, the Harvard Corporation gave the law school permission to discard the seal. So what was behind this symbol change? You guessed it. The donor was a slave owner.

I’m not questioning Harvard’s right to change the seal. I merely present this example to show that symbols are important, in some cases important enough to change if the current symbol does not represent the values of the current time. Critics of Harvard’s move are asking how far must society go to change symbols, especially those dealing with racism and slave ownership.

The subject of removing symbols seems to be gaining traction in today’s cultural environment. This past December the New Orleans City Council voted 6-1 to remove four Confederate statues from Lee Circle. Some have asked if the statue of Andrew Jackson is next in line for removal because he owned slaves.
Finally, what are the symbols that you celebrate or are disgusted by? Does your business have a symbol that might be offensive to someone? The greater question might be about whether we are even prepared to have a rational and reasonable discussion about symbols when it seems that we are segregating ourselves by idealogy.

The day I took a federal agent to CS’s.

February 25, 2016

Back in the day when I was a state investigator I worked on a case with a federal criminal investigator. He was a native of New York, and had been assigned to the Atlanta regional office a year earlier. He was coming to Jackson, Mississippi for the first time on a case. As we planned our investigation he told me that when he arrived in Jackson he wanted to go to a local restaurant, one of the things that he loved to do when traveling around the South. He requested that I take him to the most “local” restaurant in town. I decided that it would be CS’s, which is located on Northwest Street across from Millsaps College.

When we arrived at CS’s his eyes grew larger as he beheld the collection of beer cans, bumper stickers and the collection of luncheon diners. There were construction workers, public officials, professional people and students, all sitting side-by-side. The agent told me that this was exactly what he was looking for.

Momentarily, the legendary Inez herself presented us with menus. He studied it and then told Inez that he wanted the Inez platter, which was a huge burger with fries all topped off with chili and cheese. Inez immediately replied something to the effect, “Honey, you don’t want that. It’s too much for you to have at lunch.”

He was taken aback. After all, who tells a federal agent they can’t have what they want for lunch? You know the rest of the story. Inez brought him the platter and he couldn’t eat it all. Inez could not resist saying that she told him so. After we left CS’s he remarked that he had just enjoyed one of the most unusual and pleasant “Southern” experiences. “No wonder they call you guys the Hospitality State,” he said.

Well, Inez and CS’s is still there. The ambiance hasn’t changed much. Neither Inez. Have a lunch experience at one of Jackson’s most unusual local restaurants. And tell Inez hello.

More about CS’s at