I’ll just stay right here, thank you.

God I love it when you actually find an American that has lost interest in money or material goods. The complete loss of bargaining power anyone has is awesome.

What a moron - I look forward to the article where her children smother her in her sleep. Turning down 1 million for 120K worth of property is asinine. Why people get sentimental about a piece of dirt I'll never understand.

Well, there's sentimentality, and there's senti-mental illness. If they were offering her the true value of the land, I'd almost agree with her, but ten times the value..?

To say that she doesn't have interest in a material good is wrong. She is interested in the real property that is her house and land. She's just digging her heels in to be contrary, when she could be a hell of a lot more comfortable somewhere else.

What will they offer for property when she, or her family, wants to sell it? Not a million dollars, I bet.

While picking your life up and moving it somewhere new can be traumatic, especially for an 86 year old, I agree this is just stubbornness. If she really doesn't want the money, then sell the house, buy a new one like it somewhere nice and give the rest of the money away to charity. What kind of quality of life could possibly be maintained with a mini mall wrapped around her house?

I live in a small town grappling with its own growth. This scenerio is all too commonplace here, and it looks terrible. Nice beautiful new buildings, and scraggly old lopsided houses wedged between them.

A lot of the houses are tiny, overgrown, and run down (not even rustic. Just...junky). Probably due to similar situations, older people who don't want to move (and don't have the mobility to upkeep their yard/house exterior).

IMO this woman is purely stubborn. She could be living quite nicely in a safer neighborhood. Now, she's going to need some good locks on her doors. Living in a buisness area can be dangerous.

Read the article!
She has no children (her only child died of meningitis), her husband is long dead, her dog died recently and the house is the only thing left that somehow links her to the family she lost (she bought it for her mother). I wouldn't sell it either.
And she doesn't seem to be some grumpy old woman - the construction workers love her.

Good on her! Money is horrible stuff covered in germs, it's great she doesn't want it. Sounds like she's really connected to the house, memories and all that stuff. I admire people like this, that are not for sale.

I would much rather have 100 year old houses around than yet another friggin' strip mall.

This country seriously needs an attitude adjustment. Newer isn't always better.

She is 86 years old -older people do not like change. Its not about money or even sentimentality. She is simply comfortable in her usual environment.

I already posted this story online, but I know three families who did this and every single one of them was really angry that their NEIGHBORHOOD changed and were overall, not happy that office workers stared into their garden nor that their backyard was surrounded by a parking lot. What she wants is gone, so the question still remains: why did she stay when the neighborhood is gone?

stubbornness and certainly not logic. She will turn around in her kitchen and look straight into the eyes of someone bored at a desk 25 feet away and scream about her big mistake.

I would stay put if I were that age, too. After seeing aged family members die soon after major changes in their accommodations, I'd have to say that her point of view is valid (and not necessarily stubborn). She wants familiarity. I'm sure she couldn't care less about the money she's being offered. What's she going to do with a million dollars at age 86? Buy a Ferrari and go shopping in Milan?

If she likes the house, she can always move it (though it's best not to do it yourself).

The neighborhood is going to be gone anyhow - might as well get the money, have them pay for the move, and still have your old 100-year old house, but in a better neighborhood.

This form of stubbornness is like a pyrrhic victory.

She may be simply being stubborn, but, in fact, she's not turning down ten times what the property is worth. The assessed value of the home and property is $128,000, but that's not the same as what she could sell it for. Assessments for tax purposes are lower than the actual worth of a parcel, sometimes (as in this instance) significantly so. Given that the house has been valued at $8000, it's probable that this is the "frozen" value of the home, which is how the assessor calculates the value for homes owned by seniors who fall below certain income levels. For the area of the city that the house is located in, the actual worth of the house and property is probably more like $500K to $600K. Considering what in-city property sells for (even in less desirable neighborhoods than Ballard), not to mention the profit that the development company stands to make if they could get her out and turn that parcel into a commercial site, $1M is a gross insulting underbid. They tried to take advantage of her and she didn't allow them to.

She's an old woman with no heirs; the developers will get that land eventually. I say good for her for making it difficult for them.

Kudos to her. Whether you or the developers or the neighbors or whomever think she is crazy not to sell is frankly irrelevant. That's what property rights are all about. If I have something that you want to buy, you need to offer me something I am willing to agree to. If you (or your minions) force me to take anything less, that is THEFT. She's under no obligation to take offers for the benefit of her heirs, charities, or anyone else. It is HER property.

I'm actually surprised that the developers weren't able to "grease thë skids" with the local paid-for politicians. Nowadays after the Kelo ruling, it's pretty easy for anyone to steal your land by paying you what they want to pay for it and just convincing the local political machine in power that they are offering you "a fair price".

As for offering her "10x what is worth" , that is a crock. The property is worth whatever a rational individual or corporation is willing to pay for it. The developer offered $1M (and not a penny more), because that is *exactly* what it was worth. If it was worth less, they would have offered less. If it was worth more to them, they would have upped the offer rather than build around her. The problem they ran up against, is that it is worth more to HER. And that's all that matters, folks.

Hasn't anyone ever taken Economics? Were you all asleep in class? Geez.

I live 10 minutes from her and often drive by.. Kudos to the girl.

P.S., 1 mil is not much money here in Seattle. A tiny old house (built in the 30's, 2000 sq feet) is going for 400,000 to 800,000. 2 million's a more equitable deal.

I agree it seems like a good idea that the could move the house to a new site as her familiar neighborhood is gone. She would still have the same house. Has anyone suggested this to her?