Kelo v. New London and other ED abuse
Here’s an article that looks at another case of Eminent Domain abuse cases headed to the Supreme Court. It also addresses the problem:
Court rulings have stretched the definition of “public use,” adding urban blight and job creation to the original goals of acquiring land for highways, public schools, and the like. Ohio law says eminent domain in the name of economic development cannot be used solely to expand the tax base. It must create jobs and the positive effect must happen in a reasonable amount of time.
Some examples:
Among the most egregious examples of abuse of eminent domain, the institute and other critics say, occurred in Lakewood, Ohio, where the city council deemed a neighborhood of 200 homes to be “urban blight” to make way for a condominium and retail development with a movie theater.
In Mesa, Ariz., the city wants to remove Randy Bailey’s Brake Repair Shop to make way for a larger, more valuable Ace Hardware store.
In New London, the city has condemned private homes on a 90-acre tract to make way for a waterfront hotel and conference center, and mixed-use development of offices and residential units. The project is designed to build upon pharmaceutical goliath Pfizer’s decision to open a research facility in the area.
The Connecticut Supreme Court said New London had a valid public use, claiming the redevelopment would raise the tax base and create thousands of jobs. But an appeal to the highest court on behalf of seven property owners said they seek “to stop the use of eminent domain to take away their most sacred and important of possessions: their homes.”
The fact is that using ED as an economic development tool tramples the property rights of others. Hopefully this Spring, the Supreme Court will rule that way. Given some of their horrendous rulings lately, I’m not feeling too good about it.
