Good news on the eminent domain front
BB&T, a bank that operates locally, says:
BB&T Corporation today said it will not lend to commercial developers that plan to build condominiums, shopping malls and other private projects on land taken from private citizens by government entities using eminent domain.
The commercial lending policy change comes in the wake of Kelo v. City of New London, a controversial Supreme Court decision in June that said governments can seize personal property to make room for private development projects.
The court’s ruling cleared the way for an expansion of eminent domain authority historically used primarily for utilities, rights of way and other public facilities.
“The idea that a citizen’s property can be taken by the government solely for private use is extremely misguided, in fact it’s just plain wrong,” said BB&T Chairman and Chief Executive Officer John Allison.
“One of the most basic rights of every citizen is to keep what they own. As an institution dedicated to helping our clients achieve economic success and financial security, we won’t help any entity or company that would undermine that mission and threaten the hard-earned American dream of property ownership.”
Reward good behavior. Seriously. I may just have to switch my banking needs to BB&T. That is awesome. Hats off to them.
In a move supported by Gov. Don Carcieri, the state Economic Development Corporation will discontinue using eminent domain to take people’s property and give them to private developers for economic development.
The policy change came in a vote by the EDC’s board on Monday.
“We’re trying to send a clear message that when it’s owner-occupied we’re respecting those rights,” said Carcieri, who’s chairman of the EDC. He asked the agency last year to revise its eminent domain policy that would protect Rhode Islanders’ homes from eminent domain condemnations for office buildings, hotels and other private uses. Carcieri said earlier this month that he plans to introduce legislation to prevent the use of eminent domain for economic development statewide.
January 25th, 2006 at 11:53 am
“The idea that a citizen’s property can be taken by the government solely for private use is extremely misguided, in fact it’s just plain wrong,” said BB&T Chairman and Chief Executive Officer John Allison.
“One of the most basic rights of every citizen is to keep what they own. As an institution dedicated to helping our clients achieve economic success and financial security, we won’t help any entity or company that would undermine that mission and threaten the hard-earned American dream of property ownership.”
This is the best way to fight eminent domain abuse.
Goodbye Suntrust hello BB&T.
January 25th, 2006 at 12:05 pm
I wish I lived in your area, just so I could switch to BB&T.
January 25th, 2006 at 12:43 pm
I wish people actually understood what the Kelo ruling allows.
January 25th, 2006 at 12:46 pm
I wish people actually understood what the Kelo ruling allows.
Do you support the Kelo ruling?
January 25th, 2006 at 12:53 pm
I understand what it allows and it still sucks. I wish judges understood what the Constitution allows.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:45 pm
It’s not only the right thing to do morally, it may well be the right thing to do from a risk management standpoint.
With this area of law likely to change in the short term future, either through legislation or a new USSC case, BB&T doesn’t want to risk financing a large project built on wrongly taken private land that might be given back to the rightful owners, leaving BB&T without any collateral to secure a loan.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:50 pm
BB&T decides on principle over profit.
In my professional life I have to deal with BB&T as one of my customers, and honestly I do not care for the processes in which we deal with them.But with this news from Say Uncle, I must re-evaluate my feelings.Sure they have some hair-brained pr
January 25th, 2006 at 2:52 pm
I’m not so sure that last on, from RI, is as good as it sounds. If you read it closely, it seems he’s only talking about not taking peoples homes.
So somebody’s old, not the prettiest building, muffler shop, say, or gun store, might not be safe if someone else wanted to build a big new mall that would bring in more tax $$.
January 25th, 2006 at 3:00 pm
Not so fast. BB&T is virulently anti-gun. They will get no business from me.
January 25th, 2006 at 4:08 pm
They are? Not that I doubt you just want verification.
January 25th, 2006 at 8:45 pm
This is good to hear. Makes me glad I bank with BB&T.
January 26th, 2006 at 6:48 am
BB&T is listed on VCDL’s Gun Owner Unfriendly page:
http://www.vcdl.org/static/gue.html
April 14th, 2006 at 8:39 am
[…] A while back, BB&T said it wouldn’t loan money for projectes taken via eminent domain. Now, a government agency is reacting: The city’s urban renewal agency is looking to pull its $2.37 million out of BB&T because of the regional bank’s policy against loaning money for private projects that depend on eminent domain to obtain property. […]