Eminent Domain & Economic Development
Local executive and legislative offices become often contentious with each other and with the public over redevelopment projects all across US cities and communities. Governments all around the world are legally allowed to use the power of “eminent domain”, government’s legal authority to seize private property for a public purpose, or what we often hear as “economic development.” In most cases, the only remaining and negotiable item to be discussed is the compensation for the private property owners for their property.
According to Wikipedia:
The U.S. Supreme Court has largely given the public use requirement an expansive interpretation and has allowed takings of private property for reconveyance to other private parties, or in some cases by private parties directly, on the theory that the new owners will put the taken land to more lucrative uses that are likely to generate more tax revenues. This is known as "economic redevelopment." It uses eminent domain to enable acquitre and then convey land to commercial development or redevelopment to increase tax revenues. The Supreme Court's decision in Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005), affirmed the majority decision of the Connecticut Supreme Court and allowed such takings, was heavily publicized in the media. This increased awareness of eminent domain post-Kelo, inspired a great public outcry. Several states have enacted or are considering state legislation that would drastically restrict the state's own power of eminent domain. The Supreme Courts of Illinois, Michigan (County of Wayne v. Hathcock)(2004)[1], and Ohio (Norwood, Ohio v. Horney)(2006) have recently ruled to disallow such takings under their state constitutions.
I understand that in growing and expanding cities like NYC, local governments must play a role in fostering such growths by creating appropriate opportunities for economic development. But how and who decides the need for government intervention? Some cities, like Anaheim, stayed away from abusing the powers of eminent domain by deciding to respect the rights of private property and readjusting the policies so that the market economy can dictate any changes to land use. In other words, when Anaheim was faced with the decision to redevelop parts of their City, their Mayor and City Council decided to make their rezoning process and other land use policies more transparent and flexible for the public.
In NYC, many business and homeowners are fighting the Mayor’s eminent domain powers and the NYC Economic Development Corporation. Here are some interesting blogs:
http://duffieldst.blogspot.com/2007/07/organizing-against-eminent-domain-abuse.html
http://www.nolandgrab.org/
What’s also interesting is that according to a study by the Institute for Justice, “in 24 years, 2,532 projects were carried out in 992 cities that displaced one million people, two-thirds of them African American.” Eminent domain and economic development often results in the displacement of minority businesses and minority homeowners. Part of our democratic idealism pushes our government to practice equitable policies and assist the underserved, not displace them.
Do you think governments should use eminent domain? Take this poll.