Entries Tagged 'Eminent Domain' ↓

If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!

Ah, the power of a police force. The Kane County, Illinois government is in a quandary. They signed a long term lease on an old Montgomery Ward to house their government offices. But then decided they wanted to buy the building.

If it was a deal with anyone but a governmental agency, the process would have involved negotiations and paying a fair market price. But not to these fine governmental officials. Instead when they were told that the lowball offer they made was not good enough they decided to vote for an eminent domain takeover.

How is that for negotiating power. I could see if there was no other space in town and Montgomery Ward refused to rent the space to them, then there would be a specific need. But instead they have a 20 year lease.

A twenty year lease, that I guess is not with favorable enough terms, that the fine elected governmental officials will be willing to bring the full police force of the government to take the building from private citizens.

That is what is wrong with eminent domain laws in the country. It allows government to make bad decisions and then have the citizens pay for it.

Kane County and the New York-based limited partnership that now owns the property reportedly are several million dollars apart in their respective appraisals on the property that for tax purposes is assessed at slightly more than $8 million.

Tuesday’s vote to file an eminent-domain lawsuit to acquire the property came after an executive session at which board members reportedly were told that talks between the two sides over selection of an independent appraiser to review the situation had reached an impasse.  via the chicagotribune.com

If eminent domain is a topic that interests you please take a few minutes and watch this video by Drew Carey and Reason TV. It shows how the government uses eminent domain and the term blight to take over a persons property for their benefit and those that can buy access.

You have to love the homeowner that would not give in to the pressures of a developers in China. Of course, this developer I would not want to meet in a game of Poker either.

The villa now stands alone in a 30ft deep man-made pit in Chongqing city, reports Jinbao Daily.
The Chongqing Zhengsheng Real Estate Company wants to turn the area into a £40m ‘Broadway’ square, including apartments and a shopping mall.
But the owner of the villa says he won’t move out unless the company pays his price - the equivalent of £1.3 million.
“The villa owner refuses to move, so the real-estate developer has had to dig out all around it to force him to,” says a saleswoman at Weilian Real Estate Sales Company. via Ananova

Hat tip Boing Boing

The City of Baltimore has to be one of the shadiest and most underhanded governmental agencies in the country. They have in their arsenal of “urban renewal” tools a process called the “quick take.” The quick take is the rapid taking of multiple pieces of property in a very short period of time under the guise of eminent domain. That is bad enough you say, but here is the kicker.

These thieves do not have a plan for the property. They just take the property and then package it up for a future developer to come in. Can you create a greater climate for graft and corruption. Boss Tweed would be proud. Trying to justify this makes the settlers actions to the indians look ethical.

The true concept is lets get this property before the owners know the appreciation that is available to them and keep the money for ourselves and the government to dispense. The point of a gun is a very effective sales tool used by the city redevelopment agency.

Fortunately, they are now being taken to court on this, and the state appeals court has the chance to get rid of this theft. Lets hope they do so.

The pointed questions and comments of two Court of Appeals judges conveyed strong skepticism of Baltimore’s redevelopment policy, particularly the wisdom in taking someone’s land first, then figuring out what to do with it later - because the legality of eminent domain centers on taking property only for the public good.

“When the city filed the quick take, it had no clue as to what it intended to do with this piece of property?” Judge Alan M. Wilner asked Baltimore’s attorney, adding later: “You don’t see a constitutional issue here?”

In May, in what land-use officials called the first time the court has blocked a Baltimore quick take seizure, Circuit Court Judge John Philip Miller ruled that city economic development officials failed to show “sufficient grounds” to warrant taking a Charles North bar and package goods shop called The Magnet. via the baltimoresun.com.

Ah, the greed of a developer and the threat of new laws aimed at stopping them. The St. Louis Redevelopment Agency in its eagerness to avoid following the legistlatures decision, rushed an eminent domain takeover lawsuit to remove property from a Wheel Chair Bound senior citizen who has a long term lease on a property the city wants to turn into an entertainment district.

The legislature passed a new more restrictive eminent domain law to stop such aggressive and enriching taking by development agencies, but the law does not go into effect until December 31st, 2006. So instead of following typical proceedure, some greedy and unethical bureaucrat decides to file the lawsuit to start the process before the law takes effect.

So instead the city is going to have a big black eye as it tries to take the property from an elderly woman, who leases it from a church. Does the city of St. Louis have no shame? All to avoid a more restictive law passed by the legislature they will aggresively sue an old lady.

The suit, filed in St. Louis Circuit Court, says the city’s Land Clearance for Redevelopment Authority has been unable to agree on a price for 1119-1127 South Broadway, owned by the Convent of the Sacred Heart.

The land and buildings have been leased for no rent to Salvatore and Mabel Inserra for a 999-year term, according to an appraisal supplied by the Inserras’ lawyer, Francis X. Duda.

The Inserras have leased the 13,660-square-foot property since at least the early 1980s. Salvatore Inserra, a longtime Soulard Market produce seller, died at work in 1985 at age 60.

The suit also names property owners from centuries ago and their heirs, including John Mullanphy, said to be St. Louis’ first millionaire, a nun and “Philipini Duchesne.” The suit appears to be referring to St. Rose Phillipine Duchesne, who founded a school for the Society of the Sacred Heart of Jesus in a cabin in St. Charles in 1818, according to the Vatican. She died in 1852 and was canonized in 1988.

The Senate took a pass at bringing a vote to the floor on the eminent domain issue, allowing Federal dollars to be used to take others properties for private gain. The Republican leadership attempted to bring the eminent domain issue for a vote, but a Senator placed a block on the legislation. This denied the opportunity to bring the Private Property Rights Protection Act of 2006 to a vote even after the House backed the measure with a strong bipartisan vote.

Morons… Eminent domain is one of the dominant issues of our time, and one anonymous Senator can stop a piece of legislation that could have made a huge difference. Why am I not surprised.

From the Institute for Justice:

After failing to bring to a vote the reform that would have de-funded eminent domain abuse at the federal level, S. 3873 was “hotlined” last Tuesday [Dec. 5, 2006] in an attempt to pass the legislation before the 109^th Congress adjourned last week.  (Hotlining is an expedited process that allows congressional leadership to present a bill to the entire chamber for unanimous approval.)  However, at least one unknown senator placed an anonymous “hold” on S. 3873, effectively killing the legislation.  Eminent domain reform legislation was stalled both in the Senate Judiciary Committee and on the Senate floor.

Dana Berliner, a senior attorney with the Institute for Justice, which represented Susette Kelo in her fight against eminent domain abuse and is leading the nationwide effort for eminent domain reform, said, “Historically, the federal government has provided the money to throw hard-working people out of their homes and businesses to make way for private development projects.  The Senate had the opportunity to end this abuse, and they blew it.”  Under the federal Housing Act of 1949, cities were authorized to use eminent domain to clear “blighted neighborhoods,” and in the process displaced one million people, two-thirds of them African-American.    

The biggest winner on Tuesday was not the Democrats, but the foes of Eminent Domain Abuse. All 10 inititives on the ballots across the country passed easily showing the American people value property rights more than they want an nanny state government taking away their properties.

Some stories from across the nation:

• North Dakota Voters Restrict Eminent Domain
• Eminent Domain Limited in South Carolina
• Georgians Pass Eminent Domain Limits
• Eminent Domain Limits Pass in Michigan

If you are a Xavier University Alumni, you should be embarrassed by your University. They are putting out to the public that they will try to use eminent domain to take homes from people that do not want to sell to them. How about that for a good citizen award.

Of course they are couching the language in terms of last resort, but to me this screams something else. What I hear is, “Small homeowner, sell us your land at our price as we are much better and more important than you are. If you do not, we will get the local government to take it for us.”

This reminds me of the hoodlum who explains to his victim, we can do this the easy way or the hard way. Xavier University should be ashamed of itself.

Officials at Xavier University say they’re exploring whether the Cincinnati school could seize some private homes to build a new business college.
But a university vice president says Xavier would only consider taking the properties through eminent domain as a last resort.
For years, Xavier has been quietly buying up property near its campus, and last year it announced plans for the business school. It wants to break ground next year but is still negotiating with some neighboring homeowners. via  FOX19 Cincinnati News and Weather WXIX

Ohio has long been seen as one of the worst abusers of eminent domain in the country. The combination of a slow economy (lower taxes), older infrastructure, and local Democratic Party machines has created an environment where personal property rights have been trampled to improve the tax base.

And parts of me can see the reasoning. Some of the prospects for the smaller Ohio cities are bleak. However, taking a mans property by the government is so much more wrong. That these local governments never see this is frightening and I am very pleased with the ruling today by the Ohio Supreme Court. Their recognition of the rights that the Federal Supreme Court could not see is inspiring and we owe them a debt of gratitude.

In a unanimous and lengthy decision, the Court laid out a series of important legal opinions.  The Ohio Supreme Court explicitly rejected the U.S. Supreme Court’s infamous Kelo decision of June 2005, in which that Court held that local governments can take property from one person and transfer it to another because the new owner might produce more taxes or more jobs than the current one-so-called “economic development.”  Second, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled that state courts must apply “heightened scrutiny” to uses of eminent domain, especially when the property is being taken for use by another private party; according to the Court, lower Ohio courts should not simply rubber-stamp decisions by local government to take property.  Next, the Court held that statutes authorizing the taking of property cannot be vague.  The “deteriorating” standard used by Norwood “is a standardless standard,” and the Court rejected it.  Finally, the Court struck down Ohio’s statute that allowed property to be taken even before an appeals court ruled that the taking was legal.

Thank you Ohio for setting such a strong standard.

The power of eminent domain can be intimidating and overwhelming to the typical property owner. The government comes in with their full power saying we will take your property and this is what we will offer. And you have to take it. If not, we have the right to have people with guns to force you to accept the deal. The Mafia is more subtle than this.

So new laws like the ones signed in Missouri this week empower the landowner. And you know the laws are effective. When city planners and government officials scream and cry about how it will be disastrous for the community, things are moving in the right direction. Because these government functionaries are losing power to create deals and opportunities to help their developer friends and benefactors. And they lose power. And that is  a very, very good thing.

“It’s David against Goliath,” said (John Scorse, the Galena, Kan., resident who owns, manages or leases more than 1,500 acres of land in Missouri, Kansas and Oklahoma.

On Thursday, Scorse was present when Missouri Gov. Matt Blunt signed into law restrictions on the use of eminent domain. Scorse believes the new law will help shift the balance to landowners when challenges arise over eminent domain.

“It’s a positive move forward,” he said. “This law is starting to level, or at least give our judicial system an opportunity to help ensure fairness.”

Scorse had earlier testified before the Missouri Task Force on Eminent Domain formed by the governor last year.

“It is a good step,” said Steve Anderson, coordinator of the Castle Coalition with the Virginia-based Institute for Justice, which tracks eminent-domain issues and legislation. “It is really good for farmers.”

via the Athens Review.