The American Heritage Dictionary defines “eminent domain” as the right of a government to appropriate private property for public use, usually with compensation to the owner.  Now, I always get nervous around the term "government rights”, especially when it comes to something as sacred as private property and when they only “usually” provide compensation to the owner. 

The controversial concept of “eminent domain” has been around a long time.  If you ask most people about it, they’ll say they’re against it, but then again, most people, when they think of “eminent domain”, picture a dilapidated house next to the highway that is seized and replaced with a new on-ramp.  It’s an ugly house and the new ramp will cut 15 minutes off their trip to the mall, so they let that go.  Well, I’m here today to tell you about a new type of “eminent comain”, the type that can take your home not just for public use but for private investment.  Let me reiterate in case you didn’t catch that: governments around the country are taking private property from ordinary citizens by “eminent domain” and selling them to the highest bidder; all in the name of the “public good”.

So, how does this work?  Well, a private developer can go to the government at the local or state level and convince the powers that be that he can build more expensive homes, offices, condos, hotels…etc. on your property that will pay much more in taxes than you do.  The government agrees and attempts to use “eminent domain” to appropriate your property.  If you think that is disturbing, consider that it doesn’t always happen that way; many times, the government itself will initiate the seizure.

Skeptical?  Just ask the homeowners in Lakewood, Ohio.  In 2004, the mayor of Lakewood, Madeleine Cain, decided that the tax base of the town was too low, and that they simply needed more money.  So, she sought out developers to build upscale condominiums with scenic views of the Rocky River.  The only problem was that there were already 55 homes, four apartment buildings and more than a dozen businesses on the property she targeted. So, she planned on taking the privately owned real estate by “eminent domain”.  In order to do legally do this, the town had to certify the area as “blighted”.  Well, the homeowners disagreed that their community was “blighted” and fought hard to keep their homes and businesses.  Mayor Cain addressed the issue: “The term blighted is a statutory word and it really doesn’t have a lot to do with whether or not your home is painted…A statutory term is used to describe an area.  The question is whether or not that area can be used for a higher and better use.” Guess who decides what constitutes “a higher and better use”?  That’s right…the same people who get to define the term: “blighted”.

Are you nervous yet?  According to Dana Berliner, an attorney with the non-profit group: The Institute for Justice: “This is a nationwide epidemic. We have documented 10,000 instances of government taking property from one person to give to another in just the last five years.”

The most famous of these instances involves the Town of New London, CT.  In 1998, Pfizer Corp. began construction on a new research center on the outskirts of the Fort Trumbull section of New London.  Desperate for increased tax revenue and perceiving an opportunity, the New London government reactivated the New London Development Corporation, a private entity under the control of the city government, to look into redeveloping the area in order to take advantage of the Pfizer presence.  They created a development plan that included a resort hotel and conference center, a new state park, new residences, office, and retail space. Again, there was one small problem with their plan: an established community in Fort Trumbull consisting of 90 acres and 115 lots.  Surprisingly enough , some residents didn't want to sell. So, the government of New London sought to take their private property by “Eminent Domain”. The residents fought long and hard, and eventually, the case made it to the Supreme Court of the United States.  It was the first major “eminent domain” case to be heard by the Supreme Court since 1984.  In a controversial decision, by a vote of 5-4, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in favor of the City of New London.  The residents would lose their homes and property to private development.

Justice Sandra Day O’Connor wrote the dissenting opinion: “Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party, but the fallout from this decision will not be random.  The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms."

Let me end on a happy note, the people of Lakewood, Ohio won their court case at the State level, stopped the proposed development and removed the “blight” label from their neighborhood.  They then celebrated by voting Mayor Cain out of office at the next election, further proving that the private property owner’s most powerful weapon against “eminent domain” will always be the ballot box.





...more columns by Todd A. Carges