Private property/eminent domain

Last week the U.S. Supreme Court began hearing arguments in the case of Kelo v. New London, Connecticut, over the legal basis for eminent domain.  Eminent domain, as I remember it from high school constitution class, was a right given to the State to take (not steal) private land for public use, usually for the construction of railroad lines.  The railroad was the typical example given for eminent domain, an act meant to be for the public good.

Presently we are seeing eminent domain being used more and more frequently by local governments for the taking (seizing) of private property for the good of private business and maybe to build a larger local tax base.  A developer wants to build a large subdivision or shopping center or office complex on land currently occupied by older homes or businesses.  When the owners of said homes and businesses refuse to sell the developer will often convince local governmental authorities to use the right of eminent domain to take these properties. 

Collinsville has been having public hearings on a proposed shopping center and there has been opposition from residents of an older trailer park.  These residents do not own the land on which their mobile homes sit and the owner of the ground has agreed to sell to the developer.  The residents have been involved in huge protests against the new Collinsville Crossings, have hired a Springfield lawyer, and have tried every thing under the legal sun to stop construction.  Now, after all else has failed they are trying to make it seem as though the city is going to use eminent domain to force them out. 

The fact remains they have no legal standing.  Eminent domain has not been in play, and using this law as a scare tactic is actually detrimental to the city, the area in question is horridly blighted and the scene of drugs and prostitution.  Tonight the city council will vote on the final piece of the puzzle which will give this development a green light.  The trailer park residents and their attorney will most likely find something else to delay or stop it.  That run down area needs to go and so do they. 

But, eminent domain is being used unfairly.  There are places nationwide and locally where it has been enacted unfairly, not to mention illegally and it is high time the Supreme Court took a look at it and ruled once and for all. Wizbang has a terrific piece on what should constitute eminent domain.  4 points, beautifully laid out.  A must read.   

Comments

[Elizabeth Adams]

In response to a posting by Diane Meyer regarding the Collinsville development: If she had been attending the public hearings she would have known that several business owners, including the owner of the mobile home park being displaced, have statet that the City of Collinsville has threatened the use of eminent domain to take business property if the owner's have refused to sell willingly.

In addition, Collinsville First had their own TIF expert conduct a survey of all the areas being added to the TIF district and the mobile home park was NOT considered to be blighted...in fact....most residents of Collinsville didn't even know the Crescent Mobile Home Park existed.

I agree there are areas that need to be addressed, especially where the long-term stay motel is located, which, by the way, is where the crime is located. As a resident of the mobile home park myself, do you think we have not complained about the crime at our back door as well?

The problem is this: City officials are not suppose to violate the laws of the land. Review the Uniform Relocation Act which is a Federal Law, but also applies to us because the State of Illinois has adopted it as part of the TIF regulations. If you picked up your paper one morning after being told by city officials (after they were directly asked if our mobile home park was going to be part of the development and we were told "NO"), and find out that your city officials lied to your face then followed that up with refusals to discuss what their plan was in regards to displacing over 100 families...you would have hired a lawyer too.

Like it or not, people are people. We are NOT cattle and we deserve to be treated in the manner the LAWS stipulate.

In digging into the relocation laws and TIF laws, we found that there were many other legalities that our officials side-stepped. If resident allow their local government to get away with breaking the law, then what is the point in having any law?

The fact is, our city government has FAILED in addressing the problem areas of our city. We have ordinances in place to address problems such as blight and crime but what good do they do if nobody is enforcing them? Trying to use the excuse that a Redevelopment Project will take care of problems that our City is responsible for taking care of is just another way to cover up the fact that our city officials are failing to do their jobs.

If we do not have enough police officers to address the crime - that is the city's fault for not hiring more police officers. If we have blight, that is the city's fault for not enforcing the ordinances they so painstakingly revised in January 2003.

I don't care how many people get mad at me as the leader of Collinsville First. There are principals involved here that go much deeper than the fact that my family might be displaced and have to move. How can we teach our children to follow the law if we allow our elected officials to break it?