WSJ: Cities Use Eminent Domain To Clear Lots for Big-Box Stores

[question everything]

The Wall Street Journal

MEDIA & MARKETING

Cities Use Eminent Domain To Clear Lots for Big-Box Stores

By DEAN STARKMAN
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
December 8, 2004; Page B1

Big-box retailers have a message for local landowners: Move.

And the command has the force of law, much to the dismay of Darrell M. Trent, a part-time developer in Pittsburg, Kan. Mr. Trent thought he scored a coup this year when he leased part of a seven-acre parcel his family had owned since the 1960s to a local plumbing supplier. But the city took the property this spring through its powers of eminent domain and handed it to a developer with a different tenant: Home Depot Inc.

(snip)

Desperate for tax revenue, cities and towns across the country now routinely take property from unwilling sellers to make way for big-box retailers. Condemnation cases aren't tracked nationally, but even retailers themselves acknowledge that the explosive growth of the format in the 1990s and torrid competition for land has increasingly pushed them into increasingly problematic areas -- including sites owned by other people.

The village of Port Chester, N.Y., is clearing an entire business district -- including a marina, a housewares importer, an antiques store and several other businesses -- to make way for Costco Wholesale Corp., Bed Bath & Beyond Inc. and others. Costco took over another site after the city of Cypress, Calif., condemned a vacant lot as a "public nuisance" to stop a Christian group from building a religious center there. After a public uproar, the city found another site for the church , which says it is satisfied with the ultimate outcome. The township of North Bergen, N.J., moved to condemn a store in a shopping center occupied by Kmart Holding Corp. in favor of a developer who plans another Home Depot. When the city of Maplewood, Mo., invited retailers to compete for a chunk of choice land, developers for Costco and Wal-Mart Stores Inc. fought a nasty legal and political battle. Wal-Mart's developer won -- and 150 homes and businesses were condemned.

(snip)

Property-rights advocates say the use of condemnation for big boxes is an abuse of government power that subsidizes big retailers at original landowners' expense. "They're the new generation of robber barons, like the railroads of the 19th century" says Gideon Kanner, a professor emeritus at Loyola University Law School in Los Angeles. "They look upon this as the new way of doing business." The U.S. Constitution and most state constitutions allow the government to take private property, with compensation, for a "public use." But courts over the years have allowed cities and towns to stretch the definition to include economic-development projects, on the principle that one private owner can better create jobs and increase tax revenue than another.

(snip)

Lately, cities' power to condemn property has come under increased legal scrutiny. In August, the Michigan Supreme Court reversed a landmark 1981 ruling, widely cited by other states, that effectively barred condemnations for purely economic purposes in that state. Then, in September, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear a suit brought on behalf of New London, Conn., property owners challenging the city's plan to clear nonblighted homes and businesses to make way for an office-and-research park. The case, brought by Institute for Justice, a Washington, D.C., property-rights law firm, is the first the high court has heard on economic-development condemnations since the 1950s.

(snip)


Write to Dean Starkman at [e-mail]

URL for this article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB110245261831593568,00.html

[Somawas]

1. This kind of action by a city

is pretty much totally unconsionable.

[The Backlash Cometh]

2. It's not "government" that is behind this. It's the Chamber of Commerce.

The very same property rights activists who want to develop anywhere they like with the least amount of building codes, are the ones that have the power to pull the strings in city hall these days.

We really need to differentiate between the old style public servant and what is presently controlling our governments. Imagine real estate developers with law degrees sitting on the city commission, and you'll understand who is behind these excesses of power.

This is what Libertarians and Republicans will bring to the table. They have taken government and made it worse.

[bryant69]

3. Wait a moment

If those giant block stores aren't allowed to crush anybody who stands in their way, they will simply move all their stores to Thailand or Cameroon. Do you want that? All those jobs going to Taiwanese? Plus think of the commute. Frankly if we are going to have giant box stores oppressing communities, we need to do everything in our power to ensure that such oppressive tactics are used against Americans, not Taiwanese.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[JHB]

9. Unfortunately, it's all too common these days...

Atlantic City did it for Trump...
Houston did it for Bush and his team's stadium...

This is an abuse of power all over the place, not limited by "red" or "blue", and needs to be fought.

[Charon]

4. "WSJ: Cities Use Eminent Domain To Clear Lots for Big-Box Stores"

Hate admit this but Bortz beats on city govt. about misuse of eminent domain almost weekly on his radio program.

[question everything]

5. Who is Bortz?

I don't "do" radio talk shows...

[The Backlash Cometh]

6. If Bortz is the end-all, why doesn't he do an investigation and find

out who is making these decisions. People assume it's career public servants. It's not. It's real-estate interest that now controls our local governments.

[w4rma]

7. Boortz could care less, except for ratings, otherwise he'd rally folks to

go after the folks who are REALLY doing this. The folks funding the politicians (and who are likely the same folks paying his paycheck).

[SpiralHawk]

8. "All your lots are belong to us."

CorpCo and associated subsidiary governments.

[TO Kid]

10. It's been going on for years

One of the worst offenders is AMC Theatres- nearly all of their multiplexes were built on expropriated land. The calculus is that buying some politicians is cheaper than paying for the true value of the land.

There is an organization that's been fighting it for more than a decade called the Institute for Justice. They engage in property rights litigation dealing mainly with Eminent Domain and asset-forfeiture drug laws but their successes have included restrictive business licensing practices.