Episode 8: Eminent Domain: This land is my land, this land is your land. [7:25m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | DownloadT: Imagine receiving a letter in the mail from your city council saying your home is in such bad shape that “your land would better serve the public if it was redeveloped and turned into an area for luxury townhomes and condos.” This is what happened to Lori Vendetti.
Vendetti: I own a home down in Long Branch, New Jersey. My parents have their own home as well down there — they’ve had their home for 47 years. We’re along the oceanfront. In New Jersey they don’t call areas blighted any more. They call them “an area in need of redevelopment.” They zoned our area “in need of redevelopment” to build luxury townhouses and condominiums along the oceanfront for the wealthy, and they’re trying to throw the average citizen — middle-class, lower-class citizen — out from the oceanfront that has been there for years. Currently we’re in a battle to save our homes from being demolished. We want to stay there, and no amount of money is going to buy us out.
T: Eminent domain, the right for the government to take private property, has been around for quite awhile, though lately many Americans have objected to what they see as a growing abuse of this constitutional right. Steven Anderson is a legal expert and director of the Castle Coalition, which helps activists around the country fight what they say is eminent domain abuse.
Anderson: The 5th amendment to the U.S. Constitution says “nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.” Over the last 50 years the public use clause has deteriorated from a traditional understanding of public use as things like roads, schools, court houses and post offices to the modern understanding — through at least five justices of the Supreme Court — that luxury condominiums, big-box stores and factories are also public uses.
T: Then came the Kelo v. City of New London Supreme Court ruling in 2005.
Anderson: The court said that any home or small business can be taken by the government on the mere possibility that it can make more money for the local government or provide more jobs. None of those promises ever have to come true, only the possibility that you can have more money or more jobs through redevelopment. That’s especially harrowing for every small-business owner and homeowner across the country, because any home can make more money if it’s turned into a luxury condominium, any small business can make more money if it’s turned into a big-box store.
T: The Kelo case opened the floodgates for privately owned land to be handed over to private developers. And though the owners of the land are compensated, Anderson says it is not always fair.
Anderson: The threat of eminent domain, when that hangs over someone’s head, they will often get less than they probably otherwise would have if they were to litigate a case because a local government or their agents or the developer will come and say, “this is what we’ll offer you now. We’re going to get your property anyway, so you might as well sell out now, take the money and go” as opposed to going through the court case and having to pay your lawyer.
T: Lori Vendetti says money isn’t the issue, and feels that her family’s home is priceless.
Vendetti: Our house is three houses away from the ocean. I wake up in the morning, and I smell the ocean. I see the sunrise, I go for a walk on the boardwalk and take my dog for a walk near the ocean. I can’t buy another house near the ocean in New Jersey for the price that they’re offering us. But that’s not even the point. The point is that your house should not be threatened by eminent domain for someone else’s profit. That’s what we’re fighting. We’re fighting the principle. They could offer me $5 million, and I would still fight. My memories are in that house. My two brothers have since passed; I’m the only child left. That home is not a structure — to me, it’s part of the family.
T: Lora Lucero is staff attorney for the American Planning Association, which filed a brief in favor of the developers in the Kelo v. New London case.
Lucero: American Planning Association is a non-profit organization that represents about 43,000 members across country who are mostly professional planners, with chapters in almost every state. Planners who are involved in making these plans are very very concerned about this issue.
T: Lucero says she understands how homeowners like Vendetti feel when their home’s being taken by eminent domain.
Lucero: We argued that eminent domain needs to remain in the toolbox for local communities to use, but perhaps we need to find better ways to value what just compensation is. Because how do you value memories, if your family, your grandparents have lived in that house for generations? There are sentimental values and there are other factors that perhaps should go into defining what just compensation is. So maybe that’s where the reform should really be focused on: not getting rid of the tool of eminent domain altogether and taking it out of the toolbox, but looking at if it is necessary, and if it is necessary and used to justify and implement a community plan, then maybe reexamining what just compensation is going to be awarded.
T: Lucero acknowledges abuse of eminent domain does happen, but she says this abuse can be prevented if homeowners are involved in their local government and community.
Lucero: People who are concerned about eminent domain should be concerned about “what kind of planning is occurring in our community, and how do I get involved in the planning process? How do I make sure that my voice and my expectations for the community plan, or the redevelopment plan, how do I make sure that I can voice my opinions? I should be, as a property owner, involved at the front end, helping guide where this community plan ends up, rather than at the back end fighting a particular project or the use of eminent domain.” It’s a lot tougher at the back end. So I would encourage people to get involved early on in the planning process.
A lot has been orchestrated by interest groups that are concerned about eminent domain and the potential for abuse. I think the potential for abuse has been blown out of proportion. I don’t think it’s as serious as the proponents of these changes make it out to be, because eminent domain is a very important tool in the toolbox. But it’s definitely a subject of conversation around the country now, and I don’t think it’s going to subside for a while.
These properties are not just taken from property owners. The proponents of all the change that we see going on now, many of them don’t talk about the second half of this equation, which is taking the property but also paying compensation. I think we need to look more closely at that second half of the equation and figuring out how just compensation is calculated.
(interlude)
T: Eminent domain is a controversial subject, and we’d love to hear your opinions about it. Do you think using it for private redevelopment is justifiable in most cases as long as the property owners are fairly compensated? Or is the use of eminent domain as a government tool getting out of hand? Let us know by commenting on our website, angieslistpodcasts.com, or by emailing us at podcast at angieslist.com.
Until next time, this is Tristan. Thanks for taking the time to list-en!
