|
Florida city considers eminent
domain
By Joyce Howard Price THE
WASHINGTON TIMES October 3, 2005
Florida's Riviera Beach is a poor, predominantly black,
coastal community that intends to revitalize its economy by using eminent
domain, if necessary, to displace about 6,000 local residents and build a
billion-dollar waterfront yachting and housing complex. "This is a community
that's in dire need of jobs, which has a median income of less than $19,000 a
year," said Riviera Beach Mayor Michael Brown. He defends the use of eminent
domain by saying the city is "using tools that have been available to
governments for years to bring communities like ours out of the economic
doldrums and the trauma centers." Mr. Brown said Riviera Beach is doing what
the city of New London, Conn., is trying to do and what the U.S. Supreme Court
said is proper in its ruling June 23 in Kelo v. City of New London. That
decision upheld the right of government to seize private properties for use by
private developers for projects designed to generate jobs and increase the tax
base. "Now eminent domain is affecting people who never had to deal with it
before and who have political connections," Mr. Brown said. "But if we don't
use this power, cities will die." Jacqui Loriol insists she and her husband
will fight the loss of their 80-year-old home in Riviera Beach. "This is a very
[racially] mixed area that's also very stable," she said. "But no one seems to
care ... Riviera Beach needs economic redevelopment. But there's got to be
another way." In the Kelo ruling, a divided Supreme Court held that private
development offering jobs and increased tax revenues constituted a public use
of property, but the court held that state legislatures can draft
eminent-domain statutes to their satisfaction. Dana Berliner, senior lawyer
with the Institute for Justice, which represented homeowners in the Kelo case,
said "pie in the sky" expectations like those expressed by Mr. Brown are
routine in all these cases. "They always think economic redevelopment will
bring more joy than what is there now," she said. "Once someone can be replaced
so something more expensive can go where they were, every home and business in
the country is subject to taking by someone else." Last week, the Riviera Beach
City Council tapped the New Jersey-based Viking Inlet Harbor Properties LLC to
oversee
the mammoth 400-acre redevelopment project. "More than 2,000
homes could be eligible for confiscation," said H. Adams Weaver, a local lawyer
who is assisting protesting homeowners. Viking spokesman Peter Frederiksen said
the plan "is to create a working waterfront," adding that the project could
take 15 years and that "we would only use condemnation as a last resort."
Viking has said it will pay at least the assessed values of homes and
businesses it buys. Other plans for the project include creation of a basin for
megayachts with high-end housing, retail and office space, a multilevel garage
for boats, a 96,000-square-foot aquarium and a manmade lagoon. Mr. Brown said
Riviera Beach wants to highlight its waterfront. "We have the best beach and
the most attractive redevelopment property anywhere in the United States," he
said. Mr. Frederiksen said people with yachts need a place to keep and service
them. "And we want to develop a charter school for development of marine
trades." Mr. Brown and others said this could be one of the biggest
eminent-domain actions ever. A report in the Palm Beach Post said it is the
biggest since 1954, when 5,000 residents of Washington were displaced for
eventual development of the Southwest D.C. waterfront, L'Enfant Plaza, and the
less-than-successful Waterside Mall. The fact that Riviera Beach is so
financially downtrodden may seem ironic because as Mr. Brown notes "it sits
right across the inlet from Palm Beach," one of the nation's wealthiest areas.
"Palm Beach County is the largest county east of the Mississippi, and we have
the second-highest rate of poverty in the county," the mayor said.
[Non-text portions of this
message have been removed]
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C.
section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or
payment to those who have expressed prior interest in receiving this
information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For further
information please refer to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml |