Liberty Matters News Service

January 11, 2008  

It Depends On What The Definition Of Blight Is

The City of Clarksville, Tennessee has designated two square miles of downtown Clarksville "blighted." The Ordinance, approved by the City Council, subjects approximately 1,800 homes and businesses for seizure by eminent domain, to be replaced by private developers. Attorney John Summers, labeled the Council's move "audacious," and said if it stands it will be the largest designation of its kind in the country, especially since no specific projects have been identified and none are ready to go. Angry landowners claim they were "blindsided" by the Council's move and have formed the Clarksville Property Rights Coalition to fight for their rights. Coalition members say they did not receive adequate information about the City's plans for their property until it was a done deal. A meeting will be held January 10 to clarify misconceptions about the plan, according to Missy Graham, Communications Director for the City of Clarksville. "The Downtown District Partnership worked on the plan for several years before presenting it to the City in the fall of 2007," Graham explained. "The City Council voted on the plan on two separate occasions and did not receive any opposition from the public," she continued. The Council has not been forthcoming in providing answers to the public's questions. Clarksville Online publisher Bill Larson submitted a list of questions to city officials but has received no response. His last request was made January 3.

Community Meeting to Explain Method Behind the Madness of "Blight"

Eminent Domain Prompts Protests In New Jersey

A group of angry property owners gathered in front of the Glassboro, New Jersey municipal building January 5 to protest the city's land-grab policies. The landowners have formed a working group, Glassboro United, because they are concerned about how property is acquired for the Rowan Boulevard redevelopment project. The protestors followed the city councilmen to their meeting. They were not acknowledged, although the council did praise each other for the redevelopment project. "There's no doubt in our decision that it is for the best," said Council President Anthony Fiola. Rowan University President Donald Farish, whose school stands to benefit from the project, remarked: "We've said to each other all along the destiny of the university and the town are inextricably woven together." But Suleiman Arifi, who escaped from communist Yugoslavia and found refuge in the United States, doesn't share their enthusiasm. Arifi owns a combination commercial and residential property in the targeted area. He and his wife live in one apartment, rent out the second, and lease the rest to a salon/spa. The city wants to take his property, not for a different use, but because they want a different owner. Mr. Arifi, who suffers from severe coronary artery disease fears the stress of the fight may kill him. "You are destroying my health. You are destroying my everything," Arifi charges. "I live here and I'm making a business here," Arifi told the Gloucester County Times in July. "How can they do this to me in America?"

Citizens Protest in Glassboro
Are You Fit to Own Your Property?

Eminent Domain Defused

It doesn't happen very often in this increasingly tyrannical America, but sometimes right prevails. A Superior Court jury in California awarded $26.5 million to a family whose land had been confiscated by the state transportation department (Caltrans) to build a leg of a freeway. The department used eminent domain to take 2.8 acres of the Anderson family's 58-acre parcel on Otay Mesa. That left the Andersons without access to the rest of their property, but Caltrans said that wasn't their problem and instead offered to pay $172, 410 for the 2.8 acre piece. Besides, argued the agency, the remaining property was to be designated open space and couldn't be used anyway. The Anderson's turned down Caltrans' "generous" offer and went to court. After a three-week trial, the jury came back with a unanimous decision for the Andersons. The panel figured the value of the purloined 2.8 acres at $1.3 million and damages for the loss of use of the landlocked property at $20.1 million. Additionally, the jury awarded the family $5.1 million in damages from the loss of business due to Caltrans' sloppy business practices. Vincent Bartlotta, attorney for the family, said the verdict was "truly a victory for the little guy. The justice done in this case shows that Caltrans can't just come in and bulldoze people." The decision will likely be appealed. "We respect the jury's verdict, but disagree with the assumptions that support the verdict," said Ed Cartagena, spokesman for Caltrans. "An appeal is likely in the future."

Family Awarded $26.5 Million in Eminent Domain Case

Justice Delayed In Texas

A Texas family has been battling attempts by the small town of Freeport, on the Gulf of Mexico, to take their waterfront property to build a high-class marina since 2002. Freeport officials, in collusion with wealthy developer H. Walker Royall, think they can haul in millions in taxes by building the private marina and attendant up-scale shops now occupied by Western Seafood on the Brazos River waterfront. The Gore family was not interested in turning over the business that Wright Gore Sr. had built in the 1940s to greedy Freeport city managers, so the officials decided to take the property by eminent domain. Wright Gore III didn't realize how that tool could be distorted to steal private property. "I only knew that it was used to take property for roads, bridges, and streets. I was not aware that government could take my land and transfer ownership to somebody else." The U.S. Supreme Court decision on Kelo in 2005, gave the green light to unscrupulous city fathers across the country to seize private property for other private dealings and Freeport was no exception. The case has bounced through the court system for years. From the Texas Federal District Court, it went to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans, which ordered it back to a Texas trial court. There, a state trial court ruled that condemnation was not allowed in this case. That should have been the end of it, but the town of Freeport apparently thinks that high court costs and attorney's fees are worth it and the town has appealed the case to the Texas Court of Appeals. Pacific Legal Foundation has filed an amicus curie brief, as it did in the Fifth Circuit adventure. It is not known when the case will be heard. Texas governor Rick Perry last year vetoed an eminent domain law the 2007 Legislature crafted to protect landowners. It overwhelmingly passed both Houses, but Perry said it would cost government too much money proving he favors big government over individual Texans' private property rights.

Home

Send mail to the webmaster with questions or comments about this web site.
Copyright © 2001 Liberty Matters