ST. LOUIS--Missouri property rights activists raised concerns today that Rep. Steve Hobbs' eminent domain legislation (HB 1944) fails to adequately protect the rights of Missouri property owners.
"The fundamental issue is that taking someone's property for a private developer is wrong," said O'Fallon resident Steve Blechle, MEDAC's co-chairman. "We're happy that the bill makes some procedural improvements, but ultimately, it leaves loopholes in place that leave property owners in danger."
Jim Roos, MEDAC's coordinator, agreed: "We're not saying you have to change the process by which you take our property, our homes and our businesses, but rather, that you should stop doing it completely," he said. In particular, he noted that the bill does little to close the "blight" loophole, which is the most common pretext for eminent domain abuse. The Hobbes bill allows blight takings for areas that suffer from "dilapidation," "overcrowding," and "lack of ventilation, light, or sanitary facilities"--terms that are likely to be in the eye of the beholder, Roos warned.
Sunset Hills resident Kathy Trip had similar concerns. "Any reform legislation has to say, unequivocably, that made-up-as-you-go definitions won't cut it," she said. "PGAV, the consulting company the city hired to determine that my neighborhood was 'blighted,' re-wrote the rules to ensure that they got the outcome the city wanted. They could do the same thing with the definition in the Hobbs bill."
For example, she says, PGAV cited her home's small basement windows as a fire hazard. Yet the home was compliant with the fire codes in place when the home was constructed, and her 225-pound son has no difficulty climbing out the window in an emergency. The Hobbs exception about "lack of light" could be abused just as easily, she said.
Brentwood resident and MEDAC member Karen Smith said that the best eminent domain reform is also the simplest: prohibit the use of eminent domain for private use. "We don't want a better process," she says. "We want our rights protected. It doesn't look to me like the Hobbs bill gets the job done." Smith pointed out that eminent domain isn't necessary to deal with blight--cities already have powers under nuisance law to deal with abandoned and hazardous properties. Eminent domain just makes it easier to seize property and turn it over to politically-connected developers.
Smith suggested that Missouri citizens may have to solve the problem themselves through an initiative petition. MEDAC has endorsed a constitutional amendment proposed by Missouri Citizens for Property Rights that would prohibit virtually all private-to-private takings and deal with blight through nuisance law instead.