Missouri Eminent Domain Abuse Coalition

Show-Me Institute criticizes Hobbs Bill

The Show-Me Institute today posted an article on its website calling the Hobbs bill "window dressing":

When the law permits eminent domain for private profit, ordinary property owners become subject to the whim of the powerful and well-connected. We recently saw a clear example of the dangers of eminent domain abuse in Clayton, where the Board of Aldermen is in the process of condemning five small downtown retail establishments to make room for the expansion of Centene Corp's corporate headquarters. The city justifies the taking on the basis that the retail establishments are "blighted," despite the fact that downtown Clayton is one of the most prosperous neighborhoods in the St. Louis metro area.

"Blight" has become a catch-all term that allows municipal leaders to condemn anyone's land. It was the pretext under which the city of Sunset Hills condemned properties in its doomed re-development plan, which collapsed last fall when it was discovered the developer couldn't finance the project. And it was the justification given by St. Louis alderman Tom Bauer when he sought to condemn several homes and businesses to make room for a QuikTrip gas station--a plan that led his constituents to recall him.

Yet the legislation being sent to the governor this week wouldn't have done a thing to stop any of those three abuses. "Blight" takings are still permitted, and no change has been made to the current "anything goes" rules for defining blight. Under the current rules, cities commission blight studies by friendly consulting companies that invariably give cities the answers they're looking for. Such studies often cite trivial problems such as broken drain spouts, declining tax revenues, or windows that are too small for the latest fire code. Amazingly, some studies even cite poor upkeep of public streets and sidewalks as evidence of blight, even though those are the responsibility of the city government that sought the blight designation in the first place.

MEDAC Calls on Governor Blunt to Veto Hobbs Bill

MEDAC released the following press release earlier this week:

On Tuesday, May 9th, 9:00 a.m., in Hearing Room #5 of the Capitol, MEDAC will ask
the Goveronor to veto “Hobbs’ bill” (HB 1944) and declare a moratorium on eminent domain for private gain until the legislature can further consider it in special session or next year. We will travel to the capitol by bus and cars to make our statement.

Since the Kelo Supreme Court decision last summer, people have protested the TAKING of properties for private gain. The Hobbs’ bill allows any property to be taken if it is located in an area in which a city classifies 51% or more of the property as “blighted, unsanitary or substandard”. In short, safe, decent, property can be taken because a neighbor’s property is blighted and blight is very nebulous and subjective.

Compensation is not equal or just in Hobbs’ bill. The bill proposed to pay some people 150%, some 125%, and some 100% of “fair market value”. Several farmers testified to the Governor’s task force or legislative committees. They wanted to be treated with respect by MoDOT or utility companies and paid what it would cost them to replace their property with equally useful/valuable property. Home owners did not want their homes taken for private use and, if taken for public use, they wanted what it would cost to replace their home in a setting equally desirable to them. To anyone forced to sell, just compensation is ALWAYS more than fair market value and is not an exact percentage of fair market value.

Municipalities claim eminent domain is a necessary tool to remove blight and redevelop an area. In fact, many communities that 20-40 years ago were severely distressed, such as Soulard, Lafayette Square, Shaw, and Old North St. Loiuis, have fully recovered without eminent domain. Furthermore, eminent domain is only attempted in neighborhood where development is already possible. In really bad neighborhoods no one attempts to use eminent domain to solve the problems.

In April, the Georgia Legislature passed a far better bill, HB 1313. Essentially, it said that a property has to be a danger to public health and safety to be designated as blighted. It also required that individual properties, as opposed to areas, be designated as “blighted”.

This week the Florida Legislature passed HB 1567 which protects all citizens equally. It prohibits the taking of private property to prevent or eliminate slum or blight conditions or to abate or eliminate public nuisances. The bill also said that property taken for public use may not be sold to private parties for a period of ten years.

Senate Fails Property Owners

MEDAC released the following statement yesterday:

MEDAC, the Missouri Eminent Domain Abuse Coalition, expresses its disappointment in the eminent domain bill, aka Hobbs' bill, HB1944, which was voted out of the full senate yesterday, May 2nd. Jim Roos, Coordinator, and Joan Botwinick, Secretary of MEDAC, stated that this bill is much inferior to the bill passed last week by a senate committee. The full senate bill allows "unblighted, sanitary, standard" property to be taken if such is located in an area in which a municipality classifies 51% or more of the property as "blighted, unsanitary or substandard." The bill does not define area or blight. An area could be two blighted and one non blighted properties. Blight could be a cracked sidewalk, outmoded design, broken sewer cover, narrow streets, etc. Safe, decent, property could be taken because a neighbor' property is "blighted".

Property rights are not equally protected. Farm Land is explicitly protected from being taken by eminent domain. Any urban property near "blighted" properties is subject to being taken.

Compensation is not equal and not just. Some owner receive 150%, some 125%, and some 100% of "fair market value". Besides that, "Fair market value" is not just compensation. Just compensation should be the full cost to reestablish oneself in equally comfortable, desirable, conditions.

Municipalities claim eminent domain is a necessary tool to remove blight and redevelop an area. In fact many communities that 20-40 years ago were severely distressed, such as Soulard, Lafayette Square, Shaw, and Old North St. Louis, have fully recovered without any eminent domain. Furthermore, eminent domain is only attempted in neighborhoods where development without it is already possible. In really bad areas, noone attempts to use eminent domain to solve the problem.

We request that Governor Blunt not sign this bill and that he declare a moratorium on all eminent domain for private development, to take effect immediately, and that the senate and house ratify that moratorium with it to be in effect until May 2007.