« Brooklyn Beep Bleeps! | Main | Spitzer disses public authorites, but too late for AY review »
January 3, 2007
Next big test of power to seize property?
The US Supreme Court will examine whether a private company can demand payment in exchange for not seizing private property.
The Christian Science Monitor
By Warren Richey
If you had any doubts that NY State is the posterchild for eminent domain abuse, check this out:
Bart Didden wanted to put a CVS pharmacy on his property in Port Chester, N.Y. He even obtained approvals from the local planning board.
But because a portion of the CVS site was in a blighted redevelopment zone, Mr. Didden was told that planning board approval wasn't enough. He'd have to reach an understanding with a private company that had been selected by Port Chester officials to control all construction inside the renewal zone.
The developer, Gregg Wasser of G&S Port Chester, told Didden he'd have to pay $800,000 or give G&S a 50 percent stake in the CVS business. If Didden refused, Mr. Wasser said, he would have Port Chester condemn and seize his property and instead of a CVS he'd put a Walgreens drugstore on the site.
Didden refused. The next day, the Village of Port Chester began legal proceedings to seize Didden's land by eminent domain.
Lawyers for Didden took the matter to federal court. They even went to the FBI - all to no avail. Now they are asking the US Supreme Court to examine whether a private company can demand payment in exchange for refraining to seize private property in an urban renewal zone.
Posted by lumi at January 3, 2007 9:34 PM