« The Coney contrast: the city sticks to its guns, challenges developer | Main | MISSING: Candidate Marty Markowitz »
September 4, 2007
How Eminent Should Domain Be?
The NY Times
By Joseph Berger
Hold the presses: The Times ran a story this Sunday which was largely sympathetic to critics of eminent domain, with a disclosure that "Some of the property for the new headquarters of The New York Times was acquired through eminent domain."
As Atlantic Yards Report recounts, on July 29 the Sunday Times ran an article about regional eminent domain controversies, but did not run it in the City section, "and this past Sunday, the Times did it again, running an article sympathetic to the "little guy" in the Westchester section but not elsewhere."
Interestingly, the Times describes one Yorktown Town Councilmember's work against eminent domain abuse thusly:
Last January, he went further and engineered passage of a law barring the town from condemning private property for commercial purposes, while allowing it for traditional public uses, like the building of roads, sewers and schools. A vague declaration that a neighborhood is blighted or dangling a promise of jobs and taxes could not be used to expropriate a home or shop for a developer’s benefit.
Norman Oder notes that these same issues bear examination by The Times in New York City proper:
But when is the Times going to look more broadly and ask how eminent domain reforms in other jurisdictions, if applied in New York City, would affect controversial projects like Atlantic Yards?
After all, vague and contested declarations of blight and shifting promises about jobs and new tax revenues are hallmarks of the Atlantic Yards plan. And were standards recently adopted by New Jersey courts applied in Brooklyn, the exercise of eminent domain for Atlantic Yards might be stalled.
Links:
The NY Times, How Eminent Should Domain Be?
Atlantic Yards Report, The Times's eminent domain blind spot, again
Posted by lumi at September 4, 2007 2:01 PM