« It came from the Blogosphere... | Main | Eminent-domain outrage in Conn. shows why Ratner's Yards plan stirs anger »

November 13, 2009

A Turning Point for Eminent Domain?

NYTimes.com

When Pfizer announced on Monday that it was closing its global research and development headquarters in New London, Conn., the news reverberated far beyond the struggling seaport city. The project, part of an urban renewal effort, was the basis for a much-debated 2005 Supreme Court decision upholding government’s eminent domain rights to take private property for public use.

But the New London redevelopment never got off the ground, even after the local and state governments spent more than $80 million to buy and demolish private property to pave the way. Now comes the blow from Pfizer: how will its withdrawal affect future eminent domain battles in redevelopment projects? What are the lessons learned for urban planners and local governments?

Here's an excerpt from Paul Bass's essay, headlined Clarence Thomas was right:

The lesson learned in the City of New London’s Fort Trumbull neighborhood — or what was once the Fort Trumbull neighborhood — is that urban liberals make mistakes, big mistakes when they stand against the little guy through the misuse of eminent domain.

These urban liberals — the Democrats running New London at the time — thought they could build a “better” neighborhood by destroying generations of individual investment. And they used government power, the power of eminent domain, to do it. Eminent domain makes sense when used for public safety, but it doesn’t make sense when it means giving already powerful interests an advantage in real estate development.

Now the homes are gone and vast acres remain abandoned. Not only is Pfizer not building the new neighborhood it promised, it is closing its research and development headquarters and moving 1,400 jobs out of town.

article

Posted by eric at November 13, 2009 10:40 AM