« Curbed Awards '09 Neighborhoods: NIMBYs, Rants And More! | Main | The Atlantic Terrace "neighborhood" somehow lacks an acknowledgment of Atlantic Yards »
January 2, 2010
Columbia Gets a Lesson in Property Rights
The Wall Street Journal
By Julia Vitullo-Martin
This editorial reviews the ruling this past December against Columbia University's use of eminent domain in its expansion into West Harlem. Questions about what might come next:
- How will the State Court of Appeals rule on the appeal and will it reopen Goldstein et al. v. Urban Development Corporation in light of contradictory rulings?
- Will New York State legislators revise eminent domain law?
- Will Governor Paterson declare where he stands on eminent domain?
Judge Catterson also wrote that "the blight designation in the instant case is mere sophistry. It was utilized by ESDC years after the scheme was hatched to justify the employment of eminent domain but this project has always primarily concerned a massive capital project for Columbia."
Judge Catterson's decision sets up a conflict that will likely shape how eminent domain is used in the future. Just a week before he issued his ruling, New York's highest court, the Court of Appeals, decided in Goldstein et al. v. Urban Development Corporation that ESDC could seize private property in Brooklyn and hand it over to Forest City Ratner, a private developer.
That case was a big setback for private property advocates, who had spent years trying to curtail the use of eminent domain and who got a bump in public support after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Kelo v. the City of New London (2005) that states could seize private land as part of private development projects.
Now, in the wake of Judge Catterson's ruling, the state's Court of Appeals will likely have to take the issue up again if the case is appealed. Perhaps this time it will impose strict limits on when the power of eminent domain can be used.
State Sen. Bill Perkins, a Harlem Democrat and chairman of the committee on corporations, authorities and commissions, doesn't want to leave it to the courts. He held one public meeting on Judge Catterson's ruling before Christmas and is planning a second this coming week. He also fired off a letter to Democratic Gov. David A. Paterson asking him not to appeal Judge Catterson's ruling, and to impose a "statewide moratorium on the use of eminent domain" until the state legislature can pass legislation that specifies how the power can be used.
The governor hasn't decided what to do, but he doesn't have the luxury of sitting on the sidelines forever. With two conflicting court decisions and a brewing controversy, the legislature will almost certainly pass something that will force him to choose sides.
Posted by steve at January 2, 2010 8:31 AM