Brooklyn Seizures Approved for Bruce Ratner

by

From Develop Don’t Destroy – Brooklyn:

DEVELOP DON’T DESTROY BROOKLYN
Contact: DDDB Spokesman Daniel Goldstein – 917-701-3056

For Immediate Release: March 1, 2010

Judge Grants New York State Right to Steal Homes By
Eminent Domain for Bruce Ratner’s Atlantic Yards Boondoggle

Outstanding Legal Issues Still Plague Atlantic Yards


Brooklyn, New York—A Brooklyn Supreme Court judge today, in an 80-page ruling, granted the Empire State Development Corporation’s petition to take title ownership of the private properties—homes and businesses—in the footprint of developer Bruce Ratner’s $5 billion Atlantic Yards boondoggle. The project consists of a proposed $1 billion money-losing arena and purportedly 15 skyscrapers though there are no renderings or models of anything other than the arena.

The property owners and tenants fighting for their rights will be considering all of their legal options in light of today’s ruling.

“Several overarching legal and financial issues still plague Ratner’s Atlantic Yards project, meaning today’s extreme measure by New York State to seize ownership of private property is premature,” said Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn legal director Candace Carponter. “There are two pending cases, one just completed briefing, and the other is awaiting a judicial ruling. Either would stop Atlantic Yards dead in its tracks and could impact today’s ruling.”

“Today is a very sad day to be a Brooklynite. Our state government, long mired in corruption and scandal, has bent over backwards to give Bruce Ratner whatever he wants, including my home, and the homes of other citizens. I am angry with our so-called political leaders who proudly stand by their abuse of power,” said Daniel Goldstein a spokesman for Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn and a homeowner targeted by New York’s abuse of eminent domain for Ratner’s benefit. “When the most powerful forces in state government collude with the real estate industry, injustices will happen, and today is a result of that.”

“But should we win or lose the fight against Atlantic Yards, there is a bright spot. We are on the road to overturning New York’s atrocious and abusive eminent domain laws. Senator Bill Perkins’ proposed legislation will bring much-needed reform to these laws that afford no meaningful protections to communities attacked by greedy developers and their political cronies.

The abuse of eminent domain must not happen again; Senator Perkins’ bill to redefine ‘blight’ and reform eminent domain must be passed.

I call on my fellow citizens and elected officials across the city and state who believe that government abuse of power must be reined in, that government theft of property on the slimmest of pretexts has got to stop, to actively support Senator Perkins’ bill.

And when it passes, it will be one of the legacies of the stance I and so many others have taken against the Atlantic Yards abuses, and the stand other citizens have taken in West Harlem, Willets Point, Downtown Brooklyn, East Harlem, Port Chester, Syracuse and so many other cities and neighborhoods across the State of New York.”

The judge’s decision to transfer ownership of the properties to Bruce Ratner comes after more than six years of a long legal battle with owners and tenants opposing what most experts agree is an abuse of eminent domain in a state that has the worst eminent domain laws in the country.

IJ Texas Chapter Cautions Voters: Prop 11 Eminent Domain Constitutional Amendment Contains Major Problems

by

WEB RELEASE: October 22, 2009
Media Contact: Matt Miller
(512) 480-5936

Austin, Texas—The Institute for Justice Texas Chapter, which has been fighting for true eminent domain reform in the Lone Star State, warned today that the eminent domain constitutional amendment on the November 3 ballot might not do everything voters have been led to believe it does.

“Our goal is to see that Texans enjoy real protection for their private property but, unfortunately, some last-minute changes to Prop 11 mean that it doesn’t do everything voters might think it does,” said Matt Miller, executive director of the Institute for Justice Texas Chapter.  “One provision that was added at the eleventh hour allows the Legislature to grant the power of eminent domain to any entity—public or private.  That means a future Legislature could give a stadium developer or shopping mall developer the power to condemn private homes and businesses.  Prop 11 would enshrine that power in our state’s constitution.”

Miller said, “The Texas Bill of Rights, which Prop 11 is amending, is meant to protect individual rights like the right to be secure in your home or business.  Under this amendment, government could soon be transferring its power to the very people it should be protecting you from.  Those who have come out in favor of the amendment never mention the fact that it gives the Legislature the ability to grant the awesome power of eminent domain to a private party.  Usually that will mean a utility or airport or other entity that has traditionally enjoyed the benefits of eminent domain.  But there is nothing in this amendment to stop a future Legislature from giving the eminent domain power to the next politically connected private developer who dazzles them with designs about how to better use land where your home or small business now stands.”

Miller said, “Any assurances that giving private parties the power of eminent domain will be limited because of a two-thirds vote requirement are laughable to anyone who understands how politics works.  If eminent domain for private use is wrong with a simple majority of votes, it is equally wrong with a super majority of votes.”

“When are politicians going to learn that real eminent domain reform isn’t just wildly popular with voters, but it is the right thing to do?” asked Susette Kelo, whose legal case against eminent domain abuse became a national sensation when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled her land could be handed over for private development.  “People should not face the loss of their homes or small businesses just so some other private party who has more political influence can try to make more money off that land, or promise to create more jobs.  If homeownership means anything in Texas or elsewhere, it means you—and not the government—get to decide if and when you sell your home.”

“We have repeatedly shown legislators that homes and small businesses in Houston, San Antonio and El Paso are in danger of being wiped out by agreements between developers and local officials, but the Legislature has yet to put a stop to it,” said Matt Miller.  “Prop 11, as introduced, was a sterling piece of legislation.  But the conference committee between the House and Senate introduced some significant flaws—and those flaws have made their way to the ballot.  Voters need to understand the complete package before they say yes to this.”

“The one good thing about Prop 11 is that under it, blight designations, which trigger the use of eminent domain, must be done on a parcel-by-parcel basis, rather than on an area basis as they’re done now,” Miller said.  “Whole neighborhoods won’t be able to be taken because of blight on a single piece of land.”

Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour Introducing Sham Eminent Domain Reform in Special Session

by

Mississippi-Gov-Fake-Reform.jpg

Arlington, Va.—Today, during a special legislative session, Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour is scheduled to introduce his own eminent domain reform bill, which will do nothing to protect the rights of Mississippi’s home, small business, church and farm owners.  According to Barbour’s website, his legislation will even exempt projects authorized under the Mississippi Major Economic Impact Act. Just over one month ago, Barbour vetoed H.B. 803, a strong eminent domain reform bill that was passed overwhelmingly by both houses of the state legislature.

“This provision will ensure that all property in Mississippi is still up for grabs to the highest bidder,” said Scott Bullock, senior attorney at the Institute for Justice.  Bullock and the Institute represented the Archie family of Canton, Miss., when the Mississippi Development Authority attempted to seize their 24-acre homestead for a new Nissan plant.  “Governor Barbour made it clear in his veto message of H.B. 803 that he supports seizing your home, business, church or farm for wealthy developers and large corporations, and this legislation will ensure that he is able to continue to do just that.”

Despite Gov. Barbour’s assertion to the contrary, major economic development projects happen every single day through private negotiation, not government force.  Barbour claimed that he vetoed the legislation because it would destroy Mississippi as an economic competitor, but as demonstrated by a recent Institute for Justice study, “Doomsday?  No Way:  Economic Trends and Post-Kelo Eminent Domain Reform,” this is patently false; states can pass reform, protect the rights of their citizens and enjoy uninhibited economic growth.

“Mississippians shouldn’t be deceived into thinking their property will be protected by this supposed ‘reform,’” said Christina Walsh, the Institute for Justice’s director of activism and coalitions.  “Property rights shouldn’t depend on how big of a project a potential developer is proposing for your land, and that is exactly what Barbour’s legislation will codify.”

Previous attempts to reform Mississippi’s eminent domain laws failed in the legislative process, but H.B. 803 received wide bipartisan support in both legislative houses, making it the first piece of meaningful eminent domain reform to pass the legislature in Mississippi since the Kelo decision.  The Institute for Justice represented Susette Kelo and her neighbors in Kelo v. City of New London, where the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that private property may be seized for private economic development projects that promise increased tax revenue or jobs.

In the wake of that decision, 43 states have reformed their laws, restricting their power to abuse eminent domain for private gain.  While Georgia, Alabama and Florida have all passed particularly strong reforms, Mississippi remains one of the seven states that have done nothing.

“You can have property rights protections and economic development, and Mississippians, who have shown that they strongly support eminent domain reform, deserve better from their state officials,” said Bullock.

Diverse Coalition of National and Mississippi-based Groups Join Institute for Justice in Urging Gov. Barbour to Sign H.B. 803

by

WEB RELEASE: March 19, 2009
CONTACT: John E. Kramer
(703) 682-9320

Arlington, Va.—Sign Mississippi’s eminent domain reform into law. That is the message of a widespread and growing coalition of groups now urging Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour to sign H.B. 803, a bill that would enact much-needed eminent domain reform. H.B. 803, if signed, will protect Mississippi’s home, small business, church, forest and farm owners from having their private property taken by force and given to other private parties.

The coalition who sent a letter to the Governor encouraging him to sign H.B. 803 includes the National Federation of Independent Business, Mississippi Farm Bureau, Mississippi Center for Public Policy, Southern Christian Leadership Conference, Americans for Tax Reform, Mississippi Loggers Association, Mississippi Forestry Association, Mississippi Cattlemen’s Association, Property Rights Alliance, National Taxpayers Union and the Institute for Justice.

The legislation lies before the governor after both the Mississippi House and Senate passed the bill by overwhelming margins—199-3 in the House and unanimously in the Senate. If signed, Mississippi would become the forty-fourth state to enact eminent domain reform legislation after the 2005 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Kelo v. City of New London.

“With no ill economic effects—and with the substantial benefits strong reform provides the rightful owners of property and society as a whole—legislators nationwide have been encouraged to pursue safeguards against eminent domain abuse,” the letter states. “All told, 43 states have increased their protections against eminent domain abuse in the four years since the Kelo decision—but not Mississippi, where citizens are more vulnerable than ever to eminent domain abuse.”

Despite the overwhelming support for eminent domain reform not just in Mississippi but across the nation, Gov. Barbour expressed doubts about the legislation after it passed the legislature because he thought it would prevent economic development from happening in the state—a concern the coalition finds to be misplaced. In the letter, the coalition cites an Institute for Justice study that found that “eminent domain reform has no negative consequences on economic development” and more specifically that “post-Kelo reforms have provided greater protection to property owners without sacrificing economic health.”

IJ represented Susette Kelo and her neighbors before the U.S. Supreme Court in Kelo v. City of New London and defended the Archies of Canton, Miss., when the state wanted to take their family homestead for the 1400-acre Nissan plant project, even though both state and Nissan officials said the project didn’t require the Archies’ land.

Download the letter to the Governor (PDF)

Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour Vetoes Eminent Domain Reform

by

IJ Report Demonstrates States Can Have Reform AND Development

WEB RELEASE: March 24, 2009
CONTACT: John E. Kramer
(703) 682-9320

Arlington, Va.—It is too bad that before Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour vetoed H.B. 803—eminent domain reform that passed overwhelmingly by both houses of the state legislature—that he did not read the Institute for Justice’s report, “Doomsday? No Way:  Economic Trends and Post-Kelo Eminent Domain Reform.”  If he had, the governor would have learned that states can pass strong property rights protection reforms and have economic development, too.

The report is available at www.ij.org/images/pdf_folder/other_pubs/doomsday-no-way.pdf.

“Simply stated, this study reveals that reforms passed after 2005’s infamous Kelo eminent domain decision from the U.S. Supreme Court have provided greater protection to homes and small businesses without sacrificing economic health; securing property rights and stimulating economic development can coexist,” said Dick Carpenter, director of strategic research for the Institute for Justice.  “With no ill economic effects—and with the substantial benefits strong reform provides the rightful owners of property and society as a whole—legislators nationwide should be encouraged to keep good reforms in place while pursuing new and stronger safeguards against eminent domain abuse.”

But yesterday, Gov. Barbour vetoed Mississippi’s eminent domain reform, which would have prohibited the use of eminent domain for private development or for increasing tax revenue.

“Gov. Barbour’s veto is outrageous.  It leaves property owners across Mississippi vulnerable to the abuse of eminent domain,” said Scott Bullock, senior attorney for the Institute for Justice, the national public interest law firm that argued before the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of Susette Kelo.  “Mississippi is just one of seven states in the nation that has failed to reform its eminent domain laws.”

H.B. 803 would have provided solid protection to property owners in Mississippi from eminent domain abuse.  The bill prohibits the taking of private property for private development, for increasing tax revenue or in order to convey it to another private party with the exception of the planned Blue Springs Toyota plant.  The bill also tightens the definition of urban blight.

The governor’s veto came as no surprise, as he indicated after the bill’s passage in the House that he favored taking private property for large-scale projects—like the Toyota plant.  Toyota recently announced that the company would allow the construction of the plant to be completed but that officials were delaying the plant’s opening indefinitely.

Last week, a diverse coalition of 11 groups sent Gov. Barbour a letter urging him to sign H.B. 803.  The coalition includes the National Federation of Independent Business, Mississippi Farm Bureau, Mississippi Center for Public Policy, Southern Christian Leadership Conference, Americans for Tax Reform, Mississippi Loggers Association, Mississippi Forestry Association, Mississippi Cattlemen’s Association, Property Rights Alliance, National Taxpayers Union and the Institute for Justice.

Barbour joins only a handful of governors to veto eminent domain reform in the almost four years since the Kelo decision.  In all but two of the previous cases, reform has been enacted in the end.  In Iowa, the legislature overrode the governor’s veto in a special session, for the first time in over 40 years.  Arizona citizens passed Proposition 207 following their governor’s veto.  New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson signed a comprehensive reform bill during that state’s next legislative session to provide even more protections than the previous effort.  The governor of Delaware’s veto was not overridden, but her lieutenant governor—who supported the veto—could not even win his party’s nomination for governor, losing to now-Gov. Jack Markell, who said he would sign the vetoed bill.  Markell’s opponent also ran on an anti-eminent domain abuse platform.  Texas Governor Rick Perry is now pushing for reform.

Previous attempts to reform Mississippi’s eminent domain laws failed in the legislative process, but H.B. 803 received wide bipartisan support in both legislative houses, making it the first piece of meaningful eminent domain reform to pass the legislature in Mississippi since Kelo.

The Institute for Justice has fought the use of eminent domain for private gain in Mississippi.  Nine years ago, the Mississippi Major Economic Impact Authority (MMEIA) threatened to take the Archie family homestead in Canton as part of the 1,400-acre Nissan plant project.  Both Nissan and the former head of the MMEIA publicly admitted that the project did not require the Archies’ land, but they went ahead with condemnation anyway.  After the case drew national support for the Archies from the likes of Martin Luther King III and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, and then went to the state Supreme Court, the state stopped its condemnation attempts, allowing the Archies to stay in their homes.

“There’s no question that Mississippi needs reform and that property owners want reform,” Bullock continued. “We’ve defeated eminent domain abuse in Mississippi before, and we’ll continue to work to make sure that it cannot occur in the future.”

Delaware Legislature Passes Historic Eminent Domain Reform

by

Governor Markell Set to Sign Senate Bill 7

WEB RELEASE: April 3, 2009
CONTACT: Bob Ewing
(703) 682-9320

Arlington, Va.—For the second time in as many years, the Delaware legislature has passed historic eminent domain reform. Both houses of the Delaware legislature voted unanimously to approve S.B. 7, which will protect homes, small businesses, farms and houses of worship from the abuse of eminent domain for private profit. The legislation heads to Governor Jack Markell, who has said he would sign the bill.

“Delaware just shot to the head of the class,” said Steven Anderson, an attorney at the Institute for Justice who worked with property owners and legislators on the bill. “S.B. 7 is reform that should make everyone proud, allowing all Delaware property owners—from Brandywine to Bethany Beach—to keep what they’ve worked so hard to own.”

After the U.S. Supreme Court’s infamous decision in Kelo v. City of New London, which allows the government to forcibly transfer property from one private individual to another, Delaware became the first of 43 states to reform its eminent domain laws. Unfortunately, the 2005 legislation provided only modest reform, allowing eminent domain abuse to continue.

Nowhere was that more apparent than in Wilmington, where local officials authorized the use of eminent domain for private gain against 62 properties and 38 businesses, including Ed Osborne’s Auto Repair, along the Christina River waterfront. The City is threatening to seize the land of these successful businesses and hand it over to a private developer who promises increased tax revenue and jobs from the construction of luxury condominiums and upscale shops.

S.B. 7 makes several critical changes to current law that will better protect property owners from eminent abuse. It specifically excludes increased tax base, tax revenue and economic development from the state’s definition of “public use” and restricts eminent domain to its more traditional uses—things like roads, schools, parks and police stations. S.B. 7 will continue to permit the acquisition of property for public utilities.

Most important, S.B. 7 makes certain that property that sits in a so-called slum or blighted area or is unfit for habitation or abandoned can be taken by eminent domain only when it is a direct threat to public health and safety in its current condition. Local governments retain the tools to obtain the worse properties, but only when they are objectively bad. And in situations where a private party may develop or own such properties, the bill requires municipalities to provide “clear and convincing evidence” that the condemnation complies with the state’s new definition of “public use.”

Anderson said, “It’s refreshing to see elected officials do what’s right and stop the abuse of eminent domain once and for all. Delaware finally finished what it started four years ago and the folks who fought for this legislation should be applauded.”

Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour Vetoes Eminent Domain Reform

by

IJ Report Demonstrates States Can Have Reform AND Development

WEB RELEASE: March 24, 2009
CONTACT: John E. Kramer
(703) 682-9320

Arlington, Va.—It is too bad that before Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour vetoed H.B. 803—eminent domain reform that passed overwhelmingly by both houses of the state legislature—that he did not read the Institute for Justice’s report, “Doomsday? No Way: Economic Trends and Post-Kelo Eminent Domain Reform.” If he had, the governor would have learned that states can pass strong property rights protection reforms and have economic development, too.

The report is available at www.ij.org/images/pdf_folder/other_pubs/doomsday-no-way.pdf.

“Simply stated, this study reveals that reforms passed after 2005’s infamous Kelo eminent domain decision from the U.S. Supreme Court have provided greater protection to homes and small businesses without sacrificing economic health; securing property rights and stimulating economic development can coexist,” said Dick Carpenter, director of strategic research for the Institute for Justice. “With no ill economic effects—and with the substantial benefits strong reform provides the rightful owners of property and society as a whole—legislators nationwide should be encouraged to keep good reforms in place while pursuing new and stronger safeguards against eminent domain abuse.”

But yesterday, Gov. Barbour vetoed Mississippi’s eminent domain reform, which would have prohibited the use of eminent domain for private development or for increasing tax revenue.

“Gov. Barbour’s veto is outrageous. It leaves property owners across Mississippi vulnerable to the abuse of eminent domain,” said Scott Bullock, senior attorney for the Institute for Justice, the national public interest law firm that argued before the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of Susette Kelo. “Mississippi is just one of seven states in the nation that has failed to reform its eminent domain laws.”

H.B. 803 would have provided solid protection to property owners in Mississippi from eminent domain abuse. The bill prohibits the taking of private property for private development, for increasing tax revenue or in order to convey it to another private party with the exception of the planned Blue Springs Toyota plant. The bill also tightens the definition of urban blight.

The governor’s veto came as no surprise, as he indicated after the bill’s passage in the House that he favored taking private property for large-scale projects—like the Toyota plant. Toyota recently announced that the company would allow the construction of the plant to be completed but that officials were delaying the plant’s opening indefinitely.

Last week, a diverse coalition of 11 groups sent Gov. Barbour a letter urging him to sign H.B. 803. The coalition includes the National Federation of Independent Business, Mississippi Farm Bureau, Mississippi Center for Public Policy, Southern Christian Leadership Conference, Americans for Tax Reform, Mississippi Loggers Association, Mississippi Forestry Association, Mississippi Cattlemen’s Association, Property Rights Alliance, National Taxpayers Union and the Institute for Justice.

Barbour joins only a handful of governors to veto eminent domain reform in the almost four years since the Kelo decision. In all but two of the previous cases, reform has been enacted in the end. In Iowa, the legislature overrode the governor’s veto in a special session, for the first time in over 40 years. Arizona citizens passed Proposition 207 following their governor’s veto. New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson signed a comprehensive reform bill during that state’s next legislative session to provide even more protections than the previous effort. The governor of Delaware’s veto was not overridden, but her lieutenant governor—who supported the veto—could not even win his party’s nomination for governor, losing to now-Gov. Jack Markell, who said he would sign the vetoed bill. Markell’s opponent also ran on an anti-eminent domain abuse platform. Texas Governor Rick Perry is now pushing for reform.

Previous attempts to reform Mississippi’s eminent domain laws failed in the legislative process, but H.B. 803 received wide bipartisan support in both legislative houses, making it the first piece of meaningful eminent domain reform to pass the legislature in Mississippi since Kelo.

The Institute for Justice has fought the use of eminent domain for private gain in Mississippi. Nine years ago, the Mississippi Major Economic Impact Authority (MMEIA) threatened to take the Archie family homestead in Canton as part of the 1,400-acre Nissan plant project. Both Nissan and the former head of the MMEIA publicly admitted that the project did not require the Archies’ land, but they went ahead with condemnation anyway. After the case drew national support for the Archies from the likes of Martin Luther King III and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, and then went to the state Supreme Court, the state stopped its condemnation attempts, allowing the Archies to stay in their homes.

“There’s no question that Mississippi needs reform and that property owners want reform,” Bullock continued. “We’ve defeated eminent domain abuse in Mississippi before, and we’ll continue to work to make sure that it cannot occur in the future.”