Eminent domain abuse
Eminent domain abuse
(OP)
The "Ethical Engineering Work" thread touched on this subject. What are the opinions on the abuse of eminent domain? I'm especially interested in the opinions of civil and structural engineers who are more closely involved.
Eminent domain has "expanded" from power lines and highways to parking lots, strip malls, and restaurants. It's shameful theft. It is not right for a government to commandeer property simply to increase revenue.
Eminent domain has "expanded" from power lines and highways to parking lots, strip malls, and restaurants. It's shameful theft. It is not right for a government to commandeer property simply to increase revenue.





RE: Eminent domain abuse
Governments need to be able to acquire property to do stuff. There is no way around governments having this power.
Governments abuse the power because the voters elect people who do have insufficient respect for private property, and because they elect people whose campaigns have been paid for by developers who want to replace neighborhoods with shopping centres.
I do not see this as an issue of engineering ethics.
An engineer can plot a route for a power line that causes the least possible disruption of people's property. None of the eminent domain abuse incidents I have been reading about involve engineering projects. Shopping malls and expensive condos seem to be the culprits.
Note to any anarcho-libertarians out there. You live in a government free community with privately owned roads. I purchase the roads and order everyone to stay the heck off my property. My business parter waits six months and then offers a ridiculously small sum of money for your property. We build shopping malls and condos. We will have hire an engineer at some point, but the overall program still is not engineering.
RE: Eminent domain abuse
RE: Eminent domain abuse
Abuse of eminent domain in the pipeline industry is an extremely bad idea. Landowners feeling as partners to the project are much easier to deal with over the next 50 years.
Also unfortunately I've found that the closer the proponent is related to government, perhaps actually being an agency of the government, makes for the worse the abuse.
**********************
"Pumping accounts for 20% of the world's energy used by electric motors and 25-50% of the total electrical energy usage in certain industrial facilities."-DOE statistic (Note: Make that 99% for pipeline companies) http://virtualpipeline.spaces.live.com/
RE: Eminent domain abuse
Texas voters passed a constitutional amendment that limits eminent domain powers. The amendment prevents the government from taking private property via eminent domain and then making the the property available for private economic development even if the private enterprise might increase tax revenues.
The Texas Legislature passed similar legislation only to have the current governer Rick Perry veto the legislation. The Texas voters sorted out this mess. Perhaps they will sort out Rick Perry next year.
RE: Eminent domain abuse
**********************
"Pumping accounts for 20% of the world's energy used by electric motors and 25-50% of the total electrical energy usage in certain industrial facilities."-DOE statistic (Note: Make that 99% for pipeline companies) http://virtualpipeline.spaces.live.com/
RE: Eminent domain abuse
Perhaps the pipeline companies don't take the land from the owner; instead the pipeline only occupies a portion of the land. This is not the same as forcing the owner to sell to the state who then resells the land to a developer to build the mall.
RE: Eminent domain abuse
The problem - and what the OP was referring to - is when cities use eminent domain to seize a undesirable business (say a auto repair shop) and then give the property to a business more desirable (say a restaurant). This happened in Mesa, AZ a couple years ago. Basically the city wanted to hand pick which business were located on each street corner. That's not right.
You get into a similar issue with shopping malls.
Honestly, you don't need to go around seizing property to make the development work. I work at Boeing and we built a huge office in a part of town that used to be residential. One of the neighbors thought it was cool to be located so close to Boeing, so she refused to sell (the plan was to level her house and turn it into a parking lot) even though everyone around agreed to sell. So Boeing built a parking lot that completely surrounded her house. She was ok with that and for probably 10 or 20 years she lived in the middle of a corporate parking lot! She eventually died, Boeing bought the house, and today it is a parking lot. But it goes to show that emmiment domain didn't need to be used to seize the property.
Cedar Bluff Engineering
http://cedarbluffengineering.webs.com
RE: Eminent domain abuse
**********************
"Pumping accounts for 20% of the world's energy used by electric motors and 25-50% of the total electrical energy usage in certain industrial facilities."-DOE statistic (Note: Make that 99% for pipeline companies) http://virtualpipeline.spaces.live.com/
RE: Eminent domain abuse
In my experience it's been the land owner that extorts money out from the public. There always seems to be at least one person that threatens to derail a project by holding up easements or rights-of-way on some garbage piece of land unless they get paid 10 times what it's actually worth.
I think the power of eminent domain is essential for cities to function and grow...and don't assume that the government is always the bad guy.
RE: Eminent domain abuse
This is precisely what government wants the public to think. Land cannot be garbage; if it were, it would be useless for development, as well.
While the historical usage of eminent domain has been to raze delapidated buildings and rennovate/redevelop neighborhoods, the more recent usage has been much more mercenary, eliminating viable areas of the community because doing so would bring more revenue than what the city was getting in property taxes. This particular aspect went to the Supreme Court and was overwhelmingly supported by the business-rabid members of the court.
The current law of the land is that if some developer can either convince or pay off enough of your city council, YOUR house and neighborhood will be sacrificed on the altar of big business, regardless of the viability of said neighborhood.
TTFN
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies
RE: Eminent domain abuse
RE: Eminent domain abuse
TTFN
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies
RE: Eminent domain abuse
In my opinion, the most over rated Aussie movie since "The Cars That Ate Paris".
Regards
Pat
See FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies for tips on use of eng-tips by professional engineers &
http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm
for site rules
RE: Eminent domain abuse
I moved to Houston in 1974. Among the local tales was the last property sold for to the developer of a business park "Greenway Plaza". I only wish that such fate were mine. Perhaps a garbage piece of land may have been worth $1000 per acre before a development plan but it can quickly change to $1000 per square foot if the development needs that property. More power to the property owner.
RE: Eminent domain abuse
By the way, the owner wasn't a farmer, it was a development corporation who bought the land several years earlier and leased it back to the farmer.
RE: Eminent domain abuse
**********************
"Pumping accounts for 20% of the world's energy used by electric motors and 25-50% of the total electrical energy usage in certain industrial facilities."-DOE statistic (Note: Make that 99% for pipeline companies) http://virtualpipeline.spaces.live.com/
RE: Eminent domain abuse
RE: Eminent domain abuse
My parents lived in a condo high rise on the Long Island coast in NY. The adjoining blocks had old single residences, which were cleared in short order. I believe there were poor blacks living in the old houses. It's a repeating pattern.
When the Blue Ridge Parkway was developed in VA, the displaced were moved to new apartments outside the park. That's the most responsible approach to eminent domain.
RE: Eminent domain abuse
http://ww
RE: Eminent domain abuse
Wisconsin just began action to curtail eminent domain abuse by the university system.
http:/
RE: Eminent domain abuse
(b) In this section, "public use" does not include the taking of property under Subsection (a) of this section for transfer to a private entity for the primary purpose of economic development or enhancement of tax revenues.
This is part that has been allowed by the US Supreme Court in several cases, and had established precedence for communities to take property and convert to strip malls and the like.
However, it appears that this Texas law has a double negative. It says that property cannot be taken for "public use" without, blah, blah, blah, but "public use" does not include taking for transfer to a private entity. Using that definition, the law basically says nothing about the taking property and transferring it to another private entity, so I would read this as affirming the Supreme Court's prior decisions.
TTFN
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies
RE: Eminent domain abuse
The Texas bill states the no property can be taken for "public use" without adequate compensation. It then states that "public use" does not include the transfer of said property to a private entity for the primary purpose of increasing the tax revenue or economic development.
I read that as saying you can't use eminate domain to take property and then sell it off to just increase the tax revenues.
The Texas bill is a step in the right direction, but if you look at it carefully there are still loop holes. "In this section, "public use" does not include the taking of property under Subsection (a) of this section for transfer to a private entity for the primary purpose of economic development or enhancement of tax revenues"
So if you think about it all you'd have to do as a developer is say that project would be a job creator or some other creative way to describe the project. You know some high priced lawyer will come up with that argument its only a matter of time.
I should put in a wall, moat, and draw bridge on my property. Might keep them out for a couple of days.
RE: Eminent domain abuse
Had the legislature really want's to do the right thing, added wording would have been:
No person's property shall be taken, damaged, or destroyed for or applied for any private use without adequate compensation being made, unless by the consent of such person.
I would also question the usage "adequate compensation" since my "adequate" isn't going to be the same as the county's "adequate"
And, just to show that politics is politics:
"A last-minute change allows the state to give any entity—including private entities—the power of eminent domain."
http://
so, the wording and semantics that we've been arguing is moot, isn't it?
also:
"HJR 14 provides absolutely no guarantees when it comes to addressing the problem of government taking property through eminent domain for private redevelopment projects," said Miller. "In addition to the problem of giving eminent domain authority to private parties, the final language is far too vague. If it passes in November, we hope courts will interpret it in a way that is consistent with the legislature's intent—to make sure that no home or business owner ever loses their property for a shopping mall, condominium or other private development project. But it is going to take years of litigation before we can be confident that this language actually protects property owners."
So, I'm not the only one that thinks the wording actually did anything terribly new.
TTFN
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies
RE: Eminent domain abuse
I agree politics as usual in the end. What are you going to do, in the end it all comes down to those pesky lawyers anyway and developers have deep pockets.