[RFEngineer]

"It's non-residential property that is most affected."

I don't think this limitation was expressed in the opinion.

What if your neighbor wanted to expand his house? Why couldn't he get yours through eminent domain if it could be shown that tax revenues will be higher to the locality.

Then you can just go find an empty parcel of land that strikes your fancy and get it through eminent domain so you can build on it.......it'll bring more tax revenue, so why not?

This has so many unintended consequences it's unreal.

[AmishDude]

I'm saying that this is the practical effect.

If my neighbor wanted to expand his house and use E.D. to get it, I would be thrilled. I'll take the check now.

But if I owned a large parcel of land that had much more potential value than what I was using it for -- say a junkyard -- then I would be hosed.

I suppose the retired would be effected as well, having no intention to ever sell.

[acad1228]

Here in Tulsa, there talking about condemning several high dollar homes to allow a private venture group to build a toll bridge across the Arkansas River. This isn't a public use issue! The local government won't see any revenue from the tolls for eleven years, and even then it will only be a small per cent-age