Posted on 05/24/2002 6:42:51 AM PDT by brityank
Future of eminent domain in question High court said recent case was abuse of power
By ADRIANA COLINDRES
STATE CAPITOL BUREAUA recent court ruling that limits governments' powers to seize property could hamstring future economic development efforts in communities across the state, according to some legal observers.
In an unusual case, the Illinois Supreme Court last month reversed itself and said the Southwestern Illinois Development Authority had abused "eminent domain" power by condemning land so it could become a racetrack parking lot.
"Using the power of the government for purely private purposes ... is a misuse of the power entrusted by the public," the court said in its majority opinion.
But in a sharp dissent, Justice Charles Freeman said most of his court colleagues erred in their stance that property taken by eminent domain "must be accessible to the general public as of right."
"This requirement is the death of social legislation in furtherance of economic development and revitalization," Freeman wrote.
Governments may exercise the power of eminent domain - or condemnation - to take private property for public use, even when a property owner objects. The property owner generally gets paid fair market value for his or her loss.
While the court's April 4 ruling appears to have no direct impact on any pending projects in the Springfield area, it raises questions about the potential impact on future economic development plans around the state, officials said.
"It's kind of a troubling case," said Roger Huebner, general counsel for the Illinois Municipal League, which represents more than 1,000 Illinois cities and villages.
The case, Southwestern Illinois Development Authority v. National City Environmental LLC, involved a governmental body that condemned property with the intent of turning over the land for a private development, Huebner noted.
"That happens, particularly for economic development purposes, in areas all throughout the state," he said.
Attorney Thomas Walsh, who represents the Southwestern Illinois Development Authority, said the Illinois Supreme Court ruling "severely restricts the types of projects for which eminent domain can be used."
If the ruling remains in effect, it would mean that governments could not use eminent-domain powers on property that ultimately gets turned over to an owner who charges a fee and makes a profit, he said. For example, that could include sports stadium projects, said Walsh, who is with the Bryan Cave law firm in St. Louis.
The case dates back to 1998, when the development authority used its eminent-domain powers to acquire 1481/2 acres of land next to Gateway International Raceway. Gateway is an motorsports racetrack near the border of St. Clair and Madison counties just east of St. Louis.
The racetrack opened in 1997 and proved such a popular draw that it sometimes caused traffic to clog on Interstate 55/70 near St. Louis.
A year later, the racetrack sought to increase its parking space. Unable to buy the adjacent land from National City Environmental, a metal-recycling business, racetrack officials asked the development authority to condemn the property.
Gateway planned to buy the land from the development authority and build a parking lot there. But National City Environmental fought in court, arguing that the proposed property-acquisition was for an unconstitutional private use.
A St. Clair County judge sided with the development authority, saying the condemnation served a public purpose because it involved public safety issues, such as the snarled highway traffic.
The 3rd District Illinois Appellate Court reversed the circuit court, saying the development authority had exercised its eminent-domain power in an unconstitutional way.
Next, the case went to the Illinois Supreme Court. In April 2001, the Supreme Court reversed the appellate court and said the development authority had acted within constitutional bounds after all.
National City Environmental then asked for a rehearing before the Supreme Court. Such a request isn't uncommon from the losing side. But in an unusual move, the court decided in June 2001 that it would rehear the case.
The second time around, the high court reached a different conclusion. By a 5-2 vote, the justices decided the Southwestern Illinois Development Authority had acted inappropriately.
Members of the public "are not the primary intended beneficiaries of this (property) taking," the court said in a majority opinion written by Justice Rita Garman. "This condemnation clearly was intended to assist Gateway in accomplishing their goals in a swift, economical and profitable manner."
Garman's opinion pointed to evidence that Gateway could have built a parking garage on its existing property but decided it was cheaper to have the adjacent land condemned and turned into a parking lot.
In his dissenting opinion, Freeman said the development authority didn't abuse its eminent-domain powers.
"The taking of the property was for a public use, not a private use," he wrote.
Walsh, the development authority's lawyer, hopes to get a more favorable ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court. He expects to learn later this year whether that court will hear the case.
Because of the legal dispute, the racetrack parking lot never was built, he said.
Adriana Colindres can be reached at 782-6292 or adriana.colindres@sj-r.com.
© Copyright 2002, The State Journal-Register
"This requirement is the death of social legislation in furtherance of economic development and revitalization," Freeman wrote.
Good !!
Ping.
What a damn outrage. I can't believe any governing body anywhere in this country would even consider taking land from one private entity so that another may have it. They want to steal someones property so they can build an effen racetrack. WTF!
They not only considered it, the bastards are upset that they didn't get away with it.
I suspect that this Court won't grant the hearing, which unfortunately leaves these types of theft still available to the other states.
Since the power of eminent domain was for Pubilic Use only, it cannot legally be used to transfer property from one private party to another.
"Movin' Father's Grave"
(Traditional)
They're moving father's grave to build a sewer
They're moving it regardless of expense.
They've dug up his remains to lay down nine-inch drains
To irrigate some posh bloke's residence.
Now what’s the use of havin’ a religion
If, when you’re dead, your troubles never cease.
If some posh city chapper—wants a pipeline to his …privie—
They’ll never let a british workman rest in peace.
Damn! You mean it might still live?
Until now, this has been perfectly legal, but it's high time that the courts put a stop to it.
I'm a big supporter of eminent domain for legitimate purposes, such as streets, power lines, and general infrastructure. But seizing of private property to convert to somebody else's private property is fundamentally wrong.
I hope the US Supreme Court takes the case and embodies this principle into law.
It's about time!
GREAT call by the Illinois Supremes!
BUMP!
This will be almost revolutionary, if it stands...
I don't think governments are going to give up their right to grant favors all that readily. ;^)
Just a correction.
Some people truly have their whole lives tied up in their lands and there is not enough money in the world to take it away from them, as it well should be! Some people refuse to sell initially to raise the price, and why should they not? If the land is going to a company that will make profits year after year after year, then why deny the landowner his chance at financial freedom also?????
The concept of fair market value has changed drastically over the last several years. When regulations in an area occur, when the rumor of the threat of eminent domain is made, the value of the property plunges! Exactly what the plan was! So there is no such thing as Fair market value anymore! The government(s) local, state and feds have figured out how to bring down the price substainally! I know of folks that were paid "fair market value" that barely got out with the clothes on their backs! They went in the hole instead of gaining.
We all buy land to either keep as heritages to our families or as and investment. We put our monies in the property for improvements,yet we also put blood, sweat and tears into it as well! If the time comes that we want to sell our properties, then of course we expect to make a financial gain. I think that is reasonable and correct. Eminent domain is being used as a tool to devalue property before the take over of the property!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.