November 10, 2004

Nashville Government May Steal From Poor to Help Rich

Nashville's Metro Development and Housing Agency is threatening to use its condemnation powers under "eminent domain" to take property from two property owners, destroy two small businsses on the properties, and give the land to a well-heeled real estate developer. That's not right. I plan on contacting The Institute for Justice, which wages legal battles against government abuse of "eminent domain," as well as the Castle Coalition. Who is the Institute for Justice?

For half a century, unrestrained local and state governments have taken private property not for "public uses" - such as for bridges or public buildings - as permitted by the Constitution, but for private businesses in the name of "economic development." Private homes and businesses have been bulldozed, replaced by newer businesses and homes owned not by the public, but by private, politically powerful individuals and corporations.

The Institute for Justice began its fight against eminent domain abuse by successfully defending Vera Coking, an elderly widow from Atlantic City, against the condemnation of her home by a state agency that sought to take her property and transfer it (at a bargain-basement price) to another private individual: Donald Trump. Trump wanted the property for a limousine parking lot for his customers - hardly a public use. Until IJ began fighting eminent domain abuse, the presumption was that people like Vera would lose. But thanks to our path-breaking work in the court of law and the court of public opinion, Vera won. The Institute set an important precedent that it continues to build on to this day, preserving property rights nationwide.

The "blighted" properties are home to two small businesses - a market and an auto repair business. The "New Urban" project, called Martin Corner, would be a $10-$15 million development including three-story mixed-used buildings, concealed parking, retail shops, restaurants and professional offices. In addition, the development will include at least 20 condominium units and eight single-family homes. The developer already has all of the land necessary, except the three corner parcels. He also has investor partners who have the substantial cash resources to fund the venture. And he has a government agency willing to force two property owners to sell property at a price set by the government agency (and, no doubt, the developer).

MDHA Executive Director Phil Ryan said the Martin Corner development would greatly improve the area, which neighbors contend is pockmarked by unsightly buildings. He said he is hopeful that condemnation (also called “eminent domain” when a public use/improvement is involved) would not be necessary.

P.S. Whitney Kemper, the developer of the proposed Martin Corner development has been mentioned at HobbsOnline previously, here and here. In a spectacularly bad bit of journalistic ethics, the City Paper failed to disclose that Kemper is married to a City Paper reporter, and that he wrote a 21-part series for the paper last year, chronicling his hike along the Appalachian Trail, and has written op-ed columns for the paper as well. The City Paper reporter following the Martin Corner story faces an extra ethical obligation to to ensure that future stories on the project reflect not just MDHA's and Kemper's point of view but also focuses on the the plight of the property owners and small business owners facing MDHA's reverse-Robin Hood move and whether MDHA is abusing its eminent domain rights to benefit Kemper. The Institute for Justice website would be a good place for that reporter to start researching current legal precedent in similar cases.