Property rights case in front of Supreme Court
The Supreme Court is hearing a case regarding government's use of their eminent domain power to condemn land to be used later in a redevelopment, presumably to make more money. Some states don't allow it for private use, only for government use. I think there are some cases where this priviledge can be used, but other cases where it makes sense. If, for example, one guy is holding up a $10 million development that will bring jobs and property tax dollars because he won't sell (some people just like being a pain in the ass you know), should the whole project die and perhaps millions of dollars of benefits to the community go down the drain?
Its a pretty touchy subject. You can read about it here:
http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/mld/ledgerenquirer/news/politics/10965336.htm
Its a pretty touchy subject. You can read about it here:
http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/mld/ledgerenquirer/news/politics/10965336.htm
posted by bigalsbeans at 8:36 PM
2 Comments:
There should be limits on the use of eminent domain to acquire land for private development, especially if someone's home is involved. If it is used, the private developer should pay the entire cost of the eminent domain process including any court costs.
I have a bigger beef with the use of tax incentives to bribe developers. If you have run a store for years, is it fair for a new competitor down the street to be subsidized by local taxpayers? This very thing happened in Peoria, resulting in existing grocery stores being driven out of business while the new development enjoys a 20-year tax break.
It depends on what kind of tax incentives you are referring to here. If you are referring to a TIF, the TIF money goes to the developer (or sometimes to the city) to recoup costs for roads, sewers and other infrastructure improvemtents. Very seldom are the developer and the tenants (such as the grocery store you refer to in your posting) the same party. Without actually having the facts in front of me, I would bet that the situation you are referring to is not a break for the grocery store, but indeed a TIF district where they still pay taxes but they go to support the development. In some cases the tif may help fund building a store but not anything after that. And if a city can bring in a new development that brings a million in new sales tax and property revenue, would they not be foolish to pursue such a project? In a metro area such as KC where I live, if say Independence turns down such a deal, the developer may go a mile or two to another city like Blue Springs or Lees Summit and get that same deal. Then they see their city losing out on property tax dollars and especially sales tax dollars.
Post a Comment
<< Home