The City of Sunset Hills, Mo., teamed up with private developer Jonathan Browne of Novus Development Company to bulldoze Sunset Manor—destroying large parts of a neighborhood that was the most ethnically diverse and most affordable part of town. In 2002, Novus quietly approached the City with plans to build a $165-million shopping center, offices and a hotel. City officials responded by pledging $62-million in Tax Increment Financing and handing the private developer its governmental power of eminent domain to condemn and demolish more than 250 homes. Novus representatives visited residents who had no interest in selling their homes and no plans to move, threatening them with eminent domain and giving them five days to accept offers.18 (Eminent domain was, after all, a “last resort.”)
Despite overwhelming citizen opposition to the project through the public and political process, the City decided to move forward with its abuse of eminent domain. In February 2006, financing for the project fell through, and the City scrapped its plans, leaving the neighborhood in shambles.19 In this instance, and the vast majority nationwide, the democratic process was simply not enough of a check on abuse.
In some cases, City officials have even gone to extreme measures to silence opponents of eminent domain abuse—including kicking them out of public meetings, criticizing them and simply ignoring them.20 Even when projects fail, these officials do not take the blame for their actions.21 This makes it all the more difficult to take action at the ballot box, and elected officials understand that this is the case.
As the enormous number of condemnations for private development reveals, the political process surrounding individual development projects favors the abusers of eminent domain, not its victims. The bottom line is that individual rights should not be subject to the whim of the majority. Citizens should not be required to vindicate their property rights—before courts or city councils—when government does not have the constitutional or moral authority to take land in the first place.
14 Margaret Gillerman, “Despite Petitions, Clayton Referendum Still in Doubt,” St. Louis-Post Dispatch, Jan. 6, 2006, at B1.
15 Joe Kollin, “Eminent Domain Vote Falters; 3 on Commission Oppose Taking Issue to Public,” Sun-Sentinel (Fort Lauderdale, FL), Jan. 8, 2006, at 1.
16 Shawn Foucher, “Lorain Votes on Urban Renewal,” The Chronicle-Telegram (Elyria, OH), Nov. 2005 (online edition).
17 John Holland, “Hollywood Mayor Felt ‘Obligation’ to Approve Eminent Domain Seizure,” Sun-Sentinel (Fort Lauderdale, FL), Apr. 22, 2006, at B1; Shannon O’ Boye, “Hollywood Moves to Seize Woman’s Storefronts So Developer Can Build Condos,” Sun-Sentinel (Fort Lauderdale, FL), June 22, 2005.
18 Clay Barbour, “From Sunset Hills, A Story of Hollow Homes and Lives Left in Limbo Residents Are Stuck - Along with Novus’ Development Project,” St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Feb. 12, 2006, at A1; News Channel Five Newscast: Sunset Hills Aldermen Officially Halt Retail Development, (KSDK radio broadcast, Feb. 14, 2006), available at http://www.ksdk.com (June 2, 2006).
19 Clay Barbour, “Sunset Hills Board Kills Troubled Project, Shopping Center Developer Novus Misled the City, Mayor Says,” St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Feb. 15, 2006, at B1.
20 Kathy Tripp (Sunset Hills, Mo. homeowner), Telephone interview conducted by Justin Gelfand, Dec. 2005; Lori Vendetti (Long Branch, N.J. homeowner), Telephone interview conducted by Justin Gelfand, Oct. 17, 2005.
21 Clay Barbour, “Sunset Hills Board Kills Troubled Project, Shopping Center Developer Novus Misled the City, Mayor Says,” St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Feb. 15, 2006, at B1.
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Ohh, The Audacity
Ohh, The Audacity…
To the surprise of nobody who has been alive in St. Louis County for the past two years, Novus Development and its president, Jonathan Browne, are having trouble with another project. The Post-Dispatch has a short article on his plans in Rock Hill with a wonderful little nugget:
"Browne said he met with residents to determine why they hadn’t signed contracts to sell their properties and learned they wanted more money."
How dare they!!! In America of all places! Who do these people think they are trying to get the most money possible for their investment? So what does the very sinkable Mr. Browne do? Negotiate further? Counteroffer? Reason with them? Of course not. This is 2007, so his first choice is:
"Novus President Jonathan Browne had said his company needed an additional $7 million in tax incentives."
Go to the city and demand more money from taxpayers! Wisely, the Rock Hill Board of Alderman has rejected this shameless demand. Now bids are again being considered to redevelop the northwest corner of Rock Hill aka McKnight and Manchester. Whatever the new plan is, I hope the incredibly succesfull restaurant stays. As for other possible tenants, I can think of one company that would be absolutely perfect there.
A Victim of Novus Eminent Domain Abuse
| The summer of 2005 was not a good one for Sharon Fitzgerald. On Memorial Day, she learned she had inoperable lung cancer. Three days later, she got a knock on her door. It was Jonathan Browne, head of real estate developer Novus Equities. He wanted to buy her house. And he made it clear that this was an offer she couldn't refuse.
"He told us that if we didn't sell, he'd just use eminent domain and take our home anyway," said Sharon, "What could we do? With my health and everything and the chance to lose our home anyway, we didn't really have a choice." Sharon and her husband Michael reluctantly agreed to sell. They wanted to get the issue behind them so they could concentrate on dealing with her illness. But when the time came to close on the house, they were dealt another blow: "It turned out that Browne didn't have enough money from the banks to close," said Sharon. Residents say that Browne misled them and the city council about his capacity to complete the project. In reality, he didn't have the money he needed to buy out the properties, and he was having trouble recruiting tenants for the shopping mall he wanted to build. When those facts came to light, the project collapsed.
That has put many Sunset Hills residents in a bind. Some of them had already entered into agreements with Browne to sell their homes to him, and they had made plans to move on the assumption that the contracts would be honored. Even worse, some property owners have already moved, leaving their previous homes in a state of disrepair. There wasn't much blight in Sunset Hills at the start of the process, but there is plenty now. Some of the most neglected homes in the neighborhood are owned by Browne, who has not kept them in good repair. One Sunset Hills resident died without bequeathing his house to anyone, leaving the house abandoned. Sunset Hills doesn't have any legal provision for handling abandoned property, and neighbors say that the city council hasn't made any effort to address the problem, choosing instead to let the property deteriorate. With the collapse of Browne's development plan, the uncertainty faced by Sharon and Michael has only increased. There is talk of finding another developer, but that will take time. In the meantime, property values have begun to decline as the looming threat of condemnation discourages anyone from purchasing property in the area.
Sharon and her husband weren't the only ones whose lives were put on hold by Browne's actions. Sharon's parents live just down the street from her in the house they've owned since 1954. When Browne came to the door with threats of eminent domain, Sharon's parents became quite frightened. "They were scared out of their minds," said Sharon. "They've lived in that house for decades and they can't afford house payments now, with their medical bills and other expenses. The entire experience has had a terrible effect on their health." Not all of Sharon's neighbors were so easily intimidated. Resident Kathy Tripp decided to tell Mayor Hobbs about Browne's strong-arm tactics. She got nowhere. "He assured me everything would be fine, but then he didn't do anything at all," said Kathy. But Kathy isn't easily deterred. She recently filed suit against Novus and Browne for fraud. The suit details Browne's extensive harassment of residents.
Kathy says that Browne's harassment campaign was made possible by the city's decision to use the power of eminent domain. When Browne approached the city with his development proposal, the city enthusiastically agreed to help him get the land he wanted. They commissioned a blight study from Peckham, Guyton, Albers, and Viets (PGAV), a consulting firm notorious for finding blighted conditions everywhere they look. After inspecting only 42 of the 262 homes, PGAV concluded the neighborhood was blighted, citing such problems as a broken rainspout, an unsettled concrete porch, and a family of four living in a 2-bedroom house. With the blight study in hand, Browne had a credible threat to use against residents who didn't want to sell their homes. Residents say that eminent domain has pitted neighbor against neighbor, as those who want to move blame those who want to stay, and vice versa. "I've been called every name in the book by some neighbors," said Kathy. "Some people don't like me standing up for my rights." But both Sharon, who signed a contract with Browne, and Kathy, who refused to do so, agree on this much: it's not right to use eminent domain for private profit. "It's not right what Browne has done, or what the city has done." Sharon said. "People's homes shouldn't be taken away just because the city can pocket some extra money. A hospital is one thing, but profit is different. And Brown has nearly destroyed our neighborhood, pitting one against the other. The hardest ones hit are the elderly." |
Novus and Eminent Domain
Folks in Rock Hill, MO have been under the thumb of oppressive development for the last several years. A developer named Jonathan Browne, owner of a firm called Novus Development, decided he wanted to build a strip mall. In what has become the trendy approach to suburban "revitalization", he demanded taxpayer funding to cover his costs (and his mistakes!). He insisted on eminent domain to acquire property on the cheap. He bullied the very amateur mayor and board of aldermen into running over their very own citizenry in the hopes of increasing the city's tax base.
The result: a stable neighborhood has been bulldozed. An empty, ugly brick monstrosity sits on a corner where before was grass, sidewalks, and kids playing in the yards. Rock Hill is flat out broke, unable to even fix holes in the roads or pay their firefighters pension. And Jon Browne drives around in a shiny BMW and goes home at night to a million dollar condo in Clayton.
Anyone still think eminent domain is a necessary tool for economic revival?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)