Report From The Castle Coalition

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.