To:
From: "Tenant"
Subject: Spitzer, Brodsky, Faso lame on Eminent Domain issue
Publication: The New York Sun; Date:Mar 2,
2006; Section:Front Page; Page:1
WELD VOWS TO BAR EMINENT DOMAIN IN PRIVATE TAKINGS
Likens Recent High Court Ruling To Ideology of Communist China
By JACOB GERSHMAN Staff Reporter of the Sun
ALBANY � Thrusting the heated issue of eminent
domain into the forefront of the governor�s race,
Republican candidate William Weld vowed that, if
elected, he would bar state government from
condemning private property and transferring it to another private
owner.
In a speech yesterday in New York City,
where protracted legal battles over eminent
domain are playing out in Manhattan and Brooklyn,
Mr. Weld, a former federal prosecutor who was
also governor of Massachusetts, said the recent
U.S. Supreme Court decision in favor of giving
local governments broad leeway in seizing private
property reminded him of �Communist China.� And
he challenged his Democratic rival, Attorney
General Eliot Spitzer, to define his position on
an issue that is gaining traction in New York and other states.
�Instead of the security of property, the
Kelo court made it clear that the great purpose
of government is now the security of the tax
base,� he said, referring to the court case.
�King of bootstrap, if you ask me. It has put
alleged collective needs ahead of individual
liberty and property rights, and increased tax
revenue ahead of the pursuit of individual
happiness. It�s a decision I would expect in
Communist China,� he said, addressing the Manhattan Institute think
tank.
Mr. Weld, who is trying to separate himself
from a pack of Republican candidates aggressively
seeking the party�s nomination, is seizing upon a
national issue that has united liberals and
conservatives and is likely to be a dominant
concern of lawmakers here following the passage of the state budget.
In a telephone interview with The New York
Sun, Mr. Weld stopped short of criticizing
Governor Pataki�s stance on eminent domain, but
he is drawing a line between himself and the
tradition in New York of governors supporting
expansive condemnation powers. It�s a tradition
most closely associated with Governor Rockefeller
and the finance authority he created, the Urban
Development Corporation, which later became the
Empire State Development Corporation. During Mr.
Pataki�s tenure, the corporation, headed by
Charles Gargano, has supported eminent domain for
economic development purposes such as increasing jobs.
Speaking to the Sun, Mr. Weld said the
problem is not with the governor but with the
state law that permits such broad uses of eminent
domain.�I think it�s important for the next
governor to make sure we�re not using eminent
domain just to effectuate the transfer of private
property from one private owner to another,� he
said.�That�s not what the Fifth Amendment means.�
The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution bars
government from seizing property except for �public use.�
In a 5-to-4 decision, the Supreme Court in
June in the case Kelo v. City of New London
upheld a broad interpretation of �public use,�
allowing the Connecticut city to condemn private
property on 90 acres of waterfront land to make
way for office buildings, a marina, a hotel, and new homes.
While in that case the liberal justices
sided with New London, in New York City some
liberal community activists have joined forces
with property rights groups to oppose development
projects, such as Bruce Ratner�s Atlantic Yards
development in downtown Brooklyn and Columbia
University�s expansion of its campus into West
Harlem. Mr. Weld said he has no problem with Mr. Ratner�s project.
In his remarks before the Manhattan
Institute, Mr. Weld said that as governor he
would �introduce legislation preventing the use
of eminent domain to promote incidental
government benefits,such as an enhanced tax
base.�He also said the state �must not invoke�
eminent domain in cases of private-toprivate transfers of property.
�Will Mr. Spitzer take a similar pledge? Who
knows. I do know that in public remarks, Mr.
Spitzer said that Kelo didn�t change the law
much,� Mr. Weld said. A spokeswoman for Mr. Weld
said the information about the attorney general�s
position was taken from an article that appeared
in the Post-Standard newspaper in Syracuse. The
article, from June 28, 2005, reported that Mr.
Spitzer played down the importance of the Supreme
Court�s June decision. He reportedly said
politicians who invoke eminent domain have to
persuade the voters that they are seizing private
property for a valuable public purpose. Mr. Weld
also said the attorney general advised Mr. Pataki
to veto a bill that would force the government to
mail notices to land owners of planned public takeovers.
A spokesman for Mr. Spitzer�s campaign did not return calls for
comment.
Other Republican candidates for government,
Randy Daniels and John Faso, have said they
oppose the Supreme Court�s ruling. Mr. Faso said,
however, that Mr. Weld�s position was too
inflexible and would have precluded the state
from contributing to the redevelopment of 42nd
Street in Manhattan during the 1990s, when the
state forced the removal of massage parlors and pornography shops.
This spring, the state Legislature is
expected to debate several pieces of legislation
that would put restrictions on the government�s
power to condemn private property. A Democratic
Assemblyman who represents a district in
Westchester County and is a candidate for
attorney general, Richard Brodsky, said Mr.
Weld�s proposals suggest that he hasn�t �thought it through.�
Under Mr. Weld�s proposal, he said, the
state would be forbidden to invoke eminent domain
to build a road connecting a highway to a
university. Mr. Brodsky has introduced
legislation that would create an eminent domain
�ombudsman� who would resolve disputes.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Tenant Network(tm) for Residential Tenants
TenantNet(tm): http://tenant.net
email: tenant@tenant.net
Information from TenantNet is from experienced non-attorney tenant
activists and is not considered legal advice.
No comments:
Post a Comment