The Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution protects some of the most sacred rights granted to the American citizen. Among them is the right to fair compensation for any taking of personal property for public use. This compensation clause, more commonly known as eminent domain, allows both state and federal governments to transfer property from one private owner to another, as long as the property benefits the local community or the general public.
It seems feasible and clear-cut, but the "public use" requirement for eminent domain has been the subject of frequent lawsuits. While Baruch College's projected renovation of the 17 Lexington building in an effort to address over crowding has gone smoothly, the college may face challenges if it chooses to acquire land for future expansions. The Columbia University expansion in Manhattanville, Harlem and private developer Bruce Ratner's Atlantic Yards Project in Brooklyn, have become subject to numerous opposition groups, public outrage and legal implications.
In 1954, Berman v Parker established the modern eminent domain jurisprudence after Berman challenged the legality of whether taking private property for the purposes of a redevelopment plan constitutes public use. The Supreme Court decided that private property could be taken for a public purpose with just compensation but established a very important feature of takings law. The court stipulated that "the power of eminent domain is merely the means to the end" and if the goal of eminent domain is justifiable, then so shall be the means.
Fast-forward to the 21st century and the Supreme Court revisits the public use debate in the case of Kelo v New London in 2005, where the state used eminent domain "for the purposes of economic development."
The court ruled the use of eminent domain constitutional for private economic development, broadening the public use requirement, slightly altering its previous conservative position. Justice Stevens stated that a narrow definition of public use has "steadily eroded over time" and is "impractical given the diverse and always evolving needs of society." After being tested by the Berman, Midkiff and Kelo cases, eminent domain has given the green light to private developers such as Bruce Ratner and Columbia University to pursue their "public" expansion projects.
Bruce Ratner, CEO of Forest City Ratner Companies and developer of the Atlantic Yards Project, has come under a lot of scrutiny from the public for his plans to redevelop 22 acres of residential and commercial property in Brooklyn. The Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn advocacy group claims the "project relies on an abusive use of eminent domain, which would allow the State of New York to seize private properties, homes and businesses, and hand them over to Forest City Ratner to demolish."
In Goldstein v. Pataki, Goldstein and 10 other property owners in the area of dispute contended that the taking is unconstitutional because only a private party, Ratner and his development, will benefit from the project, therefore failing to pass the public use requirement. Goldstein lost when the Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed that the plaintiff's claim, "the project's public benefits are serving as a 'pretext' that masks its actual raison d' être, enriching the private individual [Ratner] who proposed it and stands to profit most from its completion" which is "far-reaching." In addition, the court stated that it would not interfere with the legislative goal that has already established the project for public use. The pretext contention is unfounded because the project clearly presented many public benefits and did not solely benefit Ratner.
Residents and commercial property owners of Manhattanville in West Harlem are also preparing for a possible bout with eminent domain claims. For the purpose of the "expansion of knowledge," Columbia University is seeking to expand their campus - 18 acres and $7 billion worth. They have already received approval from the City Council to move forward with their plans. Their plan, however, includes relocating 300 residents and business owners. While they have vowed to negotiate with owners to purchase their property on agreeable terms, Columbia's Executive Vice President, Robert Kasdin, said this "did not remove the possibility of requesting that the state invoke eminent domain to assemble the few commercial properties that remain in the proposed 17-acre expansion area."
In 2008, the Empire State Development Corporation (ESDC), reported that Manhattanville was blighted and would be subject to eminent domain if Columbia chose to take that route. To date, the university has been quiet about the possibility of invoking eminent domain for the remainder which is about 30 percent of the expansion area. In Sept. 2008, the ESDC held a public hearing for concerned citizens to voice their opinions.
The Coalition to Preserve Community Group, an opposition group led by Columbia graduate Tom Kappner, argued that "this project is not 'civic' nor 'for the public good.'" The group also said that it believed "eminent domain at this point is premature" and that to acquire properties as a private entity through eminent domain would be "undemocratic and un-American."
In The Current, a student publication at Columbia, a student wrote, "The potential abuse of the state's eminent domain power should temper our support of Columbia's expansion." He said this "is not what the framers intended by the term."
Be the first to comment on this article!