Can someone tell me why this is still legal?

Ohio court hears first case since ruling on homeowner rights

COLUMBUS, Ohio Ohio's Supreme Court today is hearing the first property-rights case to reach a state high court since last year's U-S Supreme Court ruling that governments can seize homes for private development.Joy and Carl Gamble are fighting to save their home from city officials and a developer who want to tear it down to build offices and shops.
Joy Gamble says, "What's ours is ours." In Ohio, a new law bans local government seizure of unblighted private property for private development. But in this case, the Cincinnati suburb of Norwood wants to take what it considers a "deteriorating" neighborhood for a 125 (m) million-dollar development. A legal expert says the case is important because if blight is "vaguely defined," then it would be "open season for condemnations."

Comments

  1. Unknown12:10 PM, January 12, 2006

    First, nice blog and a HI from a fellow ohioan...

    Secondly, having seen what happened locally here in Toledo when home and business owners tried to fight their land being taken for a new Jeep plant as well as other situations such as a mobile home park being bulldozed, situations like this really bother me.

    While there are of course legitimate times when a government should be allowed to take land from a property owner this is being abused. If this definition is allowed to stand it would be in my opinion a very horrible misjustice would be taking place.

    ReplyDelete
  2. James Manning2:41 PM, January 12, 2006

    These governments are getting out of hand with this. I saw it happen in Wheaton, IL and in many parts of Chicago. In fact, Chicago has uprooted every type of neighborhood there is in order to pursue development. It's very sickening.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Tina10:42 PM, January 12, 2006

    Funny, but since Kelo became the ungodly law of the land, the Freepers haven't said 1 single word about seizing homes in a place like New Orleans, now have they? I guess they only bitch when "decent white folks" have their homes seized, eh?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Drew Dallons12:10 PM, January 13, 2006

    Lisa Renee- Hi and thanks for visiting! Always good to bump into another Ohio'an in the blogosphere!

    Eminent Domain law is a touchy issue. I think there are times when it is necessary. When I lived in Bakersfield, CA, the city had to buy back a few blocks of land because they allowed houses to be built on an old toxic waste dump. Obviously, for the public safety, this was a needed action. The rub, though, was the city wouldn't pay full market value for the properties, and in the end was sued by the owners.
    There have also been times where I think local governments have overstepped. Some cities have tried to use ID law as a means to evacuate and raze low tax base areas to put in higher taxed businesses. I have a hard time reconciling the idea that if you purchase something, like a house, the government still has a right to take that from you if it sees fit. There are too many grey areas in the law.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Drew Dallons12:42 PM, January 13, 2006

    James - Yeah, thats happening in cities all over the country. It's a bit of a multifaceted problem though. On one hand, cities (and states) become so developer friendly that they allow suburban sprawl to completely move the tax base out and away from the city. Then, instead of working with business and housing developers to revitalize urban areas, they simply allow them to deteriorate, which in action begins a domino effect. The housing industry buys up chunks of farmland to build cookie cutter suburban developments. The middle class abandons the urban areas to live in said suburbs, as crime and cost of living are lower. Those who can't afford to move stay, and the tax base drops. The inner city education system becomes underfunded, adding to the devaluation of property values and a drop in the quality of education. More flight occurs. Soon, businesses that have thrived for years in the city are forced to either close shop or move out to the suburbs. It's an endless cycle. In Columbus, cities on the outskirts of the metro area have openly allowed outward development at an alarming rate. Instead of attempting to revitalizing areas of the city, developers keep pushing further and further out. Cities need to be managed so that they may revitalize internally without simply resorting to a land grab. Instead work with the community to improve the neighborhoods. Work with businesses to draw them back and increase tax revenue. Budget emergency services in a manner that increases safety and decreases crime rates. Budget schools so they waste less and improve education quality. Increase cultural and diversity awareness within the community. Find ways to make urban living more attractive and accessable to the middle class.

    It seems like a lot of work, but it makes more sense than simply tearing down neighborhoods that have stood there for years.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Drew Dallons12:45 PM, January 13, 2006

    Tina - Yeah, they only really care about big government oppressing their base. As for NOLA, I think they would love to see it tore down and rebuilt to their specifications.. ie. high cost properties that price out anyone close or underneath the poverty level. It would be a white man's utopia, so to speak.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Universal Healthcare or Corporate Welfare?

Ever since Hillary Clinton's overreaching Universal Health Care project fell flat in the 90's, we constantly hear Republicans tying the very idea of government sponsored healthcare to Communism and Socialism. Privatization supposedly offers more choices and provides a lower overall cost to the consumer. In theory, they are somewhat correct. In practice, however, that is not the case. The healthcare industry is rapidly consolidating. There are maybe five major players nationally at this point, and as with what is happening to many American industries, you can pretty much make a safe bet that in the next few years, there will be even less choices. Much of this is due to deregulatory legislation that has been very healthy for corporate America over the last few years. I think this is one of the major drawbacks of an unfettered Capitalistic economy. When there are no stops in place, the Corporation is allowed to grow and absorb all that it can, thus eliminating competition and incr...
Read more

Right Wing Cheerleader of the Week Award

Image
I'm a frequent reader of right wing propaganda. I'll admit that. I think there are quite a few decent, straight forward Republicans out there who run excellent commentary on their blogs. They are typically warm and open to respectful debate. Mike M. 's blog is a good example. However, I am convinced that there are some real nut jobs out in the blogosphere, who's primary goal is to berate and destroy any opposition to their polar ideology. So, with all due respect, I've opted to create a weekly award to highlight randomly selected right wing nutjobs' hate filled contribution to our online community as well as the political landscape. This section will appropriately be labeled "The Right Wing Cheerleader of the Week Award", in honor of everyone's favorite Yale cheerleader! Without any further ado, this week's Right Wing Cheerleader of the Week Award is given to Ottman, over at The Creative Conservative . Otto is a fearless general of mis-informa...
Read more

How to Cheat, Lie, and Steal and Blame it on Your Opponent - For Dummies

Image
Blognonymous has a great post on a new Washington Post chart that basically shows what Democrats have said all along... Abramhoff was lining three Republican pockets for every one Democrat pocket. But if you read sites like anti-Dem No Agenda or Espella Humanzee , you'll see how Republican apologists are trying to spin the whole "they did it too so it's okay" arguement. In fact, No Agenda makes no note of the blatent corruption happening on their side of the aisle. Typical. Still, I haven't heard squat from the MSM about Bush's $100,000 in campaign contributions received from the lobbyist. Of that $100,000, the Administration has agreed to return 6% of the amount to charity. That's kinda like donating a small portion of your bank robbery pot to the Red Cross.
Read more