Real Estate & Property Law

New York City Wants to Destroy Productive Business and Pay Low Compensation

By Alan Ackerman

Earlier this month, this blog wrote about the East Harlem 'renewal' project. The New York Times noted that the project, contemplated since 1968, is only being executed now. During this lengthy delay, many small business owners took the initiative the City lacked and built their own successful enterprises, questioning the designation of this area as 'blighted.' The City argues the owners had knowledge of the project and therefore should be punished. These bureaucrats need a reality check. The government effectively abandoned the project, forcing property owners to rely on their own entrepreneurship to combat blight. Now, to minimize compensation, 'big development' proponents are resurrecting the decades old 'blight' designation and blaming property owners for using their land productively.

The New York Times

Many of the business owners knew that a large stretch of the area was included in a 150-block urban renewal effort that was approved in 1968 but never quite materialized. But property owned by at least three of the businessmen was not included in the renewal zone, at least not until 2008, when the Bloomberg administration added those parcels to the mix.

At the time, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg hailed the creation of jobs and housing, and the city justified taking the private property by declaring the area 'blighted' — a description that Mr. Bae and the other business owners found galling.

The city owned most of the land, allowing it to sit fallow for decades while turning down Mr. Bae and other business owners who wanted to buy parcels to expand their operations.

'It's artificially manufactured blight,' Mr. Bae said.

Proponents of the project argue that the property owners should have known that someday their property could be subject to eminent domain because it sat within the old urban development zone. But both Mr. Spindler and Mr. Bae said title records indicated that their properties were not part of that plan when they bought them.
 

Full post as published by National Eminent Domain Blog on February 13, 2011 (boomark / email).