Real Estate & Property Law

St. Louis Northside Plan

By Alan Ackerman

KMOX

At issues in the case, is whether the city and the Tax Increment Finance Commission did its homework before agreeing to give McKee millions in tax breaks.    In opening remarks,  one of the plaintiff's attorneys,  Eric Vickers,  accused the city of rushing the plan through without careful analysis.

"Their whole blight analysis that was supposed to be done by the city was, in fact, done by the developer," Vickers said. "The city just tramped over the TIF statute."

The plaintiff in the case is northside homeowner Cheryl Nelson.   She has yet to testify, but in media interviews leading up to the case ( arranged by a public relations assistant) Nelson has claimed that her neighborhood of relatively new homes was arbitrarily blighted to give McKee tax breaks.   Nelson is expected to testify that the blighting designation has made her property values fall dramatically.
 

In the media, Paul McKee is taking quite a beating.  An example is the linked KMOX article above.
    

The reality is flight plans are frequently prepared by the developer.  The developer hires an expert who determines blight, which gives rise to the authority to have an area designated as blighted.
  

 One of the underlying problems with Mr. McKee's statements that he will not acquire property through eminent domain is the likelihood for that representation to change in the future.  So long as the area is considered to be blighted, the statute will likely allow eminent domain in the future.  Passing legislation barring eminent domain will likely be elusory because the enactment could be modified by a legislative body at a future date.

Full post as published by National Eminent Domain Blog on February 19, 2010 (boomark / email).