Eminent Domain's Scary Precedent (28. July 2006, 06:40 by Derek Young) ~ Hmmm...
Once upon a time Sound Transit posted on its website a meeting notice that included discussions about property decisions in South Tacoma and Lakewood related to its expansion. The owners of the properties in question weren’t notified in any direct way and the decisions that came out of the meeting led to eminent domain actions. I wrote about it in more detail here. So now, after a protracted legal battle that ended in the State Supreme Court last week, the Miller family has lost their property and have signed over their land to Sound Transit.
The State Supreme Court ruled that the Miller family was not entitled to “individualized notice” and that the website meeting notice was sufficient. Following the ruling, Sound Transit cut their ‘offer’ in half – well below current market rate.
I’ve said this before, and I’ll say it again, the precedent scares me. I’m not opposed to eminent domain as a tool. However, I do believe the process should be in place to allow for public comment and proper public notice. This whole case, from beginning to end, seems sloppy and the precedent is extremely unsettling.
Link to the Business Examiner
Previously on Exit133
Commenting Is Closed
Comments are allowed for two weeks from the posted date. If you want to make a comment or reopen this discussion, please contact us with your request. Thank you for visiting.
a sign that everybody should keep their towel handy and a vigilant lookout for the Vogon Constructor Fleet; electric thumbs to the sky
1 | Posted by Richard Anderson | Jul 28, 09:13 AM
Remember that the exercise of eminent domain precedes a purchase of the property at fair market value.
One could more easily argue for the use of eminent domain for the public benefit of reducing traffic congestion and increasing equitable access to employment areas. Think mass transit project rather than a golf course, or even shopping mall.
Unfortunately, the Son of Measure 37 folks (I-933) will surely misuse this situation for its campaign against government involvement of any kind in relationship to individual property rights.
3 | Posted by Wildono | Jul 28, 03:22 PM
Commenting is closed for this article.
