
|
Los Angeles City Guides
|
Article History BALTIMORE (Map, News) - The use of eminent domain to seize private property has become a tool of economic development in some parts of Baltimore.
“The city thinks they can just go around seizing people’s land for their own purposes,” said John Murphy, who is one of the top eminent domain lawyers in the state. “Promising private owners’ properties to developers even before going to court to legitimately seize it. Just look at how they promised the Weinberg Foundation privately held property in the city’s Westside. It’s unimaginable.”
“When [officials] are condemning viable businesses to give the property to a developer to bring in their own business, then something is wrong with the process,” said Linn Koo, who with his father is embroiled in an eminent domain battle with the Baltimore Development Corporation and Baltimore City. “It’s not like they are clearing the land to make way for a highway to help ease congestion. They are just putting sound businesses out of business.”
Calls to BDC executive director M.J. “Jay” Brodie, contracted to spearhead economic development projects in Baltimore City, were not returned.
“It’s been used in building roads, schools, parks and public infrastructure,” Baltimore County spokeswoman Fronda Cohen said. “Baltimore County used eminent domain to purchase property when the County was building Honeygo Boulevard in White Marsh.” Baltimore County plans to use eminent domain to seize more than 8 acres of land in Dundalk’s Yorkway community in order to make way for a $17.2 million economic development project, despite promises from County Executive Jim Smith to use eminent domain powers to only build parks.
In the last legislative session, Maryland lawmakers passed a bill in the state Senate to increase compensation to private owners and place a three-year timeline on local governments that initiate such proceedings.
In Baltimore County, a fight over eminent domain launched the political career of Del. Richard Impallaria, a Republican whose Middle River body shop was targeted by officials for condemnation. Their plans were thwarted when Impallaria’s grassroots efforts to avoid land seizure put an initiative on the ballot that voters supported.
rchappelle@baltimoreexaminer.com
Not ranked |
EMAIL ME THIS STORY |
ARTICLE HISTORY |
Sports
Business |
Real Estate Family Movies and Books Venues, Sports and Music Concerts, Artists and Tickets Be Inspired - Quotes and Stories |
Comments from Examiner Readers
10:35 AM MST on Tue., Jun. 24, 2008 re: "Economist says Baltimore development hurt city"
Report as inappropriate
1:01 PM MST on Sat., Mar. 1, 2008
re: "Governments' ability to seize property at stake on June ballot"
Report as inappropriate
10:37 AM MST on Sat., Mar. 1, 2008
re: "Governments' ability to seize property at stake on June ballot"
Report as inappropriate
3:33 AM MST on Fri., Aug. 3, 2007
re: "Alexandria sanitation agency to try seizing 10 acres after unsuccessful bid"
Report as inappropriate
11:13 AM MST on Fri., Jun. 29, 2007
re: "County moves forward with condemnation"
Report as inappropriate
11:32 AM MST on Wed., Jun. 27, 2007
re: "County moves forward with condemnation"
Report as inappropriate
12:21 PM MST on Thu., May. 31, 2007
re: "Judge extends restraining order in well takeover case"
Report as inappropriate
10:54 AM MST on Wed., May. 16, 2007
re: "Eminent domain questioned in city, county"
Report as inappropriate
10:00 AM MST on Wed., May. 16, 2007
re: "Evans mulls eminent domain against Boys and Girls Club branch"
Report as inappropriate
AMERICA CALLING said:
what he forgot to add is that baltimore or crime city that bleeds is a big factor
1 agree | 0 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
I spent 22 years in SoCal, left in 2002 for VA. It was a great state, you could do almost anything there as long as you didnt bother anyone (including being gay etc). Crime was low, taxes etc were managable. Then came the liberal agenda and now its a one party state to include Arnold!. Then came the gun control, taxes on taxes and rules on rules. Gas is more than 4 dollars a gallon and you rent a million dollar shoe box to live in. Watch out Virginia, we are next...
66 agree | 59 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
True Story. I knew a man who owned a plumbing supply business in Burlingame. His next door neighbor, the SM County Mosquito Abatement District said they "needed" part of his land for its function. He said "no way." They seized it by E.D. claiming a public health "need." He was paid market price, of course, but lost half his land. Ever since, the mosquito abatement people used that extra land for,,,, washing personal vehicles, storing personal tow trailers and personal boats, and other personal no essential stuff. Once when I was visiting him, he told me to go next door and see what they were doing. I walked over and chatted with an employee. He was cleaning a small fish pond with goldfish in it. Moral of the story? THEY DIDN'T NEED THE LAND AS THEY SAID THEY DID. IT TURNED OUT TO BE EXCESS LAND FOR THEM.
75 agree | 59 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
The county could put an easement on the property . That will make the owner unable to sell the property . Piece of cake. However, if the county wants to take the possession of the property, the county has to have at least 4 independent estimate, then average out to be fair to the owners.
160 agree | 180 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Absolutely positively the government has NO RIGHT to take our private property...under NO circumstances. We are begining the slide down the slippery slope of which we can never return. I am afraid this is only the beginning! Not surprising for Maryland.
175 agree | 154 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Jamie said:
Under what circumstances should the county condemn properties? In this case it's drugs and violence. But did the properties at Yorkway commit these crimes? Hardly. The county is leveling these apartments to make room for higher end homes/condos and pushing the crime somewhere else. So what is it again that we are trying to accomplish? The shifting of crime onto someone else. But where? Who cares. That's not our problem. What we want are better neighbors and a better value for our homes. But is the county making life better for us or our landlords? When will we begin to tackle the root cause of Yorkway? Maybe the new developers will have a great new way to deal with crime and drugs in our neighborhood. Something tells me, though, that this is not their problem. Which leads me back to my question.
166 agree | 159 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Only in America
170 agree | 157 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Cynical Citizen said:
What development is proposed for the Koo's property and in what condition is the property in? Seems notably absent from the article...
172 agree | 187 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
There is something seriously wrong with this statement. Has this man never heard of the United States Constitution? Evans "said he would seek to condemn the club and have the city take it under eminent domain if it chooses to sell to developers and fails to include some sort of comparable community organization. "
190 agree | 211 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree