Willets Point is a maze of auto replair shops and junk yards with a shoddy infrastructure and no sidewalks. Tribune photo by Ira Cohen In a 5-4 decision in June, the country’s highest court ruled that economic development could fall under a broad definition of “public use,” thereby upholding laws that allowed eminent domain to be used for private projects. The ruling also makes clear, however, that legislatures can also pass laws defining “public use” more narrowly, limiting such a power. The New York City Constitution defines “public use” as, “anything for the health, safety, welfare and general prosperity,” of the city, a clause that has been broadly interpreted, according to Lisa Bova-Hiatt, senior counsel for the city law department. Following the June decision, a bill was introduced in the City Council that would forbid the “power of eminent domain to take ownership of private property solely for economic development purposes.” It is currently being discussed in committee. Addressing Fears An entire generation removed from his family’s first experience, Addabbo (D-Howard Beach) must once again grapple with the issue of eminent domain as a politician who represents a strip of attractive waterfront real estate. The councilman said the June “Kelo” decision caused fear and concern almost immediately from residents in his districts who worried that luxury condos could replace their one or two-family homes. “I just think it opens up a can of worms and takes away security from the average homeowner,” Addabbo said. “You may own a home in a downgraded area, and if the city deems that the part can be redone better, the person could be out.” He and other borough officials recently met to discuss their concerns with Bova-Hiatt, who assured them that the city would not start snapping up locations as a result of the recent Supreme Court decision. Even the possibility of acquiring land through eminent domain requires a detailed, time-consuming economic development plan that assesses the current property and its future potential, she said. New York has exercised its eminent domain ability for private purposes on at least two occasions, once for the New York Stock Exchange and another for the World Trade Center. At the moment, residents in downtown Brooklyn are fighting a new basketball arena that could displace them from their homes but is projected to bring in millions of dollars for the city. Both the previous instances of eminent domain for private sector use required special legislation and a brief court battle to remove the current owners of the property. Bova-Hiatt believes the prominence of the Kelo decision could make legislators warier of passing such special legislation again because of the potential political fallout from their constituents. “I actually don’t think there will be more lawsuits,” Bova-Hiatt said. “I think there will be more legislation purposed by different states to either narrow public use clause or include economic development. It’s really not up to the courts, it’s up to the Legislature.” The Blight at Willets Point But still, there have been rumblings in Queens over the city possibly invoking eminent domain to further purely economic interests, most publicly over the often-besieged Willets Point. For almost the last 40 years, the city has struggled on and off with business owners of the “Iron Triangle” about developing their makeshift auto stores into a more integrated and lucrative enterprise. The city’s Economic Development Corporation is juggling several proposals for the area, many of which mirror the mixed-development spaces involved in the New London case. Richard Music, a spokesman for the Willets Point Business Association, said the topic of eminent domain did come up once at a meeting between his group and city officials. Several options must be exhausted before the city would consider that measure, and both sides appeared eager to avoid the inevitable legal battle that would follow it, Music said. “Once you start talking about eminent domain, we’d have to go out and hire not just an attorney, but a whole team of attorneys,” Music said. Councilman John Liu (D-Flushing), who represents Willets Point, said he could only support a case where private property would be taken and resold in the private sector if the rationale for such a move were rock solid. He could not provide an example. “Eminent domain should be the last resort after all else fails,” Liu said. “The city hasn’t said anything about eminent domain and Willets Point, and I always hope that we can avoid having to invoke eminent domain.” The issue could hinge on whether Willets Point can be considered a blighted area, which legally makes it easier to condemn in favor of other private groups. Although local owners argue they have thriving businesses, the dilapidated streets and tin-roof shops lend some to call the area a public nuisance. Legal precedent has left the definition of blight relatively open-ended. The New York State Constitution cites examples such as lack of sanitation and overcrowding, but sets no specific guidelines. The determination on a neighborhood’s condition comes from an independent review that should accompany a proper economic development plan, Bova-Hiatt said. The EDC has been reluctant to share details of its findings thus far despite continued testing around the site, Music said. Even when the final plans are made public, the ambiguous laws-without additional legislations- could land the dispute in court, officials said. “If that’s an exception to the rule, then what does blight mean?” Addabbo said. “Therein lies the bigger issue of interpretation, and a vague interpretation usually means a lawsuit.”

[Feature Archives]