|
Remember Mister Ed, that talking horse of TV yesteryear? Over
time a lot surfaced about Ed. Some of it tabloid stuff. But you
know the saying-- no smoke without fire. Allegedly, in the show's
early episodes, Ed was really a zebra painted to look palomino.
Ed got away with the dye job thanks to the visual limitations of
black & white television. Though the "ED" covered here is of a
different stripe, false appearances do figure in.
Eminent domain (ED) is the right of local, state and federal
government to claim private property in the name of the public
good. Owners receive "fair market value". ED has reasonable uses,
such as the building of roads and bridges. But uses are
broadening. Governments now use ED to clear the way for private
economic development. ED is also applied as final solution to
urban blight. Inner city neighborhoods that languish in the
doldrums are a political embarrassment. But grand plan projects
make politicians look visionary. Up and doing. And since public
funding flows more smoothly into redevelopment projects sped by
ED, it's a win win situation. Though maybe not for the residents
of targeted nabes.
ED is frequently invoked as cure for neighborhood drug trade:
the "bad" people will be driven out and the "good" will be
allowed to return to new sheetrock Edens. Ones built by
nationally active non-profit developers in concert with local
government. Since local pols know who on the home front is
naughty or nice, they make the call as to who returns to the
new/old neighborhood. Yet when ED nabes were slipping down hill,
these same pols were incapable of weeding out slumlords whose
buildings were drug warrens. Heck-- some even had trouble keeping
police on the streets outside those warrens. Much less busting
up the businesses within. But that's another can of worms. Back
to that Santa-like knowledge of naughty and nice.
Most local pols do know nice. Nice people put your election signs
in their windows and write letters to the local paper praising
your name. They make nice campaign contributions. But naughty
people nag and complain. They remember politicians are public
servants and if the service sucks, they don't tip. Nice people
from ED nabes do deserve "fair" market value or a slice of
revitalization pie. But the naughty? A pox on their house!
Expanding governments' ability to invoke eminent domain ignores
the political taste for payback. And when ED is used as blight
fighter and component of massive, public funded redevelopments,
it provides financial incentive to let things slide. No need to
make city services and code enforcement reach into the inner
reaches of inner cities: deterioration will ultimately prove more
profitable. ED is also a giant eraser. It can wipe out the blots
of other, failed revitalizations-- bulldozing empty HUD bucked
commercial strips that didn't provide the projected jobs, or the
rows of "owner occupied" two family homes that turned into strip
mine rentals or were flipped to an FHA fare thee well.
Also consider what constitutes "blight". Those who say they know
it when they see it, might be surprised to discover that in the
Scenic Park neighborhood of Lakewood, Ohio it means not having
an attached two car garage, or central air conditioning, or three
bedrooms and two bathrooms. In late September, Scenic Park and
Lakewood were featured on CBS's "60 Minutes". Lakewood
is a post industrial town of 56,000 with a shrinking tax base.
Though many of its citizens (including the former mayor) live
in homes similar to those in Scenic Park, Scenic Park has
something extra. It hugs the shores of scenic Lake Erie. Scenic
Park generated private developer interest. But only if delivered
shovel ready. Scenic Park, with a population of roughly 1000, is
being pressured to throw itself on the sword of eminent domain,
in order to lift Lakewood out of its financial difficulties. The
pressure is coming not only from Lakewood's mayor and city
council, but from the Lakewood school district and citizens
living in other sections of the city. Even from a few people
within Scenic Park-- who hope to make more money selling their
homes to government than they would on the open market.
So far Scenic Park's demise has been beaten back at the ballot
box. Though maybe only temporarily. In mid November, Lakewood
voters defeated the use of ED by a slim margin. A recount is
required. Even if Scenic Park survives, the community of Lakewood
has been sundered. A bag of much needed gold was dangled before
its eyes. To get it, all citizens had to do was feed their
neighbors to ED. Who knows in what city ED might knock next,
using the same broad criteria employed in Lakewood? If the
specter of ED is raised in enough cities, it will undermine
belief in the stability of urban home ownership. Though property
flippers will be snapping up buildings left and right,
anticipating taxpayer buyouts. While they anticipate nary
a repair will be made or rehab launched.
Eminent domain dramas play out around the nation. Some state
laws give ED a leg up. Ohio for instance, not only allows local
governments to use the right of eminent domain on behalf of for-
profit entities: that right can be transferred to the entities
themselves. In many places non-profit groups are scrambling for
the right to invoke ED in the name of enlightened planning. ED
wars range from large to small. Scenarios vary. Some pit old,
bread and butter businesses against new, upscale ventures. Big
buildings against bigger buildings. Strip malls against mega
malls. Some even revolve around matters of taste. Don't like your
neighbor's aluminum siding? Find kindred spirits and pull a few
strings at city hall. The most socially destructive ED wars pit
neighbor against neighbor. Or neighborhood against neighborhood.
The latter most typically develop when cities launch ED as "fix"
for a poor neighborhood. What's said to be at stake is not only
the future of the targeted neighborhood, but of surrounding or
nearby ones. Over the years, as conditions in the poorest inner
city neighborhoods proved recalcitrant, a sea change took place
in urban planning. A theory emerged which posited the best hope
for cities was to concentrate public resources on borderline
neighborhoods, ones that might tip over into slums. These
neighborhoods were seen as still having sufficient social fabric
to respond to treatment. They were also the neighborhoods judged
most capable of attracting an educated middle class. Particularly
if encouraged by government funded or supported home ownership
programs. Many of these "urban homesteaders" became plugged into
developing their neighborhood's real estate. Largely through
organizations characterized as "non profit" which rely heavily on
government support. A politically and financially sophisticated
New Urban class formed. Despite the idealism of some, and
rhetoric celebrating a broad sense of civitas, New Urbanism is
essentially a real estate driven movement. When ultra local
interests seem threatened by someone else's neighborhood, it's
goodby big city and hello ED.
The willingness to use the government force of eminent domain to
"fix" poor neighborhoods reflects their increased social and
economic marginalization-- which has run parallel with the focus
on transitional areas. A theoretical impasse has been reached
as to what can be done to truly change the most hard hit
communities. Old approaches haven't worked and new ones are
unthinkable. Too many urban players are entrenched in the
financial pockets of the old, or cling to ideological constructs
which bear little relation to real life in hard hit communities.
And since manufacturing left town, no new economic engine has
come down the pike sufficiently powerful to lift enough of the
under class into the middle class.
The marginalization of poor neighborhoods holds true across race
lines. ED steamrolls left-behind blue collar whites as surely
as it blacks out black. The secret dream of New Urbanism is
that these intractable human "problems" will just disappear. Or
go elsewhere. Leaving a few specimens behind as HUD bait. Some
might also bus tables at sidewalk cafes. Though out of work
actors have more cache. Visit any of the cities held up as prime
examples of New Urban revitalization, be they West or East Coast,
and what immediately jumps out are social divisions so rigid
they carry a hint of caste. Behind latte strips skulk the
underemployed, hanging on social services and their allotted
"affordable" housing. Seeking the last lunch counter that
doesn't call a doughnut a beignet.
The growing use of eminent domain also reflects the clout of the
real estate economy. Some say it's become the foremost economic
game in the nation. In Lakewood, Ohio there is no other notable
engine of revenue growth. This particular engine, hand in glove
with government, demands that the people of Lakewood toss their
neighbors overboard in the name of the public good. If that's
not a zebra painted up like a horse I don't know what is.
Carola Von Hoffmannstahl-Solomonoff
If you want more of the famous Mister ED, visit the following
link to RentWars.Com, a NYC based site that covers housing issues. "Will Eminent Domain Swallow an Albany Neighborhood?" is
my take on an ED case currently unspooling in upstate New York.
For confidential tips and comments mailto:editor@mondoqt.com
Note: ontheqt@nycap.rr.com should no longer be used
|