Your $7.00 monthly contribution will go a long way to helping us expand the coverage and services you enjoy.
GET THE LATEST PUBDEF NEWS 24/7:
ABOUT PUB DEF
PUB
DEF is a non-partisan, independent political blog based in the
City of St. Louis, Missouri. Our goal is to cast a critical eye
on lawmakers, their policies, and those that have influence upon
them, and to educate our readers about legislation and the political
processes that affect our daily lives.
CONTACT US
Do you have
a press release, news tip or rumor to share?
The Board of Adjustment sided with the City yesterday and ordered Jim Roos' two-story "End Eminent Domain Abuse" mural to be removed.
Roos, a longtime anti-eminent domain activist, argued before the Board that supporters of the use of eminent domain often have hundreds of thousands of dollars at their disposal to persuade city officials and the general public. But opponents, many of them poor or elderly homeowners, may only have signs on their own property as their only means to inform neighbors and warn the public about the dark side of eminent domain.
But one alderman thinks neighbors informing neighbors may not be such a good thing. Roos' attorney supplied PubDef.net with a copy of a letter Ald. Phyllis Young (7th Ward) wrote to the city's zoning administrator.
"If this sign is allowed to remain," wrote Young, "then anyone with property along any thoroughfare can paint signs indicating the opinion or current matter relevant to the owner to influence passersby with no control by any City agency."
The stating of one's opinion without the approval of the government? What's next — an informed electorate, high voter participation, accountability to the general public? Anarchy!
Yesterday, the Missouri Court of Appeals reversed a trial court decision in favor of property owners fighting to keep their valuable downtown Clayton property from being condemned because of "blight".
"While we note that pursuant to section 353.020(1), an 'area' may include buildings that are not themselves blighted, but which are deemed necessary for the redevelopment, there is a lack of evidence of social liability as to any portion of the area," stated the judges' ruling.
In January, St. Louis County Circuit Judge James R. Hartenbach rendered a decision allowing Centene Redevelopment Corporation to condemn property owned by David Danforth, Dan Sheehan and Debbie Pyzyk so the company can build a multi-use retail area to support its corporate headquarters.
Under Missouri law this meant that Centene could proceed with the condemnation action and all activities related to the decision. However, once papers were filed to appeal the judgment, the Missouri Court of Appeals entered an order to halt any action by Centene until the Court could review the case and make its own decision. Only the Court of Appeals could legally grant a stay and stop the action by Centene.
Tueday's ruling said there was insufficient evidence to support a conclusion that the upscale area in question was a "social liability, and therefore blighted, under either the prior common law standard, or the more recent standard set forth in section 523.261. Therefore, we would hold that the trial court's judgment condemning defendants' properties was in error."
Knowing what this case could affect billions of dollars of development plans across the state, the Appeals Court decided to send the case to the State Supreme Court.
"We would reverse the judgment of the trial court as discussed above; however, because of the general interest and importance of the issues presented in this case concerning the applicable standard of review for a legislative determination of blight, and the consideration of social liability in the context of such a determination, we transfer the case to the Missouri Supreme Court."
"Begging for Billionaires" is a documentary that examines the expanding use of eminent domain for private profit in America — specifically, Kansas City, Missouri.
Roos, a longtime anti-eminent domain activist, argued before the Board that supporters of the use of eminent domain often have hundreds of thousands of dollars at their disposal to persuade city officials and the general public. But opponents, many of them poor or elderly homeowners, may only have signs on their own property as their only means to inform neighbors and warn the public about the dark side of eminent domain.
