Bloomberg Speaks Out for Eminent Domain
Mayor Bloomberg came out strongly in support of maintaining the right of cities to seize private property by eminent domain: “You would never build any big thing any place in any big city in this country if you didn’t have the power of eminent domain,” Mr. Bloomberg said, speaking at a ground-breaking ceremony in Times…
Mayor Bloomberg came out strongly in support of maintaining the right of cities to seize private property by eminent domain:
“You would never build any big thing any place in any big city in this country if you didn’t have the power of eminent domain,” Mr. Bloomberg said, speaking at a ground-breaking ceremony in Times Square, which was redeveloped in part through government condemnation of private property. “You wouldn’t have a job, neither would anybody else standing here today. None of us would.”
“There are some in Albany and Washington,” Mr. Bloomberg said, who do not “appreciate the crucial importance of eminent domain to our ability to shape our own future. They mistakenly equate it with an abuse of government power, and ignore the benefits that come to us all from responsible development of formerly blighted areas.”
You can see why a Mayor wouldn’t want to give up the power to use eminent domain and there are certainly extreme cases–an entire blighted block with only a single house left on it, for example– where we think the best interests of the community are served by eminent domain, but those instances are so few and far between and the potential for abuse–like tearing down perfectly decent buildings in well-functioning neighborhoods to make way for an arena and condos–so great that we just can’t get comfortable with the concept.
Bloomberg Says Eminent Domain Is Vital [NY Times]
Say, can anyone recommend a good lubricant?
no, eminent domain is not bad. but when it is perverted, abused and combined with cronyism and blight it IS bad.
David, I’ve read the majority and the concurring majority by Kennedy, and thats what it says. sorry.
Gentrification is not all bad, folks. And neither is eminent domain.
Let’s go Nets!
Who even needs eminent domain when there is arson. Prospect Heights? Greenpoint?
Deg – you might have a point… if what you said was anywhere written in the majority opinion…but it isnt.
Displacement is displacement. Whether by eminent domain or by gentrification, people get displaced. My point above is that the very people who decry the former, often approve (perhaps silently) the latter. If someone is displaced via eminent domain, it’s a crime; if the same person is displaced by so-called “organic development”, then that’s progress. Go figure.
Okay guys…the trolls are really coming out of the workwork this time. None…I repeat, none…of the posts appearing under my name earlier in this thread are mine.
Is there nothing we can do about this?
you guys don’t get it. there is a clear distinction between “gentrification” and eminent domain. go figure it out.