>>Valley Patriot>> |
We have thus come to the point in our society where the all-consuming greed of government for more tax revenue is now more likely than ever to cost you your house, your business and your land. And this confiscation has been given the stamp of approval by our highest court. The Constitution of the United States is an amazing document. Our Founding Fathers wrote it not to define the functions of our government, but to define the limits of that government in our lives. They were well aware of the intrusive actions of an overbearing government from the actions of King George, and were determined not to let that occur in the newly formed United States. The Constitution’s first ten amendments, known as the Bill of Rights, enumerate a long list of carefully thought out “rights” granted to the citizens, not the government. The Federalist Papers leading up to the writing of the Constitution reinforce the framers’ concern about overreaching government power. The Fifth Amendment says, in part, “…nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.” Until 1954, all governments defined that “public use” as the construction of roads, buildings and other such “government-owned” entities. Then in that year, the Supreme Court expanded the use of eminent domain to include the taking of blighted areas and slums for redevelopment purposes. Now, in 2005, your local mayor and selectmen don’t have to prove that your property is in a blighted area to take it and give it to somebody else who may pay more taxes than you do. This should worry every single homeowner in Haverhill, Lawrence and Methuen who have property along the banks of the Merrimack River. You may have a beautiful piece of property which has been in your family for generations, but if the city wants it for a developer to build luxury condos, well … you’re out of luck. If you also happen to live in an older section of Andover or North Andover where there are many smaller homes, the town can now take your properties and turn them over to a private developer to build new, million dollar mansions or a huge shopping mall … whatever the town now desires in its quest for tax revenue. Businesses could also be taken at the whim of government. Just since this recent court decision, Freeport, Texas has started moving to commandeer waterfront property owned by two seafood companies in order to allow for the construction of a 900-slip private marina. And it gets worse. Freeport will even be loaning the developers $6 million to finance the project with no guarantee that it will get its money back. The eminent domain taking of the two seafood companies will cost scores of local jobs. So, what can be done to protect our property? Massachusetts could pass laws or amend its constitution to prohibit egregious use of eminent domain, but don’t hold your breath for this to happen. A better option is for cities and towns to adopt local initiative petition and referendum procedures so that citizens will at least have the right to collect signatures to force a town or city-wide vote on any eminent domain action. This tactic has been successfully used to prevent the taking of homes in communities such as Lakewood, Ohio, where angry citizens collected signatures and voted to overrule their city council, thus saving the destruction of 56 homes, four apartment buildings and over a dozen businesses in a middle-class neighborhood. The mayor and council had been pushing to take the properties and sell them to a developer for upscale housing and a mall. Interestingly, this past spring North Andover had the chance to add the concepts of initiative petition and referendum to its charter, but those attending town meeting voted not to adopt these citizen protections. I guess those attending trust the government to always do the right thing … without a vote of the people. Will they
worry more now about the future, like our Founding
Fathers once did? *Ted Tripp is an
International Consultant in high-tech manufacturing
methods. He has BS and MS degrees in Chemical Engineering
from MIT. You can reach him at tripp@gis.net. *Send your questions
comments to ValleyPatriot@aol.com |
With apologies to Henny Youngman,
the above phrase aptly describes the terrible Supreme
Court decision rendered on June 23rd in Kelo vs. City of
New London. In a 5 to 4 decision, the Court ruled that a
person’s home could be taken by the local government
through eminent domain for virtually any reason the
politicians felt was for the greater good of the
community. No longer does the taking of land by eminent
domain have to be for “public” use, such as to
build a highway, park or courthouse. Now, politicians can
take your house and land, or even your business, and then
turn it over to a private developer to build expensive
townhouses, or a mall, or a hotel, or a parking lot, or
whatever the politicians believe will enhance the
community. And they justify this by saying that the new
development replacing your home will generate greater tax
revenues.