Several small business owners are suing cities in Missouri this week over officials’ attempts to use eminent domain to take their properties for private development projects.
One of the plaintiffs, Martin George, expressed frustration, stating, “We’re not just a game of musical chairs for property in this country.” He and other business owners allege that the city staff are exploiting a vague definition of blight to push a $436 million development plan, which seeks to transform local properties into apartments, retail spaces, hotels, and restaurants.
The Department of Justice recently decided to halt random searches of DEA travelers at airports due to emerging “serious concerns.”
Bobby Taylor, a judicial attorney representing the plaintiffs, commented at a press conference that the properties in question are not hazardous to public health. He added that the city’s claims are based on minor issues, like peeling paint or age-induced cracks, which were used to justify significant changes to Manchester roads and impose changes through eminent domain.
If this definition of blight is permitted, Taylor warned, it would empower governments to seize any property that appears a bit old or needs some maintenance. This issue echoes the 2005 Supreme Court case of Kelo v. New London, which allowed cities to expropriate properties for economic development, setting a precedent that faced major backlash nationwide. In response, Missouri enacted laws in 2006 to protect property owners from such takeovers for merely economic reasons.
Nevertheless, in Missouri, laws regarding eminent domain still allow cities to claim areas as blighted if there are conditions deemed “unsafe or unsanitary.” This broad phrasing can easily be manipulated to condemn entire neighborhoods, even if individual properties are in decent shape.
After a major flooding issue in 2018 that led Brentwood to initiate a multi-million-dollar flood mitigation effort, the city subsequently labeled local properties as blighted. Business owners argue this designation is unfounded, stating improvements have been made and that their establishments are thriving. Amy Stanford, a co-owner of a local diner, asserted, “We function, grow, and it’s a great business. How can we be considered blighted?”
The city has not issued any comments regarding the ongoing lawsuit.
Bob Story, who has operated a fly fishing business in Brentwood since 1989, previously remarked that the area looks comparable to others around. He implied that tax revenue appears to be the primary motive behind the redevelopment push.
IJ lawyer Bob Belden emphasized that without the authority of eminent domain, local redevelopment efforts would stall, impacting hardworking business owners. Since approval, the Brentwood development project has undergone changes in leadership due to financial issues faced by the previous developer. A new entity, Halo Real Estate Ventures, has now taken over the project.
Halo’s CEO, Joel Oliver, previously stated that he wasn’t concerned about the lawsuit and acknowledged the fears that come with change. The trial is set to commence on Monday at the St. Louis County Circuit Court, lasting for four days.
