Eminent Domain at Columbia

New York Times

The Columbia decision “is the first thing that’s happened in New York that suggests the threat of a change in our eminent domain law,” said Kathryn S. Wylde, chief executive of the Partnership for New York City, a leading business group. “I think it’s frightening because there are few more important investments in our city’s future than that which Columbia is making.”

The clamor for reform is also being driven by a recent wave of sentiment against development in New York, as demonstrated last month when the City Council defied Mr. Bloomberg and rejected a plan by the Related Companies to convert the Kingsbridge Armory in the Bronx into a shopping center. Emboldening critics is the sense that Mr. Bloomberg’s influence has waned since his narrow victory in last fall’s mayoral race.     


The New York Times may not have this one right.  Part, if not all, of the anger is because the citizens of New York have come to believe that a few very favored and very wealthy individuals are taking advantage of the eminent domain system.  The Police Power retains its superiority over the Eminent Domain clauses of the Fifth Amendment and Due Process of the Fourteenth Amendment, at least for the time being.  This writer fully expects the New York Court of Appeals, being New York’s highest court, to reverse the lower appellate court opinion. 
 

Columbia University Challenge

 Observer

The owner of a set of storage buildings in West Harlem, Nick Sprayregen, has filed a lawsuit challenging the state’s use of eminent domain, he said this afternoon. The state has commenced actions to acquire the properties in connection with Columbia University’s planned 17-acre expansion in the area.

In Mr. Sprayregen’s 107-page petition, he challenged the state’s actions as unconstitutional, alleging the development is not intended for civic use. The petition claims that the area is not blighted, as required by law; that the studies demonstrating blight were highly flawed; and that the public approval process was rigged.

Among other claims, Mr. Sprayregen, the owner of Tuck-it-Away Storage, said that the city and state collaborated secretly more than five years ago to determine a strategy for the project, and quotes email excerpts that suggest some skepticism on the part of a city official about the process.

“Where a development agency colluded with a developer to drive out businesses,” the petition says, “vacate buildings, and then run them down, and then hired the developer’s own consultant to give the agency the basis for a blight finding, this case raises the questions of the proper limit of judicial deference to agency determinations.”

Colleges and universities have consistently and historically been treated as "public" for 'public use' purposes. What has occurred in many jurisdictions is the specific constitutional delegation for State University eminent domain actions. Frequently, there have been specific statutory delegations pursuant to a constitutional delegation empowering condemnation upon legislative grant. The Columbia University challenge will likely be peremptorily dismissed.