Hartford Courant Oped by Robert M. Ward, R-North Branford,  the Republican leader in the state House of Representatives

 

Homes Should Trump Hotels

 

I have written letters to every member of the legislature's Judiciary Committee.

I am urging them to hold a "subject matter public hearing" on an amendment I am proposing that would prohibit the government from seizing homes for a private interest.

 

March 16, 2004
 
On March 3, the state Supreme Court issued a decision that should send shivers down every homeowner's spine. The court said - in a close 4-3 decision - that it is all right to expel people from their homes for the purposes of private development.

This is not what was intended when the eminent domain law was enacted.

One of the most staggering facts in this debate is that the developers' plans for the properties, located in the Fort Trumbull neighborhood in New London, aren't even finished yet. There is only speculation that a hotel and rental housing will be part of those plans.

When reading the news accounts of what happened and the actual decision, I found myself startled at how a vague plan for a development would drive out folks who have lived in their homes for decades. I am all for redeveloping and revitalizing our state's cities - but not at such an expense.

I have written letters to every member of the legislature's Judiciary Committee. I am urging them to hold a "subject matter public hearing" on an amendment I am proposing that would prohibit the government from seizing homes for a private interest.

My amendment would not preclude the government from taking properties for eminent domain for truly public projects such as roads or schools - initiatives that all the public can use. It would also not ban the seizing of vacant or abandoned properties for private development.

But no one should be forced from his or her home just so a private developer can build a hotel.

All of us can relate to the feeling of pride and accomplishment that comes with buying a home - which has worth far beyond its fair market value. We raise our families there and we grow old there.

The purpose of the eminent domain laws is to allow the state, municipalities or those legally authorized to take private property for public use. Sometimes a homeowner must bow to the greater good and sacrifice his or her home if the government can prove that the property would be used in a way that would benefit the public at large.

Infringement on private property rights should be based upon public exigency and should be purely for public benefit, not for private development and profit.

If a town proposed to take a modest home on the waterfront to give it to a wealthy individual so that the wealthy person could build a waterfront mansion, thereby increasing town tax revenue, we would all be outraged.

We should be equally outraged when a middle-class home is taken by a large corporation for the purpose of building a hotel. Some things are more important than increased tax dollars.

The decision in the New London case will encourage other developers to follow the same strategy, unless state law is amended to prevent them.

The government must always proceed with extreme caution when taking people's homes - even if it means a developer has to do business somewhere else.

In America, the right of our citizens to own property is fundamental. I hope the entire General Assembly will join me in holding that right sacred.

Robert M. Ward, R-North Branford, is the Republican leader in the state House of Representatives.