Judge throws out Norwood suit
 
(Note: This article poses a very clear Constitutional interpretation question regarding the use of eminent domain. What do you think?)
 
November 25, 2003
 
By Kimball Perry, Post staff writer
 
 
The Cincinnati Post

125 East Court St.

Cincinnati, Ohio 45202

513-352-2000

Fax: 513-621-3962
 
 
To submit a Letter to the Editor: postedits@cincypost.com
 
Norwood, Ohio - Saying the law is on Norwood's side, a judge today threw out a lawsuit by property owners trying to block the city's attempt to take their property for a private development.

Hamilton County Common Pleas Court Judge Robert Ruehlman granted Norwood's motion to dismiss the suit, saying Norwood's attorneys were correct in noting [that] those property owners have other legal avenues to fight the city.

The judge's decision today was a surprise to Joe Horne, the owner of one property Norwood declared "blight" and plans to take by eminent domain. Horne owns a two-family home [that] he rents.

As owner of rental property in Norwood, he is required to have a certificate from the city that notes the property is "habitable" so the tenants are [deemed to be] safe.

"I just received mine a week ago in the mail, and my property is 'habitable,'" Horne said today.

He wonders how, on one hand, Norwood can tell him his building is safe to rent out but, on the other hand, the same government contends the same property is so "blighted" the city needs to seize it.

"How can they say it's OK to rent, but at the same time the city has filed a lawsuit against me that's saying it is not?" Horne asked.

Ted Kiser, an attorney for the city, refused comment today, saying the case remains in court.

The property owners -- with help from the Institute for Justice, a group that fights governments' attempts to seize property in such fights http://www.ij.org -- want to keep their homes.

Norwood wants to use eminent domain to take the properties and sell them to developer Jeffrey R. Anderson, whose Rookwood Partners plan to build Rookwood Exchange, a mix of condos, commercial and office space.

Horne promises he will fight Norwood on several fronts. In addition to a possible appeal of today's ruling, he plans legal fights over Norwood's use of:

  Eminent domain: Usually, governments use the legal maneuver to take property for such public purposes as street widening and police stations. In this case, and others like it around the country, governments are using eminent domain to seize private property and sell it to developers who will build businesses that are expected to generate far more tax revenue for the government than the private properties did.

  Blight designation: In using eminent domain to seize private property, governments often use a "blight" designation. Rarely in these kinds of cases are the properties to be seized true slums. But the governments use the designation, noting legal language that defines the property in question as a menace.

Norwood wants to take the property, near the Smith-Edwards roads interchange of Interstate 71, and pay the owners the appraised value.

 
 
The Institute for Justice
 
 
Property Rights Research