A few thoughts:
-I kinda feel the developer ought to be able to benefit from obtaining a higher price - perhaps from some Catholic interest group;
-I feel the city could “protect” the property through zoning and historic preservation;
-It seems curious/unfortunate that the interior was recently gutted/redone.
Your thoughts?
(Maybe better for IMHO, but I thought as it concerned government and religion…)
Eminent domain exists to allow the government to expropriate private property for use in a way that is important to public safety, well being, and general prosperity. For instance, a city government taking a parcel of underutilized property to build a civic center or school, a state taking control of an slope that threatens landslide onto a highway in order to build embankments and reinforce the soil, or the federal government taking land to remediate it from industrial pollution. Eminent domain is not supposed to serve special interests or turn expropriated property over a a private party for their own profit.
There is no legitimate rationale for using eminent domain to secure ownership over a private home just to turn it into a shrine for a public figure. It is just continuing the normalization of an abuse of power that governments use all too frequently for ill conceived, unneeded, and often flatly corrupt developments.
To people who have never been to Chicago, don’t know anything about Chicago, and are thousands of miles away from Chicago it’s a difference that makes no difference.
None of those people have any idea what “Dolton” is. They have heard of Chicago. Saying “The Pope comes from Dolton” has no meanign for them. Saying “The Pope comes from the South Side of Chicago” at least gets them in the ballpark.
And yet… it’s been used in the greater Chicago area for decades to allow the powerful to snatch up suddenly valuable bits of property.
The home is privately owned, and has been for its entire existence. The current owner should be allowed to reap whatever windfall recent events have created, not the government of Dolton or Illinois.
The best approach would be for the town to buy it at auction, just like any other bidder could.
But if the town loses at auction, I would have no objection to it using eminent domain to get the house. It’s become a historic site tied to the most famous person ever to come out of Dolton, likely to be of increasing public interest over time as a historic site, and I think that’s a valid use of eminent domain. The exercise of eminent domain must include fair compensation, of course, and the auction price actually paid by the winning bidder would be a logical sum.
That’s not how eminent domain works. The government has great incentive to value the home in a minimal manner in order to reduce the cost of obtaining. The result is that the person being deprived of property loses money.
Dolton doesn’t want to bit at public auction because the town government probably doesn’t have sufficient funds to be the highest bidder.
The threat of eminent domain drives down the value of the property, making it less attractive to purchase at auction because the winner will probably face years of battles in court to truly retain ownership. Which, again, allows the city government to low-ball the property’s value.
Basically, this is a dick move on the part of Dolton that screws over the current owner.
Exactly. I mentioned this in another thread about Park Ridge vs Chicago and why it is common for the former to be referred to simply as “Chicago.” I’m born and raised Chicago, Midway area, and I don’t care except to rib the occasional suburbanite. (I live here. You don’t need to tell me you live in Chicago when you damn well know I know what “Niles” is.)
That said, back in the 80s was it, when the Chicagoland area split into 312 (city) and 708 (suburbs) area codes, I remember a tee-shirt with “No 708ers” emblazoned on it. There’s always been a bit some parochialism to city natives.
I agree with your points. I only support the use of Eminent Domain in situations where it is clearly necessary for the common good, and only when fair compensation is given. I think this is a frivolous use of the law and unfair to the people who restored the structure for sale.
I realize the trend has been toward a more ‘liberal’ interpretation of the “Takings Clause” but I disagree that this was either original intent or assuredly in actual public interest, especially since doing so under the rationale of projections of economic growth is both a subjective and often false metric, as well as subject to corruptibility of public officials, even if not by direct bribery. In essence, I think eminent domain should be invoked only when no other options exist and the benefits to the public are obvious and readily traceable rather than through some kind of enrichment scheme where the benefits trickle down through “economic development” and increase of the tax base.
He is a White Sox fan. That’s as South Side Chicago as it gets. Especially with how bad we’ve been these last couple of seasons. Also where he is from is much closer to actual Chicago than most outlying suburbs are.
“Dolton is located just west of the expressway Interstate 94 and immediately south of the city limits of Chicago”
Il papa was a priest, from the south side of Chicago
(I live here. You don’t need to tell me you live in Chicago when you damn well know I know what “Niles” is.)