By Anthony Rifilato
So the Town of Hempstead, through its power of eminent domain, condemned the property. The hotel was razed last October, in the name of redevelopment for public use. After all, no one would miss the Oceanside hotel, and residents praised the condemnation. Good riddance, people said.
Now, the town has plans to evoke the doctrine of eminent domain again. In Baldwin, the town said it would use eminent domain to spur redevelopment along Grand Avenue near Merrick Road, proposing to tear down a swath of deteriorating storefronts, which the town declared blighted, in the hopes of attracting new businesses.
In West Hempstead, it's the Courtesy Hotel that, similar to the one in Oceanside, has had its share of criminal activity and is the target of the town's next plan for eminent domain.
While many agree that use of eminent domain by local towns and cities can spark economic redevelopment, many have problems with the way it is being applied across the country.
When the U.S. Supreme Court reaffirmed the government's right to condemn property in the name of job creation and heftier tax rolls in a 5-4 ruling last June, it set off a heated debate over private property being taken by government for another private use, even if in the public interest. The Fifth Amendment allows government to take property for public use provided that owners are justly compensated.
"Eminent domain is critical if communities are going to engage in rational development," said Marshall Tracht, vice dean of Hofstra University School of Law. "The question in the Supreme Court case was, can private development be used for public use? The Supreme Court agreed that it could."
The ruling in Kelo v. New London allowed officials in New London, Conn., to seize 15 homes to make way for an office, hotel and residential development along the Thames River. It also allowed many developers to proceed with multi-million dollar projects after local towns condemned properties through eminent domain.
Many lawmakers across the country have called for restrictions on its use, following numerous complaints from business owners. In New York state, the Legislature is considering new restrictions on the use of eminent domain. But Assemblyman Robert Barra, a Republican of Lynbrook, said that those efforts have taken a back seat to more immediate concerns like the budget. Still, said Barra, it's a "touchy" issue in Albany.
"I don't think eminent domain should be applied broadly, especially if you're going to take someone's home," Barra said. "But I also understand that there is a need for it, if it's something you can do to improve the community."
Barra said he thinks eminent domain should be used to remove the Capri Motor Inn, which he said is a haven for drugs and crime.
"That place has been a real dark mark on our community," said Barra. "Eminent domain has to be taken on a case by case basis."
Mixed feelings
Still, some feel that it has the potential to be abused by local towns and cities.
"Eminent domain has always been used for public use," said John Lewis, a lawyer and chairman of the Town of Hempstead Democratic Committee.
While Lewis also agreed that there are instances when it is okay to use eminent domain, like the Oceanside Hotel, Lewis cautioned that there is the potential for government to take advantage of its power, especially if a property is turned over for private redevelopment.
"I don't disagree with its use, I disagree with its scope," said Lewis. "When you grant someone sweeping powers . . . it can pose a problem."
In Baldwin, improving quality of life and attracting businesses has been the town's reasoning for applying eminent domain. This week, the town was set to adopt a blight study of Grand Avenue, which could pave the way for private redevelopment once those buildings are acquired by the town and torn down.
"What the town is looking to do in Baldwin is provide something that will be an economic engine," said Town Councilman Anthony Santino. "Eminent domain should only be used when there is some overriding public purpose behind it."
County Legislator Joseph Scannell, a Democrat of Baldwin who is working with the town to bring back Nunley's Carousel to Baldwin, said that eminent domain is a complicated legal issue. While the county may not have the same right as towns, cities and villages do to use eminent domain, Scannell said that he agrees that in Baldwin, it is the right way to go.
"It [Grand Avenue] is so run down that this is the perfect place where government can come in and redevelop it," said Scannell. "I think where people are uneasy . . . is if it was sold to a private developer for a strip mall. I share that concern. I wouldn't want government coming into a residential neighborhood. But this is in a commercial area."
Scannell and Santino said that they would work with business owners during the process. As the Herald reported last week, Howard Gainsburg, owner of Baldwin Kitchen and Bath Designs, said he is concerned about losing his business.
"He's the guy we have to look out for," said Scannell. "I would hope that it's a process everyone can be included in."
Others feel that in Baldwin, eminent domain cannot address larger issues that will arise if the town's plan goes forward. Leo F. McGinity, a longtime Baldwin resident as well as a former State Supreme Court Appellate judge and town councilman, says that it would be great to have a Starbucks and other businesses in that part of Baldwin.
"Nothing has been done to improve those buildings," said McGinity, who has lived in Baldwin since 1930. Even in those days, he said, the buildings on Grand Avenue were showing their age.
"They should be taken down," said McGinity.
But McGinity said that there are other issues that need to be addressed if this project happens, such as Baldwin's arcane zoning map, traffic problems and inadequate turning lanes all along Grand Avenue.
"The problem in Baldwin isn't just that little section over there," said McGinity. "Zoning impacts everything. We need more parking, turning lanes and a comprehensive zoning plan. The town needs to adapt to modern times."
McGinity added that eminent domain is supposed to benefit the entire community.
"Once you're left with this, you have to ask, did it improve the community," McGinity said. "It's a step in the right direction, but the town has to look at the overall plan."
Santino said that contrary to opinions that eminent domain is being overused, the town has been responsible, and uses eminent domain rights appropriately.
"It's a very potent power in the hands of local government," said Santino. "But we don't even go there unless there is an overriding concern."
Comments about this story? ARifilato@liherald.com, or call (516) 569-4000, 207.
