June 23, 2005

Kelo Supreme Court Decision Emphasizes the Importance of Planning

WASHINGTON, DC — The American Planning Association (APA) supports the 5-4 opinion issued today in the U.S. Supreme Court case, Kelo v. City of New London (No. 04-108). The court upholds the use of eminent domain as a vital community tool, as advocated by APA and others concerned with the case. The decision validates the essential role of planning in ensuring fairness in the eminent domain process.

In this decision, the High Court rejected the petitioner's arguments that the city's decision to take property did not satisfy the requirements of the "public use" clause. Justice Stevens, author of the opinion states, "The City has carefully formulated an economic development plan that it believes will provide appreciable benefits to the community, including — but by no means limited to — new jobs and increased tax revenue." Stevens cited that the "comprehensive character of the plan, [and] the thorough deliberation that preceded its adoption" led the Court to determine that the "... takings challenged here satisfy the public use requirement of the Fifth Amendment."

Click here to read APA's brief

Click here to read the U.S. Supreme Court decision

"The court's decision reaffirms that cities and planners have a responsibility to ensure the power of eminent domain is used thoughtfully and consistently with implementation of a community's comprehensive development plan," said APA Executive Director and CEO, Paul Farmer, AICP. "The court's decision not to second-guess the local government's determinations of 'public use' ensures that carefully thought-out community plans will not be hindered by a higher standard of judicial review."

In the case, Suzette Kelo challenged the City of New London's plans to redevelop her Fort Trumbull neighborhood with offices, a hotel, and housing near the new Pfizer research facility. She argued that taking private property for economic development was not an appropriate "public use" under the Fifth Amendment. The Connecticut Superior Court agreed with her, but the Connecticut Supreme Court reversed and sided with the city.

In his concurring opinion, Justice Kennedy wrote, "This taking occurred in the context of a comprehensive development plan meant to address a serious city-wide depression, and the projected economic benefits of the project cannot be characterized as de minimus." Kennedy continued to state that there were no suspicious circumstances or "purported benefits" present in this case that would lead the justices to determine otherwise.

"APA strongly believes it is important to preserve the ability of local governments to use redevelopment tools and techniques, including eminent domain when appropriate, to achieve well-defined public purposes to create communities that enrich people's lives," said Farmer.

Law professor Tom Merrill, Columbia University School of Law, collaborated with John Echeverria of the Georgetown Environmental Law & Policy Institute in drafting APA's amicus brief to the court. The National Congress for Community Economic Development and APA's Connecticut chapter joined APA in filing this amicus brief.

In its amicus brief, APA argued that "[e]minent domain is concededly a harsh power, and is subject to misuse or overuse if not properly constrained. But eminent domain imposes potentially adverse consequences on all who experience it, not just those who might be able to persuade a panel of judges that the purpose of a particular condemnation is not 'public' enough. The dangers of eminent domain should be addressed by assuring that it remains a second-best alternative to market exchange as a means of acquiring resources, by encouraging careful planning and public participation in decisions to invoke the power of eminent domain, and by building on current legislative requirements that mandate compensation beyond the constitutional minimum for persons displaced from occupied residences or businesses because of government condemnations."

In 2004, the Board of Directors of APA adopted a policy guide on redevelopment (available here). The policy guide states: "The redirection of growth into the nation's central cities, urbanized areas, inner suburbs, and other areas already served by infrastructure and supported by urban services is an essential element of the American Planning Association's vision. Local government redevelopment programs provide critical tools for accomplishing this goal."

Contact
Jason Jordan, APA, 202-349-1005; jjordan@planning.org