[lbo-talk] When is private property NOT?

Jim Devine jdevine03 at gmail.com
Fri Jun 24 08:25:10 PDT 2005



> Some friends of mine were recently screwed over by Kansas City when
> their living space and concert venue was taken over by eminent domain so
> the city could build a sport arena for teams that don't exist.
>
> Chuck

didn't the socialist mayor of Santa Cruz -- Michael Rotwin -- build a sports stadium? This usually means heavy taxpayer subsidies to developers and sports teams. (I don't know if Rotwin's program included that element or not.) An increasing number of experts say that this kind of thing isn't really beneficial to cities. That's one reason why Los Angeles doesn't have an NFL team. (Among other things, the behavior of the Raiders (now of Oakland) drove the point home.) We do have the Staples Center, but that seems (marginally?) better, since it's not tied down to a single sport.

BTW, this suggests that the recent Supes' decision isn't that earth-shattering. Almost all of the previous public uses of eminent domain were likely "public-private partnerships," i.e., thought up and organized by groups of businesscritters and pols working hand-in-glove in smoke-filled suites under the banner "I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine."

Leigh, thanks for making the K-PIG link easy to use. Now I can't get any work done at all. -- Jim Devine "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante.



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list