Small businesses in Brentwood, Missouri, are challenging the city's blight designation and redevelopment plan, which seeks to use eminent domain to seize their properties for a large-scale development. Attorneys argue that cities nationwide are exploiting vague blight definitions to circumvent state eminent domain restrictions.
As fireworks illuminated the night sky on Independence Day 2018, Roxanne and Carter Maier were hard at work remodeling a former doctor's office into a dance studio in Brentwood, Missouri. Their hopes of eventually purchasing the building were shattered when the city declared a strip of businesses, including theirs, blighted and moved to hand over the land to a private developer.
The developer, Green Street, plans to use eminent domain to force out existing property owners and replace them with a $436 million mixed-use development. Roxanne and Carter Maier, now in their 50s and 60s, face the prospect of yet another move and the loss of their investment in the property.
The Maiers' case highlights a nationwide trend of cities using blight designations to seize private property for economic development purposes. A 2005 Supreme Court ruling in Kelo v. New London allowed cities to do so, overturning prior restrictions against taking private property for non-public uses.
The Court's ruling sparked a backlash, leading to state laws strengthening property owner protections. However, many states, including Missouri, included a carve-out allowing cities to seize blighted areas.
Critics argue that the broad definition of blight, which includes factors like "insanitary or unsafe conditions" and "economic liability," can be exploited by cities to condemn even well-maintained properties.
Bob Belden, an attorney for the Brentwood businesses, believes cities are taking advantage of "extremely elastic" definitions of blight. He points out that deterioration is an inherent part of aging structures.
The city of Brentwood initially declared the area blighted in 2018 due to a history of flooding. However, after investing heavily in flood mitigation and infrastructure improvements, the city re-declared it blighted in 2023.
Business owners allege that they were not notified of the blight designation or the potential for seizure. They also argue that the city failed to provide substantial evidence of deterioration or unsafe conditions.
The city declined to comment on the development plans or the lawsuit, stating that eminent domain is legal for addressing blighted areas. However, Mayor David Dimmit argued that the redevelopment would create a cohesive and thriving area.
Green Street, the developer, faces its own challenges, including unpaid property taxes, lawsuits from contractors, and layoffs. Despite promises of increased revenue, some residents worry about the fate of their businesses and the loss of their homes.
The Institute for Justice, which represented the New London property owners in the Kelo case, sees echoes of that decision in Brentwood. They argue that it raises questions about property ownership rights and the government's ability to seize property for its own economic gain.
The neighborhood where Susette Kelo's house once stood remains a vacant lot nearly two decades after the city seized it. The only occupants have been feral animals, serving as a sobering reminder of the potential consequences of eminent domain seizures.
