Task force considers relocation expenses

Two members of Gov. Matt Blunt’s Missouri Task Force on Eminent Domain, along with a Springfield attorney, met with members of the Springfield Area Chamber of Commerce Oct. 26 to present considerations that have emerged as the task force works toward its Dec. 31 deadline to study eminent domain and determine what, if any, effect it will have in Missouri. If necessary, the task force will propose legislation for the next session of the General Assembly to address any loopholes or issues.

Howard Wright, former city attorney who now works under contract as special council for the city of Springfield, spoke on the history of eminent domain. Wright has practiced eminent domain law as an attorney for the Missouri Highway Commission, city attorney for Cape Girardeau and as city attorney for Springfield.

Leslie Holloway, of Jefferson City, is director of state and local governmental affairs for the Missouri Farm Bureau. She presented the agricultural perspective of eminent domain.

Both Wright and Holloway serve on Blunt’s nine-member task force.

The economic development perspective of eminent domain was provided by Charles Cowherd, a member of the law firm Husch & Eppenberger in Springfield.

Just compensation

The Fifth Amendment of the U. S. Constitution says that private property should not be taken for public use without just compensation. The early interpretations, Wright said, date back to acquiring private property for railroads, utilities and canals. However, Wright said, the definition of “just compensation” is one of the issues the task force is looking at.

A more efficient and fair valuing process may be considered to ensure just compensation for landowners. Also under consideration is a possible formula to reach a fair market value for property that has been blighted, so that the value would be higher than it was on the date the property was blighted or the date of the taking.

The Missouri Farm Bureau, Holloway said, recognizes the need for eminent domain authority to provide public infrastructure. “But it should be used as a last resort,” she said. “We don’t believe that it should be used for private development purposes, and we have some other suggestions in terms of reforming the process to make it what we feel would be more fair to the landowners who get involved in those types of proceedings.”

Using eminent domain, Cowherd said, is not a developer’s first choice. “In fact I would submit to you that if a developer can only do most of the project by using eminent domain, they are foolish in doing so,” he said. “If you’re a developer, the main things you’re interested in are time and money. You can’t do a project unless you do it on a time schedule, and if you’re tied up in eminent domain proceedings, that makes that time schedule very difficult to do.”

Cost of relocation

Relocation costs for landowners also are being considered.

“Missouri law doesn’t provide, except in certain instances, that you pay relocation costs. That’s wrong. I’ve been involved with relocation payments, they’re simple, they work, they’re good, they help the condemning authority and the citizens,” Wright said. “As a person who worked for the government, I never wanted to take property from someone without paying what I thought was fair compensation. On the other hand, because it’s the taxpayers’ money, I don’t want to pay them a whole lot more than what it’s worth.”

Holloway said there are several elements of fair market value that need to be addressed in addition to relocation costs.

“Replacement value is something that’s been suggested. For a farmer to go out and start farming again is a pretty hefty cost,” she said.

Intangible items such as heritage value for farms that have been in families for generations should also be taken into account, Holloway said.

“We think there should be some consideration given if there is a project that would affect a farm that’s an official centennial farm, that’s been in operation continuously for 100 years in the same family,” she said.

Under Missouri law, Cowherd said, there currently is no recognition of heritage value. “Should there be? That’s a valid question,” he said. “If you’ve lived on the same family farm for 100 years, is there an intangible value to that property? I submit, yes, there is.”

The task force also is discussing the possibility of requiring better notification of land owners earlier in the condemnation process, giving land owners the opportunity to suggest alternate routes or sites that might be less intrusive, and a penalty for low-ball offers when compensation falls within a yet-to-be-determined percentage below the initial offer.

A landowner bill of rights, to educate people about the process, is another consideration. “Many times landowners are approached and, especially if they’re elderly, they may not have any idea what condemnation is all about, what eminent domain authority means or what their options are,” Holloway said.

B.J. Johnson, chair of the chamber’s governmental relations committee, said the forum was put together to educate chamber members about eminent domain, its impact and what’s going on in Jefferson City to address it.

“To that end, we have asked these folks here to help us understand exactly what the ramifications of Kelo (v. City of New London) are and where our governor and legislature are likely headed in that direction,” Johnson said.