Monthly Archives: July 2010

Yesterday, the Minnesota Supreme Court issued its opinion in Eagan Economic Development Authority v. U-Haul Co. of Minnesota, No. A08-767 (July 29, 2010). The state supreme court reversed a 2009 appellate court decision which invalidated a “quick-take” condemnation on the basis that the Eagan Economic Development Authority (EDA) exceeded its authority to acquire property via eminent domain as the city had not executed “a binding development agreement respecting the project.”

According to the 2010 Index of Economic Freedom published by The Heritage Foundation and The Wall Street Journal, 16 countries rank higher than the United States in protecting private property rights. From the report: “The United States’ economic freedom score is 78.0, making its economy the 8th freest in the 2010 Index. Its score is 2.7 points lower than last year, reflecting notable decreases in financial freedom, monetary freedom, and property rights.”

KMOX.com reports here that just compensation has finally been paid to St. Louis property owner Bill Simon for the 2 acre commercial property he owned in the Bottle District of downtown St. Louis. In 2005, the Land Clearance and Redevelopment Authority (LCRA) seized Mr. Simon’s land by eminent domain for the purpose of redevelopment.

In July 2008, a jury awarded Bill Simon $2,871,200, an increase of approximately $1.6 million over what he had initially been offered. (See our previous post about the case here.) The court entered a judgment against the Land Clearance and Redevelopment Authority (LCRA) requiring the city agency to pay the verdict amount plus $317,427 in pre-trial interest and $475 per day in interest thereafter.

On Tuesday, July 13, Missouri Governor Jay Nixon signed into law Senate Bill 851 and House Bill 1444, which contain identical provisions that require local governmental bodies to provide at least four days’ public notice before meetings on eminent domain, tax increases or redevelopment plans financed with public funds can take place. Additionally, the new law prohibits voting on such items prior to allowing the public to comment on these items.

During the Senate confirmation hearings held this week, Supreme Court Nominee Elena Kagan did provide a somewhat direct response to Senator Grassley’s questions concerning her position on property rights. From the exchange between Sen. Grassley and Ms. Kagan:

In a majority opinion authored by Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson, the Supreme Court concluded that no compensation can be just compensation.