Is Newhall Redevelopment Victimizing the Vulnerable?

A recent national study called Victimizing the Vulnerable: The Demographics of Eminent Domain Abuse by the Institute of Justice analyzed U.S. Census data to determine the profile of people subject to eminent domain abuse in 184 projects across the country, and found that the poor, less educated and minorities are disproportionately targets of eminent domain abuse.

This is consistent with U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor's fear that the federal Kelo ruling would be used "to transfer property from those with fewer resources to those with more," as indicated in her dissenting vote on this important ruling.

In the Kelo ruling, the Supreme Court ruled that governments may seize non-blighted homes and turn them over to a private developer based on little more than a promise that the new owners could use the land in a way that might create more jobs and pay higher taxes.

This should have a familiar ring to it by now, with the Old Town Newhall Revitalization Project in full swing with a primary emphasis on increasing sales tax and property tax revenues in the area by eliminating automotive and other service businesses and replacing them with the promise of a "boutique" destination shopping area. Also targeted are many of the homes and apartments currently occupied by those who are poorer and less educated than the typical Santa Clarita area resident.

Chip Mellor of the Institute for Justice says that "eminent domain doesn’t just kick people out of their homes, it uproots entire communities and social networks, which is especially devastating for those of lower-income, predominantly minority communities."

Dr. Fullilove, a research psychiatrist at the New York State Psychiatric Institute and a professor of clinical psychiatry and public health at Columbia University states in her report Eminent Domain & African Americans:  What is the Price of the Commons? that "Eminent domain has become what the founding fathers sought to prevent:  a tool that takes from the poor and the politically weak to give to the rich and politically powerful." Dr. Fullilove also points out that "What the government takes from people is not a home, with a small ‘h’, but Home in the largest sense of the word:  a place in the world, a community, neighbors and services, a social and cultural milieu, an economic anchor that provides security during the ups and downs of life, a commons that sustains the group by offering shared goods and services."

The "politically correct" word for this process is called "gentrification", which has a basic definition of "people of higher income moving into a neighborhood."

A recent report published by On Common Ground asks of gentrification: "Is it the blueprint for neighborhood improvement or displacement?" This report is available for download on Realtor.org (the official site of the National Association of Realtors) and opens with the statement: "For some, it can signify many positives: affordable, unique housing stock with eye-catching architectural details, funky little boutiques and delightful ethnic eateries, bragging rights about a cool zip code. For others, it means nothing but negatives: rising rents, a sense of invasion, changing neighborhood identity and an uncertain future."