©
Old Dominion University's plans to buy and redevelop several blocks southeast of campus sat dormant for more than 11 years. Now, as the legal exemption allowing the city to condemn the properties is set to expire at the end of June, the Norfolk Redevelopment and Housing Authority is in a mad dash.
Last week, the authority's board of commissioners set in motion the legal machinery to take four properties, which will displace two more industrial businesses.
So much is wrong with this plan and this process: NRHA is selling its condemnation powers for a 4 percent commission. It's misleading the courts about why it's taking the properties. It's undercutting long-standing businesses by failing to offer a fair price for their properties. And it's favoring one type of business - upscale shops and housing - over another.
NRHA is going to court to force the sale of properties between 38th and 41st streets and Hampton Boulevard and Killam Avenue not for student housing, which ODU needs, but so the university can turn the area into a mixed-use development of shops, restaurants and apartments.
Virginia law expressly prohibits government confiscations for economic development. It allows the government to condemn property if it is for public use, for a public utility or if the property is blighted. NRHA's proposals don't meet even one of those conditions.
In the area ODU has targeted for its expanded University Village, most of the property is not blighted. In fact, three of the most recent properties in NRHA's sights - Norfolk Machine and Welding Inc., Norva Plastics and Central Radio - are small, taxpaying businesses. Their only sins are that they don't fit the city of Norfolk's vision of economic success, and they're in ODU's way.
Norfolk Machine and Welding is a 32-year-old industrial machinery repair company. Norva Plastics, established 35 years ago, is a fabricator and supplier specializing in suicide prevention products. Central Radio, a 76-year-old military contractor, installs and repairs electronic equipment in a building constructed specifically for it.
Ironically, Norfolk can't seem to move fast enough to condemn three businesses that are no threat to public health and safety, but it's dragging its feet in dealing with deplorable conditions on the other side of the city.
As The Pilot's Meghan Hoyer reported, a truly blighted Norfolk neighborhood of 70 homes - Central Trailer Park - was allowed to deteriorate for years. Residents' long-standing complaints of Third World conditions include backed-up sewage and jack-rigged electrical hookups, missing roofs and windows.
Rather than condemn property that should be condemned, NRHA is taking profitable, tax-generating facilities and turning the land over to ODU's real estate foundation.
That group pays NRHA 4 percent for every property it buys, which means NRHA has a financial interest in condemning Central Radio, Norfolk Machine and Welding and Norva Plastics.
With such an incentive - more than $200,000 for the latest properties - NRHA is not working on the public's behalf; it's working for itself and for developers who will get the property.
The flurry of activity in the last few months is because in 2007, Virginia made it harder for government to condemn property but gave Norfolk two years to finish redevelopment already under way, including University Village. That deadline was subsequently extended until June 30.
If the NRHA and the ODU foundation want to do right by property owners - and right by the law - they will stop trying to rush through condemnation and negotiate in good faith without the hammer of eminent domain.

Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Twitter
Google
Yahoo
More developer rubbish
Mike, you don't have to be familiar with specifics. You agree with the forced government use of eminent domain simply because you, as a developer, have an opportunity to redeveloping these politically incorrect areas. There is no publc interest. It's YOUR interest that you are concerned with. The property owner is the loser regardless. In the case of Kelo, the property wasn't blighted. The issue here was that these greedy developers in New London didn't feel that a moderately priced property/home and it's owner should be able to have a view of the water. Only rich folks should have that luxury. You and your developer weenies are foaming at the mouth for governmet to use this power to kick out property owners along the 19th street corridor, or perhaps older neighborhoods because their old houses don't fit the the mold. Kelo did provide the states with such activity. They also provided a way to stop it. Thank goodness the legislature tightened the leash on developers ability to use tactics that were used in Kelo.The Supreme Court got this one very wrong. The only interest you have is your own.
I certainly believe there is
I certainly believe there is a public interest in land being restored to quality and appropriate uses, especially if the landowner abuses the right and obligation of ownership. Blighted and deteriorating areas breed crime and a decline in the public health and welfare. No investor in his or her right mind would invest private capital in an area in distress, so the land value keeps decreasing and the city loses its tax base, so its remaining citizens are burdened with a higher tax rate to make up for the loss of property value. The only way to break this cycle is to intervene with public investment and motivation of the investment of private capital. Your denial of the legitimate role of redevelopment agencies is just plain wrong.
Confirmation of Kelo
Yes Keith, you are correct; I don't agree with your point of view on this issue. Not being familiar with the specifics, and not willing to rely on the editorial board's expression of the pertinent facts, I am posting here in general terms and I do think redevelopment agencies need to be empowered to condemn property in order to remove blight, deterioration, and property not being maintained by their owners. Why? Because the public interest is served by clearance and redevelopment, and this frequently requires an area view rather than a lot specific view. The revitalized area provides dramatic increases in the tax base, and allows a quality institution and employer like ODU to grow and prosper. Now, that said, the businesses can move and prosper in another location, and the award to them should be equitable and fair. Frankly, Kelo confirmed the power of states to provide for such activity, and they were correct in my view.
WOW!
We agree! There is no chance our esteemed developer will agree though. You can thank Delegate Algie Howell (DEMOCRAT) for introducing that legislation. Too bad the republicans voted for it's passage as well.
Has a NRHA Commissioner ever voted no?
The few times I've seen them in action, the Commissioners try to vote yes faster than the staff can finish speaking. They seem annoyed even listening to property owner's concern. One day they just might come for your property.
Not in Virginia Beach!
This is EXACTLY the reason why the citizens of Virginia Beach should never vote to allow a redevelopment authority-it simply gives developers a tool by which they can steal property from it's rightful owner, using government to carry out the theft on their behalf and make a profit-at the expense of the taxpayers and those who are robbed of their property.
No redevelopment authority in Virginia Beach-EVER.
This is why VB will never
This is why VB will never vote for it and they should be abolised nation wide.
amazing
That the Virginian-Pravda got this one right.
Stop the presses! The Pilot editors and I agree!!!
Pilot editoral board, thank you for a great Father's Day gift, at long last you have published an editorial that stands up for our property rights and points out how unelected and unaccountable government bodies are abusing their power and trashing our Constitution. Good job.
It doesn';t happen often
The Tidewater Libertarian Party discussed this abuse of power at our meeting Saturday morning and we are in full agreement with the Pilot on this issue.