Flats Property Owners Ask Judge to Dismiss Eminent Domain Claim

Thursday, March 22, 2007 Download  RSS  Short URL  Share

Lawyers for both sides in the dispute over prime land in Cleveland's East Flats District were in court yesterday. The Cleveland Cuyahoga County Port Authority wants to acquire the land through eminent domain for a $230 million mixed residential and retail development project. In a contentious hearing, holdout property owners asked the judge to throw out the Port's claim. ideastream's Tasha Flournoy reports.

Lawyer Stephen O’Bryan represents the K&S parking company, whose parking lot is one of the properties in dispute in the east Flats development project. O’Bryan says the Cleveland Cuyahoga County Port Authority didn’t act in good faith during negotiations for his client’s property prior to filing a claim to the land under eminent domain. He’s argues that using eminent domain serves to benefit project developer Scott Wolstein’s interests, not economic development.

Stephen O’Bryan: Mr. Wolstein is trying to take, through the guise of the Port Authority, the property from our client and to add it to his 40 or so percent of the property he owns in the Flats. So he can take the near $80 million public subsidy he stands to gain and the profit he stands to gain if this project goes forward.

Over two years, Wolstein successfully negotiated the purchase of three Flats properties. But the remaining owners say port appraisers valued their property too low and had a conflict of interest because they once worked for Wolstein. O’Bryan argues that the inconsistent property values and unfair bargaining are grounds for dismissing the eminent domain claim.

Stephen O’Bryan: It has to be done without the use of eminent domain power. Let the developer assemble his property in the open market.

O’Bryan also cited the recent Ohio Supreme Court Decision applied a stricter standard on eminent domain, making it more difficult to take property solely for economic benefit. He said the Port’s criteria for both blight and economic renewal are too loosely based on the port’s own rules, and aren’t consistent with the court’s.

But Port Authority lawyers say the development plan would eliminate blight, and resurrect the once-lively Flats district. Attorney Steven Kaufman says in order to win the ‘right to take’ they must prove the following: economic need to gain the land, and a public purpose for the project. He says plans for a public park, housing, and other features fulfill those standards and benefit the public.

Steven Kaufman: You have economic development benefits in the way of job creation, in the way of tax revenues, benefits to our school system, income tax revenue from people that are working and living in this district. All of sudden, we have compelling case for the public uses that are derived from this project and the Port Authority action.

During the hearing, Kaufman said property owners were grasping for straws when they bashed the Port Authority for working with private entities to complete the project. He says it’s a slight that highlights the difference between an Old Cleveland - isolationist and lacking vision - and a New Cleveland.

Steven Kaufman: If this is the new Cleveland and we have collaboration of governments working under clear laws to do good things for the general welfare. And that’s what collaboration means in this case. And, these defendants as a dark conspiracy.

Judge John Corrigan is expected to make a ruling on the arguments within the next 10 days. Tasha Flournoy, 90.3.