Tweet
Democrat to throw 6,000 people on the street
... to make room for yuppies. 
I wish them luck in fighting such a massive abuse.
Eminent doubts in Florida
6,000 to lose homes for luxury project
By John-Thor Dahlburg
Tribune Newspapers: Los Angeles Times
Published December 2, 2005
RIVIERA BEACH, Fla. -- It's across the inlet from Palm Beach, but this town--mostly black, blue-collar and with a large industrial and warehouse district--could be a continent away from the Fortune 500 and Rolls-Royce set.
Riviera Beach's fortunes may soon change, however.
In what has been called the largest eminent domain case in the nation, the mayor and other elected leaders want to move about 6,000 residents, tear down their homes and use the emptied 400-acre site to build a waterfront yachting and residential complex for the well-to-do.
The goal, Mayor Michael Brown said in September, is to "forever change the landscape" in this municipality of about 32,000. The $1 billion development scheme, local leaders have said, should generate jobs and haul Riviera Beach's economy out of the doldrums.
Opponents, however, call the plan a government-sanctioned land grab that benefits private developers and the wealthy.
"What they mean is that the view I have is too good for me and should go to some millionaire," said Martha Babson, 60, a house painter who lives near the Intracoastal Waterway.
"This is a reverse Robin Hood," said state Rep. Ronald Greenstein, meaning the poor in Riviera Beach would be robbed to benefit the rich.
Many Americans have been sensitized to eminent domain cases by a Supreme Court ruling in June. The justices approved the plan of New London, Conn., to force some homeowners to sell their properties for a private development that was supposed to generate more jobs and tax revenue. The ruling has led to moves in Congress and at least 35 states, including Florida, to restrict eminent domain seizures of private property.
2001 study finds blight
In Florida, existing law allows local officials to take private land for redevelopment if they deem it "blighted." In May 2001, a study conducted for the city found that "slum and blighted conditions" existed in about a third of Riviera Beach, and that redevelopment was necessary "in the interest of public health, safety, morals and welfare."
A skeptical Babson, who lives in a single-story, concrete-block home painted aqua that she shares with parrots and a dog, did her own survey. For three months, she walked the streets of Riviera Beach photographing houses classified as "dilapidated" or "deteriorated" by specialists hired by the city.
The official study, she said, was riddled with errors. Some lots inventoried as "vacant" (one of 14 criteria that allow Florida cities or counties to declare a neighborhood blighted) actually had homes on them built in 1997, she said. One house deemed "dilapidated," she found, was 2 years old.
Mayor Brown and Floyd Johnson, executive director of the Riviera Beach Community Redevelopment Agency, did not respond to repeated requests for an interview. In past interviews, Brown has said his city was in dire need of jobs and that if officials weren't allowed to resort to eminent domain to spur growth, Riviera Beach could perish.
The median household income in Riviera Beach in 2000 was $32,111 compared with $94,562 in Palm Beach, the U.S. Census Bureau said in its most recent report.
Project would move highway
The redevelopment project designed to bootstrap Riviera Beach to prosperity involves moving U.S. Highway 1 and digging an artificial lagoon to serve as a yacht basin.
In September, the City Council chose a joint venture between a New Jersey-based yacht company and a builder of condominiums in Australia to serve as master developer. The developer, Viking Inlet Harbor Properties, and the city now must agree on a contract.
Residents affected by the plan are supposed to be eligible for new homes elsewhere in Riviera Beach and compensation for business damages. But uncertainties have been maddening.
For 25 years, Bill Mars has sold and serviced sport-fishing boats in Riviera Beach. He said he hasn't been told whether a place in the redevelopment zone has been kept for him.
Under the plan, his sales and service center is supposed to make way for an aquarium.
"If you look at our business, we're one of the shining stars of Riviera Beach," Mars said. "Yet no one has come to us to say, `We're going to take care of you and relocate you.'" That despite the plan's incorporation of a "working waterfront," including boat sales and repair.
The owners of another business in Riviera Beach's downtown accuse local leaders of not enforcing city codes in order to produce the decay that redevelopment is supposed to remedy.
"They want to leave everything in a dilapidated condition so it seems to everybody and to the government like it's blighted," said Mike Mahoney, who runs Dee's T-Shirts.
Some residents have accepted offers from developers and moved out; others have retained lawyers to try to get a better price. Still others are waiting to see what happens, noting the troubled history of redevelopment efforts. "This is the fourth eminent domain CRA plan I've seen since I've been here," said Mars. "I survived those, and I may survive this one too."
6,000 to lose homes for luxury project
By John-Thor Dahlburg
Tribune Newspapers: Los Angeles Times
Published December 2, 2005
RIVIERA BEACH, Fla. -- It's across the inlet from Palm Beach, but this town--mostly black, blue-collar and with a large industrial and warehouse district--could be a continent away from the Fortune 500 and Rolls-Royce set.
Riviera Beach's fortunes may soon change, however.
In what has been called the largest eminent domain case in the nation, the mayor and other elected leaders want to move about 6,000 residents, tear down their homes and use the emptied 400-acre site to build a waterfront yachting and residential complex for the well-to-do.
The goal, Mayor Michael Brown said in September, is to "forever change the landscape" in this municipality of about 32,000. The $1 billion development scheme, local leaders have said, should generate jobs and haul Riviera Beach's economy out of the doldrums.
Opponents, however, call the plan a government-sanctioned land grab that benefits private developers and the wealthy.
"What they mean is that the view I have is too good for me and should go to some millionaire," said Martha Babson, 60, a house painter who lives near the Intracoastal Waterway.
"This is a reverse Robin Hood," said state Rep. Ronald Greenstein, meaning the poor in Riviera Beach would be robbed to benefit the rich.
Many Americans have been sensitized to eminent domain cases by a Supreme Court ruling in June. The justices approved the plan of New London, Conn., to force some homeowners to sell their properties for a private development that was supposed to generate more jobs and tax revenue. The ruling has led to moves in Congress and at least 35 states, including Florida, to restrict eminent domain seizures of private property.
2001 study finds blight
In Florida, existing law allows local officials to take private land for redevelopment if they deem it "blighted." In May 2001, a study conducted for the city found that "slum and blighted conditions" existed in about a third of Riviera Beach, and that redevelopment was necessary "in the interest of public health, safety, morals and welfare."
A skeptical Babson, who lives in a single-story, concrete-block home painted aqua that she shares with parrots and a dog, did her own survey. For three months, she walked the streets of Riviera Beach photographing houses classified as "dilapidated" or "deteriorated" by specialists hired by the city.
The official study, she said, was riddled with errors. Some lots inventoried as "vacant" (one of 14 criteria that allow Florida cities or counties to declare a neighborhood blighted) actually had homes on them built in 1997, she said. One house deemed "dilapidated," she found, was 2 years old.
Mayor Brown and Floyd Johnson, executive director of the Riviera Beach Community Redevelopment Agency, did not respond to repeated requests for an interview. In past interviews, Brown has said his city was in dire need of jobs and that if officials weren't allowed to resort to eminent domain to spur growth, Riviera Beach could perish.
The median household income in Riviera Beach in 2000 was $32,111 compared with $94,562 in Palm Beach, the U.S. Census Bureau said in its most recent report.
Project would move highway
The redevelopment project designed to bootstrap Riviera Beach to prosperity involves moving U.S. Highway 1 and digging an artificial lagoon to serve as a yacht basin.
In September, the City Council chose a joint venture between a New Jersey-based yacht company and a builder of condominiums in Australia to serve as master developer. The developer, Viking Inlet Harbor Properties, and the city now must agree on a contract.
Residents affected by the plan are supposed to be eligible for new homes elsewhere in Riviera Beach and compensation for business damages. But uncertainties have been maddening.
For 25 years, Bill Mars has sold and serviced sport-fishing boats in Riviera Beach. He said he hasn't been told whether a place in the redevelopment zone has been kept for him.
Under the plan, his sales and service center is supposed to make way for an aquarium.
"If you look at our business, we're one of the shining stars of Riviera Beach," Mars said. "Yet no one has come to us to say, `We're going to take care of you and relocate you.'" That despite the plan's incorporation of a "working waterfront," including boat sales and repair.
The owners of another business in Riviera Beach's downtown accuse local leaders of not enforcing city codes in order to produce the decay that redevelopment is supposed to remedy.
"They want to leave everything in a dilapidated condition so it seems to everybody and to the government like it's blighted," said Mike Mahoney, who runs Dee's T-Shirts.
Some residents have accepted offers from developers and moved out; others have retained lawyers to try to get a better price. Still others are waiting to see what happens, noting the troubled history of redevelopment efforts. "This is the fourth eminent domain CRA plan I've seen since I've been here," said Mars. "I survived those, and I may survive this one too."
Comment