City drops property-seizure plan

• Article
• Comments ()
• Click-2-Listen
• Videos

By

Riviera Beach, Fla., city officials have suspended plans to seize private property for a $2.4 billion waterfront revitalization project, saying a newly passed state constitutional amendment severely limits use of eminent domain.

But opponents of the development fear many private homes and businesses threatened by the project are still in danger, and the developer says it would consider suing both the city and state.

"The state changed the rules" and barred eminent domain "after one of its own agencies, the Department of Community Development, had already signed off" on the project, said Michael Clark, a spokesman for the developer, Viking Inlet Harbor Properties.

Mr. Clark said the company would support the city if it sues the state and would be willing to go after the city if Riviera Beach officials think it would bring public attention to the matter.

The 858-acre project, which has generated national attention as potentially the biggest use of eminent domain for private development since the Supreme Court affirmed the practice last year, was hailed as an economic engine for one of Palm Beach County's poorest cities.

The city's deal with Viking calls for a new marina district, high-end condominiums, houses, shops, offices and yacht slips. The city had yet to use eminent domain, but thousands of homes and businesses would have to be purchased or seized for the project to proceed.

Even though the Riviera Beach City Council last week passed a resolution saying it would not violate the new constitutional amendment, residents and businesses remain concerned about the city's plans.

Riviera Beach officials "are still reserving the power to use eminent domain in the future," said Bert Gall, a senior attorney at the Institute for Justice, a public-interest law firm that will proceed with one of several lawsuits against the city on behalf of residents.

The City Council measure is more flexible than eminent domain opponents like, giving the city leeway to take "advantage of any new [redevelopment] tools that might become available," said Rose Anne Brown, a spokeswoman for the City Council and Mayor Michael Brown.

Mr. Brown, a strong proponent of the plan, had threatened to sue the state after it outlawed use of eminent domain over the summer, but he has not said how he will proceed after passage of the resolution and amendment.

Floyd T. Johnson, executive director of the Riviera Beach Community Redevelopment Agency, is trying to modify the project without the need for property seizures. The agency, composed of the City Council members, acts as the city's planning board.

"We need to back up, regroup and see if it can still be an economically viable project," he said.

Mr. Clark said that Viking has spent "close to $50 million" for expenses, including buying properties, and that Riviera Beach has spent "millions of dollars" for engineering studies and other consultant reports.

"We've made our bed. We're partners with Riviera Beach to complete some level of redevelopment," Mr. Clark said.

Sixty-nine percent of Florida voters earlier this month approved the constitutional amendment, which limits using eminent domain for private development except for projects approved by three-fifths of both houses of the Legislature.

On May 11, Gov. Jeb Bush signed legislation making it illegal to take private property for private development in Florida. But because Riviera Beach had signed a master agreement the day before with Viking, Mr. Brown argued, the state law improperly interfered with a valid contract.

• This article is based in part on wire service reports.