The city leader's of Winston-Salem would like to have the ability to use eminent domain to take at "fair market value" properties that they consider eyesores and then either raze it or rehab it as affordable housing. I have real problems with eminent domain being used in this way because there have been cases in some cities where people have lost homes that they were living in because the city took them using eminent domain because they wanted the land for an office building or some other use. To me this is plain un-American.
Another problem is that city governments are made up of people, civil servants, who are as apt to make mistakes as any other group of people. When they have the power to tear property down, well, at some point they might tear down the wrong property as highlighted in this story from Detroit.
Sure there are eyesores and negligent owners out there, but they should be dealt with using the already existing channels that the city government has at its disposal, like fines or condemnation. I don't think we should punish owners who keep their properties in a habitable state, but that we or our government finds not so attractive state. Remember, one man's trash is another man's treasure.
Discover more from Befuddled
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Befuddled 
I remember when they built the Texas Motor Speedway outside Dallas. A man ran an auto body shop next to his home in rural area near the site of the new race track. His home and business were condemned so the land could be used for the parking lot. Those types of property condemnation and seizure are completely opposite to any reasonable concept of freedom.
I agree. While I have no problem with condemnation if a building is unsafe or poses some sort of health hazard, I absolutely disagree with seizure. You’re right that it’s opposite to any reasonable concept of freedom.