The very first article I published in No Force, No Fraud, back in May, was titled Is your home your castle?. The subject was the increasing use of condemnation and eminent domain by cities for "redevelopment" projects, sometimes even to benefit a single large corporate entity, such as the giant Best Buy headquarters campus in Richfield.

There is an insidious sickness permeating many city governments; the idea that, in the name of "redevelopment" or "revitalization" that those governments have a right to decide what should be built, and where, within their boundaries. They take it upon themselves to simply decide that an area should be razed and rebuilt in a different way, and anyone currently in the targeted area is simply out of luck. They will pay a great deal of money to have a contracted firm study the idea and prepare a presentation that makes it "obvious" that the project will be grand and profitable for the city...
and for the firm doing the studies,
and for the urban planners contracted with,
and for the attorneys needed to bring it about,
and for the investment firms who are allowed to build in the newly vacated space,
and for the construction companies who get the building contracts,
and for all the people who will move into the new apartments, cluster homes, and single-family homes that appear.

Other city residents will be proud of their modernized city when they drive by the spiffy new constructions. Sounds like everybody wins, doesn't it?

Not quite everyone. I've been talking about a specific "revitalization" project being studied in Crystal, Minnesota and the area they're studying is Crystal Heights, a small neighborhood around the Cub Foods store on 36th Avenue, just east of Highway 100.

One small problem... the residents don't want to sell... don't want to move.

From the study done for the city, paid for with a $60,000 Met Council grant plus $60,000 from Crystal funds:

The study was conducted to propose a solution to the difficult process of revitalization in the Crystal Heights neighborhood.  More than 90 percent of the neighborhood’s 78 houses were built as post World War II structures that do not meet current building code standards and have since experienced limited renovation and repair.  City staff and decision makers undertook the feasibility study to understand the potential for complete neighborhood redevelopment.

Simply put, these are modest, older homes on wide lots, and many of them are built on slabs rather than with basements. They are, simply, the kind of HOMES (not houses as the city refers to them) that were once widespread throughout our nation... built to accomodate the needs of the huge WWII veteran population and their new families.

The proposal assumes demolition of existing structures and relocation of all present day residents.

Structures? Relocation? Residents? Let me say it truthfully, rather than with the bland, politically-correct, deceptive language of urban planning:

The city will, at the point of a gun if need be, throw out these property owner/citizens and bulldoze their homes. This city government, supposedly the servant of the residents, will evict them, not because they have done anything wrong, but because it covets their property.

This action is unconstitutional, it's illegal under Minnesota law, and it's damned sure immoral as hell... but the Crystal city government MAY get away with it, as many other cities have.

How do they get away with it?

By using the taxpayer's own money to force and intimidate a few at a time. Like Crystal, they toss out threats of "eminent domain" and "condemned as blighted", and scare the hell out of the residents... and some of them will sell in fear and run. City governments get the eager backing of many businesses who will benefit from the whole process, and together, they bring a lot of pressure and propaganda to bear. Meanwhile, residents who were just trying to live their lives peacefully find that they suddenly have a big hammer hanging over their heads. How would you like to live not knowing whether your house would be taken from you? How would you like adding defense of your property rights to your already busy schedule? How would you like trying to organize and fight against a city hall that's using your own tax money against you?

Believe me when I tell you that this outrageous and corrupt insanity CAN happen to you too. There are very few neighborhoods that could not be "profitably" redesigned and redeveloped to squeeze in more people and produce more tax revenue, and that's all this is about. Your house could be replaced by an apartment building. If you happen to have a large lot, it could become 2 lots or a much bigger house. My 3-story apartment building could easily become twice as tall, house twice as many people and produce twice the tax revenue.

The city says that there are three approaches available to them:

a. Pursue the project at this time, either incrementally or comprehensively;
b. Declare the project infeasible, and do not pursue it further;
c. Acquire properties on a voluntary basis and hold for possible future development

Choice C is the only one that does not cruelly violate the rights of the residents, and this is about rights... the right of citizens to be safe from their own government... the right to own property that others cannot capriciously take from you. This is an example of an issue that should never arise in the first place... residents should NEVER be thrown out of their homes to increase tax revenue. It should be an absurdity on it's face.

The resident citizens have formed the Crystal Heights Coalition. They rallied together and agreed that nobody wanted to sell their homes and that they would fight any attempts to take their property. They've built a website and THEY NEED OUR SUPPORT. You can give the residents your verbal support but I would also urge you to email your comments to the people who have brought about this residents' nightmare, and who will be making the decision:

John Sutter, Planner & Redevelopment, his house built:1948
Patrick Peters, Community development, his house built 1963
Councilman Garry Grimes, his house built:1950
Councilman E. Gary Joselyn, his house built:1952
Councilman Tom Krueger, his house built: 1956
Councilman Dave Anderson, his house built: 1959 
Councilman Mark Hoffman, his house built; 1977
Mayor Peter Meinstma, his house built; 1961

You might think, from the age of their own homes, that these officials would take a different view, that they would appreciate older homes and neighborhoods. Seems not. I can only conclude that this is a serious case of NIMBY... not in MY back yard... don't do it to me, but to someone else is fair game. These are community public servants?

I call on these officials to stop this cruel insanity right now... stop the threat... stop the use of force on your own neighbors, and go back to serving your community in positive ways.