QUOTE

Would you let the government take your car and give it to someone else? How about your computer, television set, house, or business? What if the government said you would be paid  yet you had no choice?  

QUOTE

"Eminent domain, no one likes it," concedes Auburn Mayor Michael Quill, a no-nonsense former Marine and long time former Fire Chief of the city, who has a photograph on this desk with former Governor Sarah Palin and Todd Palin.  The Palins visited Auburn  last summer, in commemoration of the 1867 purchase of the Alaska territory by U.S. Secretary of State William Seward, whose house is across the street from City Hall.

But it is Auburn's current land dispute that has caused so much controversy here, as Mayor Quill and other officials contend the benefits of the hotel project simply outweigh the concerns of the property owners.   "We have a responsibility to the entire community," Mayor Quill explains, saying "we do not want to hurt an individual property owner or business owner, but we have to look at the long range for the entire community."  

QUOTE

But five years ago the United States Supreme Court  ruled that communities could use the power of eminent domain to help private interests, if  the result was for the public good. The case centered on New London, Connecticut, where a neighborhood was razed to make way for a private development that never came.

The main plaintiff was resident Susette Kelo, whose little pink house was move to another part of town and now stands as a symbol of regular citizens fighting the government's use of eminent domain. The blocks that were torn down remain largely empty to this day, save for the overgrown weeds and wild cats that roam the desolate area. The city's plans fell through.   "In the wake of Kelo, we have learned about this abuse of power," notes Christina Walsh of the Institute for Justice in Washington, D.C., which has advised the Wards.