I’m just not exactly sure how or when Bush’s directive, called “Executive Order: Protecting the Property Rights of the American People”, will leave a mark on Los Angeles.
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and to strengthen the rights of the American people against the taking of their private property, it is hereby ordered as follows:
Section 1. Policy. It is the policy of the United States to protect the rights of Americans to their private property, including by limiting the taking of private property by the Federal Government to situations in which the taking is for public use, with just compensation, and for the purpose of benefiting the general public and not merely for the purpose of advancing the economic interest of private parties to be given ownership or use of the property taken…
At face value, I think this is a very good thing – property owners, such as Bernard Luggage Co. on Hollywood Blvd., as well as thirty or so other local business, are being forced to sell their property “to make way for a $400-million project that includes a luxury hotel, apartments and condominiums.”
Other recent cases include:
…the forced sale of a furniture manufacturing site in South Los Angeles that is now proposed to be sold to a competing furniture maker, and the use of eminent domain to take a property from one shopping center developer to sell to another, also in South Los Angeles. (source: LA Times)
Regarding the recently bulldozed South Central Farm, it would have seemed time to call for eminent domain and take the the privately owned land and turned it into an official public garden… however, it was eminent domain that caused the problem long before the farmers moved in, as it was seized from private owners in 1986 to be turned into a public water processing plant. After years of legal wrangling, the original owner was able to buy the property back, but in the interim the “farmers” had begun making the land a public garden.
What I find most ironic about the Bush decree is his apparent concern over private property while his Administration appears to show no regard for private privacy.