St. John's Law Review

Eminent Reassessment Or Tax Domain: Are Local Municipalities Suffering From Dyslexia?

By Allan A. Wiesel

The doctrines of eminent domain and tax reassessment are seemingly unrelated.  In reality, though, tax reassessment can be utilized as a “backdoor” eminent domain to accomplish some of the very same goals: increased revenue for cash-strapped municipalities.  In Kelo v. City of New London, the Supreme Court expanded the permissible scope of eminent domain to include the increase of tax revenue.  A municipality in need of additional revenue could condemn “blighted” homes and replace them with luxury condominiums.  The public outcry, however, that often accompanies such eminent domain “takings” can act as a deterrent for a politician who does not want to tarnish his name.  Instead, he can rely on a tax reassessment to realize the same revenue increase without ruining his reputation.  When a municipality conducts a reassessment, especially after a long period without one, the homeowners that cannot afford the higher taxes are forced to sell their homes to wealthier people who can afford the taxes.  These wealthier individuals earn more money, and hence, pay more income tax.  They also spend more money, and therefore, generate more sales tax.  This Note makes the above connection between eminent domain and tax reassessment, and suggests reasons why one doctrine might be used in place of the other by a municipality in distress.  The Note also discusses ways to prevent future misuse of the doctrines.