In its controversial five-to-four decision in the 2005 Kelo v. City of New London case, the U.S. Supreme Court gave government officials the power to take property from local homeowners and sell it to private corporations as part of a mandatory economic development plan. 

The ruling is deeply unpopular. One respected university poll showed that 89% of Americans opposed the decision making it easier for government officials to take people’s homes.1 In an unusual move, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a special resolution, H. Res. 340, condemning the Supreme Court’s action.2 

In response to the outcry, officials in Washington state rushed to assure the public that the kind of property takings forced on Suzette Kelo and her Connecticut neighbors could not happen here, because Washington’s constitution supposedly provides stronger protection for basic property rights than Supreme Court justices found in the U.S. Constitution. 

The actual experiences of Washington citizens, however, shows these public assurances are hollow. Under a Washington statute called the Community Renewal Law (CRL), local officials routinely take people’s property against their will and sell it to private developers as part of a mandatory economic development plan. 

This study explains how the Community Renewal Law works, shows how officials use certain provisions of that law to force the sale of private land, and gives documented examples of where this has happened around the state. It also gives examples of where officials have worked voluntarily with land owners, without using the eminent domain power in the Community Renewal Law, to implement local economic improvements. Finally, the study presents specific recommendations showing how lawmakers can improve the Community Renewal Law to protect the property rights of all people in Washington.

Read the full Policy Brief here