Menu

Should Ohio adopt one standard that determines whether an area is blighted? Some say having one definition of blight could reign in aggressive eminent domain takings by local government agencies.

A subcommittee of the Ohio Eminent Domain Task Force is considering whether the current state statutory definitions of blight that are used in eminent domain proceedings should be changed.

Ohio Farm Bureau Federation's Director of Local Affairs Larry Gearhardt is on the 25-member task force, which includes lawmakers, attorneys, city planners and a judge. He expressed concern that lawmakers will only see the issues of blighted areas as inner-city problems.

"This is not just an urban issue," he said. "This is a rural Ohio issue as well."

Currently there is no provision in the Ohio Constitution that defines what blighted areas are. But, the Ohio Revised Code has two similar definitions of blighted areas. Individual cities, however, have their own definitions of blight.

State Rep. Bill Seitz, R-Cincinnati, who chairs the Blight and Constitutional Changes Subcommittee, pointed out that if someone owns a 100-acre farm and it’s completely surrounded by commercial development, perhaps that farmer’s land could be considered blighted.

The subcommittee is reviewing legislation from other states that give one standard definition of a blighted area; Gearhardt said OFBF is in favor of creating a constitutional amendment to address such issues in eminent domain hearings.

At least 15 states have passed such legislation in light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s Kelo decision last summer. The high court ruled that property could be taken from one landowner to advance the economic development efforts of another private entity.

Gearhardt said the task force's final report is due August 1. The General Assembly can vote to put the constitutional amendment on the November ballot.