: Our national planning organization, APA, weighed in on the side of the City of New London in that big takings/condemnation case decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in favor of the City, even though it was charged that these takings were not for a public purpose. The case has generated heavy media interest
As I understand it, the Pfizer pharmacceuticals company had previously announced that it would build a global research facility near the neighborhood in question. The City endorsed a plan for redeveloping the adjacent neighborhood to complement the Pfizer facility.
The Supreme Court noted safeguards in place to require a comprehensive plan.
So planners and the comp planning process were viewed as a way to ensure that there would be an overall public benefit, if only secondary benefit, from the condemnations of some private property for economic development. I've read that a number of states are concerned about the Supreme Court's decision in this case. What do you think about their decision, and also our planning organization coming in on the City's side?
Something to think about as we approach the colder and darker days of fall/winter.