Albina Vision Trust announces community design workshop

Ride up Williams and take a look at the empty lots that were bulldozed for the Hospital.

I was looking at I-5.

Yes, and the constitution requires “just compensation” be paid when property is “taken for public use”.

The thing that is missing for me in this conversation is under what theory are people whose property was taken owed more? Is it that they were unjustly compensated in this particular case? Or are all people who’ve had property taken owed additional compensation?

I would love to hear a well considered argument about why we should be paying more to those whose property was taken for I-5. If anything, those whose property was not taken and got no compensation, just a new highway next to their house, deserve something for their lost value (which would, of course, lead to a never-ending series of claims by people who felt their property was devalued by something the government did or did not do).

Replying only to HK’s “just compensation”–I think “market value” is very generally what’s considered “just compensation”. But a family’s home can have a much greater value to them than the market value. What a person is paid in a takings situation may be enough to allow you to buy a house of similar size and condition in a similar neighborhood, but may come nowhere close to compensating for what was lost.

I totally agree. But if the issue is generational wealth, market value is what matters. Presumably the records still exist to prove (or disprove) any underpayment.

I want to make clear that I do not like the use of eminent domain to take property, even in modern cases like the Orange line or the proposed Barbur Blvd. project. I don’t like highway construction. I don’t like forcing people to sell their homes. I don’t like any of it. But if you want to make a monetary claim, you’ve got to be clear on what you want and why you’re entitled to it. “I don’t like what happened to my parents’ (or grandparents’) neighborhood 60 years ago” sounds pretty weak to me. “My family was shortchanged, and here’s the proof” is something I (and, more importantly, a judge) can get behind.

Assuming the county still has it’s property records from that era, all the data is there to make a case, if there is one to be made.

There are multiple articles on how ODOT and Legacy has taken land at a massive discount. It’s icky all the way around. If Oregon wants to truly walk away from their racist roots, it needs to be addressed in a monetary and bureaucratic way. Otherwise, wounds will fester.

Portland will be forever afflicted until amends are made and reparations paid. And…to that end, Legacy needs to pay too.

https://eliotneighborhood.org/2017/09/06/emanuel-apologizes/

Exactly that. ED does not pay out well – unless the owner is connected.

What was “market value” in a red lined district where black folks weren’t allowed bank loans?

“Is it that they were unjustly compensated in this particular case?”

I’d guess the odds that black property owners in 1960s Portland were unjustly compensated are about 100%.