Custom Search

Friday, October 17, 2008

St. Paul business might get the boot, but not without fight

Please click onto the COMMENTS for the story.

18 Comments:

Blogger Bob said...

By Jason Hoppin
jhoppin@pioneerpress.com
Article Last Updated: 10/16/2008 12:51:39 PM CDT


CEO and General Counsel Karen Haug, of Advance Shoring Co., poses on a jib Wednesday on the 12-acre site of her family business in St. Paul. The St. Paul Port Authority, citing contamination, is trying to take the property by means of eminent domain reforms passed by the Minnesota Legislature in 2006. (Sherri LaRose-Chiglo, Pioneer Press)The business started by Karen Haug's father helped build St. Paul's skyline.

Advance Shoring and two sister companies, all situated along Jackson Street in an industrial area of St. Paul, provided everything from the scaffolding used in the St. Paul Cathedral renovation to the crane currently onsite for the Regions Hospital expansion.

Now, Haug has come across a construction project she wants no part of: the redevelopment of her property by the St. Paul Port Authority. And she is pledging to reopen a debate that swept the country in the wake of a controversial 2005 U.S. Supreme Court case, Kelo v. City of New London, paving the way for government to take private land for redevelopment.

"Isn't it ironic that we're being asked to leave the very city that we helped create?" Haug said Wednesday.

Advance Shoring, founded in 1960, moved to its current site a decade later. It rents out heavy equipment for local construction efforts, and its projects have included the Science Museum of Minnesota, the Xcel Energy Center and the Minnesota Life building.

But decades ago, its 12-acre property was used as a dump, and contamination there includes lead and methane, which the Port Authority said is at 37 times the minimum explosive levels. The Port hopes to use a loophole in 2006 eminent domain reforms passed by the state Legislature in the wake of Kelo that allows cities to take private property in need of environmental cleanup.

The Port has a reputation for


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Advertisement

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
taking abandoned industrial brownfields in St. Paul and turning them into productive business parks. But Advance Shoring's land is occupied by an operating business — and one that does not want to move.
The Port hopes to use the land as part of a $12 million, 35-acre project it says could generate 350 new jobs after 10 years. To do that, the Port must show the cost of the cleanup, which it estimates at $4.8 million, is greater than the value of the land, which the Ramsey County Assessor has set at $3.3 million for 2009.

Haug is promising to fight that effort in court, and those figures are likely to be the focal point of any litigation. Any such case also would represent the first challenge to environmental cleanup provisions of the 2006 eminent domain reforms.

A group helping to represent Haug, the Institute for Justice, argued the Kelo case at the Supreme Court and said the Port Authority is using those provisions as a pretext to grab property it otherwise could not obtain.

"The Port Authority is using environmental scare tactics and eminent domain abuse to take Karen Haug's property," said the IJ's Lee McGrath.

Haug downplayed the seriousness of the contamination. She has been in contact with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, which is monitoring the situation, and said tests show there is no immediate problem with methane leaking into her buildings. The lead pollution is contained and not leaching into groundwater, she added.

She also said she doesn't want to move. The land is centrally located in St. Paul with easy access to the freeway. Moving would be a disruption to Advance Shoring and its employees, which range from 43 to 50 throughout the year.

"They're providing jobs for families as we speak," said Rhys Ledger, director of organizing and government affairs for Teamsters Local 120, which is supporting Haug and Advance Shoring.

But for the Port Authority, the property is a key cog in a process begun in 1993, when it first designated the area an industrial development district. It already has developed 20 acres east of Advance Shoring in the $10 million Arlington-Jackson Business Park, which supports 560 jobs through such businesses as Viking Sprinkler and Asian Foods.

It also built a road, L'Orient Street, to lay the groundwork for future redevelopment of the area, which includes a smattering of industrial uses such as salvage yards and is, in the words of a Port Authority lawyer, "a mess."

"The Port Authority has already made the investment in the brand-new public road, and they're trying to finish the project that they started 15 years ago," Port Authority counsel Marc Manderscheid said.

The Port also disputes that the contamination is a pretext. The law is clear, it argues — it lays out the conditions under which the land can be taken for a public purpose, and this scenario fits the definition.

"I guess I don't understand what's pretextual about that," Manderscheid said.

Monte Hilleman, the Port's vice president for redevelopment, said the Port has offered $3.8 million for 9 acres of Advance Shoring's land. And he said the contamination — particularly the methane — is a serious problem. "If you go down and drill a hole in the ground and put a piece of paper over the hole, the paper will go up in the air," Hilleman said.

Manderscheid said the Port is using a real estate consultant to look for a new home for Advance Shoring and that several potential Twin Cities sites have been identified. He did not know whether any were in St. Paul.

To press their case, two busloads of Advance Shoring supporters showed up at Wednesday night's St. Paul City Council meeting. Under the 2006 reforms, the City Council must approve land takings under eminent domain law.

A final council vote is expected in 30 to 60 days.

11:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

5:32 said...Fuck the busines owner huh little Repke.

...and the articles says...

Monte Hilleman, the Port's vice president for redevelopment, said the Port has offered $3.8 million for 9 acres of Advance Shoring's land..

...and the courts will determine if that is a fair price or if they should get more under state law...

So, the question is... does someone have the right to own a dump in a City forever or does the constitution give the people the right to take the land back after paying a fair price for it?

Well that is what it says in the 5th amendment... that the government has to pay to take back its land.

So, blame James Madison and Alexander Hamilton if you don't like the constitution and the bill of rights. I didn't right them.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

12:39 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well that is what it says in the 5th amendment... that the government has to pay to take back its land.

And the courts will decide if it's a fair price, bla bla bla.

Of course, the city IS paving the way for makign that "fair price" a LOT cheaper via its "vacant building" ordinance, which will drive property values down to the point where eminent domain will be *cheap*.

There's a method to their madness.

9:10 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yeah Chuck fair price sure but how is relocation going to effect their business and its customers?It looks like the port has had a hard on for this property for 15 years and now has found a loop hole.Chuck fuck you and the city!



Phil

11:38 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey Phil, let stay there and continue to contaminateland until it seeps into the river and water supply?

This isn't the 1970's. We know that polluted land is not contained to the people doing the polluting.

3:07 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Everyone knows how the city has literally raped these neighborhoods with their illegal code enforcement and now that they have driven the prices down far enough, created blight so bad that even the so called slumlords won't buy anything, they want to come in and start buying things up on the cheap so their developer buddies can get richer yet. What the city offers is not a fair price. It's a self serving price.

6:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

3:07 PM
What does 3-M do to our country?
and about --
The St.Paul Port Authority has files that talk about
The Lafayette Bridge being designed in the 1940's. and then in 1965 the St.Paul flats, both downtown and the west side flooded and then the city told these people of all areas had to sell their homes to the city, or
the city would just condemn the property and take it anyway.
The thrives in St.Paul's City Government are far worst then any before them.
Look back when Repke was Dave Thune's stooge, and Repke always sticks up for his BUDDY DAVE.
Thank You from Bill Dahn

9:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dahn is right. St. Paul government has a long practice of taking advantage of people. They move in with code enforcement people, steam shovels, cops, social workers, financial wizard, etc. It's like a small army so they can stealk from the poor and the weak. Hell.....ya can't even get an ambulance any more without them writing you up for code violations.

10:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Good point why didn't the port eminent domain 3M Repke?They are on polluted ground and their the ones that caused it.Whats up chump talk now!



Phil

10:59 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Port couldn't take 3M by E. D. the state has made it almost impossible to use ED for economic development purposes.

This business has to be VERY poluted to be taken through ED. It is almost impossible now.

Of course the state did not change ED for roads or schools just for development.

JMONTOMEPPOF

Chuck Repke

11:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

9:18 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I see you took down the bill dahn's post.
No Freedom of speach at A or E Democracy for bill dahn.

12:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

you got the freedom to misspell (speech) so, you're halfway there.

5:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No freedom of speech anywhere for Dahn because he's so stupid he can't follow the rules.

7:39 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

4:54 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You Have The Right,
"Not To" Remain Silent

5:48 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

3:58 PM has a point!

Look Up and
See who is on the St.Paul Port Authority.
You might be surprised?

8:01 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

8:01 AM
Look Up and
See who is on the
St.Paul Port Authority.
You might be surprised?

Chuck
tell people who sits on the Board of the Port Authority?
What does Kathy Lantry have to do with it.
Does Dave Thunes name appear somewhere there

6:34 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home