There Goes the Neighborhood

Exposing Columbia University's eminent domain abuse


For the last five years, Nick Sprayregen has battled the combined forces of Columbia University and the Empire State Development Corporation (ESDC), a quasi-public entity empowered by the state of New York to seize private property via eminent domain. The conflict centers on Columbia's desire to control the West Harlem neighborhood of Manhattanville, where four of Sprayregen's successful Tuck-It-Away storage businesses currently operate, and where the university wants free reign to build a massive new research campus.

The ESDC laid the groundwork for that free reign last July by declaring Manhattanville to be "blighted," which is the state of economic disrepair required to trigger an eminent domain seizure under state law. In December, Columbia's multi-billion dollar project got the green light. But late last month, Sprayregen launched an offensive of his own, filing a 107-page petition with the appellate division of the New York Supreme Court "to reject, annul and set aside" the ESDC's determination and finding of blight.

It's a startling document, one that provides convincing and damning evidence of widespread collusion between the ESDC and Columbia University to violate both the letter and spirit of the law, as well as to create the very conditions that ESDC officials then used to justify their intervention on Columbia's behalf. As the petition notes, "This case is about the secret collaboration between ESDC and New York City agencies in a complex plan to give that developer, an elite private university, everything it wanted, without compromise or limitation, while evading public review and accountability."

Consider the following: In 2006, the ESDC hired the planning and engineering firm Allee King Rosen & Fleming, Inc. (AKRF) to perform an "impartial" neighborhood blight study. AKRF was certainly a bold choice, given that the firm was already on Columbia's payroll and actively working on the contested Manhattanville plan. According to billing records that Sprayregen's attorney, civil libertarian Norman Siegel, turned up via the state's Freedom of Information Law, as many as six AKRF employees worked on both the blight study and the redevelopment project, which is practically the definition of a conflict of interests.

The report itself proved to be just as flawed. For starters, AKRF failed to mention that Columbia owns 76 percent of the neighborhood and was thus directly responsible for the overwhelming majority of blight that the report alleged, ranging from overflowing basement trash heaps to major roof and skylight leaks. (Columbia has been performing maintenance on several buildings it plans to preserve for their historical significance.) As numerous tenants have now reported, the university refused to perform basic and necessary repairs, which both pushed tenants out and manufactured the ugly conditions that later advanced Columbia's long-term interests. As Sprayregen wrote in an op-ed for The Wall Street Journal, "Only a few years ago, this area was undergoing a resurgence. Virtually all property was occupied, many by long-standing family operations such as my own. Now most of those businesses are gone—forced out by the university."

AKRF admitted as much in preliminary findings delivered to the ESDC, which identified "Open violations in CU Buildings" and "History of CU repairs to properties" among its "issues of concern." On top of that, AKRF relied on misleading and in some cases inappropriate evidence, including irrelevant crime statistics and building code violations that had zero relationship to actual physical conditions (such as the failure to file an annual boiler inspection).

In fact, the ESDC-Columbia redevelopment scheme fails to meet even the generous standards set by the Supreme Court's notoriously eminent domain-friendly decision in Kelo v. City of New London (2005), which permitted the transfer of property from one private party to another so long as the taking was part of a "comprehensive redevelopment plan." But as Justice Anthony Kennedy's concurring opinion in the case also made perfectly clear, "transfers intended to confer benefits on particular, favored private entities, and with only incidental or pretextual public benefits, are forbidden by the Public Use Clause." As Sprayregen's petition demonstrates, that is exactly what is happening between the ESDC and Columbia University.

Perhaps the worst part of the whole affair is that Columbia no longer even needs eminent domain to get its way. The threat alone did the trick. Beginning in roughly 2002, the university started dropping none-too-subtle hints to property holders that they hurry up and sell their land before the state condemned it. Between the 76 percent Columbia now owns and the 15 percent that New York City effectively controls (including property held by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority), the university holds sway over 91 percent of Manhattanville. Surely that's enough land to build a swanky new campus? As for Sprayregen's four holdout properties, all but one of them sits on the periphery of Columbia's proposal. To date, the university has made no offer to buy any of them.

So what happens next? As Sprayregen told me via email, "Although we are hopeful that the NY courts will stop this use of eminent domain, if need be we are more than prepared to take this case to the U.S. Supreme Court."

Damon W. Root is an associate editor at Reason magazine.

NEXT: Because Nothing Stimulates an Economy Like Stifling Innovation

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I previosly the hell out of the reflexive defenders of governmant eminent domain abuse to benefit the well heeled and well connected here.

    Columbia is being a dickhead and the NY government is too busy fellating them to actually defend the rights of it’s citizens.

    Who’d a thunk it?

  2. This can go both ways.
    Here in Tucson, the U of A has had an issue where they contracted with one guy a number of years back such that they paid him a couple of hundred thousand dollars for the exclusive right to purchase his home when he was ready to sell.

    Fast forward a decade or so. The guy starts complaining that the price that he previously agreed to is too low, because housing prices have risen since then. Activists start agitating about the poor old man who is being “ripped off” by the university.

    End result is that the university is forced to pay market rates for something they previously paid for exclusive rights to buy – effectively negating the value of the original contract.

    It’s kinda like they were forced to pay twice for the same house, cause some idiots didn’t understand what the point of the original deal was.

  3. we should push for a nationalization of Columbia university then, and dilute the quality of professors and students.

    How do you like the taste of your own dick medicine, then, huh columbia?

  4. it’s not theft if the end result is puppies!

  5. Columbia faculty, students, and alumni should be ashamed of this injustice.

  6. I am glad to read this article because I travel through the columbia area every day. I am a big fan of the giant “Stop Emminent Domain Abuse” poster on the side of the storage warehouse.

    If Columbia really wants the land of a profitable business that bad, how about they make an offer and negotiate a price. I know shocking.

  7. When the average citizen can no longer count on the law to protect their interests…then they’ll end up resorting to the law of the jungle.

    The more people this sort of behavior affects, the more likely it is that someone is going to get shot over it.

  8. Wow. At the very least any professional engineers at that firm better lose their licenses. That is a major breach of the Engineering Code of Ethics. They should be ashamed of themselves!

  9. It’s “Free rein”… not “Free reign”. It’s a horse-ridin’ term. Not a monarchy term. It’s like when you get lost out on the grand prairie and need to find your way back to the ranch. You just drop the reins – thus giving your hors “free rein” and he finds his way back to the stables. That’s where the food is. They always find their way back.

  10. Universities are now real estate developers with classrooms.

    Similar tales out of Chicago (U of C on South Side and Northwestern in North suburbs). Georgetown and George Washington in DC.

    Look for the new stimulus pot to fund a chunk of all this. Just in the nick of time, since the parental gravy train is a tad hung up right now.

  11. Apparently, Mr. Root has never visited the area. It is blighted. As someone who is not affiliated with Columbia and who lived within 2 blocks of the proposed expansion zone long before Columbia began buying properties there, I can tell you: it is blighted. Abandoned warehouses, flat-tire fix shops, boarded up buildings, rodents in the streets. Spooky and dangerous. It is blighted and has been for a long time. The Columbia expansion and creation of thousands of new area jobs will be a benefit and a boost for the local people who need those jobs. That’s a huge public good.

  12. Very good work! I always like to leave comments whenever I see something unusual or impressive. I think we must appreciate those who do something especial. Keep it up, thanks

    David Mayer

    download books | geo tv online

  13. I am glad to read this article because I travel through the columbia area every day. I am a big fan of the giant “Stop Emminent Domain Abuse” poster on the side of the storage warehouse.

    David Mayer
    geo news

  14. What a great post! Very Informative! Carry on the good work…

  15. Great post! it was very helpful to my research in regards to writing my term papers, thanks and kudos!

  16. Willis Embry, who is a psychologist in a jail, was left by his girl-friend. He has no time to be sad about it because an old man, who is very ill, tells him something about a robbery and the millions of dollars hidden somewhere. The old man asks Willis to find it and give a part of it to his relative, and he can keep the rest.

  17. I just came across your blog and reading your beautiful words. I thought I would leave my first comment but I don’t know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.

    David Mayer


Please to post comments

Comments are closed.