Whitman-Walker diagnoses up 232 percent from this time last year
Md. governor cites ‘busy schedule,’ prompting criticism
Barry opposes same-sex marriage, but would vote to legalize it
|
Friday, July 22, 2005
In a little noticed development, a D.C. Superior Court judge on June 15 dismissed a lawsuit filed by adult gay arcade owner Robert Siegel that called for blocking the city’s plan to build a baseball stadium on land where six gay clubs are located.
Judge Geoffrey M. Alprin ruled that Siegel’s suit was premature because the city had not yet begun eminent domain proceedings to seize Siegel’s properties on the unit block of O Street, SE, and nearby locations. Siegel owns the land and buildings in which the gay clubs Heat, the Follies Theater, the Glorious Health & Amusements, Ziegfeld’s and Secrets are located.
Alprin declared that if and when the city begins eminent domain proceedings, Siegel has no legal grounds to challenge the stadium financing rules, as he attempts to do in his lawsuit. His only legal recourse, Alprin said, is to contest the amount of compensation the city offers him for his land, with the aim of obtaining a higher compensation.
“[T]he two acts governing the site acquisition program create no private right of action in individual citizens like plaintiffs that would permit them access to this court to challenge the [stadium financing] program,” Alprin stated in his ruling.
Siegel said he would file another suit challenging the city’s attempt to take his land once the eminent domain proceedings begin. He said city officials have yet to provide him with an offer of compensation for his properties, although he received a letter calling for him to vacate the properties by Dec. 31.
Siegel alleged in his lawsuit that a study conducted by the D.C. chief financial officer, Natwar M. Gandhi, grossly underestimated the amount of money the District would have to spend to acquire land near the Anacostia River where the stadium is to be built.
The D.C. Council voted last year to approve Mayor Anthony Williams’ proposal for the new stadium on the condition that the city’s total cost for the project — including land acquisition — does not exceed $165 million. Gandhi’s study estimated the total cost to be $161.4 million.
Gandhi’s estimate is “erroneous, speculative, false and unreasonable,” Siegel alleged in his suit. The suit charged that the cost would “likely far exceed” $161.4 million. It called on the court to issue an injunction halting the stadium project and barring the city from seizing Siegel’s land.
Earlier this year, Carol Mitten, director of the D.C. Office of Property Management, sent letters to Siegel and other property owners on the site of the proposed stadium informing them that they must vacate their properties by the end of this year. The new stadium is scheduled to open for the Washington Nationals’ 2008 baseball season.
On July 16, three separate landowners filed suit in federal court to stop the stadium project on grounds that the D.C. government was about to violate their civil rights by seizing their properties, according to the Washington Post. The Post reported that mayoral press secretary Vince Morris declined to comment on the lawsuits, although he said Williams doesn’t believe they will interrupt the stadium’s construction schedule.
Stadium supporters have said a U.S. Supreme Court decision last month on an eminent domain case in Connecticut greatly strengthened the right of cities to invoke eminent domain to seize land for projects deemed to be for the “public good,” even if the projects are owned or operated by private enterprises rather than the cities themselves.
Alprin cited constitutional support for eminent domain in his ruling on Siegel’s lawsuit.
“[T]he court’s view is that an adequate remedy at law is provided and that remedy is plaintiff’s right to obtain ‘just compensation’ for their properties and businesses pursuant to the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution and the District’s eminent domain statute,” Alprin stated in his ruling. “Plaintiffs’ rights in this situation are owed no more and no less than just compensation.”
Gay activists have called on Williams and the Council to change zoning laws to allow the gay clubs to move to another part of the city if current zoning rules bar them from operating because of their classification as adult businesses.
Bill Cooter, Siegel’s attorney, said he filed an appeal to Alprin’s decision on Siegel’s behalf last week, challenging the judge’s assertion that citizens don’t have the authority to contest whether the mayor is complying with a law passed by the D.C. Council that put a cap on the expenditure of city funds to pay for a new stadium.
“I hold Judge Alprin in high regard,” Cooter said. “But his decision is clearly wrong. We are confident it will be reversed.”
Lou Chibbaro Jr. can be reached at lchibbaro@washblade.com.
|
