On July 11th we met with three representatives of the United States Government Accountability Office and U.S. General Accounting Office in the city of Los Angeles to critique the use of eminent domain by Community Redevelopment Agencies in the Los Angeles region. In performing their nationwide discovery they met with ten organizations who were asked to provide data on a selected list of topic areas. In addition to visiting LA their team also traveled to Baltimore, MD, Chicago, IL, Denver, CO and New York, New York to meet with other regional and national organizations to collectively quiz us on redevelopment activity which can now be found on their just released 58 page report GAO-07-28. You can download the report from their web site or purchase copies as stated therein.
www.gao.gov
One of the areas that we covered, that is mentioned in their analysis, dealt with relocation expenses. Representatives of four of the five visited cities all felt that “the payment amounts allowable under the URA might not be adequate to cover costs.”
Folks. We are speaking of a business relocation with a cap of $20,000. Ref. Pgs 16 and 27.
Having just begun to read the report I am not prepared to comment as to what areas I feel were not covered or if our position varies from, or is in agreement with, the rest of the nation or the analysts’ position.
Larry Gilbert, Orange County Co-director, Californians United for Redevelopment Education CURE
The Uniform Relocation Act provides for a business to receive the following payments: Moving Expenses (No Cap), Reestablishment Payment ($10,000 Cap), & Searching Expenses ($1,000 Cap) or a business can elect to receive a payment in lieu of these mentioned, but it cannot exceed $20,000 and is based on the average net over a two year period prior to displacement. Also a business in California may be eligible for a Loss of Goodwill payment. Without boring everyone, this is a quick synopsis of eligible payments. You can refer to 49CFR Part 24.
SA 92703.
Thank you for your in-depth analysis of relocation expenses.
Let me quote from footnote #24 on page 16 which reads: “The URA permits payment for (1) actual reasonable expenses for moving, (2) actual direct losses of tangible personal property as a result of moving or discontinuing a business up to a reasonable amount that would have been required to relocate, (3) actual reasonable expenses in looking for a replacement busines, and (4) actual reasonable expenses necessary to reestablish a business at a new site. 42 U.S.C. 4622(a). However, the amount permitted to be paid for reestablishment is limited to $10,000. 42 U.S.C. 4622 (a) (4).”
Footnote #25 has a cap of $20,000.
I would argue that simply moving contents of a home from Orange County to Oregon or Nevada might cost upwards of the cap set for an operating business.
See part two of my report for additional data.
Larry Gilbert
Larry: I have been providing relocation services to public agencies for over 21 years and I would be more than happy to meet with you and explain not only the Uniform Relocation Act, but also relocation guidelines as they apply to FHWA, FTA, FAA, CDBG, HOME Funds and Redevelopment projects. I can even go over San Jose Redevelopment’s own set of rules. Your claim that there is a cap is misleading.
SA 92703.
Good morning.
I would be happy to meet with you to discuss the relocation aspect of eminent domain activities.
Please bear in mind that I quoted directly from the report. If that data is incorrect I will notify GAO Director Bill Shear and have his department revisit their report and footnotes which I referenced.
Best regards. Larry Gilbert
PS: If you wish to meet to discuss the San Jose example simply let me know.
I’ll send you an e-mal.