Unfortunately, eminent domain is perfectly legal. In fact, it's even blessed by the Constitution, in which the process is sanctioned by the Fifth Amendment. But the Fifth Amendment does not give government carte blanche to take any property anytime it sees fit. Compensation is mandated and the seizure must be for the "public use."
Yes, I know it's in the Constitution, but that doesn't make it right.
The city is in this fix because the property's owners, Karen and Frank Dabby, are unhappy with the latest offer of $452,000 for the 0.13 acres of land. According to a Daily Pilot report, owner Karen Dabby called the offer "ridiculous."
Even more ridiculous is the rationale for the street widening. Caltrans traffic flows are called "Levels of Service" (LOS) and are assigned a range from A to F.
LOS A represents a traffic situation with no delays, which today you will find only near a Krispy Kreme doughnut store.
LOS F represents heavily congested traffic and "considerable delays." That's also known as "gridlock," and is the type of traffic you'll find on the floor of the state Assembly.
Today, traffic is flowing quite freely in front of the center. So why the rush to seize the property? Because a report issued by the city estimates that in 2030, the intersection will be performing at LOS D, and in order to get some county money to support the project, construction must begin soon.
Yes, you are reading that correctly: There is no problem at the current intersection where the property stands. But apparently, someone borrowed the same crystal ball used to predict a Boston Celtics' victory in the NBA Finals to predict that traffic would be a mess in 20 years, all because the city wants the subsidy.
Now that's scary.