The City Could Still Take the Land
Judge Humes ruled that Seattle’s constitutional debt limit does not interfere with eminent domain, clearing the way for the Howell Street extension through the Ivey property.
The constitutional limit of indebtedness has no bearing on the right of eminent domain vested in the city, according to a decision of Judge Humes in the superior court yesterday.
The question arose in the case of the city vs. Edwin Ivey et ux., in a proceeding to condemn land for the extension of Howell street. The defendants filed an answer setting up as a bar to the action that the city had exceeded its constitutional limit of debt, and therefore had no right to bring the condemnation suit. The answer was demurred to, and yesterday the court sustained the demurrer, practically nullifying the Iveys’ defense. The action will probably now proceed to final adjudication, and the court will fix the amount of damages for the property, as prayed for in the complaint.
“The constitutional limit of indebtedness has no bearing on the right of eminent domain vested in the city.”
Eminent domain remains a live Seattle issue as the city builds through private property for transit, bike lanes and street projects. The 1895 ruling separated the question of whether a project is legal from whether a city has borrowed too much — an argument that still echoes in fights over municipal debt and public works.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.