In City of Norwood v. Horney , Case No. 2005-1210, 1211, the Ohio Supreme Court is considering whether a city can use its eminent domain powers for private redevelopment. The U.S. Supreme Court held in Kelo v. City of New London, that takings for economic development could be valid under the U.S. Constitution. The property owners (appellants) in the City of Norwood case assert that the Ohio Constitution offers more protection to property owners than the U.S. Constitution.
The attorneys for the property owners made several other arguments: (1) The city did not engage in a sound reasoning process to determine the property was deteriorating; (2) The Norwood City charter is such that any property could be declared deteriorating, and is thus unconstitutional; and (3) The city's stated public purpose was not the real reason for its exercise of eminent domain power. See Ohio Supreme Court Oral Argument Summaries; Ohio Court Hears First Case Since Fed Ruling on Homeowner Rights by Andrew Welsh-Huggins, New York Newsday, Jan. 12, 2006; Eminent Domain Battle Goes to Court by T.C. Brown, The Plain Dealer, Jan. 12, 2006.
The Ohio Legislature has declared a moratorium on takings for economic purposes until the end of 2006. See Governor Taft Signs Eminent Domain Bill.