However, the ULI could consider one glaring issue: the legislature should drop the “project influence rule” as it is called when appraising property for condemnation for redevelopment (not for regular use of eminent domain for roads, pipelines or electric transmission line corridors). This rule change would help developers to privately assemble more land without eminent domain.

Let me give you a personal and real world example: I have a house on commercial zoned land for sale that a developer is willing to pay three times the price that the land is worth for a single family home. The higher price is contingent upon the developer getting design approvals from the city. But if my property were acquired by eminent domain I would only be able to be compensated for the loss of my property at its lowest and worst use. Moreover, under California eminent domain law it is the “owner’s” burden to prove the highest use of the property!! In other words, government rules lean toward “low ball” appraisals.

I would direct readers to the ULI’s 22-page report to achieve the balance you desire. I should also point out that the ULI should not be faulted for bad public policies or for cities siphoning tax increment funds for pensions.

We need redevelopment to rid the earth of those growing cantaloupes and almonds replacing them with Irvine-style boxy condo cells and big box stores for the globalist slaves all along the right side of the tracks!