Seized Land Has Bank Taking Stand
This article is from the archive of The New York Sun before the launch of its new website in 2022. The Sun has neither altered nor updated such articles but will seek to correct any errors, mis-categorizations or other problems introduced during transfer.
CHARLOTTE, N.C. – Regional bank BB&T Corporation, one of the nation’s largest financial institutions, will make no loans to developers who plan to build commercial projects on land taken from private citizens by the government through the power of eminent domain, the company said yesterday.
“The idea that a citizen’s property can be taken by the government solely for private use is extremely misguided, in fact it’s just plain wrong,” the bank’s chairman and chief executive, John Allison, said in a statement.
In an interview, BB&T chief credit officer Ken Chalk said the bank expects to lose only a tiny amount of business, but believes it was obligated to take a stance on the issue.
“It’s not even a fraction of a percent,” he said. “The dollar amount is insignificant.”
But he added: “We do business with a large number of consumers and small businesses in our footprint. We are hearing from clients that this is an important philosophical issue.”
Mr. Chalk said he knows of no other large American bank with a similar policy.
BB&T, which is headquartered in Winston-Salem, ranks among the nation’s top 10 banks by assets.
In June, a divided Supreme Court ruled that cities may raze people’s homes to make way for shopping malls or other private development. The 5-4 decision gave local governments the power to seize private property in the name of increased tax revenue.
The ruling upheld a decision by the City of New London, Conn., to seize seven property owners’ land so developers could build a hotel and high-end condominiums to keep pharmaceutical giant Pfizer expanding in the state.
Scott Bullock, a senior attorney with the Arlington, Va.-based Institute of Justice, who represented homeowners in the New London case, applauded the bank’s decision.
“Eminent domain abuse is wrong and unconstitutional,” Mr. Bullock said in a statement. “BB&T has stepped up and recognized its corporate responsibility to not be a part of this shameful abuse of individual rights.”
The policy also will protect the assets of banks such as BB&T by not tying up their money in projects that may draw political opposition, said Columbia University law professor Thomas Merrill, a specialist on eminent domain.
