Received by email

CHARLOTTE, N.C. – Regional bank BB&T Corp., 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 Wednesday.

“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,” John
Allison, the bank’s chairman and chief executive, 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.” Chalk said he knows of no other large U.S. 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,” 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.

Merrill added that he did not believe there were many cases similar to the
one that developed in New London.

“No one knows how many of these projects are out there because the data is flimsy,” he said. “But my hunch, from what data we do have, is that the
number is relatively small and concentrated in large congested cities like
New York, Boston or Baltimore.”

In its statement, BB&T said 38 states have recently passed or are
considering laws to ban the use of eminent domain for private development. Similar legislation is pending before the U.S. Congress.

“While we’re certainly optimistic about the pending legislation, this is
something we could not wait any longer to address,” Chalk said in a
statement. “We’re a company where our values dictate our decision-making and operating standards. From that standpoint, this was a straightforward decision; it’s simply the right thing to do.”

BB&T, with $109 billion in assets, operates more than 1,400 branches in 11 states and Washington, D.C.

This entry was posted in Other Articles. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Received by email

  1. Vera Long says:

    Stillwater, Oklahoma. February 10, 2006.
    A big thank you for making the right decision, and hopefully others will follow.
    OSU Foundation, in a desire to obtain 100 acres of residentual property in the city of Stillwater, sent letters to over 400 homes, threating to use Eminent Domain if the residents did not sell to OSU within 6 months of the letters.
    This heartless regime refuses to change their plans, but hopefully the public will change it for them
    When the residents tried to speak up, they were “shut up” by OSU officials. T. Boone Pickens decided the $30 Million was not enough to buy them out, he gave an additional $165 Million to speed the progress of the
    Athletic Village……..We need all the help we can get, here in Stillwater. .

  2. Tamara Colbert Maschino says:

    Ohio community tests eminent domain
    By Dennis Cauchon, USA TODAY Mon Feb 20, 9:04 PM ET

    “The developer wants my property for the same reason I do: It’s in a good location”
    Shortcut to: http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=2631&ncid=2631&e=2&u=/usatoday/20060221/ts_usatoday/ohiocommunitytestseminentdomain

  3. Tamara Colbert Maschino says:

    Tuesday, February 21, 2006 12:23 AM
    Subject: States Curbing Right to Seize Private Homes

    States Curbing Right to Seize Private Homes
    By JOHN M. BRODER
    Published: February 21, 2006

    Shortcut to: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/21/national/21domain.html?hp&ex=1140498000&en=8e0bbbd8c507afab&ei=5094&partner=homepage

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>