To build a road in Clarksville connecting Great Star Drive to Auto Drive, as the county is proposing, a few local businesses would have to sell some of their land.

But if the businesses are not willing sell, the county could use its power of eminent domain, the legal process under which a local government can condemn property for public use.

Concerned about that prospect, County Councilman Greg Fox plans to introduce an amendment to the county charter regulating the county's ability to use that power. The Fulton Republican said he will introduce his amendment at the council's meeting Tuesday, Sept. 6, the first following its August recess.

"Concerns over eminent domain are something that I have talked about throughout both of my campaigns," Fox said. "It's always been something that's been there on my mind.


Submit a Letter to the Editor for the Laurel Leader, Columbia Flier and Howard County Times

"Now, seeing what's going on with the county executive and the whole Clarksville Gateway project, I have several concerns of the egregious things that have been occurring surrounding that project."

County Executive Ken Ulman said he would never use eminent domain for private economic development, but would consider it as a last resort when land is needed for traffic safety improvements. However, he noted he is committed to working with property owners in Clarksville to develop mutually acceptable solutions.

Fox's concerns started in July when the county terminated its agreement with GreenStone Ventures to develop the former Gateway School property, a 7.8-acre parcel located off Route 108, into a mixed-use center.

GreenStone was not interested in closing on a deal without access to the property from Great Star Drive, a county road. But Kendall Hardware, directly to the left of the Gateway site, owns the driveway that would serve as a natural extension to Great Star Drive on the north side of Route 108.

Steve Kendall, the store's owner, said he was willing to sell the county an easement so it could extend the public road for access to the Gateway site. But Ulman said there was a huge discrepancy between what Kendall believed the easement was worth and what the county believed it was worth.

By terminating the agreement with GreenStone, Fox said he worries the administration is setting up a scenario that would make it easier to argue Kendall's land, and that of other area businesses, is needed for public use and therefore should be condemned.

Ulman: Limits already exist

Fox's proposed charter amendment, which if passed by the council would still have to be approved by voters through a ballot question in the 2012 election, says "the power of eminent domain may only be used to acquire property for public purpose or public use; and may not be used for purpose of economic gain."

Land acquired under eminent domain, the amendment adds, "is not considered to be for a public purpose or public use if the property is transferred to a private entity for the primary benefit of the private entity."

Fox said the amendment "may not occur in time to necessarily help the situation, (but) it can help highlight the situation."

But Ulman said regulations on condemnation already exist. When he served on the council, Ulman said he introduced a resolution, adopted unanimously, to prohibit the county from using eminent domain for private, economic development gains.

"That continues to be my view," he said.

Ulman added: "I know other people want to read in ulterior motives, and that's their right."

Council Chairman Calvin Ball, meanwhile, said any proposed amendments to the county charter should be discussed with the Charter Review Commission, which has been meeting for the past several months.

"I would question the timing and motivation of any charter-related legislation that hasn't been discussed with that group," the Columbia Democrat said. "The most transparent and thoughtful way to address charter amendments at this time is to discuss it with this group."

As for the merits of Fox's proposal, Ball added: "I am unaware of any current or future problems that this amendment addresses."