The recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court to review a case involving a local government?s use of eminent domain threatens to unravel more than 50 years of constitutional precedent that provides broad judicial latitude to municipalities in carrying out economic development plans.

The case ? and the eventual Supreme Court ruling ? has far-reaching implications for cities and towns of all sizes throughout the country.  It deals with a fundamental economic development tool that must be protected.

The ability of local leaders to reenergize communities through economic development demands local and regional self-sufficiency, not na?ve reliance on a continuous and sufficient flow of state and federal dollars.

Therefore, it is in the public interest for municipalities to pursue economic development locally and regionally because a healthy economy helps generate the revenue necessary to provide services and infrastructure needs of the public.  At times, the ability to provide for the public good requires municipalities to exercise the power of eminent domain granted by state authority.

That authority must be available to be used wisely, with considerable caution and with an eye toward achieving a greater public good that will benefit the entire community and the region.

The challenge from private property rights advocates that will play out when the case of Kelo vs. City of New London comes before the U.S. Supreme Court puts that tool at risk.

Opposition to eminent domain also has unintended consequences because marketplace uncertainty and increased risk threatens to increase municipal borrowing costs associated with economic development projects.

That?s why NLC is intervening in the case on behalf of all cities and towns.  This case is a perfect example of the important role the National League of Cities plays not only in lobbying Congress and the administration on federal priorities for cities and towns but also in ensuring a local voice on precedent setting court cases.

More than a year ago, NLC expanded its legal advocacy work by creating a special fund and establishing a Legal Advisory Committee to decide when and how NLC will intervene in court cases.  One fundamental criterion for intervening is the importance of the case to the interests of local government.  This eminent domain case clearly meets that standard, and we want to make sure that the local message is heard and considered.

Beyond the New London case, NLC is already advocating on behalf of municipalities before the judicial and legislative branches to protect the ability of state and local governments to conduct economic development that is necessary to promote economic growth, including job retention and creation.

NLC?s advocacy efforts, however, do not include unqualified approval of the indiscriminate use of economic incentives by state and local governments to induce firms to move from one location to another.  NLC believes that with legislative authority comes legislative responsibility to negotiate economic development incentive packages that avoid ?smokestack chasing,? to design redevelopment plans that protect the public interest from predatory redevelopment and to ensure efficient economic outcomes that provide tangible public benefits.

NLC is prepared to take the lead in the legal and legislative battles brought on by attempts to reverse more than 50 years of legal precedent that supports municipal authority to conduct economic development.

Be assured that NLC will work tirelessly to preserve the ability of municipal officials to use their best judgment to improve their communities.

Donald J. Borut is executive director of the National League of Cities.
S. Ellis Hankins is executive director of the North Carolina League of Municipalities, and chair of NLC?s Legal Advisory Committee.