Washington Eminent Domain Appraisals Aren't Always Right

It's always interesting to see how much a property is worth when the property and information surrounding are presented to a jury. It isn't that the property owner is always right, or that the government is always wrong, but it is just hard for twelve disinterested people to give all the weight to the state. Not only does there seem to be an inherent belief that the government is trying to get the lowest price possible for property it acquires, but the natural human tendency is come somewhere in the middle of two opposing viewpoints.

And it is stories like this that tend to prove this theory. Although not in Washington, Seattle, Spokane, Renton, Olympia, or otherwise, it is a good example of what tends to happen. In the Marysville, California area, property was needed, specifically 99 acres, for the improvement of levees. The person who owned the property thought his ground, containing peach and walnut orchards, were worth at least 2 million dollars more than the government had appraised it for. And instead of laying down and taking the government's offer of just compensation, he fought the government to get what was rightfully his - the fair market value of his lost property.

Traditionally, even when the parties are as far apart on their determination of valuation as these groups, the two sides will meet to talk. But in this case the governmental agency, tasked with rebuilding some levees, balked at meeting with the landowner. So what did the landowner do? He did what all Washington landowners facing condemnation should do: he hired an eminent domain expert.

After some time, the case went to a jury, who awarded the landowner 2.8 million dollars as just compensation for his eminent domain taking. What can account for this difference? As usual, the government looked for the lowest possible use of the property, agriculture, while the landowner saw the highest and best use for the property - residential (the town was moving toward the landowner's property, making it reasonable to believe residential growth could occur).

So, what two lessons can be learned from this? First, it is okay to challenge the government's determination of just compensation for your property. They are not right all the time. They are not right most of the time. And no person knows your property better than you. If you think the price is too low, consult an eminent domain professional to not only review your offer of just compensation to see if your thoughts about your property's value are correct, but to help you present your point of view to the government so they will view your eminent domain counter-offer with the respect it deserves.

And second, the government knows all about these large jury verdicts, and it scares them. They know going to a jury is a crap shoot (it is for the landowner too) and that the human tendency is to split the differing views down the middle, leaning more toward the side they think is actually right. This ensures that not only will the government listen to your eminent domain counter-offer, but they will traditionally be happy to work out a deal with you. Press like the story above also doesn't help the public perception of gov't officials, making them even more eager to please.