Thomas Boggan/Tribune file photo
West Mesa residents and their elected representatives have been frustrated for years about the deteriorating status of Fiesta Village, a once-thriving retail center located just north of Fiesta Mall. Or maybe I should say west Mesa residents have been frustrated with the strip mall’s owner, Valley developer W.M. Grace. In defiance of all logic, Grace has allowed this 15 acres to become a collection of vacant buildings and pathetic-looking parking lots, now surrounded by temporary chain-link fences.
In past meetings with the Tribune Editorial Board, Mesa city officials have talked about hints from Grace that the company was working toward a complete make-over for the site. That would be an explanation for not trying to replace exiting stores with new tenets. But the entire plaza has been empty for some time with no action on the horizon. Grace has refused to talk about what it’s doing or, more accurately, what it’s not doing.
Typically in such situations, municipalities will prod a neglectful landowner to redevelop or to sell with a combination of sweet-talk and aggressive enforcement of various health and safety codes — essentially making it too expensive for the landowner to ignore the issue any longer.
But Mesa officials say they just can’t get Grace’s attention. Requests for meetings go ignored and the company apparently is willing to absorb any maintenance costs (although a swift glance tells you just how little the company is spending).
Now, Mesa City Councilman Dennis Kavanaugh is suggesting the city should seize the property from Grace and get on with re-using it. Mesa rightly has steered clear of eminent domain redevelopment in recent years after the Tribune exposed the city’s attempted abuse of this police power to seize Bailey’s Brake Shop. But Kavanaugh’s proposal offers something that always was missing in the Bailey’s case — a legitimate public use for the land under Fiesta Village.
Mesa voters approved construction of a new police substation in November as part of a public safety bond package. Even the staunchest defenders of private property rights recognize this type of public building as an acceptable reason for government to seize land. Add in the fact that Fiesta Village meets most common definitions of “‘blight” and this might seem like a slam dunk for eminent domain.
But not so fast. Is this really the best location for a new police station in western Mesa? Would the city be considering the property if Fiesta Village still had a few stores open, or if Grace had announced plans to build a hotel/condo project at some future, unspecified date?
Also, a commenter with the screen name “Scream” on Tribune writer Sonu Munshi’s story raises an interesting point. Did Mesa contribute to the Fiesta Village’s demise with its $80 million in subsidies for the Riverview project near Loop 202 and Dobson Road? Kavanaugh told Munshi at least one reason Grace won’t communicate with the city now is because Mesa rebuffed a request several years ago for redevelopment tax incentives.
As Tibor Machan explains, protection of private property rights is essential in a truly free society that honors the supremacy of individual liberties. Property rights are so important, in fact, that government generally should avoid using eminent domain for moral reasons even when such action would be legal.
The Mesa City Council needs to consider carefully the implications of seizing Fiesta Village because the current landowner isn’t using the property as the city would like.
If that location isn’t the best site for a new police station, but “good enough,” then the only lesson that Mesa will have learned from Bailey’s Brake Shop is the city simply manufactured the wrong reason a decade ago for seizing a man’s livelihood.
Twitter
Maybe a stiff “neglect” fee (tax?) would be an effective stimulant to change? The worse it get the higher the tax. This is not much different from tobacco tax and the speeding fee. The ugliest, the sickest, and the fastest pays the highest tax.