Johnnie Walker Eminent Domain Case

The City of Cypress, California Department of Planning and Community Development (DPCD) is led by Commissioner Johnnie Walker. As commissioner of DPCD, Mr. Walker provides leadership and policy direction for the Offices of Planning, Buildings, and Housing. He is also the overseer of all eminent domain cases within the city however he has never dealt with such a case until now. On one particular early Monday morning Commissioner Walker walked into his office to find a very interesting eminent domain case waiting on his desk. On his desk he found two very compelling arguments about the potential development of a church on private property. In the documents, Commissioner Walker read that Pastor Bayless Conely of the Cottonwood Christian Center

Under a consequential perspective, Commissioner Walker opines that as an official of the city he is ethically obligated to make decisions that promote good consequences for the greatest number. As he begins to deliberate on the case he starts to reflect on the two schools of thought. He first starts to ponder the meaning of consequentialism. He knows that consequentialism is the view that morality produces the right kinds of overall consequences. He understands that the phrase “overall consequences” of an action implies that everything the action brings about, including the action itself. For example, the city believes by having a retail store there it will make the city thrive by keeping Cypress financially secure. In this instance Commissioner Walker knows that more revenue will be generated for the city through patronage and taxes. By having a retail store instead of a church appears to financially bring about more good for the community than a church would. Secondly, he understands that consequentialism tells him that people can agree while disagreeing about what kind of outcomes are good and bad. Whether an act is right or wrong depends only on the results of that act and the more good consequences an act produces, the better or more right that act will be. In the case of Cottonwood Church, he knows that only a small percentage of the city population would protest such a

He believes Kant would argue that since the property rightfully belongs to Cottonwood Church, the City of Cypress has no moral right to take it. Kant would view this as stealing. Additionally, this kind of attitude goes beyond the issue of right or wrong and simply turns eminent domain into a pure issue of political power. He understands in politics that if you have the power, you get the property, and any moral problems can just be ignored. Instead, as Commissioner of DPCD who advocates for developers and other private businesses, it is important to understand that seeking to confiscate someone else’s property requires him to think long and hard about the moral implications of such seizures, not about whether the law will allow him to get away with it. As such, Commissioner Walker attempts to apply one of Kant’s categorical imperatives. Commissioner Walker realizes that under the pretense of categorical imperative two, “Act only in such a way that you always treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never, simply as a means, but always at the same time as an end (site Feuer)” should allow Pastor Bayless to morally keep the property his congregation rightfully purchased.