Eminent Domain

Ok, I just had to say my opinion on the recent Supreme Court ruling regarding Eminent Domain. I think it was wrong. The ruling allows a city to acquire an area of land owned privately by homeowners and sell it to a corporation to build a hotel and convention center. It is a declining area and the property values may be on the fall but does that give the city the right to claim someone's privately owned land?
According to the Supreme Court it does. I could understand if it were for a governmentally owned and needed community project but to turn around and sell it to a corporation for constructing a hotel and convention center is just wrong. They have to pay the homeowners "just compensation" but just how much is your home worth? If it were one of the Justices homes, I wonder if the ruling would have been the same. Land and Home ownership is one of the most basic rights under the Constitution and should be protected. I find it hard to believe that the city and homeowners couldn't come up with a better solution to making a deal work. Basically it means that after time passes, no ones homes are safe from being claimed by the government. During a press conference the city openly stated that they needed money from the tax revenues this project will bring. I say let the homeowners share in those revenues then. Also, how did the city get so far in the hole that it needs to confiscate peoples homes? Perhaps the city council should have offered up their houses to be torn down and the land sold to a corporation? I sure hope the "just compensation" includes a prime price for the people who's lives they've just sold.