Local governments wary of new eminent domain laws.State eminent domain eminent domain, the right of a government to force the owner of private property sell it if it is needed for a public use. The right is based on the doctrine that a sovereign state has dominion over all lands and buildings within its borders, which has its origins in laws passed in the wake of the controversial Kelo decision have made it harder for local governments to approach redevelopment. And the fallout isn't over yet, legislators were told in a crowded session at the National Conference of State Legislatures' 2006 Annual Meeting. When the U.S. Supreme Court decided on June 23, 2005, that it would not over-rule the Connecticut Supreme Court The Connecticut Supreme Court, formerly known as the Connecticut Supreme Court of Errors, is the highest court in the U.S. state of Connecticut. It consists of a Chief Justice and six Associate Justices. in Kelo v. City of New London Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005)[1], was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States involving the use of eminent domain to transfer land from one private owner to another to further economic development. , it set off a firestorm of public criticism. "It went from being a non-issue in Georgia to a snowball rolling down rolling down The liquidation of an option position by an investor at the same time that he or she takes an essentially identical position with a lower strike price. a hill," said Georgia's House Speaker Glenn Richardson Glenn Richardson is the current Speaker of the House for the state of Georgia. Richardson was born in Douglas County, Georgia, where he graduated from Douglas County High School in 1978. . The Supreme Court's decision essentially allowed private development to occur over the objections of local landowners if it was deemed to be for a "public purpose." That caused a huge legislative response. Forty-six states have had legislative sessions since Kelo and 31 of them--two-thirds--passed legislation to limit eminent domain powers. Six states proposed constitutional changes. Laws passed fall into seven categories: * Prohibit eminent domain use for economic development. * Bar such use to increase tax revenues. * Ban a transfer of private property to another private owner. * Define the term "public use" more narrowly to reduce such takings. * Restrict the use of eminent domain to blighted property and redefine what constitutes blight. * Change the process to require public hearings, more open transactions and more public input. * Require compensation at greater than market value. Pace Law School Professor John Nolon views the new laws New Laws: see Las Casas, Bartolomé de. as trouble for cities. State legislators have so tightened the rules that "cities that have no other opportunity ... except for redevelopment" have lost the ability to pursue a viable future, he says. Many new restrictions bar the use of eminent domain to improve the tax base, he noted. Cities challenged by under-employment, population loss and "lulus," or "locally unwanted land uses" like hospitals and nonprofit landowners, may so bog down some cities that the only possible development is redevelopment, he said. Other summaries from sessions at the 2006 NCSL NCSL National Conference of State Legislatures NCSL National College for School Leadership NCSL National Conference of Standards Laboratories NCSL National Council of State Legislators NCSL National Computer Systems Laboratory (NIST) Annual Meeting are available at www.ncsl.org/programs/ press/2006/notesfromnashville_summaries.htm |
|
||||||||||||||||||
Printer friendly
Cite/link
Email
Feedback
Reader Opinion