Over 30 states are now moving forward on actions to limit eminent domain. Here are a few highlights from February on the post-Kelo eminent domain front:
Property rights supporters, including current and former public officials, have begun a voter initiative to limit government's power to condemn private property and also to require compensation for owners when land-use actions diminish property values. The group, known as Arizona Home Owners Protection Effort...needs to submit signatures from at least 122,612 registered voters by July 6 to get the measure on the November ballot.
A special House committee striving to form a consensus on how to change the state's eminent domain laws enters its final scheduled meeting today, hoping to recommend a new policy in time for the start of the legislative session on March 7. The Florida House Select Committee to Protect Private Property Rights was formed in the wake of a controversial U.S. Supreme Court decision last summer that upheld a Connecticut city's effort to take private property for the purposes of economic development.
The Governor is proposing a bill to strip eminent domain powers from anyone other than elected officials.....The Governor also proposed a constitutional amendment that would prohibit the use of eminent domain for economic development or to boost tax revenue.
A state bill that toughens rules for condemning private property for public use will head to the state Senate where lawmakers may make additional changes. Although the state House of Representatives approved an eminent domain bill last week, it did so after various modifications to the original bill.
Small-business owners crowd House hearing on eminent domain.
Mayors and city council members from several Minnesota communities have declared their support for reforming the state's eminent domain laws.
The New Hampshire Senate was unanimous today in supporting a bill that would limit government's power to take private land by eminent domain. Similar legislation is also advancing in the House. Two constitutional amendments also have been proposed.
A measure limiting the power of governments to seize land using eminent domain gained unanimous support in the House....The bill would prevent land from being seized from a private owner in order to promote private or commercial development.
Calling it a model of legislative cooperation, the South Dakota Senate on Tuesday unanimously passed a measure that is designed to protect private-property rights.
State Sen. Randy McNally doesn't want government agencies, utilities or development authorities to have the right to seize private land under Tennessee's eminent domain laws unless an elected government body votes in favor of a particular project. Reps. Charles Sargent and Ben West, both of whom have filed bills in the House for the upcoming legislative session, want to stop local and state governments from condemning private property and forcing a sale solely to attract new development with greater economic value.Those three legislators' bills are among at least 29 filed by Tennessee lawmakers in the wake of a U.S. Supreme Court ruling last summer that reinforced governments' broad powers to take private property to build projects touted as having greater economic clout.
The state already has approved legislation limiting government's eminent domain powers to take private property when it comes to certain uses, including economic development. But Wright Gore III, backed by a petition with more than 400 signatures, wants to prohibit eminent domain for private business, including its use to seize property deemed blighted. State law, approved last year, allows use of the tactic for municipal urban renewal activities to eliminate blighted areas.
A House committee voted Tuesday [2/21/06] to spend more time researching proposed restrictions to the way governments take private property for public use.
Both the House of Delegates and Senate have unanimously passed bills that say the government cannot use eminent domain for the primary purpose of enhancing tax revenue.
