INSTITUTE FOR
JUSTICE
901 N. GLEBE
ROAD SUITE 900 ARLINGTON, VA
22203 (703) 682-9320 FAX (703)
682-9321
HOME PAGE:
WWW.IJ.ORG
FOR
IMMEDIATE RELEASE: November 8, 2006
2006 Election Wrap
Up:
Voters Overwhelmingly
Passed
Eminent Domain
Reform
Arlington, Va. -
Amid many close races in yesterdays mid-term
elections, there was one issue an overwhelming majority of voters agreed
on: the need to limit governments power of eminent domain following
last years despised U.S. Supreme Court Kelo ruling.
Eminent domain ballot measures,
restricting governments from taking private property and giving it private
entities, passed by wide margins nationwide. In the eight states with ballot measures limiting eminent
domain by addressing public use, all eight passed
overwhelmingly. Yesterdays
election, combined with earlier reforms passed by the states, raises to 35 the
number of states that have limited eminent domain abuse.
Voters Pass All Six Constitutional
Amendments Referred by Legislatures
The strongest protection a state can
offer property owners is to put it in the constitution, and legislators
referred a number of amendments to their constituents.
·
With more than 85% approval, South
Carolinas constitution now specifically
prohibits municipalities from condemning private property for the purpose
or benefit of economic development, unless the condemnation is for public
use. Also, an individual property must now be a danger to public
health and safety for it to be designated as blighted, closing a
loophole that enabled local governments to use eminent domain for private use
under the States previously broad blight definition.
· In Florida, which had been one of the worst abusers of eminent domain,
government can no longer take property for so-called blight removal
and the newly passed statutes prohibit localities from transferring land from
one owner to another through the use of eminent domain for 10 years-effectively
eliminating condemnations for private commercial development. After
yesterday, with nearly 70% approval of the constitutional amendment, each house
of the Legislature must now pass exemptions by a 3/5 vote.
· In Georgia, nearly 85% of the electorate voted in favor of a constitutional
amendment requiring a vote by elected officials any time eminent domain will be
used. Coupled with statutory reform, Georgia property owners are now
protected from eminent domain abuse.
·
More than 80% of Michigan voters approved a proposed constitutional amendment that
prohibits the taking of private property for transfer to a private entity
for the purpose of economic development or enhancement of tax revenues
and requires government to prove its authority to take a piece of property for
blight removal by clear and convincing evidence.
· New Hampshires
legislature passed both statutory reform as well as a
constitutional amendment, which was supported by more than 85% of New Hampshire
voters.
· Louisiana was the first post-Kelo constitutional amendment to restrict
eminent domain abuse, passing in Septembers primary election. The
amendment prohibits local governments from condemning private property merely
to generate taxes or jobs and ensures that the States blight laws can
only be used for the removal of a genuine threat to public health and safety on
a specific piece of property.
Voters Passed Citizen Initiatives
That Solely Limit Eminent Domain
· Nevadas constitutional amendment, which was presented to voters through a
citizen initiative and sharply limited eminent domain for private development,
was affirmed by over 60% of voters and will reappear on the 2008 ballot for
final approval.
· Oregon
voters overwhelmingly passed, with over 65% approval, a citizen initiative that
provides stronger property rights protections in Oregons
statutes.
Citizens around the nation agree
that property rights must be protected in the wake of the Kelo decision,
said Chip Mellor, president and general counsel of the Institute for Justice,
which represented the homeowners in Kelo before the U.S. Supreme Court.
The public is right to be outraged and fearful, with such a fundamental
right left to the whim of government and the influence of wealthy
developers. The state response has been historic, but Congress needs to
act and offer federal protection as well.
Mixed Results for Efforts Combining
Eminent Domain and Regulatory Takings
· More than 65% of Arizona voters passed an initiative
that restricted the definitions of public use and
blight in spite of the controversial regulatory takings language
included in the measure.
· Without a legislative session this year,
North Dakota passed a
constitutional amendment through a citizen initiative that prohibits private
use of property taken though eminent domain and requires compensation for
regulatory takings. The measure passed with over 65% approval.
· Measures that sought to limit regulatory takings and eminent
domain in California
and Idaho
failed. Those initiatives did little to stop the type of eminent domain
abuse exemplified in Kelo. (In Washington, a measure dealing
exclusively with regulatory takings failed.)
Where the public could vote on pure
eminent domain reform, they marched to the polls and demanded to be
heard, said Senior Attorney Scott Bullock, who argued the Kelo case for
the Institute. An overwhelming majority of the public recognize how
a narrow majority of the Supreme Court got it wrong.
Yesterdays election results
highlight the nations complete rejection of eminent domain for private
development, said Institute for Justice Senior Attorney Dana
Berliner. That is why it is so surprising that the U.S. Senate
leadership has completely failed to address the issue. I hope the
Senators, especially Senator Frist, will use the few remaining days of this
Congress to finish the work the House started last year and pass reform that
will protect the entire nation.
Mellor said, The popular backlash
against Kelo remained strong. The momentum for eminent domain reform
continues - fueled by the outrage of property owners and a nations
concern over this onslaught on fundamental rights. Yesterdays
eminent domain ballot measure successes are property rights victories.
Other states need to continue the push and do exactly what the U.S. Supreme
Court refused to do: protect homeowners from this abuse of government
power.
# # #
Christina Walsh Assistant Castle Coalition Coordinator Institute for Justice 901 N. Glebe
Road, Suite 900 Arlington, VA 22203
(703) 682-9320 www.ij.org www.castlecoalition.org
[Non-text portions of this
message have been removed]
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C.
section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or
payment to those who have expressed prior interest in receiving this
information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For further
information please refer to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml |