©
By Bob Lewis
RICHMOND
An amendment to Virginia's Constitution that would make it harder for governments to take private land is on its way to a House floor vote and, most likely, November's ballot for voters to have their say.
The measure cleared the House Privileges and Elections Committee on an 18-3 vote.
The Republican-backed measure won General Assembly enactment last year even with Democrats in charge of the state Senate.
With Republicans ruling the House and Senate now and passage appearing to be only a formality, the only obstacle to adding the amendment to the state Constitution is ratification in the fall election.
Opponents say it will make the costs of public projects more expensive for state and particularly local governments.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Twitter
Google
Yahoo
Even better
The fact that this amendment is so vehemently opposed by a local developer in bed with the Virginia Beach council makes me like it even more.
Two bad your post reveals
Two bad your post reveals that you don't understand what happened that evening. Moss's resolution which supported the amendment as is failed to gain a majority, and his maneuvering to table the motions failed as well. So to say that what transpired helped passage of the amendment would be an exaggeration at best. Davis's resolution would require redrafting, which would require that the process start over again, and then a new amendment would need to be passed in two successive sessions of future General Assemblies. Frankly, all the good work done at the Beach in regard to BRAC could be in jeopardy if this amendment passes, so if you really believe in the good work done to make peace with the Navy, oppose this amendment.
This amendment is a solution
This amendment is a solution in search of a problem. First, Kelo had no effect in Virginia; our statute never defined taking property for another's use as a public use. Second, this bill was poorly crafted, and has numerous serious unintentional consequences. Third, it creates a windfall for rich commercial property owners at the expense of residential tax payers. So who makes those campaign contributions? Fourth, it will dramatically increase the cost of taking property for public use, and taxes will increase to pay the awards to the wealthy. Lastly, it will stop needed major highway construction like U.S. Route 460 and improvements to U.S route 58 because the Governor has touted these as economic development, killing the projects.
Excellent!
I am very pleased. This will be one more choke in the chain to keep developers from circumventing the property owner. It's long over due.
Excellent
Ever since the disastrous Kelo v. City of New Haven US Supreme Court case, private property rights have been under attack, with no more glaring example than the City of Norfolk. Hopefully this law will help people who have spent a lifetime building a business or paying for a home so they don't see an overreaching local government take their property.
From the story: "Opponents say it will make the costs of public projects more expensive for state and particularly local governments." In other words, localities cannot simply use eminent domain to take private property to give to developers, and in legitimate eminent domain cases property owners will have to be paid the actual value of their property.
Good.
First, you display your
First, you display your misunderstanding of the Supreme Court's decision; Kelo simply affirmed the right of the states to define public use in their jurisdiction. Connecticut has a broad definition, required in states with intense need for redevelopment. Virginia has a very strict definition which restricted the taking of private property to give to another party to develop. Kelo never applied in Virginia. Second, your inability to understand that payments will increase to rich commercial property owners, payments that will increase the tax rates paid by homeowners, reveals an inability to understand that republican legislators serve their corporate and business masters, and their interests will be served by this amendment.
You're a commercial property developer, right?
I understand Kelo perfectly. It broadened the scope of eminent domain. It used to be for things like roads or schools, but because of Kelo all a developer (you know, people like you) has to do it prove he can get more in tax revenue and it's considered enough of a "public good" to take private property. Sharper legal minds than yours agree with me.
Since you earn your living developing commercial property, you'll forgive me if I see your dissatisfaction with this amendment. You're not exactly a neutral observer. I know it sucks you'll actually have to pay people the value of their property it this amendment passes.
What you fail to understand is not everybody is as stupid we you think they are.
Kelo did nothing of the
Kelo did nothing of the sort; the Supreme Court does not legislate. It simply reviewed the statutes in Commecticut, and ruled that the voters in that State had the right to define public use as they deemed appropriate, subject to the U.S. and the Connecticut Constitutions. Since most of us believe in State's rights, that is an entirely appropriate decision. However, in Virginia, our definition of public use, and the statutes that have been established in Virginia Courts through the centuries, take a much more limited view of public use, and the taking of private land is strictly limited by our statutes. The proposed amendment throws all that out the window; in fact, some argue that by doing so, it makes it worse for the taxpayers.
Well Mikey, that is exactly
Well Mikey, that is exactly what is happening in Virginia. The state legislature can redefine public use of property just like Connecticut where developers can steal property by going to their local government. The voters through their representatives and eventually via referendum are now defining what constitutes public use from private property seized via eminent domain. They are defining that the right to own property is just that... a right that deserves Constitutional protection from developers in Virginia whereas Kelo in Connecticut could not. It also means you're going to have work really hard now to take it for a 500 room hotel and a 10 ft X 10 ft public park.
Sorry
I'll take the word over my friend with the law degree from UVa who specializes in Constitutional law over a property developer who stands to lose money from this.