Why I want to pair that press release with Robert's Great Moments in British Statesmanship, I'm not quite sure... I guess it's because there have been people who understood that government exists to serve the people, not herd them about to please other people with good connections. There are, in fact, people today who understand that. There just don't seem to be enough of them in the right places...Arlington, Va.—Yesterday, Utah Governor Jon Huntsman signed House Bill 365, a bill that rolled back the state’s prior eminent domain reform passed in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2005 decision in Kelo v. City of New London. The legislation, which passed unanimously in the Senate and overwhelmingly in the House, allows local governments to take private property for another private party’s gain. Worse yet, it allows property owners to vote their neighbor out of their home or business, thereby imposing a tyranny of the majority.
“This bill is bad for Utah property owners, who once had one of the strongest protections against eminent domain abuse in the country,” said Steven Anderson, director of the Castle Coalition, which helps homeowners nationwide fight the use of eminent domain for private development. The Castle Coalition is a grassroots organization coordinated by the Institute for Justice, which litigated the Kelo eminent domain case before the U.S. Supreme Court two years ago. “Local governments will no doubt be emboldened by the legislation to take property from one person and transfer it to someone else. This is a sad day for anyone who owns a piece of property in Utah.”
Utah once had one of the most comprehensive laws in the nation against the abuse of eminent domain. Under Utah’s 2005 Senate Bill 184, local governments were not allowed to acquire property in so-called “blighted” areas for private redevelopment. In most states, the definition of “blight” is so vague that nearly any well-maintained property could be declared “blighted,” thereby clearing the way for the government to take it. House Bill 365 allows property owners who own a large majority of property (in size or value) to vote to force out neighbors who want to keep their homes or small businesses. That means property owners who merely want to be left alone to enjoy what is rightfully theirs are exposed to abuse.
“This new law marks an unfortunate turn in the battle against the abuse of eminent domain,” Anderson continued. “It shows that the beneficiaries of eminent domain abuse—local governments and developers—will not sleep until their power, called ‘despotic’ by the U.S. Supreme Court centuries ago, is restored. Developers, unlike the public in general, hire well-paid lobbyists who patrol state capitals to expand their power to threaten ordinary homeowners and small businesses. Your right to own your home or farm or small business in Utah should not be placed at risk because developers and local governments wield more political power. Tragically, Utah property owners are now at risk.”
“Kelo educated the public on the horrors of eminent domain abuse so citizens around the country realize when their rights and their property are threatened,” Anderson said. “We expect this loss of rights in Utah will spark yet another popular backlash against eminent domain abuse.”
Well, let's see what the folks involved have to say...
The Utah governor's office notes the signing of House Bill 365 in a list of 28 bills signed by the Governor. So far I haven't found a separate press release touting what a great thing this particular bill is supposed to be, or what it's supposed to accomplish, or what it's supposed to prevent. The sponsor is listed as Rep. Stephen Urquhart. Urquhart has a blog. He doesn't seem to think the governor signing this bill is worth posting about (or at least he hasn't posted as of my post time). His Utah House of Representatives webpage is just a thumbnail sketch - although it notes he's Republican. It does contain a link to bills he's introduced/sponsored. Including HB 365. And HB 365 Substitute. There are audio recordings of debates and bill texts and fiscal notes, or rather links to same, which I haven't followed up yet. (As if I can translate Legislative Lingo with assurance?)
Via Castle Coalition, here's a March 13 AP article by Brock Vergakis that takes a look at what was, at that point, pending legislation. The headline reads "Utah may relax eminent domain laws." A central issue seems to be a proposed Wal-Mart in Ogden, or rather, clearing the way for same.
No comments:
Post a Comment