Friday, May 25, 2007

Eminent Domain Amendment Passes NC House, Heads to NC Senate

From N.C. House Republican Leader Paul Stam:

Raleigh – Just in time to meet “crossover” requirements, the North Carolina House has given final approval to a state constitutional amendment protecting private property. House Bill 878 would place the amendment on the ballot for voter approval during the next statewide election and would protect owners from having private property condemned by state and local governments for anything other than a “public use.”

Pressure to add limitations on the state’s power of “Eminent Domain” reached a critical point in 2005 with the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Kelo v. New London, Connecticut. In Kelo, the Court ruled the city of New London had the right to condemn private homes to resell to another private owner who offered economic development and a larger tax base. Kelo has inspired stronger protections nationwide for private property and also for a clear reading by the courts of the Fifth Amendment to United States Constitution, among the Bill of Rights, which reads in part: No person shall...be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

The bill has enjoyed strong bipartisan support, sponsored by Democratic former Speaker Dan Blue (D-Wake), House Republican Leader Paul Stam (R-Wake), Rep. David Lewis (R-Harnett) and Rep. Jim Harrell, III, (D-Allegheny), and was co-sponsored by 96 members of the North Carolina House. After surviving repeated attempts to gut the bill, the proposed constitutional referendum was approved by the House on a final vote of 104 to 15, Thursday.

The text of the proposed addition to North Carolina’s Constitution reads:

“Private property shall not be taken except for a public use, including preservation for that use. Public use does not include the taking of property for the purpose of thereafter conveying an interest in the property to a third party for economic development. This paragraph does not apply to the taking of blighted properties as defined by general law, nor to takings for access by the owner to property. As used in this paragraph, blight includes only the physical condition of the property taken. Just compensation shall be paid and, if demanded by the owner, shall be determined by a jury.”

No comments: