|
Builders Voice Concern Over Eminent Domain Abuse
 Responding to Supreme Court decisions this summer with an adverse impact on private property rights, the NAHB Board of Directors at its fall meeting earlier this month in Reno, Nev. approved policy in support of legislation to keep state and local governments from abusing their power of eminent domain and to provide landowners with access to the federal courts in takings cases.
The court’s ruling in Kelo v. City of New London confirmed that private property may be taken from one private property owner and transferred to another “if the government merely pronounces that doing so will benefit the community economically by increased tax revenue or more job opportunities,” the resolution notes.
“Such a broad interpretation of ‘public use’ imposes almost no checks or balances on eminent domain actions by state and local governments,” the resolution says, and it could allow the government to take undeveloped land and affordable housing and transfer ownership to another private property owner if there is a higher potential for revenue.
Leaving it up to legislative bodies to determine what constitutes a public use, the Supreme Court decision has prompted an outpouring of proposals in the U.S. Congress and state and local legislatures to limit the power of eminent domain.
In the resolution, NAHB board members reiterated support for the proper use of eminent domain, with just compensation:
- When a governmental entity will own or control the property for such public uses as government buildings, schools, libraries and parks
- When the project addresses public infrastructure needs such as roads, public utilities, water and sewer and treatment plants, and airports
- When the public’s health, safety and welfare is being protected by the redevelopment of slums, blighted areas, contaminated sites and nuisance properties, as defined by law
Among the legislative proposals offered in the U.S. Congress in the summer, H.R. 3135 would prevent federal funds for development projects using “economic development” as the basis for taking private property. Introduced by Reps. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) and John Conyers (D-Mich.), chairman and ranking member respectively of the Judiciary Committee, the bill has received more than 100 bipartisan co-sponsors.
The House bill followed the introduction of similar legislation in the Senate by Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas).
NAHB is working with the sponsors of these bills to ensure that they do not restrict the "traditional" uses of eminent domain. NAHB has not yet taken a position on any of these bills.
On the same issue, the House successfully passed an appropriations bill, H.R. 3058, including an amendment by Rep. Scott Garrett (R-N.J.) that would deny federal funds to any city or state project that uses the Kelo decision to condemn property.
The board’s resolution also responded to a decision by the court in the case of San Remo v. San Francisco preventing property owners from having their Fifth Amendment takings cases heard in federal court.
“NAHB should seek and support federal legislation and regulation that will justly compensate land owners in an expeditious and fair manner for the value of their property, which is taken or deemed unusable temporarily or permanently be federal, state, county, regional or local government,” the resolution said.
To read the legislation, click here and enter the bill number in the box at the upper left.
For more information on the resolution, e-mail Jay Shackford at NAHB, or call him at 800-368-5242 x8406.
For information on the federal legislation, e-mail Michael Strauss at NAHB, or call him at x8252.
|
