Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

PROTECTING YOUR PRIVATE PROPERTY [WI]
AHRC ^ | 11-2-05 | AHRC News Services

Posted on 11/02/2005 4:08:58 PM PST by SJackson

Brookfield, Wisconsin

Congressman James Sennsbrenner of Wisconsin explains why he introduced H.R, 4128

PROTECTING YOUR PRIVATE PROPERTY

Suppose Uncle Sam comes knocking at your door, bulldozer in tow, to inform you that your house must be surrendered in order for a strip mall to be built. He explains the new development will generate higher property tax revenue, which is for the good of the community. What would you do? Most people would slam the door. After all, Uncle Sam can't force Americans off their land merely for profit and increased tax revenue, right? Half-right.

This summer, the U.S. Supreme Court decided a case, Kelo v. City of New London, that justifiably created an uproar in our country. In a narrow 5-4 decision which broadened states' eminent domain power, the Court held that private property could be "condemned" for the sole purpose of implementing a local government's redevelopment plan, thereby allowing property to be turned over to private developers in a private-to-private transfer. Prior to the ruling, eminent domain was legally restricted to only projects with a clear public use, such as roads and schools.

As Justice Sandra Day O'Conner said in her stinging dissent, "nothing is to prevent the state from replacing any Motel 6 with a Ritz Carlton, any home with a shopping center, or any farm with a factory." Under this decision, Wisconsin farms are particularly vulnerable. The fair market value of farmland is less than residential or commercial property, which means it doesn't generate as much property tax as homes or offices. With our cities and towns squeezing out farm and rural areas, what's to stop family farms, passed down for generations, from being taken in the name of economic development?

To assure that Wisconsin's churches, homes, and family farms are not bulldozed in abusive, for-profit land grabs, I introduced H.R. 4128, the Private Property Rights Protection Act. This bill prohibits the federal government from exercising its eminent domain power for economic development. It also prohibits federal funds from being used by state and local government for the same purpose. When the House of Representatives deliberates on my legislation later this week, it is expected to pass with overwhelming bipartisan support.

In order to squelch this practice, state and local governments will also need to create legislative restraints so judges can't find ways to wiggle out of these protections. Growth and economic development are important to any community, but they should not be balanced on the back of individual property rights.


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: eminentdomain; kelo; landgrab; newlondon; privateproperty; wisconsin

1 posted on 11/02/2005 4:08:58 PM PST by SJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Diana in Wisconsin

ping for your list


2 posted on 11/02/2005 4:09:21 PM PST by SJackson (God isn`t dead. We just can`t talk to Him in the classroom anymore, R Reagan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

So did that NH developer ever get Souter's home via eminent domain? I know that right after the Souter-authored opinion came out a developer used it officially request the property on which Souter's NH family home was located.


3 posted on 11/02/2005 4:15:31 PM PST by wvobiwan (Proud Minuteman Project Volunteer - Secure borders, illegals OUT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

"Suppose Uncle Sam comes knocking at your door, bulldozer in tow, to inform you that your house must be surrendered in order for a strip mall to be built. He explains the new development will generate higher property tax revenue, which is for the good of the community. What would you do?"

Well, I can't really say what I'd do.
I mean, I know exactly what, but if I post it here I will get a Zot and have the FBI and ATF knocking at my door.

Even with our land, our house is assessed at about half what a McMansion is worth.
Under existing zoning (they rezoned us from Rural Residental/Agricultural to Single Family Residential against our wishes) our place could be split up into six long skinny lots. No legal reason right now that the Town, County or State can't force me to sell at whatever price they deem "fair market value." Never mind that we plan on building our retirement home on the North end and selling the family home to our daughter, or that we might want to hold onto the land as an investment.


4 posted on 11/02/2005 4:38:01 PM PST by Ostlandr ("Billions down the drain, and we ain't plugged it yet." - Federal Government motto)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ostlandr

The way our township is reappraising year after year and bleeding us dry...

I dont care if they do bulldoze my house....

I will take their 'fair market value' and move to Texas
or WY


5 posted on 11/02/2005 4:46:15 PM PST by joesnuffy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: joesnuffy
Yeah. We just got notice of yet another Reval. They're paying a consultant to do it. What does the assessor's office do all day? They always claim they will finish the reassessment and lower the marginal rate so as to keep total taxes the same.
Somehow the part about lowering the marginal rate never comes off, and they spend spend spend the resulting windfall.
6 posted on 11/02/2005 4:51:25 PM PST by Ostlandr ("Billions down the drain, and we ain't plugged it yet." - Federal Government motto)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Watery Tart; ButThreeLeftsDo; KRAUTMAN; reformedliberal; Mygirlsmom; codercpc; s2baccha; ...

Ping-a-Ling for Wisconsin Conservative Politics Peeps!


7 posted on 11/02/2005 5:23:11 PM PST by Diana in Wisconsin (Save The Earth. It's The Only Planet With Chocolate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: joesnuffy

You are not alone. Some friends of mine have had their family farm farm reappraised at the same rate as the Big Box mall down the road. They're hosed. No way they can pay the property taxes. The County might has well have just seized the land. This is a 260 acre farm that has been in the family since before the civil war.


8 posted on 11/02/2005 7:50:43 PM PST by Chuckster (Neca eos omnes. Deus suos agnoset)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

A version of this bill needs to be passed in every state in the USA. There is no end to the "daisy-chain" of "bigger-better-generates more revenue" properties being bulldozed again and again and rebuilt. This mentality is slowly pushing all the lower income people out of the areas willing to destroy their property.
Sell at a high price and then have $$$ to buy something else, you say? Perhaps, but the new higher real estate taxes will keep you from being able to do so when you are a low income earner or retired on minimal social security.


9 posted on 11/02/2005 7:59:01 PM PST by ridesthemiles (ridesthemiles)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson