Posted on 06/03/2007 11:29:20 AM PDT by Dubya
It pits property owners against government agencies, wildlife conservationists against bureaucrats.
And it's kicked up a firestorm throughout Texas.
Pleas from both sides are flooding into Gov. Rick Perry's office over House Bill 2006, a measure awaiting the governor's signature that would give property owners more protection when forced to turn over their land to the government through eminent domain.
Critics say it could cost local and state governments more than $1 billion a year in additional costs for road projects, airport runways and other public projects. Supporters say the money should have gone into landowners' pocketbooks all along.
Tarrant County is leading the charge against the bill, preparing a letter asking Perry to veto the legislation. The Texas Wildlife Association, the Institute for Justice and other supporters want it to be signed. Perry has until June 17 to take action.
"We are convinced that the legislation ... will result in much greater costs to taxpayers because the overall costs of acquiring right-of-way for public road projects, both local and state, will be increased significantly," the proposed Tarrant County letter says.
Rep. Beverly Woolley, who carried the bill along with fellow Houston Republican Sen. Kyle Janek, said it's geared to protect property rights.
"Texas courts have chipped away at property-owner protections for decades," Woolley said. "I believe governmental entities should not operate with a sense of entitlement to my land.
"House Bill 2006 restores these property-owner protections."
(Excerpt) Read more at star-telegram.com ...
If Perry signs the bill, landowners would have more rights when governments step in to take property through eminent domain, a controversial practice that allows local governments to take and buy land for public projects.
The bill would ensure that landowners receive good-faith offers for condemned property, be compensated for damage done to adjoining property, and have a chance to buy back their land -- at the same price they received -- if it isn't needed in 10 years for the development.
If signed into law, the provision would go into effect Sept. 1. The buyback provision would require a constitutional amendment that would go before voters on Nov. 6.
The measure defines "public use" to keep land from being taken for economic development and creates a process for courts to determine whether initial purchase offers are fair.
It has followed sharp reaction to a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2005 in a Connecticut case that said local governments could take private homes and businesses for economic development. That same year, Texas lawmakers passed legislation prohibiting such use, and they came back this session to add further protections.
Tarrant County commissioners will vote formally Tuesday on sending the letter to Perry asking for the veto. Whitley said other counties, including Harris and Denton, are expected to follow suit.
The Texas Municipal League is urging any cities concerned about the bill to send letters to Perry asking for a veto.
Constitutional amendments
There will be 16 constitutional amendments on the Nov. 6 ballot, including one on eminent domain. They are:
House Joint Resolution 6: Giving judges the power to deny bail, even if already granted, to a person charged with a felony or family violence related crime.
HJR 19: Requiring that Texas legislators’ final votes on most legislation be recorded — rather than a voice vote — and be available on the Internet in a reasonable time frame.
HJR 30: Allowing landowners to buy back property taken by the government through eminent domain — but not used — at the same price they were paid.
HJR 36: Allowing judges who reach the mandatory retirement age of 75 to finish out their terms.
HJR 40: Limiting the increase in appraised taxable value of a home 10 percent of the appraised value of the home in the previous year.
HJR 54: Allowing a property tax exemption for a personal vehicle used for business activities.
HJR 69: Deleting constitutional references to the inspector of hides and animals (an office that has been virtually nonexistent in recent years).
HJR 72: Revising constitutional provisions on home equity loans.
HJR 90: Creating the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas and authorizing up to $3 billion in bonds to fund cancer research.
HJR 103: Allowing the state to continue providing funding to Angelo State University in San Angelo, which is being transferred from the University of Texas System to the Texas Tech University System.
Senate Joint Resolution 20: Authorizes the Texas Water Development Board to raise up to $250 million through general obligation bonds to address water and wastewater needs in economically distressed parts of the state.
SJR 29: Exempting veterans classified as “totally disabled” from ad valorem property taxes on their homes.
SJR 44: Allowing cities with less than 10,000 residents to hold an election to temporarily freeze property taxes for five years on properties considered in or next to areas targeted for state redevelopment funding.
SJR 57: Authorizing the issuance of up to $500 million in general obligation bonds to finance low-interest educational loans to students.
SJR 64: Authorizing the Texas Transportation Commission to issue up to $5 billion in general obligation bonds to provide funding for highway improvement projects.
SJR 65: Authorizing the state to issue up to $1 billion in bonds to pay for “maintenance, improvement, repair and construction projects and the purchase of needed equipment.”
Sources: Texas Secretary of State’s Office and House Research Organization
atinsley@star-telegram.com
Anna M. Tinsley, 817-390-7610
Ping
Tarrant County Judge Glen Whitley is leading the charge on this.
"Texas courts have chipped away at property-owner protections for decades," Woolley said. "I believe governmental entities should not operate with a sense of entitlement to my land.
"House Bill 2006 restores these property-owner protections."
To get the bill voted or not signed into law. He never met a tax he doesn't like.
Why am I not surprised that Tarrant County is right in the middle of this.
Somebody needs to inform Rudi about this development, since it's his law firm, Bracewell & Giuliani, that is advising Cintra on eminent domain, and you can be certain they're not in favor of anything that will get in the way of their precious corridor, or that will cost them more money.
The PA law to limit eminent domain passed after Kelo also limited it to 'public use', to limit transfers from one owner to another for a mall or parking lot, but it didn't limit takings for environmental or preservation reasons. Since PA is working really hard to identify potential Greenways across the state, including contiguous 'wildlife corridors" and buffers, they've left the way open for the radical environmentalists who want to "Re-Wild Pennsylvania". In the 60's when the PA Constitution was re-written they put in language about how one of the Commonwealth's responsibilities was to ensure clean air, clean water and protect, preserve, enhance the natural resources of the state. Today that feel-good language (written when people believed the air was about to become unbreathable due to pollution) is being cited by those who want to take control of all land and return most of it to it's pre-Columbian state. If the Texas law leaves that opening too - the governor should veto it. The Wildlands Project people continue to work to use government money and legal action to get control of land use, and they want to return nearly all of North America to its pre-Columbian state, apparently thinking it was some kind of Utopia then.
That's all I need to hear. If TML is for it I'm against.
Not a cent of taxpayer money snhould go to TML. It's an evil organization that's 100% against the taxpayer.
I had never heard of them. Thanks for the info.
Whatever direction this goes...I am kinda hoping the votors in Tarrant County, you know, those that rememebr this stuff...
Fire every single one of those gomers...The world will not come to an end if those sitting in those seats are shown the door...
I know the ones in Harris County need to hear from us as well...This might be a good test...
I agree. We need to show them the door.
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.