Property seizure revolt heads for California ballot Initiative would limit use of eminent domain

The San Francisco Chronicle reports:

A revolt that began when the U.S. Supreme Court upheld government's right to take private property for economic development a year ago is sweeping much of the nation.

Legislatures in 25 states, as well as numerous local governments, including at least seven in California, have passed a variety of laws and ordinances to blunt the court's June 2005 ruling that the city of New London, Conn., was justified in using the legal process known as eminent domain to seize private land for a different owner to develop a hotel, condominiums and commercial space.

Property rights activists in 11 states, including California, also are responding to the ruling, called Kelo vs. City of New London, by supporting ballot initiatives to restrict land seizures and protect landowners. But California's proposed Protect Our Homes Act may be the most controversial.

"This is one of the most dynamic issues in urban policy in decades,'' said Sam Staley, director of urban and land use policy for the Reason Foundation, a libertarian think tank in Los Angeles. "I would never have predicted before Kelo the kind of reaction we've seen in the state legislatures."

The proposed ballot measure would require governments that seize property either to occupy it themselves or rent it out for public use; they could not seize it for private development. The measure also would increase how much governments must pay for seized property, and it would require governments to compensate landowners if regulations not directly related to public safety hurt their property's value -- unless the property is exempted from the new restrictions.

Redevelopment officials, other city leaders and environmentalists said these provisions would increase prices so much they would limit governments' ability to acquire property for any purpose. And they said the proposition would undermine efforts to redevelop blighted areas and regulate land use in general.

With nearly $2 million from a New York donor and an obscure Montana group, activists have gathered close to 1 million signatures for the measure, about 400,000 more than they needed to qualify the proposed measure for November's statewide ballot.

We here at Newsalert don't believe in eminent domain at all.