Groups attack eminent domain

12/30/2005

Bipartisan coalition aims to block seizing of homeowners’ land

BY BILL SALISBURY
Pioneer Press

When the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in June that local governments could seize private homes to make room for commercial developments, it sparked a wave of legislation from states across the nation to limit the use of eminent domain. That issue will be at the top of the 2006 Minnesota Legislature’s agenda when it convenes March 1.

Signaling that “homeowner protection” will be a top priority, two Minnesota House Democrats on Thursday announced their proposal to limit local governments’ use of property condemnation — beating by a week House Republicans who planned to unveil their own plan to protect property owners next Thursday.

Despite the political one-upmanship, House leaders of both parties said there’s bipartisan agreement on the issue, and they expect prompt action on legislation to tighten up Minnesota’s eminent domain law.

“I expect legislation to be ready to pass during the first week of the session,” said House Speaker Steve Sviggum, R-Kenyon.

First out of the chute with a plan were House Minority Leader Matt Entenza, DFLSt. Paul, and Rep. Paul Thissen, DFL-Minneapolis. At a Capitol news conference, they proposed legislation to prohibit local governments from using their condemnation power to seize private homes for commercial use.

Thissen said his bill would create an exception so cities could continue to condemn blighted properties, but “we ought to draw a line where homeowners are keeping up their property.” He said his proposals also would expand the power of courts to review eminent domain cases.

“We want to set a bottom line,” Entenza said, “and that line is it’s wrong for governments to take people’s homes just to build luxury town homes or condos so the government can make more property-tax money.”

In its June 23 decision in Kelo vs. New London, Conn., the Supreme Court ruled the 5th Amendment allows local governments to condemn private property and transfer it to another private entity for economic development that benefits the public. But the court also said states could pass more restrictive eminent domain laws.

Four states — Alabama, Delaware, Ohio and Texas —already have adopted such laws, and the National Conference of State Legislatures on Thursday listed eminent domain as one of the top 10 issues for state lawmakers across the country next year.

In the Minnesota Legislature, Rep. Jeff Johnson, the Plymouth Republican who chairs a House civil law committee, said he has been working over the last four months with a “broad, bipartisan coalition” of interest groups to draft legislation to protect private property. The coalition includes business, farm, civil rights, union and socially conservative organizations.

“Our bill will look very much like their (Entenza and Thissen’s) bill,” Johnson said, but it will protect businesses as well as homes. DFL Sen. Thomas Baak of Cook will sponsor the measure in the Senate, he said, and he would welcome Thissen as a co-sponsor. Johnson’s committee will conduct the first hearing on his bill Jan. 11 in Blaine.

While Minnesota has had few sensational court cases on the issue, Johnson said he’s received dozens of complaints that local governments are abusing their condemnation powers. “It’s threatened more often than it’s used,” he said. Local authorities use it as a “gun to the head of property owners to force them to sell.”

On the other side of the debate are city officials, construction firms and redevelopment specialists who argue they need the power to remove blighted properties to make way for economic growth and revitalized neighborhoods.

“The concern is they are going to take this too far and we really need to be thoughtful in our approach,” said Laura Harris, a lobbyist for the League of Minnesota Cities.

But Sviggum said that after the Supreme Court ruling, it’s important for the state to protect the constitutional rights of private property owners. He said it would be one of the top five or six items on the House Republican majority’s agenda next session.