April 17, 2007
Eminent domain roundup

ADDENDUM: sorry for earlier formatting problems.

Courtesy of my google news feed.

1. Virginia has passed new eminent domain legislation that on first glance seems to have real teeth:

The new law, among other things, requires that the process known as eminent domain be used only to take properties for public uses, not for resale to developers. And it specifies that the property itself must be blighted and not merely in a blighted area, as was previously allowed.

The legislation also raises the bar on what is considered blight, from "dilapidated or deteriorated" to "beyond repair" or "unfit for human occupancy or use."

Norfolk has long used these powers to either conserve areas - which makes them candidates for programs such as renovation grants - or perform wholesale redevelopment, in which entire blocks are razed and rebuilt from the ground up.

The Norfolk Redevelopment and Housing Authority has two redevelopment areas and 11 conservation areas for which it may need to acquire more land.

"This new legislation affects all of that," said the agency's Jim Gehman, adding that it "eliminates the idea of redevelopment areas. We have to focus on individual houses. It changes the definition of blight and makes it much harder to get a property declared blighted."

2. In NJ, the NFIB assures that eminent domain is not a dead issue in that state.

3. In Brooklyn, NY, more futile resistance to the mammoth Atlantic Yards project.

4. New Mexico has passed (I think on April 6) what looks to be a weak law. Bill text here. Last year Gov. Richardson vetoed a much stronger bill. A rough guide to how weak the enacted bill is to last year's vetoed bill: this year's is 28 pages compared to last year's 1/2 page. Lots of exemptions and enumerated powers are to blame.

Have a great day!

Posted by Edward J. Lopez at 03:01 PM in Economics

The statesman who should attempt to direct private people in what manner they ought to employ their capitals would not only load himself with a most unnecessary attention, but assume an authority which could safely be trusted, not only to no single person, but to no council or senate whatever, and which would nowhere be so dangerous as in the hands of a man who had folly and presumption enough to fancy himself fit to exercise it. -Adam Smith

Our Bloggers
Joshua Hall
Robert Lawson
E. Frank Stephenson
Michael C. Munger
Lawrence H. White
Craig Depken
Tim Shaughnessy
Edward J. Lopez
Brad Smith
Mike DeBow
Wilson Mixon
Art Carden

Blogroll

Search

Archives
By Author:
Joshua Hall
Robert Lawson
E. Frank Stephenson
Michael C. Munger
Lawrence H. White
Edward Bierhanzl
Craig Depken
Ralph R. Frasca
Tim Shaughnessy
Edward J. Lopez
Brad Smith
Mike DeBow
Wilson Mixon
Art Carden

By Month:
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004

Powered by
Movable Type 2.661

Site design by
Sekimori

XML