Archived Story

Property rights issue will be on ballot

Published 9:29am Wednesday, October 17, 2012

We have a very important issue on the November ballot.

The citizens of our county and the state are impacted by this. Hopefully everyone will support it.

How did we get here?

Property rights have been under assault since the Supreme Court’s infamous 2005 ruling Kelo v. New London.

In Kelo, the Supreme Court held that a local government could use eminent domain to take private property from a homeowner and transfer it to a private company in the name of promoting economic development.

Homeowners have worried that this ruling is so broad that it would let the government take anyone’s land for any nebulous “public purpose.”

Why do we need it?

Virginia needs this amendment because without it the government can take property through eminent domain and give it to another person.

Just look at what is happening in Norfolk, where the city is trying to use eminent domain to take property belonging Bob Wilson.

Why? Not for a road or a school, but for a commercial development.

Virginia needs better protections for private property, and the amendment will do just that.

What does the amendment do?

The amendment will state that:

• Property can only be taken for public use, like a road, and that the government bears the burden of proving the use is in fact public.

• The government cannot take more property than is necessary to accomplish the demonstrated public use.

• The compensation for the property owner will include lost profits and other losses.

Who else supports the amendment?

The amendment has been endorsed by the Virginia Farm Bureau, the National Federation of Independent Businesses as well as other property rights groups.

Larry Smith
Ivor

  • handkusp45

    We need this amendment to protect property rights. Please vote in the yes for this.

    Suggest Removal

  • windsor52

    Same Issue for New Route 460 – “Promote the Port of Virginia”; sure they use some other lame execuses as well but like Hurricane Evacuation Route. Well I have a hard time just getting to 460 during regular afternoon traffic. 460 is not the problem; the road system leading to it is in far worse shape for hurricane evacuation.

    Emmenent domain will have to be used. How appropriate is it for the state to condemn so much land for a road that does effectively the same thing? That cannot fall in the same line as needful as say a by-pass. Those are people’s properties this proposal will take.

    And for what reason?

    If old 460 is dangerous, fix it or close it. If it is not, then why abuse rural citizens for the “benefit” of those who live in urban areas on either end? Of course people in HR like the idea of a fast way to get to I-95. They are using their MOB numbers to “persuade” politicians that the majority of people want or need this.

    Is it really appropriate over the need for those property owners happiness who are “in the way” of this so called progress? I think not.

    Creating a new road that is estimated will take 4 years to complete and cost $1.4 billion a projected toll of $3.69 for cars and $11.72 for trucks while touting “low traffic counts expected for a new highway”… if this is expectation, why build it? Is this really the best use of the resources available? This is a waste of borrowed money and creating a tolled road that will need continued subsidies or raising of tolls to keep it operating is wrong.

    I believe it is 12 years they have been wasting time and money on this project. I commented officially to the state and Federal Highway administration during the NEPA process. I believe strongly, and still do, that VDOT’s decison making process was extremely flawed and that they did not follow the NEPA process correctly as described under 40 CFR 1505.1(e) with regards to evaluating a reasonable range of alternatives. The region of influence between Route 58 in Suffolk to the Suffolk/Isle of Wight line was not afforded a reasonable range of alternatives to be considered, as required by law. VDOT looked at one and only one alternative for this area then split their alternatives into 3 for the remaining 45 miles of the road. Those people were able to comment on which alternative was best; what about the people who live in the first 10 mile stretch. They have to live with VDOT breaking the law.

    Suggest Removal

Editor's Picks